Comparison of safety and toxicity of liposomal versus conventional Doxorubicin: an updated review

Rakshitha B. V., Nalini G. K., Sahana G. N., Deepak P., Jayashree V. Nagaral, Mohith N., Divyashree C. R.


Cancer persists to be a major cause of hospitalization and death every year. With the passage of time, new formulations of anticancer drugs are being introduced to the market and are drawing the concern of healthcare professionals in terms of the superiority, toxicology, and cost-effectiveness of the new formulations in comparison to the conventional formulation of the same drugs. Doxorubicin, a highly potent chemotherapeutic agent, it comes with three formulations (pegylated liposomal, nonpegylated liposomal and non-liposomal conventional formulations). English-language literature of the three formulations of Doxorubicin has been reviewed to inform the healthcare professionals regarding the differences between these formulations. Liposomal Doxorubicin promotes better toxicology profile than non-liposomal conventional Doxorubicin with an increased cost. Due to very limited studies, the cost-effectiveness of liposomal Doxorubicin is not well defined. Apart from that, this review highlights the inter patient variability in regard to the clearance and volume of distribution following the administration of liposomal Doxorubicin. In conclusion, further studies regarding the superiority of liposomal formulation of Doxorubicin , efficacy and dose standardization of liposomal Doxorubicin should be sought in the near future in a more better way.


Cancer, Cardiotoxicity, Doxorubicin, Liposome, Pegylated liposomal formulations

Full Text:



WHO 2018. Facts sheets on cancer from IARC. Available at:

Taylor K, Aulton M. Aulton's pharmaceutics: The Design and Manufacture of Medicines. 4th ed. United Kingdom: Churchill Livingstone; 2013:790-795.

Rang HP, Maureen DM. Rang & Dale′s Pharmacology. 7th ed. United Kingdom: Churchill Livingstone; 2012:673-688.

Large DE, Soucy JR, Hebert J, Auguste DT. Advances in Receptor‐Mediated, Tumor‐Targeted Drug Delivery. Adv Therapeutics. 2019 Jan;2(1):1800091.

Pathak N, Pathak P. Applications liposome in cancer drug delivery and treatment: A review. Asian J Pharmaceutical Res Develop. 2019 Feb 15;7(1):62-5.

Riaz MK, Riaz MA, Zhang X, Lin C, Wong KH, Chen X, et al. Surface Functionalization and Targeting Strategies of Liposomes in Solid Tumor Therapy: A Review. Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Jan 9;19(1).pii: E195.

Duggan ST, Keating GM. Pegylated liposomal Doxorubicin: A review of its use in metastatic breast cancer, ovarian cancer, multiple myeloma and AIDS-related Kaposi′s sarcoma. Drugs. 2011;71(18):2531-58.

Allen TM, Cullis PR. Liposomal drug delivery systems: From concept to clinical applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2013;65(1):36-48.

Pawar HR, Bhosale SS, Derle ND. Use of liposomes in cancer therapy: a review. Int J Pharmaceutical Sci Res. 2012 Oct 1;3(10):3585.

Berger JL, Smith A, Zorn KK, Sukumvanich P, Olawaiye AB, Kelley J, et al. Outcomes analysis of an alternative formulation of PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin in recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma during the drug shortage era. Onco Targets Ther. 2014 Aug 8;7:1409-13.

Abraham SA, Waterhouse DN, Mayer LD, Cullis PR, Madden TD, Bally MB. The liposomal formulation of doxorubicin. Methods Enzymol. 2005;391:71-97.

Bally MB, Nayar R, Masin D, Hope MJ, Cullis PR, Mayer LD. Liposomes with entrapped doxorubicin exhibit extended blood residence times. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1990 Mar 30;1023(1):133-9.

Speth PA, van Hoesel QG, Haanen C. Clinical pharmacokinetics of doxorubicin. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1988 Jul;15(1):15-31.

Bachur NR, Steele M, Meriwether WD, Hildebrand RC. Cellular pharmacodynamics of several anthracycline antibiotics. J medicinal chem. 1976 May;19(5):651-4.

La-Beck NM, Zamboni BA, Gabizon A, Schmeeda H, Amantea M, Gehrig PA, et al. Factors affecting the pharmacokinetics of pegylated liposomal Doxorubicin in patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2012;69(1):43-50.

Boers-Sonderen MJ, van Herpen CM, van der Graaf WT, Desar IM, van der Logt MG, de Beer YM, et al. Correlation of toxicity and efficacy with pharmacokinetics (PK) of pegylated liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD) (Caelyx®). Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2014;74(3):457-63.

Anders CK, Adamo B, Karginova O, Deal AM, Rawal S, Darr D, et al. Pharmacokinetics and efficacy of PEGylated liposomal Doxorubicin in an intracranial model of breast;8(5):e61359.

Wasle I, Gamerith G, Kocher F, Mondello P, Jaeger T, Walder A, et al. Non-pegylated liposomal Doxorubicin in lymphoma: patterns of toxicity and outcome in a large observational trial. Annals of hematol. 2015 Apr 1;94(4):593-601.

Larbi A, Rymkiewicz P, Vasudev A, Low I, Shadan NB, Mustafah S, et al. The immune system in the elderly: A fair fight against diseases? Aging Health. 2013;9(1):35-47.

Monk BJ, Herzog TJ, Kaye SB, Krasner CN, Vermorken JB, Muggia FM, et al. Trabectedin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in recurrent ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(19):3107-14.

Crivellari D, Gray KP, Dellapasqua S, Puglisi F, Ribi K, Price KN, et al. Adjuvant pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for older women with endocrine nonresponsive breast cancer who are NOT suitable for a standard chemotherapy regimen: The CASA randomized trial. Breast. 2013;22:130-7.

Wong AL, Seng KY, Ong EM, Wang LZ, Oscar H, Cordero MT, et al. Body fat composition impacts the hematologic toxicities and pharmacokinetics of doxorubicin in Asian breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;144(1):143-52.

Xu L, Wang W, Sheng YC, Zheng QS. Pharmacokinetics and its relation to toxicity of pegylated-liposomal doxorubicin in Chinese patients with breast tumours. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2010;35(5):593-601.

Ngan YH, Gupta M. A comparison between liposomal and nonliposomal formulations of Doxorubicin in the treatment of cancer: An updated review. Arch Pharma Pract. 2016 Jan 1;7(1):1-13.