Treatment of visceral leishmaniasis in 2010: direction from Bihar State, India

Abstract

Future MicrobiologyVol. 5, No. 9 EditorialFree AccessTreatment of visceral leishmaniasis in 2010: direction from Bihar State, IndiaHenry W MurrayHenry W MurrayDepartment of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1300 York Avenue, NY 10065, USA. Search for more papers by this authorEmail the corresponding author at hwmurray@med.cornell.eduPublished Online:22 Sep 2010https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb.10.92AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Keywords: kala-azarliposomal amphotericin bmiltefosineparomomycinvisceral leishmaniasisFigure 1. Bone marrow aspirate smear showing a heavily parasitized macrophage containing numerous intracellular amastigotesVisceral leishmaniasis (VL), an intracellular protozoal infection that targets tissue macrophages in the liver, spleen and bone marrow, is, seldom encountered in the USA. Nevertheless, my hospital recently cared for an otherwise healthy New York City woman who developed splenomegaly and pancytopenia 4 months after visiting family in her native Greece. Rather than the suspected hematologic malignancy, her bone marrow aspirate showed numerous macrophages parasitized by characteristic Leishmania amastigotes (Figure 1). She was hospitalized, but just for 48 h, to receive two once-daily intravenous infusions of 10 mg/kg liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome®). Treatment was well-tolerated, hematologic recovery was rapid and splenomegaly resolved. She is entirely healthy 6 months after therapy.Had this same patient been seen in New York City in 2000 rather than in 2010, her clinical outcome would likely have been the same. However, her treatment and experience would have been far different: a more lengthy hospitalization and an arduous 28 days of once-daily intravenous pentavalent antimony (sodium stibogluconate; Pentostam™), accompanied by well-recognized adverse reactions and the requirement for frequent laboratory monitoring [1].The choice of drug (AmBisome) and regimen (short-course, high-dose) in this patient was based on experience in Mediterranean VL [2], which in turn derived from treatment trials carried out in Bihar State, India, where VL (kala-azar) has been epidemic for decades. This poor, rural region houses approximately 90% of India’s cases of VL, representing approximately 50% of the world’s VL burden (estimated at 500,000 new cases per year). More than 10 years ago in Bihar, resistance ended the usefulness of sodium stibogluconate, the traditional treatment worldwide [1]. Thus, during the past decade, out of necessity, Bihar State has become the primary testing ground for new therapeutic approaches in VL. Technically, these new strategies are germane only to anthroponotic Leishmania donovani infection in the Indian subcontinent (India, Bangladesh, Nepal) where VL is generally more treatment-responsive. However, although modifications may be needed depending on the endemic region or complicating factors (e.g., HIV co-infection), approaches developed in Bihar can likely be applied elsewhere as well.In Bihar, the loss of sodium stibogluconate as the therapeutic cornerstone prompted the rediscovery of amphotericin B deoxycholate, which is effective (>95% cure), but difficult to administer and tolerate. Furthermore, despite the low drug cost, this therapy is expensive (total cost of ∼US$435 per adult treatment course) with prolonged in-hospital treatment (15 alternate-day infusions over 30 days) and laboratory monitoring for toxicity [3]. Against this backdrop, new treatment options were tested in Bihar, yielding, quite rapidly, the following tangible advances, each with cure rates of at least 94–95%: ▪ Short-course (5-day) therapy with lipid formulations of amphotericin B, permitted by the ability of these drugs to directly target tissue macrophages [4,5];▪ The first and only effective oral therapy with miltefosine (28-day course) [6];▪ Affordable treatment with the resurrected parenteral agent, paromomycin (21-day course) [7];▪ Combination short-course (8-day) parenteral–oral therapy using one infusion of AmBisome (5 mg/kg) followed by 1 week of miltefosine [8];▪ Most recently, the previously tested strategy of single-dose AmBisome alone was also revisited in Bihar; increasing the dose from 5–7.5 to 10 mg/kg proved effective (96% cure) and efficient [9].In India, and in the continued absence of a vaccine to prevent infection, how to best deploy the preceding treatment advances now lies with the National Kala-Azar Elimination Programme. Established in 2005 by India, Nepal and Bangladesh, this ambitious program seeks to reduce disease prevalence by 20- to 30-fold to less than 1/10,000 population by 2015 [10,11]. In addition to enhanced vector control, rapid noninvasive identification of infected individuals (case finding) and satisfactory detection of initial treatment failures and late relapses, this program’s success hinges on mass outpatient delivery of optimal therapy. While it is a given that such therapy must be safe, effective (≥95% cure rate) and consistently available, it must also: ▪ Be suitable for administration to tens of thousands of children and adults;▪ Be efficient (brief);▪ Require no (or little) laboratory monitoring for toxicity;▪ Produce near-100% compliance;▪ Be affordable.While it is immediately apparent that neither pentavalent antimony and amphotericin B deoxycholate fulfill these criteria, how do the following therapeutic options for the Elimination Programme measure up?Miltefosine aloneAs the only choice for self-administered (oral) and convenient (once- or twice-daily depending on bodyweight) treatment, miltefosine has already been incorporated into the Programme’s plan. However, concerns include: the long treatment duration (28 days); miltefosine cannot be given to pregnant women; women of childbearing age must use effective contraception during and for at least 3 months after therapy; and self-limited vomiting, diarrhea and raised liver transaminases are not uncommon [6]. In addition, miltefosine is considered expensive at a total cost of approximately $105 per adult course (preferential drug cost ∼$75 plus medical care ∼$30), and concern about compliance with 28 days of therapy has also been raised. Using intention-to-treat analysis, the cure rate in a Phase IV outpatient study in Bihar was only 82% [12]. It should come as no surprise that patients may stop self-treatment prematurely as they begin to feel better, and the idea of directly observed therapy has already been suggested.Paromomycin aloneResurrecting this well-tolerated aminoglycoside and making it affordable at a drug cost of $10–15 per adult treatment course (total cost of ∼$40–45) represents real achievements. However, it is difficult to envision the logistics, wide deployment and/or patient acceptability or compliance with once-daily intramuscular injections for 21 consecutive days [7].Combination therapyOne potential remedy to the problem of duration of miltefosine and paromomycin therapies is using both together or with another drug in a short-course combination regimen. Initial testing of this approach, based on the successful use of one infusion of AmBisome (5 mg/kg) followed by 7 days of miltefosine, has just been completed in Bihar [8]. The regimens of interest in this new study include: the preceding AmBisome–miltefosine 8-day treatment; and full doses of both paromomycin and miltefosine for 10 days. The projected total costs are approximately $110 and $70, respectively.Single-dose AmBisome®The 90% reduction in the cost of AmBisome to $20 per 50-mg vial, negotiated in 2007 for use in VL in developing countries (WHO–Gilead Sciences agreement, Gilead AmBisome Access Program [9]), put single-dose AmBisome back on the table of therapeutic options in India. While this approach was initially tested in 2001–2003 using 5 or 7.5 mg/kg [1], the achieved cure rate (90–91%) was below the desired benchmark (≥95%), leading to the recent testing of 10 mg/kg in one infusion. This well-tolerated regimen provided efficacy in children and adults (96% cure), efficiency (patients were safely returned home after an overnight inpatient stay) and, by definition, 100% compliance [9]. At the same time, however, AmBisome requires cold storage and a 1-h intravenous infusion, and even at a further reduced price of $18 per 50 mg, it remains expensive, with a total cost for a 35-kg patient in Bihar of $148 (drug: $126; medical care: $22). If given in an outpatient (daycare) setting, the estimated total cost is still high at $134 per course. While single-dose AmBisome will soon be tested at the district health center and then village levels in Bihar, it remains to be seen exactly how feasible this clinically appealing treatment will be in the much more poorly controlled outpatient setting of rural India.ConclusionNone of the four preceding approaches fulfills all the criteria for optimal treatment. However, the good news is that the Elimination Programme in the Indian subcontinent does have reasonable options to consider. Perhaps, the program (which will need to move along quite rapidly now to accomplish its goal by 2015) should also incorporate more than one therapeutic approach, so it can provide a more flexible response to the unanticipated issues that are sure to arise during such a large-scale treatment effort.Financial & competing interests disclosureThe author is supported by NIH grant 1R01AI083219 and received travel funds from Paladin Labs (manufacturer of miltefosine) to attend a scientific meeting in 2009. The author has no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.Bibliography1 Murray HW, Berman JD, Davies CR, Saravia NG: Advances in leishmaniasis. Lancet366,1561–1577 (2005).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar2 Syriopoulou V, Daikos GL, Theodoridou M et al.: Two doses of a lipid formulation of amphotericin B for the treatment of Mediterranean visceral leishmaniasis. Clin. Infect. Dis.36,560–566 (2003).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar3 Sundar S, Chakravarty J, Rai VK et al.: Amphotericin B treatment for Indian visceral leishmaniasis: response to 15 daily versus alternate-day infusions. Clin. Infect. Dis.45,556–561 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar4 Sundar S, Jha TK, Thakur CP, Mishra M, Singh VR, Buffels R: Low-dose liposomal amphotericin B in refractory Indian visceral leishmaniasis: a multicenter study. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.66,143–146 (2002).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar5 Sundar S, Mehta H, Suresh AV, Singh SP, Rai M, Murray HW: Amphotericin B treatment for Indian visceral leishmaniasis: conventional versus lipid formulations. Clin. Infect. Dis.38,377–383 (2004).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar6 Sundar S, Jha TK, Thakur CP et al.: Oral miltefosine for Indian visceral leishmaniasis. N. Engl. J. Med.347,1739–1746 (2002).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar7 Sundar S, Jha TK, Thakur CP, Sinha PK, Bhattacharya SK: Injectable paromomycin for visceral leishmaniasis in India. N. Engl. J. Med.356,2571–2581 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar8 Sundar S, Rai M, Chakravarty J et al.: New treatment approach in Indian visceral leishmaniasis: single-dose liposomal amphotericin B followed by short-course oral miltefosine. Clin. Infect. Dis.47,1000–1006 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar9 Sundar SD, Chakravarty J, Agarwal D, Rai M, Murray HW: Single-dose liposomal amphotericin B for visceral leishmaniasis in India. N. Engl. J. Med.362,504–512 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar10 Mondal D, Singh SP, Kumar N et al.: Visceral leishmaniasis elimination programme in India, Bangladesh, and Nepal: reshaping the case finding/case management strategy. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis.3,e355 (2009).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar11 den Boer ML, Alvar J, Davidson RN, Ritmeijer K, Balasegaram M: Developments in the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis. Expert Opin. Emerg. Drugs124,395–410 (2009).Crossref, Google Scholar12 Bhattacharya SK, Sinha PK, Sundar S et al.: Phase 4 trial of miltefosine for the treatment of Indian visceral leishmaniasis. J. Infect. Dis.196,591–598 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByPamidronate, a promising repositioning drug to treat leishmaniasis, displays antileishmanial and immunomodulatory potentialInternational Immunopharmacology, Vol. 110Need for sustainable approaches in antileishmanial drug discovery31 August 2019 | Parasitology Research, Vol. 118, No. 10Leishmania antimony resistance/ susceptibility in Algerian foci28 September 2017 | Open Journal of Tropical Medicine, Vol. 1, No. 1Antileishmanial Activity of Disulfiram and Thiuram Disulfide Analogs in an Ex Vivo Model System Is Selectively Enhanced by the Addition of Divalent Metal Ions3 August 2015 | Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, Vol. 59, No. 10Efficacy of Anti-Leishmania Therapy in Visceral Leishmaniasis among HIV Infected Patients: A Systematic Review with Indirect Comparison2 May 2013 | PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Vol. 7, No. 5Validation of a simple resazurin-based promastigote assay for the routine monitoring of miltefosine susceptibility in clinical isolates of Leishmania donovani13 December 2012 | Parasitology Research, Vol. 112, No. 2Antileishmanial activity of diterpene acids in copaiba oilMemórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Vol. 108, No. 1In Vivo Antileishmanial Activity of Plant-Based Secondary MetabolitesIn vitro phototoxicity of ultradeformable liposomes containing chloroaluminum phthalocyanine against New World Leishmania speciesJournal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology, Vol. 117Identification of Th1-responsive leishmanial excretory–secretory antigens (LESAs)Experimental Parasitology, Vol. 132, No. 3Experimental Induction of Paromomycin Resistance in Antimony-Resistant Strains of L. donovani: Outcome Dependent on In Vitro Selection Protocol29 May 2012 | PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Vol. 6, No. 5Integrated Dataset of Screening Hits against Multiple Neglected Disease Pathogens20 December 2011 | PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Vol. 5, No. 12Rare splenic complications and specific serology: decisive diagnostic tools in two cases of visceral leishmaniasisItalian Journal of Medicine, Vol. 5, No. 4Leishmania antimony resistance: what we know what we can learn from the field29 July 2011 | Parasitology Research, Vol. 109, No. 5 Vol. 5, No. 9 Follow us on social media for the latest updates Metrics History Published online 22 September 2010 Published in print September 2010 Information© Future Medicine LtdKeywordskala-azarliposomal amphotericin bmiltefosineparomomycinvisceral leishmaniasisFinancial & competing interests disclosureThe author is supported by NIH grant 1R01AI083219 and received travel funds from Paladin Labs (manufacturer of miltefosine) to attend a scientific meeting in 2009. The author has no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.PDF download