Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Researchers from Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Vietnam have shown that amphotericin B is more effective than itraconazole for the initial treatment of talaromycosis in HIV patients.

Thuy Le
Dr Thuy Le, Infectious Diseases Clinician

Principal investigator Dr Thuy Le  stated: “These results offer strong support to the call for more health policy and advocacy to improve access to amphotericin B across Asia. Implementation of the research findings is now needed in the region.”

The third most common infection that kills HIV patients in South and Southeast Asia is talaromycosis. This infection is caused by the fungus Talaromyces marneffei, (previously named Penicillium marneffei). The initial treatment with amphotericin B is effective; however this drug is not widely available and has many unacceptable side effects for which patients need to be closely monitored in the hospital. In South and Southeast Asia, itraconazole is commonly used as a substitute for amphotericin B, because it is widely available, cheap, well-tolerated, and can be given by mouth. However, until now the efficacy of these two drugs for treating patients with talaromycosis had not been tested.

In a clinical trial published last week in the New England Journal of Medicine, doctors in Vietnam in collaboration with researchers from the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit randomly assigned 440 HIV patients who were diagnosed with talaromycosis to either amphotericin B or itraconazole treatment in 5 hospitals across Vietnam. The study showed that despite more side effects, treatment with amphotericin B was associated with half the number of deaths compared to itraconazole, 11% versus 21% after 6 months. “In addition we found that amphotericin B killed the fungus in patient blood four times faster than itraconazole, and there were fewer disease relapse and complications in the amphotericin group”, commented Dr. Thuy Le. “Although amphotericin B has been included in the WHO essential medicines list since 2013, currently only 30-40% of patients with this infection in China and Vietnam are being treated with amphotericin B due to its high costs, poor supply chains, and concerns of toxicity.”

The results also suggest that a shorter course of amphotericin B treatment should be evaluated. If effective it would make the treatment more acceptable by reducing the side effects, and the shorter treatment duration would be more affordable. In addition, the survival benefit of the initial treatment with amphotericin B only became apparent after two to six months on therapy. This trial therefore serves as a useful reminder to the clinical research community to consider longer follow-up time frames in the design of antifungal treatment trials.

Similar stories

RECOVERY trial closes recruitment to convalescent plasma treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19

@Oxford Research

Convalescent plasma has been widely used as a treatment for COVID-19 but to date there has been no convincing evidence of the effect of convalescent plasma on clinical outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Recruitment to the convalescent plasma arm of the RECOVERY trial has now closed. The preliminary analysis based on 1873 reported deaths among 10,406 randomised patients shows no significant difference in the primary endpoint of 28-day mortality. Recruitment to all other treatment arms – tocilizumab, aspirin, colchicine, and Regeneron’s antibody cocktail – continues as planned.

Check-list recommended to improve reporting of microscopy methods and results in malaria studies

@Oxford MORU Publication Research

A study to explore the variations of how microscopy methods are reported in published malaria studies has recommended standardised procedures should be implemented for methodological consistency and comparability of clinical trial outcomes.

Pearl Gan, OUCRU Photographer in Residence, selected for the Lancet Highlights 2020

OUCRU

Congratulations to Pearl Gan, OUCRU Photographer in Residence, for her winning image selected for the Lancet Highlights 2020: Framing Health Stories. Despite the difficulties of this pandemic year, The Lancet received fascinating and varied entries for our Highlights 2020 photography competition. 15 striking photographs were selected. Each picture captures a unique moment, highlighting a health story.

Receiving and responding to community feedback during health system crises in Kenya

KWTRP Publication Research

The responsiveness of a health system is one of its goals, alongside fairness in financing and outcomes. Listening and responding to the public can make a health system stronger and fairer. However, responsiveness is likely to be undermined, especially for vulnerable and marginal populations, in periods of crises such as disease outbreaks. In the current COVID-19 crisis, there has been more focus on health system control interventions, with minimal consideration of community views. KWTRP colleagues in Kenya consider community engagement and citizens feedback channels, concerns raised by the public and how they were handled, and highlight lessons learned.

RECOVERY trial finds no benefit from azithromycin in patients hospitalised with COVID-19

@Oxford Research

Established in March 2020, the RECOVERY trial tests a range of potential treatments for COVID-19, including azithromycin, a widely used antibiotic that also reduces inflammation. The azithromycin arm of the trial was established to determine whether or not the drug has a meaningful benefit among patients hospitalised with COVID-19. A preliminary analysis shows no significant difference in the primary endpoint of 28-day mortality; there was also no evidence of beneficial effects on the risk of progression to mechanical ventilation or length of hospital stay.

Restoring confidence in science – tinkering in the margin is not enough

@Oxford Publication

Blog by Piero Olliaro, Josephine Bourner and Lakshmi Manoharan. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the limits of the current peer-review model, which is collapsing under the number of articles and volume of information, unable to cope with the conflicting needs for speed and quality of information. The peer review process is often slow, opaque, unaccountable and biased; it is now time to focus on tangible improvements, making transparency our top priority. We need a system reset, not tinkering in the margin.