Comparative study on the short term efficacy and adverse effects of miltefosine and meglumine antimoniate in dogs with natural leishmaniosis
- 453 Downloads
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of oral administration of miltefosine (Milteforan®) at 2 mg/kg/day for 28 days (Group M; n = 60) with a subcutaneous administration of meglumine antimoniate (Glucantime®) at 50 mg/kg/12 h or at 100 mg/kg/day for 28 days (Group G; n = 59) in the treatment of canine leishmaniosis in dogs. Out of 119 dogs included in the study, 90 could be used for efficacy assessment and 112 for safety assessment. Treated dogs were followed up for 6 weeks, with re-checks every 14 days. The mean total clinical scores significantly decreased throughout the study in both treatment groups. The evolution of parasitological results after treatment (D42) shows a high percentage of dogs with negative bone marrow smears, 90% and 91.3% in groups M and G respectively, and did not significantly differ between groups (p = 0.8066). Out of the 112 dogs used for the safety assessment, only 26 dogs (23.2%) presented product-related adverse events concerning the gastrointestinal tract. These results showed that miltefosine at 2 mg/kg once daily can be safely used over a 28-day period in the treatment of canine leishmaniosis and provides both a steadily increasing improvement of the clinical signs and a good leishmanicidal efficacy.
KeywordsAllopurinol Miltefosine Bone Marrow Smear Pyriproxyfen Pyrantel
This study was supported by VIRBAC S.A. (France). The authors are indebted to all practitioners involved for their valuable help.
- Baneth G (2006) Leishmaniases. In: Green CE (ed) Infectious disease of the dog and cat. Elsevier, St Louis, Missouri, pp 685–696Google Scholar
- Bourdoiseau G, Denerolle P (2000) Traitement de la leishmaniose canine: actualités. Revue Méd Vét 151:395–400Google Scholar
- Cruz I, Cañavate C, Rubio JM, Morales MA, Chicharro C, Laguna F, Jiménez-Mejías M, Sirena G, Videla S, Alvar J (2002) A nested polymerase chain reaction (Ln-PCR) for diagnosing and monitoring Leishmania infantum infection in patients co-infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 96(1):185–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Denerolle P (1996) Leishmaniose canine: difficultés du diagnostic et du traitement (125 cas). Prat Méd Chir Anim Comp 31:137–145Google Scholar
- Ikeda-García FA, Lopes RS, Marques FJ, Lima VMF, Morinishi CK, Bonello FL, Zanette MF, Perri SHV, Feitosa MM (2007) Clinical and parasitological evaluation of dogs naturally infected by Leishmania (Leishmania) chagasi submitted to treatment with meglumine antimoniate. Vet Parasitol 143:254–259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Manna L, Viola E, Pavone LM, Staiano N, Gravino AE (2005) Leishmanicidal activity of miltefosine in acute renal failure of naturally infected dogs. Worldleish3, Palermo-Terrasini, Sicily, Italy, p 165Google Scholar
- Manna L, Vitale F, Reale S, Picillo E, Neglia G, Vescio F, Gravino AE (2008b) Study of efficacy of miltefosine and allopurinol in dogs with leishmaniosis. The Veterinary Journal, doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2008.08.009.
- Miró G, Mateo M, Cruz I, Cañavate C, Nieto J, Montoya A, Galy S, Médaille C, Alvar J (2005) Miltefosine: a new treatment for canine leishmaniosis. Preliminary results. Worldleish3, Palermo-Terrasini, Sicily, Italy, p 175Google Scholar
- Miró G, Cardoso L, Pennisi MG, Oliva G, Baneth G (2008a) Canine leishmaniosis—new concepts and insights on an expanding zoonosis: part two. Trends in Parasitology 738:331–337Google Scholar
- Miró G, Oliva G, Cruz I, Cañavate C, Mortarino M, Vischer C, Bianciardi P (2008b) Multi-centric and controlled clinical field study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of miltefosine and allopurinol in the treatment of canine leishmaniosis. Veterinary Dermatology 19(Suppl. 1):7–8Google Scholar
- Oliva G, Scalone A, Foglia Manzillo V, Gramiccia M, Pagano A, Di Muccio T, Gradoni L (2006) Incidence and time course of Leishmania infantum infections examined by parasitological, serologic, and Nested-PCR techniques in a cohort of naïve dogs exposed to three consecutive transmission seasons. J Clin Microbiol 44(4):1318–1322CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pouyol O (2004) Leishmaniose: des consensus diagnostiques et thérapeutiques. La Dépêche Vétérinaire, no 830Google Scholar
- Riera C, Valladares JE, Gallego M, Aisa MJ, Castillejo S, Fisa R, Ribas N, Carrio J, Alberola J, Arboix M (1999) Serological and parasitological follow-up in dogs experimentally infected with Leishmania infantum and treated with meglumine antimoniate. Vet Parasitol 84(1–2):33–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Saridomichelakis MN, Mylonakis ME, Leontides LS, Ch Billinis, Koutinas AF, Galatos AD, Gouletsou P, Diakou A, Kontos VI (2005) Periodic administration of allopurinol is not effective for the prevention of canine leishmaniosis (Leishmania infantum) in the endemic areas. Vet Parasitol 130:199–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Solano-Gallego L, Riera C, Roura X, Iniesta L, Gallego M, Valladares JE, Fisa R, Castillejo S, Alberola J, Ferrer L, Arboix M, Portus M (2001a) Leishmania infantum-specific IgG, IgG1 and IgG2 antibody responses in healthy and ill dogs from endemic areas. Evolution in the course of infection and after treatment. Vet Parasitol 96(4):265–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar