Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 18, 2026

Using In Vitro Live-cell Imaging to Explore Chemotherapeutics Delivered by Lipid-based Nanoparticles
Published on: November 1, 2017
Amphotericin B lipid soluble formulations vs amphotericin B in cancer patients with neutropenia
1The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept. 7112, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen O, Denmark. hkj@cochrane.dk
Background:
Patients with cancer who are treated with chemotherapy or receive a bone marrow transplant have an increased risk of acquiring fungal infections. Such infections can be life-threatening. Antifungal drugs are therefore often given prophylactically to such patients, or when they have a fever.
Objectives:
To compare the effect and adverse effects of AmBisome and other lipid soluble formulations of amphotericin B with conventional amphotericin B in cancer patients with neutropenia.
Search Strategy:
MEDLINE and Cochrane Library. Unpublished trials from conference proceedings and contact to industry.
Selection Criteria:
Randomised trials comparing lipid soluble formulations of amphotericin B with conventional amphotericin B.
Data Collection And Analysis:
Data on mortality, invasive fungal infection, nephrotoxicity, serum creatinine and dropouts were extracted by both authors independently.
Main Results:
AmBisome vs conventional amphotericin B (3 trials, 1149 patients): AmBisome tended to be more effective than conventional amphotericin B for invasive fungal infection (relative risk 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 1.01, P=0.053) whereas there was no significant difference in mortality (relative risk 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.07). AmBisome decreased significantly the incidence of nephrotoxicity, defined as a 100% increase in serum creatinine (relative risk 0.51, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.64). Fewer patients dropped out on AmBisome but the difference was not significant (relative risk 0.78, 95% CI 0.56 to 1. 08). Amphotericin B in Intralipid vs conventional amphotericin B (4 trials, 145 patients): There were no significant differences in clinical effect whereas the patients treated with the lipid soluble formulation experienced significantly less nephrotoxicity (relative risk 0.34, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.75) and smaller increases in serum creatinine (weighted mean difference 32 micromol/l, 95% CI 21 to 43 micromol/l). Amphotericin B colloidal dispersion (ABCD) vs conventional amphotericin B (1 trial, 213 patients): There was lower nephrotoxicity with ABCD (relative risk 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.59).
Reviewer'S Conclusions:
AmBisome is a better drug than conventional amphotericin B but its high cost prohibits routine use in most settings. Furthermore, the advantages of AmBisome may be smaller than indicated in our review if conventional amphotericin B is administered under optimal circumstances. It is not clear whether other lipid formulations of amphotericin B could offer a worthwhile advantage compared to conventional amphotericin B.
Related Concept Videos
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Pharmaceutical Alternatives: Stability-Related Therapeutic Nonequivalence
Cryptococcal Meningitis
Antifungal Agents
Antiprotozoal Agents

