Pfizer for Professionals Pfizer for Professionals




Pfizer Medical Information
(Search Medical Responses)
WyethHCP.com
(Access Wyeth for Professionals)
Explore Other Online Resources
ppn-vr-sso-links.htm
To report an adverse event or to speak to a member of Pfizer Medical Information, please call 1-800-438-1985

Share Your Feedback
Prescribing Information
VFEND® I.V. (voriconazole) for Injection
VFEND® Tablets (voriconazole)
VFEND® (voriconazole) for Oral Suspension
Clinical Studies
Return to the VFEND Product Center

Voriconazole, administered orally or parenterally, has been evaluated as primary or salvage therapy in 520 patients aged 12 years and older with infections caused by Aspergillus spp., Fusarium spp., and Scedosporium spp.

Invasive Aspergillosis
Voriconazole was studied in patients for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis (randomized, controlled study 307/602), for primary and salvage therapy of aspergillosis (non-comparative study 304) and for treatment of patients with invasive aspergillosis who were refractory to, or intolerant of, other antifungal therapy (non-comparative study 309/604).

Study 307/602
The efficacy of voriconazole compared to amphotericin B in the primary treatment of acute invasive aspergillosis was demonstrated in 277 patients treated for 12 weeks in Study 307/602. The majority of study patients had underlying hematologic malignancies, including bone marrow transplantation. The study also included patients with solid organ transplantation, solid tumors, and AIDS. The patients were mainly treated for definite or probable invasive aspergillosis of the lungs. Other aspergillosis infections included disseminated disease, CNS infections and sinus infections. Diagnosis of definite or probable invasive aspergillosis was made according to criteria modified from those established by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NIAID MSG/EORTC).

Voriconazole was administered intravenously with a loading dose of 6 mg/kg every 12 hours for the first 24 hours followed by a maintenance dose of 4 mg/kg every 12 hours for a minimum of seven days. Therapy could then be switched to the oral formulation at a dose of 200 mg Q12h. Median duration of IV voriconazole therapy was 10 days (range 2-90 days). After IV voriconazole therapy, the median duration of PO voriconazole therapy was 76 days (range 2-232 days).

Patients in the comparator group received conventional amphotericin B as a slow infusion at a daily dose of 1.0-1.5 mg/kg/day. Median duration of IV amphotericin therapy was 12 days (range 1-85 days). Treatment was then continued with other licensed antifungal therapy (OLAT), including itraconazole and lipid amphotericin B formulations. Although initial therapy with conventional amphotericin B was to be continued for at least two weeks, actual duration of therapy was at the discretion of the investigator. Patients who discontinued initial randomized therapy due to toxicity or lack of efficacy were eligible to continue in the study with OLAT treatment.

A satisfactory global response at 12 weeks (complete or partial resolution of all attributable symptoms, signs, radiographic/bronchoscopic abnormalities present at baseline) was seen in 53% of voriconazole treated patients compared to 32% of amphotericin B treated patients (Table 4). A benefit of voriconazole compared to amphotericin B on patient survival at Day 84 was seen with a 71% survival rate on voriconazole compared to 58% on amphotericin B (Table 6).

Table 6 also summarizes the response (success) based on mycological confirmation and species.

Table 6
Overall Efficacy and Success by Species in the Primary Treatment of Acute Invasive Aspergillosis

Study 307/602
Comp

Study 304
The results of this comparative trial (Study 307/602) confirmed the results of an earlier trial in the primary and salvage treatment of patients with acute invasive aspergillosis (Study 304). In this earlier study, an overall success rate of 52% (26/50) was seen in patients treated with voriconazole for primary therapy. Success was seen in 17/29 (59%) with Aspergillus fumigatus infections and 3/6 (50%) patients with infections due to non-fumigatus species [A. flavus (1/1); A. nidulans (0/2); A. niger (2/2); A. terreus (0/1)]. Success in patients who received voriconazole as salvage therapy is presented in Table 7.

Study 309/604
Additional data regarding response rates in patients who were refractory to, or intolerant of, other antifungal agents are also provided in Table 7. Overall mycological eradication for culture-documented infections due to fumigatus and non-fumigatus species of Aspergillus was 36/82 (44%) and 12/30 (40%), respectively, in voriconazole treated patients. Patients had various underlying diseases and species other than A. fumigatus contributed to mixed infections in some cases.

For patients who were infected with a single pathogen and were refractory to, or intolerant of, other antifungal agents, the satisfactory response rates for voriconazole in studies 304 and 309/604 are presented in Table 7.

Table 7 Combined Response Data in Salvage Patients with Single Aspergillus Species

(Studies 304 and 309/604)
Comp

Nineteen patients had more than one species of Aspergillus isolated. Success was seen in 4/17 (24%) of these patients.

Candidemia in nonneutropenic patients and other deep tissue Candida infections
Voriconazole was compared to the regimen of amphotericin B followed by fluconazole in Study 608, an open label, comparative study in nonneutropenic patients with candidemia associated with clinical signs of infection. Patients were randomized in 2:1 ratio to receive either voriconazole (n=283) or the regimen of amphotericin B followed by fluconazole (n=139). Patients were treated with randomized study drug for a median of 15 days. Most of the candidemia in patients evaluated for efficacy was caused by C. albicans (46%), followed by C. tropicalis (19%), C. parapsilosis (17%), C. glabrata (15%), and C. krusei (1%).

An independent Data Review Committee (DRC), blinded to study treatment, reviewed the clinical and mycological data from this study, and generated one assessment of response for each patient. A successful response required all of the following: resolution or improvement in all clinical signs and symptoms of infection, blood cultures negative for Candida, infected deep tissue sites negative for Candida or resolution of all local signs of infection, and no systemic antifungal therapy other than study drug. The primary analysis, which counted DRC-assessed successes at the fixed time point (12 weeks after End of Therapy [EOT]), demonstrated that voriconazole was comparable to the regimen of amphotericin B followed by fluconazole (response rates of 41% and 41%, respectively) in the treatment of candidemia. Patients who did not have a 12-week assessment for any reason were considered a treatment failure.

The overall clinical and mycological success rates by Candida species in Study 150-608 are presented in Table 8.

Table 8
Overall Success Rates Sustained From EOT To The Fixed 12-Week Follow-Up Time Point By Baseline Pathogena,b

Comp

In a secondary analysis, which counted DRC-assessed successes at any time point (EOT, or 2, 6, or 12 weeks after EOT), the response rates were 65% for voriconazole and 71% for the regimen of amphotericin B followed by fluconazole.

In Studies 608 and 309/604 (non-comparative study in patients with invasive fungal infections who were refractory to, or intolerant of, other antifungal agents), voriconazole was evaluated in 35 patients with deep tissue Candida infections. A favorable response was seen in 4 of 7 patients with intraabdominal infections, 5 of 6 patients with kidney and bladder wall infections, 3 of 3 patients with deep tissue abscess or wound infection, 1 of 2 patients with pneumonia/pleural space infections, 2 of 4 patients with skin lesions, 1 of 1 patients with mixed intraabdominal and pulmonary infection, 1 of 2 patients with suppurative phlebitis, 1 of 3 patients with hepatosplenic infection, 1 of 5 patients with osteomyelitis, 0 of 1 with liver infection, and 0 of 1 with cervical lymph node infection.

Esophageal Candidiasis
The efficacy of oral voriconazole 200 mg bid compared to oral fluconazole 200 mg od in the primary treatment of esophageal candidiasis was demonstrated in Study 150-305, a double-blind, double-dummy study in immunocompromised patients with endoscopically-proven esophageal candidiasis. Patients were treated for a median of 15 days (range 1 to 49 days). Outcome was assessed by repeat endoscopy at end of treatment (EOT). A successful response was defined as a normal endoscopy at EOT or at least a 1-grade improvement over baseline endoscopic score. For patients in the Intent to Treat (ITT) population with only a baseline endoscopy, a successful response was defined as symptomatic cure or improvement at EOT compared to baseline. Voriconazole and fluconazole (200 mg od) showed comparable efficacy rates against esophageal candidiasis, as presented in Table 9.

Table 9
Success Rates in Patients Treated for Esophageal Candidiasis

Comp

Microbiologic success rates by Candida species are presented in Table 10.

Table 10
Clinical and mycological outcome by baseline pathogen in patients with esophageal candidiasis (Study 150-305).

Comp

Other Serious Fungal Pathogens
In pooled analyses of patients, voriconazole was shown to be effective against the following additional fungal pathogens:

Scedosporium apiospermum – Successful response to voriconazole therapy was seen in 15 of 24 patients (63%). Three of these patients relapsed within 4 weeks, including 1 patient with pulmonary, skin and eye infections, 1 patient with cerebral disease, and 1 patient with skin infection. Ten patients had evidence of cerebral disease and 6 of these had a successful outcome (1 relapse). In addition, a successful response was seen in 1 of 3 patients with mixed organism infections.

Fusarium spp. – Nine of 21 (43%) patients were successfully treated with voriconazole. Of these 9 patients, 3 had eye infections, 1 had an eye and blood infection, 1 had a skin infection, 1 had a blood infection alone, 2 had sinus infections, and 1 had disseminated infection (pulmonary, skin, hepatosplenic). Three of these patients (1 with disseminated disease, 1 with an eye infection and 1 with a blood infection) had Fusarium solani and were complete successes. Two of these patients relapsed, 1 with a sinus infection and profound neutropenia and 1 post surgical patient with blood and eye infections.

VFEND® I.V. (voriconazole) for Injection VFEND® Tablets (voriconazole) VFEND® (voriconazole) for Oral Suspension Clinical Studies

VFEND Safety Information
 

Important Safety Information

Most frequently reported adverse events (all causalities) in therapeutic trials were visual disturbances, fever, rash, vomiting, nausea, diarrhea, headache, sepsis, peripheral edema, abdominal pain, and respiratory disorder. Treatment-related adverse events that most often led to discontinuation in clinical trials were elevated LFTs, rash, and visual disturbances.

VFEND treatment–related visual disturbances are common. The effect of VFEND on visual function is not known if treatment continues beyond 28 days. There have been post-marketing reports of prolonged visual adverse events, including optic neuritis and papilledema. These events occurred primarily in severely ill patients who had underlying conditions and/or concomitant medications, which may have caused or contributed to the events. If treatment continues beyond 28 days, visual function should be monitored. Patients should be advised not to drive at night when taking VFEND and to avoid potentially hazardous tasks if they perceive any change in vision.

VFEND is contraindicated with terfenadine, astemizole, cisapride, pimozide, quinidine (since increased plasma concentrations of these drugs can lead to QT prolongation and rare occurrences of torsade de pointes), sirolimus, rifampin, rifabutin, carbamazepine, long-acting barbiturates, ergot alkaloids, and St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum). VFEND is also contraindicated with ritonavir (400 mg every 12 hours). If VFEND is coadministered with efavirenz, the VFEND maintenance dose should be increased to 400 mg every 12 hours and the efavirenz dose should be decreased to 300 mg every 24 hours. When treatment with VFEND is stopped, the initial dosage of efavirenz should be restored.

There have been uncommon cases of serious hepatic reactions during treatment with VFEND (clinical hepatitis, cholestasis, and fulminant hepatic failure, including fatalities). LFTs should be evaluated at the start of and during the course of therapy. Patients have rarely developed serious cutaneous reactions, such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome, during treatment with VFEND.

Pregnancy Category D.

vfend_safety_information.htm
SetPProProdListVar.htm
SetPFPGroupVar.htm