Journal Article > Meta-AnalysisFull Text
Malar J. 2009 August 23; Volume 8 (Issue 1); 203.; DOI:10.1186/1475-2875-8-203
Zwang J, Olliaro PL, Barennes H, Bonnet MMB, Brasseur P, et al.
Malar J. 2009 August 23; Volume 8 (Issue 1); 203.; DOI:10.1186/1475-2875-8-203
BACKGROUND: Artesunate and amodiaquine (AS&AQ) is at present the world's second most widely used artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). It was necessary to evaluate the efficacy of ACT, recently adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and deployed over 80 countries, in order to make an evidence-based drug policy.
METHODS: An individual patient data (IPD) analysis was conducted on efficacy outcomes in 26 clinical studies in sub-Saharan Africa using the WHO protocol with similar primary and secondary endpoints.
RESULTS: A total of 11,700 patients (75% under 5 years old), from 33 different sites in 16 countries were followed for 28 days. Loss to follow-up was 4.9% (575/11,700). AS&AQ was given to 5,897 patients. Of these, 82% (4,826/5,897) were included in randomized comparative trials with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genotyping results and compared to 5,413 patients (half receiving an ACT). AS&AQ and other ACT comparators resulted in rapid clearance of fever and parasitaemia, superior to non-ACT. Using survival analysis on a modified intent-to-treat population, the Day 28 PCR-adjusted efficacy of AS&AQ was greater than 90% (the WHO cut-off) in 11/16 countries. In randomized comparative trials (n = 22), the crude efficacy of AS&AQ was 75.9% (95% CI 74.6-77.1) and the PCR-adjusted efficacy was 93.9% (95% CI 93.2-94.5). The risk (weighted by site) of failure PCR-adjusted of AS&AQ was significantly inferior to non-ACT, superior to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP, in one Ugandan site), and not different from AS+SP or AL (artemether-lumefantrine). The risk of gametocyte appearance and the carriage rate of AS&AQ was only greater in one Ugandan site compared to AL and DP, and lower compared to non-ACT (p = 0.001, for all comparisons). Anaemia recovery was not different than comparator groups, except in one site in Rwanda where the patients in the DP group had a slower recovery.
CONCLUSION: AS&AQ compares well to other treatments and meets the WHO efficacy criteria for use against falciparum malaria in many, but not all, the sub-Saharan African countries where it was studied. Efficacy varies between and within countries. An IPD analysis can inform general and local treatment policies. Ongoing monitoring evaluation is required.
METHODS: An individual patient data (IPD) analysis was conducted on efficacy outcomes in 26 clinical studies in sub-Saharan Africa using the WHO protocol with similar primary and secondary endpoints.
RESULTS: A total of 11,700 patients (75% under 5 years old), from 33 different sites in 16 countries were followed for 28 days. Loss to follow-up was 4.9% (575/11,700). AS&AQ was given to 5,897 patients. Of these, 82% (4,826/5,897) were included in randomized comparative trials with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genotyping results and compared to 5,413 patients (half receiving an ACT). AS&AQ and other ACT comparators resulted in rapid clearance of fever and parasitaemia, superior to non-ACT. Using survival analysis on a modified intent-to-treat population, the Day 28 PCR-adjusted efficacy of AS&AQ was greater than 90% (the WHO cut-off) in 11/16 countries. In randomized comparative trials (n = 22), the crude efficacy of AS&AQ was 75.9% (95% CI 74.6-77.1) and the PCR-adjusted efficacy was 93.9% (95% CI 93.2-94.5). The risk (weighted by site) of failure PCR-adjusted of AS&AQ was significantly inferior to non-ACT, superior to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP, in one Ugandan site), and not different from AS+SP or AL (artemether-lumefantrine). The risk of gametocyte appearance and the carriage rate of AS&AQ was only greater in one Ugandan site compared to AL and DP, and lower compared to non-ACT (p = 0.001, for all comparisons). Anaemia recovery was not different than comparator groups, except in one site in Rwanda where the patients in the DP group had a slower recovery.
CONCLUSION: AS&AQ compares well to other treatments and meets the WHO efficacy criteria for use against falciparum malaria in many, but not all, the sub-Saharan African countries where it was studied. Efficacy varies between and within countries. An IPD analysis can inform general and local treatment policies. Ongoing monitoring evaluation is required.
Journal Article > Meta-AnalysisFull Text
BMC Med. 2020 February 25; Volume 18 (Issue 1); 47.; DOI:10.1186/s12916-020-1494-3.
Bretscher MT, Dahal P, Griffin J, Stepniewska K, Bassat Q, et al.
BMC Med. 2020 February 25; Volume 18 (Issue 1); 47.; DOI:10.1186/s12916-020-1494-3.
BACKGROUND
The majority of Plasmodium falciparum malaria cases in Africa are treated with the artemisinin combination therapies artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and artesunate-amodiaquine (AS-AQ), with amodiaquine being also widely used as part of seasonal malaria chemoprevention programs combined with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. While artemisinin derivatives have a short half-life, lumefantrine and amodiaquine may give rise to differing durations of post-treatment prophylaxis, an important additional benefit to patients in higher transmission areas.
METHODS
We analyzed individual patient data from 8 clinical trials of AL versus AS-AQ in 12 sites in Africa (n = 4214 individuals). The time to PCR-confirmed reinfection after treatment was used to estimate the duration of post-treatment protection, accounting for variation in transmission intensity between settings using hidden semi-Markov models. Accelerated failure-time models were used to identify potential effects of covariates on the time to reinfection. The estimated duration of chemoprophylaxis was then used in a mathematical model of malaria transmission to determine the potential public health impact of each drug when used for first-line treatment.
RESULTS
We estimated a mean duration of post-treatment protection of 13.0 days (95% CI 10.7-15.7) for AL and 15.2 days (95% CI 12.8-18.4) for AS-AQ overall. However, the duration varied significantly between trial sites, from 8.7-18.6 days for AL and 10.2-18.7 days for AS-AQ. Significant predictors of time to reinfection in multivariable models were transmission intensity, age, drug, and parasite genotype. Where wild type pfmdr1 and pfcrt parasite genotypes predominated (<=20% 86Y and 76T mutants, respectively), AS-AQ provided ~ 2-fold longer protection than AL. Conversely, at a higher prevalence of 86Y and 76T mutant parasites (> 80%), AL provided up to 1.5-fold longer protection than AS-AQ. Our simulations found that these differences in the duration of protection could alter population-level clinical incidence of malaria by up to 14% in under-5-year-old children when the drugs were used as first-line treatments in areas with high, seasonal transmission.
CONCLUSION
Choosing a first-line treatment which provides optimal post-treatment prophylaxis given the local prevalence of resistance-associated markers could make a significant contribution to reducing malaria morbidity.
The majority of Plasmodium falciparum malaria cases in Africa are treated with the artemisinin combination therapies artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and artesunate-amodiaquine (AS-AQ), with amodiaquine being also widely used as part of seasonal malaria chemoprevention programs combined with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. While artemisinin derivatives have a short half-life, lumefantrine and amodiaquine may give rise to differing durations of post-treatment prophylaxis, an important additional benefit to patients in higher transmission areas.
METHODS
We analyzed individual patient data from 8 clinical trials of AL versus AS-AQ in 12 sites in Africa (n = 4214 individuals). The time to PCR-confirmed reinfection after treatment was used to estimate the duration of post-treatment protection, accounting for variation in transmission intensity between settings using hidden semi-Markov models. Accelerated failure-time models were used to identify potential effects of covariates on the time to reinfection. The estimated duration of chemoprophylaxis was then used in a mathematical model of malaria transmission to determine the potential public health impact of each drug when used for first-line treatment.
RESULTS
We estimated a mean duration of post-treatment protection of 13.0 days (95% CI 10.7-15.7) for AL and 15.2 days (95% CI 12.8-18.4) for AS-AQ overall. However, the duration varied significantly between trial sites, from 8.7-18.6 days for AL and 10.2-18.7 days for AS-AQ. Significant predictors of time to reinfection in multivariable models were transmission intensity, age, drug, and parasite genotype. Where wild type pfmdr1 and pfcrt parasite genotypes predominated (<=20% 86Y and 76T mutants, respectively), AS-AQ provided ~ 2-fold longer protection than AL. Conversely, at a higher prevalence of 86Y and 76T mutant parasites (> 80%), AL provided up to 1.5-fold longer protection than AS-AQ. Our simulations found that these differences in the duration of protection could alter population-level clinical incidence of malaria by up to 14% in under-5-year-old children when the drugs were used as first-line treatments in areas with high, seasonal transmission.
CONCLUSION
Choosing a first-line treatment which provides optimal post-treatment prophylaxis given the local prevalence of resistance-associated markers could make a significant contribution to reducing malaria morbidity.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Malar J. 2012 April 30; Volume 11; 139.; DOI:10.1186/1475-2875-11-139
Van Malderen C, Van Geertruyden JP, Machevo S, Gonzalez R, Bassat Q, et al.
Malar J. 2012 April 30; Volume 11; 139.; DOI:10.1186/1475-2875-11-139
BACKGROUND
Malaria is a leading cause of mortality, particularly in sub-Saharan African children. Prompt and efficacious treatment is important as patients may progress within a few hours to severe and possibly fatal disease. Chlorproguanil-dapsone-artesunate (CDA) was a promising artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), but its development was prematurely stopped because of safety concerns secondary to its associated risk of haemolytic anaemia in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD)-deficient individuals. The objective of the study was to assess whether CDA treatment and G6PD deficiency are risk factors for a post-treatment haemoglobin drop in African children <5 years of age with uncomplicated malaria.
METHODS
This case–control study was performed in the context of a larger multicentre randomized clinical trial comparing safety and efficacy of four different ACT in children with uncomplicated malaria. Children, who after treatment experienced a haemoglobin drop ≥2 g/dl (cases) within the first four days (days 0, 1, 2, and 3), were compared with those without an Hb drop (controls). Cases and controls were matched for study site, sex, age and baseline haemoglobin measurements. Data were analysed using a conditional logistic regression model.
RESULTS
G6PD deficiency prevalence, homo- or hemizygous, was 8.5% (10/117) in cases and 6.8% (16/234) in controls (p = 0.56). The risk of a Hb drop ≥2 g/dl was not associated with either G6PD deficiency (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.81; p = 0.76) or CDA treatment (AOR: 1.28; p = 0.37) alone. However, patients having both risk factors tended to have higher odds (AOR: 11.13; p = 0.25) of experiencing a Hb drop ≥2 g/dl within the first four days after treatment, however this finding was not statistically significant, mainly because G6PD deficient patients treated with CDA were very few. In non-G6PD deficient individuals, the proportion of cases was similar between treatment groups while in G6PD-deficient individuals, haemolytic anaemia occurred more frequently in children treated with CDA (56%) than in those treated with other ACT (29%), though the difference was not significant (p = 0.49).
CONCLUSION
The use of CDA for treating uncomplicated malaria may increase the risk of haemolytic anaemia in G6PD-deficient children.
Malaria is a leading cause of mortality, particularly in sub-Saharan African children. Prompt and efficacious treatment is important as patients may progress within a few hours to severe and possibly fatal disease. Chlorproguanil-dapsone-artesunate (CDA) was a promising artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), but its development was prematurely stopped because of safety concerns secondary to its associated risk of haemolytic anaemia in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD)-deficient individuals. The objective of the study was to assess whether CDA treatment and G6PD deficiency are risk factors for a post-treatment haemoglobin drop in African children <5 years of age with uncomplicated malaria.
METHODS
This case–control study was performed in the context of a larger multicentre randomized clinical trial comparing safety and efficacy of four different ACT in children with uncomplicated malaria. Children, who after treatment experienced a haemoglobin drop ≥2 g/dl (cases) within the first four days (days 0, 1, 2, and 3), were compared with those without an Hb drop (controls). Cases and controls were matched for study site, sex, age and baseline haemoglobin measurements. Data were analysed using a conditional logistic regression model.
RESULTS
G6PD deficiency prevalence, homo- or hemizygous, was 8.5% (10/117) in cases and 6.8% (16/234) in controls (p = 0.56). The risk of a Hb drop ≥2 g/dl was not associated with either G6PD deficiency (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 0.81; p = 0.76) or CDA treatment (AOR: 1.28; p = 0.37) alone. However, patients having both risk factors tended to have higher odds (AOR: 11.13; p = 0.25) of experiencing a Hb drop ≥2 g/dl within the first four days after treatment, however this finding was not statistically significant, mainly because G6PD deficient patients treated with CDA were very few. In non-G6PD deficient individuals, the proportion of cases was similar between treatment groups while in G6PD-deficient individuals, haemolytic anaemia occurred more frequently in children treated with CDA (56%) than in those treated with other ACT (29%), though the difference was not significant (p = 0.49).
CONCLUSION
The use of CDA for treating uncomplicated malaria may increase the risk of haemolytic anaemia in G6PD-deficient children.