IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0178592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Low versus high dose of antimony for American cutaneous leishmaniasis: A randomized controlled blind non-inferiority trial in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Mauricio Naoto Saheki
  • Marcelo Rosandiski Lyra
  • Sandro Javier Bedoya-Pacheco
  • Liliane de Fátima Antônio
  • Maria Inês Fernandes Pimentel
  • Mariza de Matos Salgueiro
  • Érica de Camargo Ferreira e Vasconcellos
  • Sonia Regina Lambert Passos
  • Ginelza Peres Lima dos Santos
  • Madelon Novato Ribeiro
  • Aline Fagundes
  • Maria de Fátima Madeira
  • Eliame Mouta-Confort
  • Mauro Célio de Almeida Marzochi
  • Cláudia Maria Valete-Rosalino
  • Armando de Oliveira Schubach

Abstract

Background: Although high dose of antimony is the mainstay for treatment of American cutaneous leishmaniasis (ACL), ongoing major concerns remain over its toxicity. Whether or not low dose antimony regimens provide non-inferior effectiveness and lower toxicity has long been a question of dispute. Methods: A single-blind, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing high dose with low dose of antimony in subjects with ACL treated at a referral center in Rio de Janeiro, an endemic area of Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis transmission. The primary outcome was clinical cure at 360 days of follow-up in the modified-intention-to-treat (mITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. Non-inferiority margin was 15%. Secondary objectives included occurrence of epithelialization, adverse events and drug discontinuations. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01301924. Results: Overall, 72 patients were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment arms during October 2008 to July 2014. In mITT, clinical cure was observed in 77.8% of subjects in the low dose antimony group and 94.4% in the high dose antimony group after one series of treatment (risk difference 16.7%; 90% CI, 3.7–29.7). The results were confirmed in PP analysis, with 77.8% of subjects with clinical cure in the low dose antimony group and 97.1% in the high dose antimony group (risk difference 19.4%; 90% CI, 7.1–31.7). The upper limit of the confidence interval exceeded the 15% threshold and was also above zero supporting the hypothesis that low dose is inferior to high dose of antimony after one series of treatment. Nevertheless, more major adverse events, a greater number of adverse events and major adverse events per subject, and more drug discontinuations were observed in the high dose antimony group (all p

Suggested Citation

  • Mauricio Naoto Saheki & Marcelo Rosandiski Lyra & Sandro Javier Bedoya-Pacheco & Liliane de Fátima Antônio & Maria Inês Fernandes Pimentel & Mariza de Matos Salgueiro & Érica de Camargo Ferreira e Vas, 2017. "Low versus high dose of antimony for American cutaneous leishmaniasis: A randomized controlled blind non-inferiority trial in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0178592
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178592
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178592&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0178592?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0178592. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.