Evidence Hub

Early-Phase Adverse Effects and Management of Liposomal Amikacin Inhalation for Refractory Mycobacterium avium Complex Lung Disease in Real-World Settings

Morita A, Namkoong H, Yagi K, Asakura T, Hosoya M, Tanaka H, Lee H, Ogawa T et al.

Infection and drug resistance, 2022

11 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Purpose: Amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS), which efficiently allows amikacin to reach the pulmonary periphery for effect while minimising systemic adverse effects, was recently approved for treating Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) infections. The international Phase 3 open-label clinical trials showed promising results, contributing to sputum culture conversion, but few studies have examined the efficacy and adverse effects of ALIS using real-world data. We identified the clinical outcome and adverse effects of ALIS in the early phase of treatment, for more effective and safe use in clinical practice.

Patients and methods: The study population consisted of patients with MAC lung disease (MAC-LD), introduced to ALIS therapy after July 2021 at Keio University Hospital due to poor response to multidrug therapy. The sputum smear/culture results, symptoms, adverse effects, and the serum amikacin concentrations of the early phase of ALIS inhalation therapy were examined.

Results: A total of 11 patients (9 women; median age 64.6 years) were included in this study. The median disease duration of MAC-LD was 13.7 years, and all patients exhibited a positive culture at the beginning of ALIS inhalation. Three of the six patients (50.0%) who were initially sputum-smear-positive were confirmed to have become sputum-smear-negative within one month, including one culture conversion. ALIS inhalation therapy caused some adverse effects in nine patients (81.8%); however, no…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 11 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free