Apparent lack of cross-reactivity for infusion-related reactions between two forms of lipid-based amphotericin B.

PURPOSE: The case of a patient who experienced probable infusion-related reactions to amphotericin B lipid complex (ABLC) but tolerated continued amphotericin B therapy after a switch to an alternative lipid-based formulation is reported.

SUMMARY: A 28-year-old immunocompromised man with pneumonia, respiratory failure, and neutropenic fever was initiated on ABLC and other antibiotics for suspected invasive aspergillosis. Due to the patient's deteriorating renal function, the use of amphotericin B was deemed preferable to the standard therapy for invasive aspergillosis (voriconazole) even though he had experienced likely infusion-related reactions to ABLC on two prior occasions. During the infusion of ABLC, significant increases in the man's temperature, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, and heart rate were observed. Although those symptoms were suspected to be infusion related, it was decided that continuing amphotericin B therapy with an alternative lipid-based form of the drug was the best course of action. After the patient was switched to liposomal amphotericin B one day later, no further infusion-related adverse reactions were noted for the duration of therapy. While this case suggests that adverse reactions to one type of amphotericin B might not occur with the use of an alternative formulation, further research is needed to better define the potential for cross-reactivity among various forms of amphotericin B and related safe-infusion practices.

CONCLUSION

A patient with invasive aspergillosis who experienced likely infusion- related reactions to ABLC was able to tolerate continued amphotericin B therapy after a switch to the liposomal formulation.