Literature DB >> 24669255

Evaluation of hypokalemia and potassium supplementation during administration of liposomal-amphotericin B.

Eiseki Usami1, Michio Kimura1, Tetsufumi Kanematsu2, Shinya Yoshida1, Takayuki Mori1, Keiji Nakashima1, Tomoko Matsuoka1, Tomoaki Yoshimura1, Hiromi Mori1, Tadashi Sugiyama3, Hitomi Teramachi4.   

Abstract

Patients prescribed liposomal-amphotericin B (L-AMB) frequently require supplemental potassium to prevent hypokalemia. The aim of this retrospective study was to examine the appropriate potassium supplementation conditions to treat hypokalemia induced by L-AMB. The subjects were 100 hematological patients who received L-AMB for the first time between April 2012 and March 2013. A total of seven patients were excluded. Of the remaining 93 patients, 48 (51.6%) were assigned to the group receiving supplemental potassium (supplementation group), and 45 (48.4%) were assigned to the group without potassium supplementation (non-supplementation group). Hypokalemia greater than grade 3 was exhibited by 50 of the 93 (53.8%) patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that the minimum serum potassium levels during L-AMB administration (≤2.98 mEq/l) were an independent factor significantly contributing to the effectiveness of potassium supplementation [odds ratio (OR), 3.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.44-9.59; P<0.01]. In addition, multivariate analysis revealed that the serum potassium levels (≥2.83 mEq/l) prior to the potassium supplementation were an independent factor significantly contributing to the development of proper potassium supplementation (OR, 14.21; 95% CI, 1.95-310.72; P=0.02), and no significant difference was observed in the dosage of the potassium supplementation administered to the patients who recovered from hypokalemia and those who did not. In conclusion, it is necessary to begin potassium supplementation prior to the reduction of the serum potassium levels to <2.83 mEq/l. Potassium supplementation at an early stage of L-AMB treatment is important to prevent severe electrolyte abnormalities.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hypokalemia; liposomal-amphotericin B; potassium supplementation; risk factor

Year:  2014        PMID: 24669255      PMCID: PMC3965133          DOI: 10.3892/etm.2014.1534

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Ther Med        ISSN: 1792-0981            Impact factor:   2.447


Introduction

Invasive fungal infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. Amphotericin B (AMB) possesses broad-spectrum antifungal activity and well-documented efficacy against Candida, Aspergillus and Cryptococcus infections (1). Liposomal-AMB (L-AMB), which was developed as a drug delivery system for AMB to reduce its adverse events (e.g., nephrotoxicity), replaced AMB (2) and is commonly used in clinical practice worldwide. L-AMB is recommended as a first-line drug for hematological patients in the guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (3,4). However, treatment with L-AMB may necessitate potassium supplementation to prevent hypokalemia. A previous study (5) reported the risk factors contributing to the occurrence of hypokalemia following L-AMB administration. The study revealed that patient’s serum albumin levels (≥2.82 mg/dl) at the start of L-AMB administration and history of hypokalemia prior to L-AMB administration were independent risk factors significantly contributing to the occurrence of hypokalemia (5). However, proper potassium supplementation for hypokalemia had not been sufficiently investigated. The present study therefore retrospectively examined proper potassium supplementation for hypokalemia induced by L-AMB

Subjects and methods

Subjects

The subjects were 100 hematological patients who received L-AMB for the first time at Ogaki Municipal Hospital (Ogaki-shi, Japan) between April 2012 and March 2013. Seven patients were excluded due to prior or ongoing treatments that affect potassium levels (e.g., furosemide or fluid replacement during L-AMB administration), or as they had serum potassium levels <3.0 mEq/l (hypokalemia higher than grade 3) prior to the L-AMB administration. Of the remaining 93 patients, 48 (51.6%) were assigned to the group receiving supplemental potassium (supplementation group), and 45 (48.4%) were assigned to the group without potassium supplementation (non-supplementation group) (Fig. 1). L-AMB was administered once a day for 1–2 h. This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee at Ogaki Municipal Hospital.
Figure 1

Subject selection and the number of subjects analyzed.

Background of the subjects

The backgrounds of the subjects treated with L-AMB were investigated for their gender, age, serum creatinine levels, treatment L-AMB dose, performance status (ECOG), underlying disease and prior use of antifungal drugs for a primary infection episode. The backgrounds between the supplementation or non-supplementation groups were compared.

Incidence of hypokalemia and potassium supplementation

Incidences of hypokalemia greater than grade 3 (serum potassium levels <3.0 mEq/l) were identified and compared between the groups. Treatment dosing for potassium supplementation in the supplementation group was investigated.

Change in the serum potassium levels

The change and the minimum levels of serum potassium during L-AMB administration were identified and compared between the groups.

Investigation of the factors affecting the potassium supplementation during L-AMB administration

The factors affecting the potassium supplementation during L-AMB administration were examined between the groups.

Investigation of the factors affecting proper potassium supplementation in the supplementation group

The serum potassium levels following the potassium supplementation were investigated, and the factors affecting proper potassium supplementation were examined. The proper potassium supplementation was defined as serum potassium levels that were maintained at >3.0 mEq/l (higher than grade 2) following the potassium supplementation.

Method of data collection

Laboratory values in the form of biochemistry results were retrospectively identified from electronic medical charts. Data (including the age, serum creatinine levels, and L-AMB or potassium supplementation doses of the patients) were presented as the mean ± standard deviation. The grade of the hypokalemia was assessed in accordance with the Japan Clinical Oncology Group/Japan Society of Clinical Oncology Japanese version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v4.0.

Statistical analysis

Analyses were performed using JMP software (version 5.0.1J; SAS Institute Japan Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for comparison of the serum potassium levels prior to and following L-AMB administration. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison of the backgrounds of the subjects between the groups. The recorded P-values were two-sided and values of <0.05 were considered to indicate a statistically significant difference. The areas under the receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to estimate the accuracy and cut-off values for the continuous variables obtained by univariate logistic regression analysis. Subsequently, the data were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

Background of subjects

Table I summarizes the backgrounds of the subjects. The total L-AMB dosages for the supplementation and non-supplementation groups were 2485.1±1730.6 and 1485.6±1345.6 mg, respectively, and the treatment L-AMB doses were 125±30 and 110±25 mg/day, respectively. In addition, the duration of the L-AMB treatment was 19.8±14.2 and 12.9±8.4 days, respectively. The L-AMB was administered as a second-line therapy (following micafungin or caspofungin and others) in 61.0% (57/93) of the subjects and as a first-line therapy in 39.0% (36/93) of the subjects.
Table I

Patient demographics and baseline characteristics.

Potassium supplementation

Demographics and characteristicsWithWithoutP-value
Gender
 Male29250.63
 Female1920
Age (years; median)68.3±12.367.2±14.90.61
Serum creatinine levels (mg/dl)
 Prior to L-AMB administration0.70±0.620.76±0.630.65
 Following L-AMB administration0.91±0.710.86±0.810.75
L-AMB
 Total dosage (mg)2485.1±1730.61485.6±1345.60.01
 Treatment dose (mg/day)125±30110±250.01
 Duration of treatment (days)19.8±14.212.9±8.40.01
Potassium supplementation
 Total dosage (mEq)519.6±506.1-
 Treatment dose (mEq/day)32.6±13.4-
 Duration of treatment (days)14.4±14.0-
Minimum serum potassium levels<0.01
 K ≥3.0 mEq/l1528
 K <3.0 mEq/l3317
Performance status (ECOG)0.82
 01214
 1128
 298
 3911
 464
Underlying disease
 ML1219
 AML2210
 ALL22
 MDS33
 MM48
 AA33
 Others20
Prior antifungal drugs for the primary infection episode
 Micafungin2318
 Caspofungin51
 Voriconazole41
 Fluconazole21
 Itraconazole20
 Nothing1224

Data are presented as n or the mean ± SD (n=93). L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; K, serum potassium; ML, malignant lymphoma; AML, acute myeloid leukemia; ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; MDS, myelodysplastic syndromes; MM, multiple myeloma; AA, aplastic anemia.

The incidence of patients with hypokalemia greater than grade 3 (serum potassium levels <3.0 mEq/l) was 53.8% (50/93 subjects). Potassium supplementation was used to treat 51.6% of the subjects (48/93). The total potassium supplementation dosage was 519.6±506.1 mEq, and the treatment potassium supplementation dosage was 32.6±13.4 mEq/day. The duration of the potassium supplementation treatment was 14.4±14.0 days. The change in the serum potassium levels during the L-AMB administration is shown in Figs. 2 and 3, divided into the two groups. In the supplementation group, the serum potassium levels significantly decreased from 3.8±0.5 to 2.8±0.6 mEq/l (P<0.01), when comparing the levels prior to the initial L-AMB administration with the minimum levels (at the time of the initialization of potassium supplementation). Subsequently, the levels significantly increased to 3.3±0.6 mEq/l following the potassium supplementation (P<0.01). In addition, the levels recovered to 3.7±0.8 mEq/l following completion of the L-AMB administration (2.9±2.6 days after completion). In the non-supplementation group, the serum potassium levels markedly decreased from 3.9±0.5 to 3.2±0.5 mEq/l (P<0.01), when comparing the levels prior to the initial L-AMB administration with the minimum levels. In addition, the levels only recovered to 3.4±0.8 mEq/l following completion of the L-AMB administration (2.0±1.5 days after completion) and a significant difference was identified compared with the levels prior to the L-AMB administration (P<0.01).
Figure 2

Change in the serum potassium levels during the L-AMB administration in the supplementation group. L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; NS, not significant. Data are presented as the mean ± SD (n=48).

Figure 3

Change in the serum potassium levels during the L-AMB administration in the non-supplementation group. L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; NS, not significant. Data are presented as the mean ± SD (n=45)

Investigation of the factors affecting potassium supplementation during L-AMB administration

Nine factors affecting the differences between the groups were analyzed using univariate logistic regression analysis. The independent variables of the dosage data were analyzed as a continuous variable, and the results are shown in Table II. The total L-AMB dosage [odds ratio (OR), 67.97; 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.34–<1000; P<0.01], treatment L-AMB dose (OR, 25.57; 95% CI, 2.31–395.36; P=0.01), duration of the L-AMB treatment (OR, 224.62; 95% CI, 5.26–<1000; P<0.01), and minimum serum potassium levels during the L-AMB administration (OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01–0.55; P=0.01) showed significant differences between the two groups. The areas under the ROC curves of these factors were 0.75, 0.63, 0.71 and 0.66, and the cut-off values were 2001.4 mg, 118.5 mg/day, 16.4 days and 2.98 mEq/l, respectively. Table III shows the results of the multivariate analysis based on the factors with P<0.25 by univariate logistic regression analysis. It revealed that the minimum serum potassium levels during L-AMB administration (≤2.98 mEq/l) were an independent factor significantly contributing to the effectiveness of potassium supplementation (OR, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.44–9.59; P<0.01).
Table II

Univariate analysis of the factors affecting potassium supplementation during L-AMB administration (n=93).

FactorOR95% CIP-valueAUCCut-off
Gender (female)0.810.35–1.860.63
Age1.640.25–11.180.60
Serum creatinine levels prior to L-AMB administration (mg/dl)0.510.01–9.840.65
Total L-AMB dosage (mg)67.974.34–<1000<0.010.752001.4
Treatment L-AMB dose (mg/day)25.572.31–395.360.010.63118.5
Duration of L-AMB treatment (days)224.625.26–<1000<0.010.7116.40
Serum potassium levels prior to L-AMB administration (mEq/l)0.510.06–3.780.51
Minimum serum potassium levels during L-AMB administration (mEq/l)0.070.01–0.550.010.662.98
PS ≥21.150.34–3.830.81

L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; AUC, area under the curve; PS, performance status.

Table III

Multivariate analysis of the factors affecting potassium supplementation during L-AMB administration (n=93).

FactorOR95% CIP-value
Total L-AMB dosage (≥2001.4 mg)3.230.67–17.470.14
Treatment dose (≥118.5 mg/day)2.010.76–5.880.14
Duration of treatment (≥16.4 days)1.390.29–6.170.66
Minimum serum potassium levels during L-AMB administration (≤2.98 mEq/l)3.621.44–9.59<0.01

L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Twelve factors affecting the proper potassium supplementation were analyzed using univariate logistic regression analysis. The independent variables of dosage data were analyzed as a continuous variable, and the results are shown in Table IV. The serum potassium levels prior to the potassium supplementation showed a significant difference in the effectiveness of proper potassium supplementation (OR, 151.51; 95% CI, 12.60–733.52; P<0.01). The area under the ROC curve of this factor was 0.81 and the cut-off value was 2.83 mEq/l. Table V shows the results of the multivariate analysis based on the factors with P<0.25 by univariate logistic regression analysis. The serum potassium levels prior to the potassium supplementation (≥2.83 mEq/l) again showed a significant difference (OR, 14.21; 95% CI, 1.95–310.72; P=0.02). However, the duration of the potassium supplementation and the treatment L-AMB dose showed no significant difference in the effectiveness of the proper potassium supplementation.
Table IV

Univariate analysis of the factors affecting proper potassium supplementation (n=48).

FactorOR95% CIP-valueAUCCut-off
Gender (female)1.430.38–6.160.61
Age0.440.11–10.250.62
Serum creatinine levels prior to L-AMB administration (mg/dl)6.070.04–>10000.61
Total L-AMB dosage (mg)0.150.01–2.720.19
Treatment dose (mg/day)0.140.01–1.480.11
Duration of treatment (days)0.230.01–8.710.39
Potassium supplementation dose (mEq/day)2.030.11–52.030.65
Day of potassium supplementation start (days)0.270.01–7.010.41
Duration of potassium supplementation (days)0.110.01–4.490.24
Serum potassium levels prior to L-AMB administration (mEq/l)2.600.21–37.670.46
Serum potassium levels prior to potassium supplementation (mEq/l)151.5112.6–733.52<0.010.812.83
PS ≥24.191.05–21.410.06

L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; AUC, area under the curve; PS, performance status.

Table V

Multivariate analysis of the factors affecting proper potassium supplementation (n=48).

FactorOR95% CIP-value
Total L-AMB dosage (mg)182.000.01–262.650.91
Treatment dose (mg/day)0.740.12–4.080.73
Duration of potassium supplementation (days)0.140.01–80.640.57
Serum potassium levels prior to potassium supplementation (≥2.83 mEq/l)14.211.95–310.720.02
PS ≥23.040.62–18.230.18

L-AMB, liposomal-amphotericin B; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; PS, performance status.

Discussion

Immunocompromised hematological patients frequently develop febrile neutropenia, thus empirical treatment with antifungal drugs is initiated prior to confirmation of a definitive diagnosis of a fungal infection (1). L-AMB possesses broad-spectrum antifungal activity and is a first-line indication against unconfirmed fungal infections in empirical therapy (2). Competitive studies with other antifungal drugs have demonstrated the efficacy of L-AMB (6,7). The present study investigated hematological patients who were receiving L-AMB for the first time. Prior antifungal drugs used for the primary infection episode in the patients of the present study (61% of them used L-AMB in the change from other antifungal drugs) included micafungin and caspofungin. In addition, L-AMB was used in combination with intensive antibiotics, including carbapenem (82%) or glycopeptides (50%; data not shown). Infectious diseases in hematological patients may lead to a fatal outcome. Thus, infection control with antibiotics and antifungal drugs is critical. L-AMB may reduce the levels of blood potassium by damaging the renal tubules (8,9). The incidence of hypokalemia in patients treated with L-AMB was reported as 36% by Ringden in 1994 (10) and as 51.3% by Sunakawa in 2012 (11). In the present study, hypokalemia greater than grade 3 occurred in 53.8% of the patients, making it an adverse event that requires attention. By comparing the serum potassium levels in patients of the two groups, the minimum levels in the supplementation group were significantly lower than those of the non-supplementation group, although no difference in them prior to the L-AMB administration was observed (mean±SD, 3.8±0.5 vs. 3.9±0.5 mEq/l; P=0.51). However, the serum potassium levels following the L-AMB administration were higher in the supplementation group than those in the non-supplementation group (3.7±0.8 vs. 3.4±0.8 mEq/l; P=0.04). Recovery of the patients from hypokalemia was more rapid in those in the supplementation group. Altogether, 51.6% of the subjects were treated with potassium supplementation. The supplementation group had a longer duration of L-AMB treatment and a greater total L-AMB dosage compared with those of the non-supplementation group. Following investigation of the factors affecting potassium supplementation during L-AMB administration, it was revealed that the minimum serum potassium levels during L-AMB administration (≤2.98 mEq/l) were an independent factor significantly contributing to the effectiveness of treatment with supplemental potassium. Investigation of the factors affecting the effectiveness of proper potassium supplementation in the supplementation group revealed that serum potassium levels prior to the potassium supplementation showed a significant difference between the patients that were successfully treated for hypokalemia and those that did not receive this treatment. This means that it is necessary to initiate potassium supplementation prior to reduction of the serum potassium levels to <2.83 mEq/l. Potassium supplementation from an early stage is important to maintain serum potassium levels at >3.0 mEq/l (higher than grade 2), thereby preventing proper potassium supplementation. In conclusion, a periodic serum potassium levels monitor from the beginning of L-AMB administration and potassium supplementation from an early stage are important to prevent severe electrolyte abnormalities. Invasive opportunistic fungal infections are a serious cause of morbidity and mortality for immunocompromised hematological patients. Therefore, adverse events management of L-AMB is essential.
  10 in total

1.  Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B (L-AMB) in children.

Authors:  Keisuke Sunakawa; Ichiro Tsukimoto; Yukiko Tsunematsu; Masatada Honda; Naoichi Iwai; Takashi Maniwa; Hisamatsu Haigo; Kota Suzuki; Takeshi Mori
Journal:  J Infect Chemother       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.211

2.  Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Authors:  Alison G Freifeld; Eric J Bow; Kent A Sepkowitz; Michael J Boeckh; James I Ito; Craig A Mullen; Issam I Raad; Kenneth V Rolston; Jo-Anne H Young; John R Wingard
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Empiric antibiotic and antifungal therapy for cancer patients with prolonged fever and granulocytopenia.

Authors:  P A Pizzo; K J Robichaud; F A Gill; F G Witebsky
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 4.965

4.  Liposomal amphotericin B for empirical therapy in patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group.

Authors:  T J Walsh; R W Finberg; C Arndt; J Hiemenz; C Schwartz; D Bodensteiner; P Pappas; N Seibel; R N Greenberg; S Dummer; M Schuster; J S Holcenberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1999-03-11       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  European guidelines for antifungal management in leukemia and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: summary of the ECIL 3--2009 update.

Authors:  J Maertens; O Marchetti; R Herbrecht; O A Cornely; U Flückiger; P Frêre; B Gachot; W J Heinz; C Lass-Flörl; P Ribaud; A Thiebaut; C Cordonnier
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2010-07-26       Impact factor: 5.483

6.  Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis.

Authors:  Raoul Herbrecht; David W Denning; Thomas F Patterson; John E Bennett; Reginald E Greene; Jörg-W Oestmann; Winfried V Kern; Kieren A Marr; Patricia Ribaud; Olivier Lortholary; Richard Sylvester; Robert H Rubin; John R Wingard; Paul Stark; Christine Durand; Denis Caillot; Eckhard Thiel; Pranatharthi H Chandrasekar; Michael R Hodges; Haran T Schlamm; Peter F Troke; Ben de Pauw
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-08-08       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Safety of liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) in 187 transplant recipients treated with cyclosporin.

Authors:  O Ringdén; E Andström; M Remberger; B M Svahn; J Tollemar
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 5.483

8.  Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidaemia and invasive candidosis: a phase III randomised double-blind trial.

Authors:  Ernst-Rüdiger Kuse; Ploenchan Chetchotisakd; Clovis Arns da Cunha; Markus Ruhnke; Carlos Barrios; Digumarti Raghunadharao; Jagdev Singh Sekhon; Antonio Freire; Venkatasubramanian Ramasubramanian; Ignace Demeyer; Marcio Nucci; Amorn Leelarasamee; Frédérique Jacobs; Johan Decruyenaere; Didier Pittet; Andrew J Ullmann; Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner; Olivier Lortholary; Sonja Koblinger; Heike Diekmann-Berndt; Oliver A Cornely
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-05-05       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Effect of fenoldopam on the acute and subacute nephrotoxicity produced by amphotericin B in the dog.

Authors:  A J Nichols; P F Koster; D P Brooks; R R Ruffolo
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 4.030

10.  Comparison of nephrotoxicities of different polyoxyethyleneglycol formulations of amphotericin B in rats.

Authors:  C Tasset; V Preat; A Bernard; M Roland
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.191

  10 in total
  6 in total

1.  Medication-induced hypokalemia.

Authors:  Keith T Veltri; Carly Mason
Journal:  P T       Date:  2015-03

2.  Comparing lagged linear correlation, lagged regression, Granger causality, and vector autoregression for uncovering associations in EHR data.

Authors:  Matthew E Levine; David J Albers; George Hripcsak
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2017-02-10

3.  Rhodotorula mucilaginosa Fungemia, a Rare Opportunistic Infection without Central Venous Catheter Implantation, Successfully Treated by Liposomal Amphotericin B.

Authors:  Ryuichi Hirano; Tatsuro Mitsuhashi; Katsuyoshi Osanai
Journal:  Case Rep Infect Dis       Date:  2022-06-03

4.  Sinonasal mucormycosis and liposomal amphotericin B: A quest for dose optimization.

Authors:  Smile Kajal; Syed Shariq Naeem; Pooja Gupta; Arvind Kumar Kairo; Anam Ahmed; Prankur Verma; Ashish Saini
Journal:  Indian J Pharmacol       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.833

5.  Association between potassium supplementation and the occurrence of acute kidney injury in patients with hypokalemia administered liposomal amphotericin B: a nationwide observational study.

Authors:  Yuki Ota; Yoko Obata; Takahiro Takazono; Masato Tashiro; Tomotaro Wakamura; Akinori Takahashi; Yui Shiozawa; Taiga Miyazaki; Tomoya Nishino; Koichi Izumikawa
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 2.388

6.  The cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole compared to voriconazole, the standard of care in the treatment of patients with invasive mould diseases, prior to differential pathogen diagnosis in Spain.

Authors:  José Ramón Azanza; Santiago Grau; Lourdes Vázquez; Pablo Rebollo; Carmen Peral; Alejandra López-Ibáñez de Aldecoa; Vanessa López-Gómez
Journal:  Mycoses       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 4.377

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.