Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Comparing Oleylphosphocholine and Miltefosine for Treating Dog
By Lima, Isadora et al.·Published in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene·2025·alo Moniz Institute, Brazil·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Oleylphosphocholine versus Miltefosine for Canine Leishmaniasis.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 33 dogs in Brazil with leishmaniasis (a parasitic infection) were treated with either oleylphosphocholine (OlPC) or miltefosine, a standard medication for this disease. After 28 days of treatment, the dogs receiving OlPC showed significantly better improvement in their symptoms, such as swollen lymph nodes and skin lesions, compared to those on miltefosine. While most dogs improved, one dog treated with OlPC unfortunately died from kidney failure, which may have been related to pre-existing conditions. Overall, OlPC appears to be a promising new treatment option for dogs with leishmaniasis.
People also search for: dog leishmaniasis treatment · oleylphosphocholine for dogs · miltefosine side effects in dogs
Abstract
Oleylphosphocholine (OlPC) is a miltefosine derivative that is more effective than miltefosine against Leishmania infections in rodent models. Because canines are a natural host for Leishmania, the improved treatment of canine leishmaniasis is essential both for veterinary medicine and as a large animal model for clinical development. Oleylphosphocholine, at a dosage of 4 mg/kg/day for 28 days, was compared with the approved canine regimen of miltefosine at a dosage of 2 mg/kg/day for 28 days in 33 naturally infected Brazilian dogs (17 randomly assigned to receive OlPC versus 16 designated to receive miltefosine). The animals were followed for 5 months posttreatment. The primary endpoint was the clinical score, which was calculated as the sum of scores for each of 23 clinical parameters graded 0 (normal), 1 (somewhat abnormal), or 2 (markedly abnormal) by a blinded observer. A higher clinical score signified more severe disease. The mean (SD) clinical scores for the OlPC versus miltefosine groups are as follows: pretherapy, 10.1 (5.6) versus 7.7 (4.5; P = 0.19); 3 months posttherapy, 4.3 (4.1) versus 9.5 (4.9; P <0.01); 5 months posttherapy, 3.9 (3.8) versus 8.9 (4.7; P <0.01). Scores for lymph nodes, ear crusts, and splenic parasites were statistically lower for the OlPC group versus the miltefosine group, suggesting that both visceral and cutaneous parameters contributed to OlPC's statistically greater efficacy. One OlPC animal, with minimal splenic parasites pretreatment and zero parasites at the end of treatment, died of kidney failure due to immune-complex deposition, which was presumably already present pretreatment. The increase in blood creatinine values observed in OlPC animals warrants further study in future experiments. The superior clinical effect of OlPC in comparison to miltefosine in this canine study primes OlPC for development as an oral treatment for canine and human leishmaniasis.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39903935/