[Miltefosine versus meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis]. / Miltefosina versus antimoniato de meglumina en el tratamiento de la leishmaniasis mucosa.

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.

Risk factors for antimony treatment failure in American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in Northwestern-Argentina.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no specific literature available on the determinants for therapeutic failure (TF) with meglumine antimoniate (MA) in Northwestern-Argentina. This study aimed to identify epidemiological, clinical, and treatment-related factors that could be involved in TF. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We performed a case-control study. Cases were represented by patients who showed TF after administration of the first course of MA treatment, whereas, controls were determined as patients who evolved towards healing after the first MA cycle received. Crude Odds Ratios and their corresponding 90% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, and risk factors were then tested by multivariate analysis using logistic binary regression. Three hundred and eighty-four patients with a presumptive diagnosis of ACL were recruited, and 153 with a positive diagnosis were selected. We included in the study 71 patients, who underwent specific treatment with MA, presented complete data on response to treatment, and had a minimum post-treatment follow-up of 6 months in cutaneous leishmaniasis, and 12 months in mucosal leishmaniasis. Of these, 34 (47.9%) presented TF. In the initial analysis, TF was significantly associated with the geographical area of disease acquisition (p = 0.036), the presence of mucosal lesions (p = 0.042), the presence of concomitant skin and mucosal lesions (p = 0.002), and lesion age ≥ 6 months (p = 0.018). Risk factors influencing TF in the final multivariate model included the geographical area where the disease was acquired (adjusted Odd Ratio 8.062; 95% CI 1.914-33.959; p = 0.004), and lesion age ≥ 6 months (adjusted Odd Ratio 10.037; 95% CI 1.383-72.843; p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The results of the present study suggest the existence of some risk factors linked to TF in Northwestern-Argentina, which deserve further investigation. Herein we recorded a high percentage of TF and we described clinical and epidemiological characteristics associated with TF that could be taken into account improving the clinical management of patients.

Clinical and epidemiological features of leishmaniasis in northwestern-Argentina through a retrospective analysis of recent cases.

Leishmaniasis is a parasitic disease caused by hemoflagellates of the genus Leishmania and is transmitted to humans by the bite of infected phlebotomine sandflies. Depending on the Leishmania species, the disease has different clinical forms including cutaneous, mucocutaneous, and visceral manifestations. Previous studies performed in endemic zones of northwestern-Argentina, during epidemic outbreaks, have been important for detecting patients suffering from the acute phase of the disease, but have not given a complete representation of the clinical and epidemiological features in the region. Furthermore, due to the resurgence of leishmaniasis worldwide and in particular the large increase of international tourism to the region, it seems pertinent to update the current epidemiological and clinical profile of leishmaniasis in northwestern-Argentina. Here we present a retrospective analysis of 95 Leishmania positive cases, presenting between 2000 and 2014. Patients were derived from hospitals and diagnosed in our lab at the University of Salta, located in a non-endemic area in Salta, Argentina. We detected numerous extensive mucocutaneous cases (34/95, 35.8%) distinct from mucosal affected patients, some instances originating in locations with no previously reported human cases. Additionally patients suffering from concomitant diseases, besides leishmaniasis, were assessed. These included Chagas disease, syphilis, deep mycoses, tuberculosis, toxoplasmosis and intestinal parasitosis. This study updates the clinical and epidemiological features of leishmaniasis in northwestern-Argentina, and discusses the implications and management strategy for patients who acquire the disease in this region.

Miltefosina versus antimoniato de meglumina en el tratamiento de la leishmaniasis mucosa

El tratamiento convencional para la leishmaniasis tegumentaria es el antimoniato de meglumina, el cual presenta falla terapéutica creciente, producción de efectos adversos graves, y necesidad de administración parenteral, justificando la búsqueda de alternativas terapéuticas. Presentamos aquí los resultados preliminares de un ensayo clínico de fase II en pacientes con leishmaniasis mucosa, en el que se comparó la eficacia de miltefosina por vía oral con respecto a la del compuesto antimonial. La evaluación de la respuesta a los tratamientos se realizó mediante un seguimiento con videofibroscopia nasofaríngea, utilizándose un score de gravedad de lesiones mucosas para aplicar en cada momento del seguimiento de los pacientes. No se encontraron hasta ahora diferencias significativas entre el número de pacientes curados con miltefosina o con la quimioterapia convencional. Los resultados favorables de este trabajo sugieren que miltefosina podría constituir una alternativa terapéutica efectiva y segura en la región.

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.