[Miltefosine versus meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis]

Medicina (B Aires). 2014;74(5):371-7.
[Article in Spanish]

Abstract

The conventional treatment for tegumentary leishmaniasis is meglumine antimoniate, which needs parenteral administration, has increased therapeutic failure, and produces serious adverse effects, justifying the search for therapeutic alternatives. We report here the preliminary results of a phase II clinical trial in patients with mucosal leishmaniasis, in which the efficacy of oral miltefosine versus the antimonial compound was assessed. The evaluation of response to the treatment was performed by monitoring with nasopharyngeal video-fibroscopy, using a score of mucosal injury severity for patients at each follow-up point. We found no significant differences so far between the number of patients cured with miltefosine or conventional chemotherapy. The favorable results of this study suggest that miltefosine could be an effective and safe oral therapeutic alternative in the region.

Keywords: leishmaniasis treatment; miltefosine; mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial, Phase II
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Antiprotozoal Agents / therapeutic use*
  • Comparative Effectiveness Research
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Injury Severity Score
  • Leishmaniasis, Mucocutaneous / drug therapy*
  • Male
  • Meglumine / therapeutic use*
  • Meglumine Antimoniate
  • Middle Aged
  • Nasopharynx / parasitology
  • Organometallic Compounds / therapeutic use*
  • Phosphorylcholine / analogs & derivatives*
  • Phosphorylcholine / therapeutic use
  • Young Adult

Substances

  • Antiprotozoal Agents
  • Organometallic Compounds
  • Phosphorylcholine
  • miltefosine
  • Meglumine
  • Meglumine Antimoniate