Limited efficacy of injectable aminosidine as single-agent therapy for Colombian cutaneous leishmaniasis

Field-Deployable Treatments For Leishmaniasis: Intrinsic Challenges, Recent Developments and Next Steps

Leishmaniasis is a neglected tropical disease endemic primarily to low- and middle-income countries, for which there has been inadequate development of affordable, safe, and efficacious therapies. Clinical manifestations of leishmaniasis range from self-healing skin lesions to lethal visceral infection with chances of relapse. Although treatments are available, secondary effects limit their use outside the clinic and negatively impact the quality of life of patients in endemic areas. Other non-medicinal treatments, such as thermotherapies, are limited to use in patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis but not with visceral infection. Recent studies shed light to mechanisms through which Leishmania can persist by hiding in cellular safe havens, even after chemotherapies. This review focuses on exploring the cellular niches that Leishmania parasites may be leveraging to persist within the host. Also, the cellular, metabolic, and molecular implications of Leishmania infection and how those could be targeted for therapeutic purposes are discussed. Other therapies, such as those developed against cancer or for manipulation of the ferroptosis pathway, are proposed as possible treatments against leishmaniasis due to their mechanisms of action. In particular, treatments that target hematopoietic stem cells and monocytes, which have recently been found to be necessary components to sustain the infection and provide a safe niche for the parasites are discussed in this review as potential field-deployable treatments against leishmaniasis.

Treatment of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis and Insights into Species-Specific Responses: A Narrative Review

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is a complex skin infection that has imposed a heavy burden on many developing countries and is caused by more than 20 Leishmania species. This disease is predominantly associated with disfiguring scars and major social stigma upon infection. The severity of the disease seemingly depends on many factors including the species of parasite, the host, region of endemicity, socio-economic status and the accessibility to health facilities. Despite myriad studies that have been performed on current and novel therapies, the treatment outcomes of CL remain contentious, possibly because of the knowledge gaps that still exist. The differential responses to the current CL therapies have become a major drawback in disease control, and the dearth of information on critical analyses of outcomes of such studies is a hindrance to the overall understanding. On the basis of currently available literature on treatment outcomes, we discuss the most effective doses, drug susceptibilities/resistance and treatment failures of the Leishmania genus for both monotherapy and combination therapy. This review focuses on the available treatment modalities for CL caused by different Leishmania species, with insights into their species-specific efficacies, which would inform the selection of appropriate drugs for the treatment and control of leishmaniasis.

A Promising Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Treatment with a Nanoemulsion-Based Cream with a Generic Pentavalent Antimony (Ulamina) as the Active Ingredient

Leishmania parasites are the etiological agents of Leishmaniasis, a tropical disease that affects around 15 million people in about 90 countries. The chosen therapy for this disease is based on antimony V compounds, such as meglumine antimoniate. It can be administered as a parenteral, subcutaneous or perilesional form as successive infiltrations with pre-established doses localized in the border of the granuloma that characterizes the wound of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (CL). Herein, a topical pharmaceutical recipe, such as an emulsion, is proposed to eliminate the trauma caused by administering the medicine in parenteral form to the face or other difficult access zones. The evaluation of this vehicle was performed by analyzing parameters such as pH, viscosity, homogeneity and droplet size distribution. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the emulsion was proved by in vitro experiments using Strat-M synthetic membranes, showing that the transdermal passage of the antimonial complex is guaranteed. Moreover, complete healing of the wound has been attained in patients with CL, as shown with two clinical cases in this article.

Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis

BACKGROUND

On the American continent, cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis (CL and MCL) are diseases associated with infection by several species of Leishmania parasites. Pentavalent antimonials remain the first-choice treatment. There are alternative interventions, but reviewing their effectiveness and safety is important as availability is limited. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for all immuno-competent people who have American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis (ACML).

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our database searches of the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and CINAHL to August 2019. We searched five trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing either single or combination treatments for ACML in immuno-competent people, diagnosed by clinical presentation and Leishmania infection confirmed by smear, culture, histology, or polymerase chain reaction on a biopsy specimen. The comparators were either no treatment, placebo only, or another active compound.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our key outcomes were the percentage of participants 'cured' at least three months after the end of treatment, adverse effects, and recurrence. We used GRADE to assess evidence certainty for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies (37 were new), totalling 6533 randomised participants with ATL. The studies were mainly conducted in Central and South America at regional hospitals, local healthcare clinics, and research centres. More male participants were included (mean age: roughly 28.9 years (SD: 7.0)). The most common confirmed species were L. braziliensis, L. panamensis, and L. mexicana. The most assessed interventions and comparators were non-antimonial systemics (particularly oral miltefosine) and antimonials (particularly meglumine antimoniate (MA), which was also a common intervention), respectively. Three studies included moderate-to-severe cases of mucosal leishmaniasis but none included cases with diffuse cutaneous or disseminated CL, considered the severe cutaneous form. Lesions were mainly ulcerative and located in the extremities and limbs. The follow-up (FU) period ranged from 28 days to 7 years. All studies had high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain (especially performance bias). None of the studies reported the degree of functional or aesthetic impairment, scarring, or quality of life. Compared to placebo, at one-year FU, intramuscular (IM) MA given for 20 days to treat L. braziliensis and L. panamensis infections in ACML may increase the likelihood of complete cure (risk ratio (RR) 4.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 21.38; 2 RCTs, 157 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but may also make little to no difference, since the 95% CI includes the possibility of both increased and reduced healing (cure rates), and IMMA probably increases severe adverse effects such as myalgias and arthralgias (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.96; 1 RCT, 134 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IMMA may make little to no difference to the recurrence risk, but the 95% CI includes the possibility of both increased and reduced risk (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.17 to 19.26; 1 RCT, 127 participants; low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, at six-month FU, oral miltefosine given for 28 days to treat L. mexicana, L. panamensis and L. braziliensis infections in American cutaneous leishmaniasis (ACL) probably improves the likelihood of complete cure (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.42 to 3.38), and probably increases nausea rates (RR 3.96, 95% CI 1.49 to 10.48) and vomiting (RR 6.92, 95% CI 2.68 to 17.86) (moderate-certainty evidence). Oral miltefosine may make little to no difference to the recurrence risk (RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.37 to 23.89; low-certainty evidence), but the 95% CI includes the possibility of both increased and reduced risk (all based on 1 RCT, 133 participants). Compared to IMMA, at 6 to 12 months FU, oral miltefosine given for 28 days to treat L. braziliensis, L. panamensis, L. guyanensis and L. amazonensis infections in ACML may make little to no difference to the likelihood of complete cure (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.23; 7 RCTs, 676 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on moderate-certainty evidence (3 RCTs, 464 participants), miltefosine probably increases nausea rates (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.49) and vomiting (RR 4.76, 95% CI 1.82 to 12.46) compared to IMMA. Recurrence risk was not reported. For the rest of the key comparisons, recurrence risk was not reported, and risk of adverse events could not be estimated. Compared to IMMA, at 6 to 12 months FU, oral azithromycin given for 20 to 28 days to treat L. braziliensis infections in ACML probably reduces the likelihood of complete cure (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76; 2 RCTs, 93 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to intravenous MA (IVMA) and placebo, at 12 month FU, adding topical imiquimod to IVMA, given for 20 days to treat L. braziliensis, L. guyanensis and L. peruviana infections in ACL probably makes little to no difference to the likelihood of complete cure (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.80; 1 RCT, 80 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to MA, at 6 months FU, one session of local thermotherapy to treat L. panamensis and L. braziliensis infections in ACL reduces the likelihood of complete cure (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95; 1 RCT, 292 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared to IMMA and placebo, at 26 weeks FU, adding oral pentoxifylline to IMMA to treat CL (species not stated) probably makes little to no difference to the likelihood of complete cure (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.18; 1 RCT, 70 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence certainty was mostly moderate or low, due to methodological shortcomings, which precluded conclusive results. Overall, both IMMA and oral miltefosine probably result in an increase in cure rates, and nausea and vomiting are probably more common with miltefosine than with IMMA. Future trials should investigate interventions for mucosal leishmaniasis and evaluate recurrence rates of cutaneous leishmaniasis and its progression to mucosal disease.

In Vitro Sensitivity of Cutaneous Leishmania Promastigote Isolates Circulating in French Guiana to a Set of Drugs

AbstractAnti-leishmaniasis drug resistance is a common problem worldwide. The aim of this study was to inventory the general in vitro level of sensitivity of Leishmania isolates circulating in French Guiana and to highlight potential in vitro pentamidine-resistant isolates. This sensitivity study was conducted on 36 patient-promastigote isolates for seven drugs (amphotericin B, azithromycin, fluconazole, meglumine antimoniate, miltefosine, paromomycin, and pentamidine) using the Cell Counting Kit-8 viability test. The IC₅₀ values obtained were heterogeneous. One isolate exhibited high IC₅₀ values for almost all drugs tested. Pentamidine, which is the first-line treatment in French Guiana, showed efficacy at very low doses (mean of 0.0038 μg/mL). The concordance of the in vitro pentamidine results with the patients' clinical outcomes was 94% (K = 0.82).

Treatment of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Caused by Leishmania aethiopica: A Systematic Review

Leishmania aethiopica is the etiological agent of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) in Ethiopia and can cause severe and complicated cases such as diffuse CL (DCL), mucocutaneous leishmaniasis or extensive CL, requiring systemic treatment. Despite the substantial burden, evidence-based treatment guidelines are lacking. We conducted a systematic review of clinical studies reporting on treatment outcomes of CL due to L aethiopica in order to help identify potentially efficacious medications on CL that can be taken forward for clinical trials. We identified a total of 24 records reporting on 506 treatment episodes of CL presumably due to L aethiopica. The most commonly used drugs were antimonials (n = 201), pentamidine (n = 150) and cryotherapy (n = 103). There were 20 case reports/series, with an overall poor study quality. We only identified two small and/or poor quality randomized controlled trials conducted a long time ago. There were two prospective non-randomized studies reporting on cryotherapy, antimonials and pentamidine. With cryotherapy, cure rates were 60-80%, and 69-85% with antimonials. Pentamidine appeared effective against complicated CL, also in cases non-responsive to antimonials. However, all studies suffered from methodological limitations. Data on miltefosine, paromomycin and liposomal amphotericin B are extremely scarce. Only a few studies are available on DCL. The only potentially effective treatment options for DCL seem to be antimonials with paromomycin in combination or pentamidine, but none have been properly evaluated. In conclusion, the evidence-base for treatment of complicated CL due to L aethiopica is extremely limited. While antimonials remain the most available CL treatment in Ethiopia, their efficacy and safety in CL should be better defined. Most importantly, alternative first line treatments (such as miltefosine or paromomycin) should be explored. High quality trials on CL due to L aethiopica are urgently needed, exploring group sequential methods to evaluate several options in parallel.

An update on pharmacotherapy for leishmaniasis

INTRODUCTION

Leishmaniasis broadly manifests as visceral leishmaniasis (VL), cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. The treatment of leishmaniasis is challenging and the armamentarium of drugs is small, duration of treatment is long, and most drugs are toxic.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search on treatment of leishmaniasis was done on PubMed. Single dose of liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) and multidrug therapy (L-AmB + miltefosine, L-AmB + paromomycin (PM), or miltefosine + PM) are the treatment of choice for VL in the Indian subcontinent. A 17-day combination therapy of pentavalent antimonials (Sb(v)) and PM remains the treatment of choice for East African VL. L-AmB at a total dose of 18 - 21 mg/kg is the recommended regimen for VL in the Mediterranean region and South America. Treatment of CL should be decided by the severity of clinical lesions, etiological species and its potential to develop into mucosal leishmaniasis.

EXPERT OPINION

There is an urgent need to implement a single-dose L-AmB or combination therapy in the Indian subcontinent. Shorter and more acceptable regimens are needed for the treatment of post - kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis. Combination therapy with newer drugs needs to be tested in Africa. Due to the toxicity of systemic therapy, a trend toward local treatment for New World CL is preferred in patients without risk of mucosal disease.

Therapeutic options for old world cutaneous leishmaniasis and new world cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis

Estimated worldwide incidence of tegumentary leishmaniasis (cutaneous leishmaniasis [CL] and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis [MCL]) is over 1.5 million cases per year in 82 countries, with 90 % of cases occurring in Afghanistan, Brazil, Iran, Peru, Saudi Arabia and Syria. Current treatments of CL are poorly justified and have sub-optimal effectiveness. Treatment can be based on topical or systemic regimens. These different options must be based on Leishmania species, geographic regions, and clinical presentations. In certain cases of Old World CL (OWCL), lesions can spontaneously heal without any need for therapeutic intervention. Local therapies (thermotherapy, cryotherapy, paromomycin ointment, local infiltration with antimonials) are good options with less systemic toxicity, reserving systemic treatments (azole drugs, miltefosine, antimonials, amphotericin B formulations) mainly for complex cases. The majority of New World CL (NWCL) types require systemic treatment (mainly with pentavalent antimonials), either to speed the healing or to prevent dissemination to oral-nasal mucosa as MCL (NWMCL). These types of lesions are potentially serious and always require systemic-based regimens, mainly antimonials and pentamidine; however, the associated immunotherapy is promising. This paper is an exhaustive review of the published literature on the treatment of OWCL, NWCL and NWMCL, and provides treatment recommendations stratified according to their level of evidence regarding the species of Leishmania implicated and the geographical location of the infection.

Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis: a systematic review update

Introduction

Leishmaniasis is an important public health problem in the Americas. A Cochrane review published in 2009 analyzed 38 randomized controlled trials (RCT). We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effects of therapeutic interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.

Methods

All studies were extracted from PubMed, Embase, Lilacs (2009 to July, 2012 respectively), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (6-2012) and references of identified publications. RCTs’ risk of bias was assessed.

Results

We identified 1865 references of interest; we finally included 10 new RCTs. The risk of bias scored low or unclear for most domains. Miltefosine was not significantly different from meglumine antimoniate in the complete cure rate at 6 months (4 RCT; 584 participants; ITT; RR: 1.12; 95%CI: 0.85 to 1.47; I2 78%). However a significant difference in the rate of complete cure favoring miltefosine at 6 months was found in L. panamensis and L. guyanensis (2 RCTs, 206 participants; ITT; RR: 1.22; 95%CI: 1.02 to 1.46; I2 0%). One RCT found that meglumine antimoniate was superior to pentamidine in the rate of complete cure for L. braziliensis (80 participants, ITT; RR: 2.21; 95%CI: 1.41 to 3.49), while another RCT assessing L. guyanensis did not find any significant difference. Although meta-analysis of three studies found a significant difference in the rate of complete cure at 3 months favoring imiquimod versus placebo (134 participants; ITT; RR: 1.45; 95%CI: 1.12 to 1.88; I2 0%), no significant differences were found at 6 and 12 months. Thermotherapy and nitric oxide were not superior to meglumine antimoniate.

Conclusion

Therapeutic interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis are varied and should be decided according to the context. Since mucosal disease is the more neglected form of leishmaniasis a multicentric trial should be urgently considered.

Topical paromomycin with or without gentamicin for cutaneous leishmaniasis

BACKGROUND

There is a need for a simple and efficacious treatment for cutaneous leishmaniasis with an acceptable side-effect profile.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, vehicle-controlled phase 3 trial of topical treatments containing 15% paromomycin, with and without 0.5% gentamicin, for cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania major in Tunisia. We randomly assigned 375 patients with one to five ulcerative lesions from cutaneous leishmaniasis to receive a cream containing 15% paromomycin-0.5% gentamicin (called WR 279,396), 15% paromomycin alone, or vehicle control (with the same base as the other two creams but containing neither paromomycin nor gentamicin). Each lesion was treated once daily for 20 days. The primary end point was the cure of the index lesion. Cure was defined as at least 50% reduction in the size of the index lesion by 42 days, complete reepithelialization by 98 days, and absence of relapse by the end of the trial (168 days). Any withdrawal from the trial was considered a treatment failure.

RESULTS

The rate of cure of the index lesion was 81% (95% confidence interval [CI], 73 to 87) for paromomycin-gentamicin, 82% (95% CI, 74 to 87) for paromomycin alone, and 58% (95% CI, 50 to 67) for vehicle control (P<0.001 for each treatment group vs. the vehicle-control group). Cure of the index lesion was accompanied by cure of all other lesions except in five patients, one in each of the paromomycin groups and three in the vehicle-control group. Mild-to-moderate application-site reactions were more frequent in the paromomycin groups than in the vehicle-control group.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial provides evidence of the efficacy of paromomycin-gentamicin and paromomycin alone for ulcerative L. major disease. (Funded by the Department of the Army; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00606580.).

Modes of action of Leishmanicidal antimicrobial peptides

Leishmaniasis is one of the major neglected tropical diseases of the world. It is present in 88 countries with an estimated number of 500,000 cases of visceral leishmaniasis and 1.5 million cases of cutaneous disease. No effective vaccinations are available against leishmaniasis and the efficacy of existing treatments is compromised due to the emergence of drug resistance. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop new compounds with antileishmanial activity. Antimicrobial peptides have potential as novel antileishmanial therapy, either for use alone or in combination with current drug regimens. The modes of action of these peptides against Leishmania includes: membrane disruption leading to necrotic cell death; induction of apoptosis; binding to intracellular target(s); and indirect effects via immunomodulation of host immune cells. This article reviews the mechanisms of action of antimicrobial peptides with leishmanicidal activity.

Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis

BACKGROUND

Pentavalent antimonial drugs are the most prescribed treatment for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. Other drugs have been used with varying success.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of therapeutic interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (January 2009), the Register of Controlled Clinical Trials in The Cochrane Library (Issue 1,2009), MEDLINE (2003 to January 2009), EMBASE (2005 to January 2009), LILACS (from inception to January 2009), CINAHL (1982-May 2007) and other databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing treatments for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 trials involving 2728 participants. Results are based on individual studies or limited pooled analyses. There was good evidence in:Leishmania braziliensis and L. panamensis infections:Intramuscular (IM) meglumine antimoniate (MA) was better than oral allopurinol for 28 days (1RCT n=127, RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.26, 0.58). Intravenous (IV)MA for 20-days was better than 3-day and 7-day IVMA plus 15% paromomycin plus 12% methylbenzethonium chloride (PR-MBCL) or 7-day IVMA (1RCT n= 150, RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.11, 0.50; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.53, 0.90; RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.44, 0.92 respectively). Oral allopurinol plus antimonials was better than IV antimonials (2RCT n= 168, RR 1.90; 95% CI 1.40, 2.59; I(2)=0%).L. braziliensis infections:Oral pentoxifylline plus IV sodium stibogluconate (SSG) was better than IVSSG (1RCT n= 23, RR 1.66; 95% CI 1.03, 2.69); IVMA was better than IM aminosidine sulphate (1RCT n= 38, RR 0.05; 95% CI 0.00, 0.78) and better than IV pentamidine isethionate (1RCT n= 80, RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.29, 0.71). Intramuscular MA was better than Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (1RCT n= 93, RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.32, 0.65).L .panamensis infections:Oral allopurinol was better than IVMA (1RCT n= 58, RR 2.20; 95% CI 1.34, 3.60). Aminosidine sulphate at doses of 12 mg/kg/day and 18 mg/kg/day for 14 days were better than aminosidine sulphate 12 mg/kg/day for 7 days (1RCT n= 60, RR 0.23; 95% CI 0.07, 0.73; RR 0.23; 95% CI 0.07, 0.73 respectively). Oral ketoconazole for 28 days, oral miltefosine and topical PR-MBCL were better than placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most trials have been designed and reported so poorly that they are inconclusive. There is a need for large well conducted studies that evaluate long-term effects of current therapies to improve quality and standardization of methods.

Is paromomycin an effective and safe treatment against cutaneous leishmaniasis? A meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials

Background

High cost, poor compliance, and systemic toxicity have limited the use of pentavalent antimony compounds (SbV), the treatment of choice for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Paromomycin (PR) has been developed as an alternative to SbV, but existing data are conflicting.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, without language restriction, through August 2007, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy or safety between PR and placebo or SbV. Primary outcome was clinical cure, defined as complete healing, disappearance, or reepithelialization of all lesions. Data were extracted independently by two investigators, and pooled using a random-effects model. Fourteen trials including 1,221 patients were included. In placebo-controlled trials, topical PR appeared to have therapeutic activity against the old world and new world CL, with increased local reactions, when used with methylbenzethonium chloride (MBCL) compared to when used alone (risk ratio [RR] for clinical cure, 2.58 versus 1.01: RR for local reactions, 1.60 versus 1.07). In SbV-controlled trials, the efficacy of topical PR was not significantly different from that of intralesional SbV in the old world CL (RR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.26–1.89), whereas topical PR was inferior to parenteral SbV in treating the new world CL (0.67; 0.54–0.82). No significant difference in efficacy was found between parenteral PR and parenteral SbV in the new world CL (0.88; 0.56–1.38). Systemic side effects were fewer with topical or parenteral PR than parenteral SbV.

Conclusions/Significance

Topical PR with MBCL could be a therapeutic alternative to SbV in selected cases of the old world CL. Development of new formulations with better efficacy and tolerability remains to be an area of future research.

Millions of people worldwide are suffering from cutaneous leishmaniasis that is caused by parasites of the genus Leishmania. Although pentavalent antimony compounds are the treatment of choice, their use is limited by high cost, poor compliance, and systemic toxicity. Paromomycin was developed to overcome such limitations. However, there is no consensus on its efficacy. This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of paromomycin compared with placebo and pentavalent antimony compounds. Fourteen randomized controlled trials, including 1,221 patients, met our selection criteria. Topical paromomycin appeared to have therapeutic activity against the old world and new world cutaneous leishmaniasis, with increased local reactions, when combined with methylbenzethonium chloride. Topical paromomycin was not significantly different from intralesional pentavalent antimony compounds in treating the old world form, whereas it was inferior to parenteral pentavalent antimony compounds in treating the new world form. However, a similar efficacy was found between parenteral paromomycin and pentavalent antimony compounds in treating the new world form. Fewer systemic side effects were observed with topical and parenteral paromomycin than pentavalent antimony compounds. These results suggest that topical paromomycin with methylbenzethonium chloride could be a therapeutic alternative to pentavalent antimony compounds for selected cases of the old world cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Paromomycin

Paromomycin is an aminoglycoside that is active against Gram-negative and many Gram-positive bacteria as well as some protozoa and cestodes. It is out of use as an antibiotic but was licensed in 2007 in India as an effective, well tolerated and affordable treatment for visceral leishmaniasis (VL) at a dose of 11 mg/kg (base) for 21 days. Currently, the non-profit group Drugs for Neglected Diseases Initiative is conducting studies on paromomycin (as monotherapy and in combination) in VL in Africa, and the Institute for OneWorld Health is conducting a Phase IV study in India. Paromomycin in combination with sodium stibogluconate has proven to be effective in African and Indian VL and improves survival in African VL. To prevent the emergence of drug-resistant leishmaniasis in areas of anthroponotic transmission (India and Africa), paromomycin should be used as part of combination therapy for VL. Further trials testing different combinations are much needed. In addition, the distribution of paromomycin (like other drugs for leishmaniasis) should be well regulated and preferably restricted to the public sector. These strategies should ensure the longevity of paromomycin as a useful drug for VL.

Treatment of leishmaniasis with miltefosine: 2008 status

BACKGROUND

Miltefosine is the first recognized oral treatment for leishmaniasis. It was first registered, in 2002, for Indian visceral leishmaniasis, and was reviewed by the present author in 2005.

QUESTION

Miltefosine is now being used for the full range of clinical leishmaniasis. The present review addresses non-clinical and clinical advances since 2005.

METHODS

PubMed was accessed for all articles on miltefosine from 2005 to 2008.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Miltefosine is effective and can be recommended for visceral disease in India and in Ethiopia, and for cutaneous disease in Colombia and Bolivia. For unusual forms of disease that require long periods of treatment such as diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis and post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis, oral miltefosine is probably the treatment of choice.

Tratamento da Leishmaniose Tegumentar Americana

A leishmaniose tegumentar americana é doença infecciosa da pele e mucosa, cujo agente etiológico é um protozoário do gênero Leishmania. Seu tratamento é desafio porque as drogas disponíveis apresentam elevada toxicidade, e nenhuma delas é bastante eficaz. A recidiva, a falha terapêutica em pacientes imunodeprimidos e a resistência ao tratamento são fatores que motivam a busca de uma droga ideal.

Miltefosine: oral treatment of leishmaniasis

The well-known problems of classic treatment of the leishmaniases with pentavalent antimony (reduced efficacy), difficulties of administration and increasing frequency and severity of adverse events have stimulated the search for new drugs to treat these diseases. Other injectable, oral and topical drugs have not been consistently effective, especially in the modern World. Beginning in 1998, Indian researchers conducted several trials with hexadecylphosphocholine (miltefosine) in patients with visceral leishmaniasis, and in 1999, clinical studies were initiated in Colombia for cutaneous disease. More than 2500 patients have been treated, including patients with diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis, mucosal disease and patients coinfected with HIV. Cure rates between 91 and 100% were reached with a dose of 2.5 mg/kg/day for 28 days, with no difference between treatment-naive and relapsing patients. Mild gastrointestinal events were present in 35-60% of patients and 10-20% had mild transaminase and creatinine elevations. Miltefosine has potent leishmanicidal activity as a consequence of its interference in parasite metabolic pathways and the induction of apoptosis. Miltefosine is the first effective and safe oral agent with the potential to treat all major clinical presentations of leishmaniasis.

Double blind, randomized controlled trial, to evaluate the effectiveness of a controlled nitric oxide releasing patch versus meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis [NCT00317629]

Background

Cutaneous Leishmaniasis is a worldwide disease, endemic in 88 countries, that has shown an increasing incidence over the last two decades. So far, pentavalent antimony compounds have been considered the treatment of choice, with a percentage of cure of about 85%. However, the high efficacy of these drugs is counteracted by their many disadvantages and adverse events. Previous studies have shown nitric oxide to be a potential alternative treatment when administered topically with no serious adverse events. However, due to the unstable nitric oxide release, the topical donors needed to be applied frequently, making the adherence to the treatment difficult. The electrospinning technique has allowed the production of a multilayer transdermal patch that produces a continuous and stable nitric oxide release. The main objective of this study is to evaluate this novel nitric oxide topical donor for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Methods and design

A double-blind, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial, including 620 patients from endemic areas for Leishmaniasis in Colombia was designed to investigate whether this patch is as effective as meglumine antimoniate for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis but with less adverse events. Subjects with ulcers characteristic of cutaneous leishmaniasis will be medically evaluated and laboratory tests and parasitological confirmation performed. After checking the inclusion/exclusion criteria, the patients will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. During 20 days Group 1 will receive simultaneously meglumine antimoniate and placebo of nitric oxide patches while Group 2 will receive placebo of meglumine antimoniate and active nitric oxide patches. During the treatment visits, the medications will be daily administered and the presence of adverse events assessed. During the follow-up, the research group will visit the patients at days 21, 45, 90 and 180. The healing process of the ulcer, the health of the participants, recidivisms and/or reinfection will also be assessed. The evolution of the ulcers will be photographically registered. In case that the effectiveness of the patches is demonstrated, a novel and safe therapeutic alternative for one of the most important public health problems in many countries will be available to patients.

Clinical status of agents being developed for leishmaniasis

Leishmaniasis, which exists in both visceral and cutaneous forms, is currently treated with intramuscular antimony or intravenous amphotericin B. The primary unmet need is for oral therapy. Of the several drugs in clinical development, miltefosine is unique in being an oral agent with efficacy against both forms of the disease. Sitamaquine is an oral agent with substantial but not sufficient efficacy against visceral disease. Oral fluconazole has been shown to be more effective than placebo in one instance: for Leishmania major cutaneous disease from Saudi Arabia. Paromomycin is in widespread trial. Topical paromomycin formulations are being tested for cutaneous disease, and intramuscular paromomycin is in Phase III trial for Indian visceral disease. The most likely replacements for present therapy are oral miltefosine for many of the visceral and cutaneous syndromes, intramuscular paromomycin for visceral disease and topical paromomycin for some forms of cutaneous disease.

Successful liposomal amphotericin B treatment of Leishmania braziliensis cutaneous leishmaniasis

Existing systemic treatments for New World cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) caused by Leishmania (vianna) braziliensis are unsatisfactory. Liposomal amphotericin B has been used extensively for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis, but in few cases of CL, and an appropriate regimen for CL has not been described. We successfully treated a patient with multiple L. braziliensis CL lesions acquired in Belize. Liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) was given to our patient as an inpatient for seven daily doses of 3 mg kg(-1) day(-1) and then as an outpatient at 3 mg kg(-1) twice weekly for a further three weeks, a total of 40 mg kg(-1). Liposomal amphotericin offers a well-tolerated alternative to pentavalent antimony or amphotericin B deoxycholate for the systemic treatment of New World CL.

Miltefosine to treat leishmaniasis

Leishmaniasis exists in both visceral and cutaneous forms, and miltefosine is the first oral agent with demonstrable efficacy against both types of this disease. At a dose of approximately 2.5 mg/kg/day for 28 days, miltefosine is > 90% curative for visceral disease in India and cutaneous disease in Colombia. Miltefosine is a lecithin analogue and its mechanism may be to inhibit phosphatidylcholine biosynthesis in the causative parasites. The clinical half-life of miltefosine is approximately 7 days. Whether or not miltefosine can be used for widespread out-patient treatment of individuals and whole populations depends on whether its efficacy and tolerability can be maintained in further treatment trials.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis: current and future management

Leishmaniasis remains a major world health problem that continues to increase in incidence. This review considers epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis and current treatment options. Recent developments in the treatment of simple cutaneous leishmaniasis are discussed followed by speculation about future therapies.

Miltefosine for New World Cutaneous Leishmaniasis

The oral agent miltefosine has demonstrated a >95% cure rate in Indian visceral leishmaniasis. We performed a large, placebo-controlled study of miltefosine therapy (2.5 mg/kg per day orally for 28 days) against cutaneous leishmaniasis in Colombia and Guatemala. In regions in Colombia where Leishmania vianna panamensis is common, the per-protocol cure rates for miltefosine and placebo were 91% (40 of 44 patients) and 38% (9 of 24). These values are similar to historic values for the antimony standard of care and placebo. In regions in Guatemala where L. v. braziliensis and L. mexicana mexicana are common, the per-protocol cure rates were 53% (20 of 38) for miltefosine and 21% (4 of 19) for placebo. The miltefosine rate was lower than historic antimony cure rates of >90%. Miltefosine was well tolerated. Miltefosine is a useful oral agent against cutaneous leishmaniasis due to L. v. panamensis in Colombia but not against leishmaniasis due to L. v. braziliensis in Guatemala.

Therapeutic trial in experimental tegumentary leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania (Leishmania) amazonensis. A comparative study between mefloquine and aminosidine

One hundred and eighty-two male inbred C57/BL/6 mice were infected with 3 x 10(6) Leishmania (Leishmania) amazonensis promastigotes of the MHOM/BR/PH8 strain by means of a subcutaneous injection in the right ear. The animals were separated in three groups: 1) oral mefloquine hydrochloride treatment (16 mg/kg/day/10 days), 2) intramuscular aminosidine (Paromomycin) treatment (20 mg/kg/20 days) and 3) control. Twenty-six mice of each treated group were sacrificed, one at the end of treatment (nine weeks after inoculation), and one six weeks later (fifteen weeks after inoculation). Control Group animals were sacrificed at weeks six, nine and fifteen after inoculation. There was no significant difference between Group 1 (mefloquine) and Group 3 (control) subjects. Group 2 animals (aminosidine) presented the smallest differences of all, both at the end of the treatment and six weeks later. The histopato-logical parameters have shown the following findings: a) there was no significant difference between the mefloquine treated group and the control group; the group treated with aminosidine showed fewer of vacuolated macrophages than the control group, at week 9 (end of treatment). b) both at the end of treatment and six weeks later, evaluation of tissue necrosis and tissue fibrosis revealed no differences between the treated groups. It was found that six weeks after the end of treatment, mice in the control group presented significantly more severe degrees of fibrosis than mice in the other groups. It can be concluded that mefloquine showed limited therapeutic effect in this experimental model, whereas aminosidine had a significant effect. Nevertheless, neither of them resulted in cure of the lesions.

[Treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis with aminosidine sulfate: results of two year follow-up]

In 1996, 20 of 21 patients with mucosal leishmaniasis, treated in 1994 with aminosidine sulfate, 16mg/kg/day salt, by intramuscular injection for 20 days, were clinically evaluated. One patient died due to disease not related to mucosal leishmaniasis. Seven of 14 patients (66.7% N = 21) who achieved complete remission three months after treatment remained clinically cured 24 months later and seven relapsed in the same period (50% N = 14). Sorological follow-up showed poor correlation with the results of clinical examination.

New developments in the chemotherapy of leishmaniasis

Several significant advances in the chemotherapy of leishmaniasis have occurred in the last 10 years. Some of these advances have arisen due to the greater awareness of the pharmacokinetic properties of drugs, such as the pentavalent antimonials, while others have resulted from the introduction of drugs new to the treatment of leishmaniasis, such as aminosidine which can be used both systemically and topically against cutaneous leishmaniasis. The most encouraging advance is the use of lipid-associated amphotericin B; very short treatments with these preparations have been shown to be effective. Other studies have shown the usefulness of combination therapy and the use of immune modulators. A number of biochemical pathways in Leishmania, such as those associated with purine and sterol metabolism, are known to be distinct from those of the mammalian hosts. These have been exploited in the search for the rational choice of anti-leishmanial agents.