-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2003Amodiaquine has been widely used to treat malaria. Fatal adverse reactions have been reported in adults taking it for prophylaxis. This has led some authorities to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Amodiaquine has been widely used to treat malaria. Fatal adverse reactions have been reported in adults taking it for prophylaxis. This has led some authorities to suggest it is withdrawn as a first line treatment for malaria.
OBJECTIVES
To compare amodiaquine with chloroquine or sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group specialized trials register (February 2003), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2003), EMBASE (1980 to December 2002), LILACS (February 2003). We contacted researchers in the field and pharmaceutical companies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality.
MAIN RESULTS
56 studies included, mostly from Africa. Treatment allocation was adequately concealed in three trials, and unclear or inadequate in the remainder. Amodiaquine was more effective than chloroquine for parasite clearance (day 7, Peto odds ratio 4.42 (95% confidence interval 3.65 to 5.35); day 14, Peto odds ratio 6.44 (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.09 to 8.15). Comparisons with sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine were more mixed, with sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine more effective on day 28 (Peto odds ratio 0.41; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.61). No significant difference for adverse events was observed between amodiaquine and chloroquine and sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine. Reported adverse effects were minor or moderate. No life threatening events were detected.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence to support the continued use of amodiaquine to treat uncomplicated malaria, although local drug resistance patterns need to be considered. Monitoring for adverse events should continue.
Topics: Amodiaquine; Antimalarials; Chloroquine; Drug Combinations; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Pyrimethamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 12804382
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000016 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2021The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2015 stated atovaquone-proguanil can be used in travellers, and is an option in malaria-endemic areas in combination with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2015 stated atovaquone-proguanil can be used in travellers, and is an option in malaria-endemic areas in combination with artesunate, as an alternative treatment where first-line artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) is not available or effective. This review is an update of a Cochrane Review undertaken in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of atovaquone-proguanil (alone and in combination with artemisinin drugs) versus other antimalarial drugs for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
The date of the last trial search was 30 January 2020. Search locations for published trials included the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. To include recently published and unpublished trials, we also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting efficacy and safety data for atovaquone-proguanil or atovaquone-proguanil with a partner drug compared with at least one other antimalarial drug for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum infection.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For this update, two review authors re-extracted data and assessed certainty of evidence. We meta-analyzed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for treatment failures between comparisons, and for safety outcomes between and across comparisons. Outcome measures include unadjusted treatment failures and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-adjusted treatment failures. PCR adjustment differentiates new infection from recrudescent infection.
MAIN RESULTS
Seventeen RCTs met our inclusion criteria providing 4763 adults and children from Africa, South-America, and South-East Asia. Eight trials reported PCR-adjusted data to distinguish between new and recrudescent infection during the follow-up period. In this abstract, we report only the comparisons against the three WHO-recommended antimalarials which were included within these trials. There were two comparisons with artemether-lumefantrine, one trial from 2008 in Ethiopia with 60 participants had two failures with atovaquone-proguanil compared to none with artemether-lumefantrine (PCR-adjusted treatment failures at day 28). A second trial from 2012 in Colombia with 208 participants had one failure in each arm (PCR-adjusted treatment failures at day 42). There was only one comparison with artesunate-amodiaquine from a 2014 trial conducted in Cameroon. There were six failures with atovaquone-proguanil at day 28 and two with artesunate-amodiaquine (PCR-adjusted treatment failures at day 28: 9.4% with atovaquone-proguanil compared to 2.9% with artesunate-amodiaquine; RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 15.22; 1 RCT, 132 participants; low-certainty evidence), although there was a similar number of PCR-unadjusted treatment failures (9 (14.1%) with atovaquone-proguanil and 8 (11.8%) with artesunate-amodiaquine; RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.91; 1 RCT, 132 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were two comparisons with artesunate-mefloquine from a 2012 trial in Colombia and a 2002 trial in Thailand where there are high levels of multi-resistant malaria. There were similar numbers of PCR-adjusted treatment failures between groups at day 42 (2.7% with atovaquone-proguanil compared to 2.4% with artesunate-mefloquine; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.34; 2 RCTs, 1168 participants; high-certainty evidence). There were also similar PCR-unadjusted treatment failures between groups (5.3% with atovaquone-proguanil compared to 6.6% with artesunate-mefloquine; RR 0.8, 95% CI 0.5 to 1.3; 1 RCT, 1063 participants; low-certainty evidence). When atovaquone-proguanil was combined with artesunate, there were fewer treatment failures with and without PCR-adjustment at day 28 (PCR-adjusted treatment failures at day 28: 2.16% with atovaquone-proguanil compared to no failures with artesunate-atovaquone-proguanil; RR 5.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 43.52; 2 RCTs, 375 participants, low-certainty evidence) and day 42 (PCR-adjusted treatment failures at day 42: 3.82% with atovaquone-proguanil compared to 2.05% with artesunate-atovaquone-proguanil (RR 1.84, 95% CI 0.95 to 3.56; 2 RCTs, 1258 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). In the 2002 trial in Thailand, there were fewer treatment failures in the artesunate-atovaquone-proguanil group compared to the atovaquone-proguanil group at day 42 with PCR-adjustment. Whilst there were some small differences in which adverse events were more frequent in the atovaquone-proguanil groups compared to comparator drugs, there were no recurrent associations to suggest that atovaquone-proguanil is strongly associated with any specific adverse event.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Atovaquone-proguanil was effective against uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, although in some instances treatment failure rates were between 5% and 10%. The addition of artesunate to atovaquone-proguanil may reduce treatment failure rates. Artesunate-atovaquone-proguanil and the development of parasite resistance may represent an area for further research.
Topics: Adult; Amodiaquine; Antimalarials; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artemisinins; Atovaquone; Cameroon; Child; Colombia; Drug Combinations; Ethiopia; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Mefloquine; Proguanil; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thailand; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 33459345
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004529.pub3 -
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica =... Jan 2006To assess the relationship between the genetic and phenotypic factors linked to the cytochrome P-450 enzyme system and the response to the antimalarial drugs... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
OBJECTIVES
To assess the relationship between the genetic and phenotypic factors linked to the cytochrome P-450 enzyme system and the response to the antimalarial drugs chloroquine, amodiaquine, mefloquine, and proguanil, as well as to determine how certain biological and social factors of the host influence the behavior of this enzymatic complex.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the medical bibliographic databases PubMed, Excerpta Medica, LILACS, and SciELO by using the following Spanish and English descriptors: "CYP-450" and "citocromo P-450" in combination with "proguanil" (and with "mefloquina," "cloroquina," and "amodiaquina"), "farmacocinética de proguanil" (and the same using "mefloquina," "cloroquina," and "amodiaquina"), "resistencia a proguanil" (and the same using "mefloquina," "cloroquina," and "amodiaquina"), "metabolismo," "farmacogenética," "enfermedad," "inflamación," "infección," "enfermedad hepática," "malaria," "nutrición," and "desnutrición." The same terms were used in English. The search included only articles published in Spanish, English, and Portuguese on or before 30 June 2005 that dealt with only four antimalarial drugs: amodiaquine, chloroquine, mefloquine, and proguanil.
RESULTS
Some genetic factors linked to human cytochrome P-450 (mainly its polymorphism), as well as other biological and social factors (the presence of disease itself, or of inflammation and infection, the use of antimalarials in their various combinations, and the patient's nutritional status) influence the behavior of this complex enzymatic system. It has only been in the last decade that the genetics of the cytochromes has been explored and that the mechanisms underlying some therapeutic interactions and aspects of drug metabolism have been uncovered, making it possible to characterize the biotransformation pathway of amodiaquine and chloroquine. Hopefully new research will help answer the questions that still remain, some of which pertain to the metabolism of other antimalarial drugs, the distribution in the population of the genetic alleles linked to the enzymes involved in their metabolism, the contribution of these genetic mutations to therapeutic failure, and the possibility of predicting the response to antimalarial therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
The therapeutic response to antimalarial drugs is a multifactorial process that is poorly understood, so that it is not possible to ascribe to a specific phenotype or genotype a role in the response to antimalarial therapy. Attention should be given to biological and social factors, such as diet, nutritional status, and inflammatory and infectious processes that are often present in areas where malaria is endemic.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Amodiaquine; Animals; Antimalarials; Biotransformation; Child; Chloroquine; Cytochrome P-450 Enzyme System; Databases as Topic; Disease Models, Animal; Genotype; Humans; Malaria; Malaria, Falciparum; Mefloquine; Mice; Murinae; Mutation; Nutritional Status; Phenotype; Plasmodium berghei; Polymorphism, Genetic; Proguanil; Rats
PubMed: 16536934
DOI: 10.1590/s1020-49892006000100003 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Oct 2007Malaria is a major health problem in the tropics, with 300-500 million new clinical cases annually, most of them cases of uncomplicated malaria. An estimated 1.1-2.7... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Malaria is a major health problem in the tropics, with 300-500 million new clinical cases annually, most of them cases of uncomplicated malaria. An estimated 1.1-2.7 million deaths occur annually as a result of severe falciparum malaria. Uncomplicated malaria can progress to severe malaria, become chronic, or resolve, depending on host immunity and prompt access to appropriate treatment.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: Are artemisinin combination treatments more effective than non-artemisinin combination treatments in people living in endemic areas (excluding South East Asia)? Which artemisinin combination treatment is most effective in people living in endemic areas? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to November 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 18 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate plus mefloquine, artesunate plus amodiaquine, and artesunate plus sulfadoxine.
Topics: Antimalarials; Drug Therapy, Combination; Ethanolamines; Fluorenes; Humans; Malaria; Malaria, Falciparum; Plasmodium falciparum
PubMed: 19450360
DOI: No ID Found -
Malaria Journal Jan 2014Increasing access to and targeting of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) is a key component of malaria control programmes. To maximize efficacy of ACT and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Increasing access to and targeting of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) is a key component of malaria control programmes. To maximize efficacy of ACT and ensure adequate treatment outcomes, patient and caregiver adherence to treatment guidelines is essential. This review summarizes the current evidence base on ACT adherence, including definitions, measurement methods, and associated factors.
METHODS
A systematic search of the published literature was undertaken in November 2012 and updated in April 2013. Bibliographies of manuscripts were also searched and additional references identified. Studies were included if they involved at least one form of ACT and reported an adherence measurement.
RESULTS
The search yielded 1,412 records, 37 of which were found to measure adherence to ACT. Methods to measure adherence focused on self-report, pill counts and bioassays with varying definitions for adherence. Most studies only reported whether medication regimens were completed, but did not assess how the treatment was taken by the patient (i.e. timing, frequency and dose). Adherence data were available for four different ACT formulations: artemether-lumefantrine (AL) (range 39-100%), amodiaquine plus artesunate (AQ + AS) (range 48-94%), artesunate plus sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (AS + SP) (range 39-75%) and artesunate plus mefloquine (AS + MQ) (range 77-95%). Association between demographic factors, such as age, gender, education and socio-economic status and adherence to ACT regimens was not consistent. Some evidence of positive association between adherence and patient age, caregiver education levels, drug preferences, health worker instructions, patient/caregiver knowledge and drug packaging were also observed.
CONCLUSIONS
This review highlights the weak evidence base on ACT adherence. Results suggest that ACT adherence levels varied substantially between study populations, but comparison between studies was challenging due to differences in study design, definitions, and methods used to measure adherence. Standardising methodologies for both self-report and bioassays used for evaluating adherence of different formulations across diverse contexts would improve the evidence base on ACT adherence and effectiveness; namely, specific and measurable definitions for adherence are needed for both methodologies. Additionally, further studies of the individual factors and barriers associated with non-adherence to ACT are needed in order to make informed policy choices and to improve the delivery of effective malaria treatment.
Topics: Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Malaria; Medication Adherence
PubMed: 24386988
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-13-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016Malaria causes ill health and death in Africa. Treating illness promptly with artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) is likely to cure people and avoid the disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Malaria causes ill health and death in Africa. Treating illness promptly with artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) is likely to cure people and avoid the disease progressing to more severe forms and death. In many countries, ACT use remains low. Part of the problem is that most people seek treatment from the retail sector where ACTs are expensive; this expense is a barrier to their use.The Global Fund and other international organisations are subsidising the cost of ACTs for private retail providers to improve access to ACTs. The subsidy was initially organised through a stand-alone initiative, called the Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria (AMFm), but has since been integrated into the Global Fund core grant management and financial processes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of programmes that include ACT price subsidies for private retailers on ACT use, availability, price and market share.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 1, The Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register); MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL (EbscoHost), EconLit (ProQuest), Global Health (OvidSP), Regional Indexes (Global Health Library, WHO), LILACS (Global Health Library, WHO), Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) and Health Management (ProQuest). All databases were searched February 2015, except for Health Management which was searched November 2013, without any date, language or publication status restrictions. We also searched the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; WHO), ClinicalTrials.gov (NIH) and various grey literature sources. We also conducted a cited reference search for all included studies in ISI Web of Knowledge, checked references of identified articles and contacted authors to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted-time-series studies that compared the effects of ACT price subsidies for private retailers to no subsidies or alternative ACT financing mechanisms were eligible for inclusion. Two authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed study risk of bias and confidence in effect estimates (certainty of evidence) using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
MAIN RESULTS
We included four trials (two cluster-randomised trials reported in three articles and two non-randomised cluster trials). Three trials assessed retail sector ACT subsidies combined with supportive interventions (retail outlet provider training, community awareness and mass media campaigns). One trial assessed vouchers provided to households to purchase subsidised ACTs. Price subsidies ranged from 80% to 95%. One trial enrolled children under five years of age; the other three trials studied people of all age groups. The studies were done in rural districts in East Africa (Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania).In this East Africa setting, these ACT subsidy programmes increased the percentage of children under five years of age receiving ACTs on the day, or following day, of fever onset by 25 percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI) 14.1 to 35.9 percentage points; 1 study, high certainty evidence). This suggests that in practice, among febrile children under five years of age with an ACT usage rate of 5% without a subsidy, subsidy programmes would increase usage by between 19% and 41% over a one year period.The ACT subsidy programmes increased the percentage of retail outlets stocking ACTs for children under five years of age by 31.9 percentage points (95% CI 26.3 to 37.5 percentage points; 1 study, high certainty evidence). Effects on ACT stocking for patients of any age is unknown because the certainty of evidence was very low.The ACT subsidy programmes decreased the median cost of ACTs for children under five years of age by US$ 0.84 (median cost per ACT course without subsidy: US$ 1.08 versus with subsidy: US$ 0.24; 1 study, high certainty evidence).The ACT subsidy programmes increased the market share of ACTs for children under five years of age by between 23.6 and 63.0 percentage points (1 study, high certainty evidence).The ACT subsidy programmes decreased the use of older antimalarial drugs (such as amodiaquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine) among children under five years of age by 10.4 percentage points (95% CI 3.9 to 16.9 percentage points; 1 study, high certainty evidence).None of the three studies of ACT subsidies reported the number of patients treated who had confirmed malaria.Vouchers increased the likelihood that an illness is treated with an ACT by 16 to 23 percentage points; however, vouchers were associated with a high rate of over-treatment of malaria (only 56% of patients taking ACTs from the drug shop tested positive for malaria under the 92% subsidy; 1 study, high certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Programmes that include substantive subsidies for private sector retailers combined with training of providers and social marketing improved use and availability of ACTs for children under five years of age with suspected malaria in research studies from three countries in East Africa. These programmes also reduced prices of ACTs, improved market share of ACTs and reduced the use of older antimalarial drugs among febrile children under five years of age. The research evaluates drug delivery but does not assess whether the patients had confirmed (parasite-diagnosed) malaria. None of the included studies assessed patient outcomes; it is therefore not known whether the effects seen in the studies would translate to an impact on health.
Topics: Africa, Eastern; Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Child, Preschool; Drug Costs; Financial Support; Humans; Infant; Malaria; Private Sector; Program Evaluation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26954551
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009926.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2005Chloroquine (CQ), amodiaquine (AQ), and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) are inexpensive drugs, but treatment failure is a problem. Combination therapy may reduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chloroquine (CQ), amodiaquine (AQ), and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) are inexpensive drugs, but treatment failure is a problem. Combination therapy may reduce treatment failure. CQ or AQ plus SP are affordable options of combination treatment, but there is debate about their effectiveness.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the combination of CQ or AQ plus SP compared with SP alone for first-line treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (April 2005), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2005), EMBASE (1974 to April 2005), LILACS (1982 to April 2005), Science Citation Index (1981 to April 2005), African Index Medicus (1993 to 1998), and reference lists. We also contacted researchers at relevant organizations and a pharmaceutical company.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials in adults or children with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria were eligible for inclusion. The main outcomes of interest were total and clinical failure at day 28 follow up and serious adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two people independently applied the inclusion criteria. One author extracted data and another checked them independently. We used relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve trials (2107 participants) met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of five AQ trials (461 participants) showed a statistically significant reduction in total failure at day 28 with the combination therapy (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.91), and meta-analysis of three trials (384 participants) showed a significant reduction in clinical failure at day 28 (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.49). The statistical significance in the total failure analysis was sensitive to losses to follow up. Data from two CQ trials showed no advantage for total failure with combination therapy at day 28. There was no evidence from the included trials of serious adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence base is not strong enough to support firm conclusions. The available evidence suggests that AQ plus SP can achieve less treatment failure than SP, but this might depend on existing levels of parasite resistance to the individual drugs.
Topics: Adult; Amodiaquine; Chloroquine; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Malaria; Malaria, Falciparum; Pyrimethamine; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 16235276
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000386.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Intermittent preventive treatment could help prevent malaria in infants (IPTi) living in areas of moderate to high malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. The World... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intermittent preventive treatment could help prevent malaria in infants (IPTi) living in areas of moderate to high malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. The World Health Organization (WHO) policy recommended IPTi in 2010, but its adoption in countries has been limited.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with antimalarial drugs to prevent malaria in infants living in malaria-endemic areas.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following sources up to 3 December 2018: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), LILACS (Bireme), and reference lists of articles. We also searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal for ongoing trials up to 3 December 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IPT to placebo or no intervention in infants (defined as young children aged between 1 to 12 months) in malaria-endemic areas.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The primary outcome was clinical malaria (fever plus asexual parasitaemia). Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, evaluated the risk of bias, and extracted data. We summarized dichotomous outcomes and count data using risk ratios (RR) and rate ratios respectively, and presented all measures with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We extracted protective efficacy values and their 95% CIs; when an included trial did not report this data, we calculated these values from the RR or rate ratio with its 95% CI. Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 trials that enrolled 19,098 infants; all were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Three trials were cluster-RCTs. IPTi with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) was evaluated in 10 trials from 1999 to 2013 (n = 15,256). Trials evaluating ACTs included dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (1 trial, 147 participants; year 2013), amodiaquine-artesunate (1 study, 684 participants; year 2008), and SP-artesunate (1 trial, 676 participants; year 2008). The earlier studies evaluated IPTi with SP, and were conducted in Tanzania (in 1999 and 2006), Mozambique (2004), Ghana (2004 to 2005), Gabon (2005), Kenya (2008), and Mali (2009). One trial evaluated IPTi with amodiaquine in Tanzania (2000). Later studies included three conducted in Kenya (2008), Tanzania (2008), and Uganda (2013), evaluating IPTi in multiple trial arms that included artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). Although the effect size varied over time and between drugs, overall IPTi impacts on the incidence of clinical malaria overall, with a 30% reduction (rate ratio 0.70, 0.62 to 0.80; 10 studies, 10,602 participants). The effect of SP appeared to attenuate over time, with trials conducted after 2009 showing little or no effect of the intervention. IPTi with SP probably resulted in fewer episodes of clinical malaria (rate ratio 0.78, 0.69 to 0.88; 8 trials, 8774 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), anaemia (rate ratio 0.82, 0.68 to 0.98; 6 trials, 7438 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), parasitaemia (rate ratio 0.66, 0.56 to 0.79; 1 trial, 1200 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), and fewer hospital admissions (rate ratio 0.85, 0.78 to 0.93; 7 trials, 7486 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). IPTi with SP probably made little or no difference to all-cause mortality (risk ratio 0.93, 0.74 to 1.15; 9 trials, 14,588 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Since 2009, IPTi trials have evaluated ACTs and indicate impact on clinical malaria and parasitaemia. A small trial of DHAP in 2013 shows substantive effects on clinical malaria (RR 0.42, 0.33 to 0.54; 1 trial, 147 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and parasitaemia (moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In areas of sub-Saharan Africa, giving antimalarial drugs known to be effective against the malaria parasite at the time to infants as IPT probably reduces the risk of clinical malaria, anaemia, and hospital admission. Evidence from SP studies over a 19-year period shows declining efficacy, which may be due to increasing drug resistance. Combinations with ACTs appear promising as suitable alternatives for IPTi.
Topics: Africa South of the Sahara; Amodiaquine; Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Bias; Confidence Intervals; Disease Eradication; Drug Combinations; Endemic Diseases; Hospitalization; Humans; Infant; Malaria; Parasitemia; Pyrimethamine; Quinolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 34273901
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011525.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2005The World Health Organization recommends artemether-lumefantrine for treating uncomplicated malaria. We sought evidence of superiority of the six-dose regimen over... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization recommends artemether-lumefantrine for treating uncomplicated malaria. We sought evidence of superiority of the six-dose regimen over existing treatment regimens as well as its effectiveness in clinical situations.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the six-dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine for treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (April 2005), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2005), EMBASE (1974 to April 2005), LILACS (1982 to April 2005), conference proceedings, and reference lists of articles. We also contacted experts in malaria research and the pharmaceutical company that manufactures artemether-lumefantrine.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials comparing six doses of artemether-lumefantrine administered orally with standard treatment regimens (single drug or combination), or supervised with unsupervised treatment, for uncomplicated falciparum malaria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently applied inclusion criteria to potentially relevant trials, assessed trial quality, and extracted data, including adverse events. Total failure by day 28 (day 42 for sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and day 63 for mefloquine) was the primary outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine trials (4547 participants) tested the six-dose regimen. Total failure at day 28 for artemether-lumefantrine was lower when compared with amodiaquine (270 participants, 1 trial), amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (507 participants, 1 trial), but not with chloroquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (201 participants, 2 trials). In comparisons with artemisinin derivative combinations, artemether-lumefantrine performed better than amodiaquine plus artesunate (668 participants, 2 trials), worse than mefloquine plus artesunate (270 participants, 4 trials), and no differently to dihydroartemisinin-napthoquine-trimethoprim (89 participants, 1 trial).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The six-dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine appears more effective than antimalarial regimens not containing artemisinin derivatives.
Topics: Antimalarials; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artemisinins; Drug Combinations; Ethanolamines; Fluorenes; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sesquiterpenes
PubMed: 16235412
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005564 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) to treat uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum (P falciparum) malaria.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) to treat uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum (P falciparum) malaria. Concerns about artemisinin resistance have led to global initiatives to develop new partner drugs to protect artemisinin derivatives in ACT. Pyronaridine-artesunate is a novel ACT.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of pyronaridine-artesunate compared to alternative ACTs for treating people with uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, and to evaluate the safety of pyronaridine-artesunate and other pyronaridine treatments compared to alternative treatments.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; and LILACS. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry for ongoing or recently completed trials. The date of the last search was 8 May 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Efficacy analysis: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pyronaridine-artesunate for treating uncomplicated P falciparum malaria.Safety analysis: RCTs of pyronaridine-artesunate or pyronaridine for treating P falciparum or P vivax malaria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For this update, two review authors independently re-extracted all data and assessed certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for treatment failures between comparisons, and for safety outcomes between and across comparisons.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 relevant studies. Seven studies were co-funded by Shin Poong Pharmaceuticals which manufactures the drug. Three studies were funded by government agencies.For efficacy analysis we identified five RCTs with 5711 participants. This included 4465 participants from 13 sites in Africa, and 1246 participants from five sites in Asia. It included 541 children aged less than five years.For polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-adjusted failures at day 28, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.31; 4 RCTs, 3068 participants, low-certainty evidence), artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.77; 1 RCT, 1245 participants, low-certainty evidence), and mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 1117 participants, low-certainty evidence).For unadjusted failures at day 28, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.58; 4 RCTs, 3149 participants, low-certainty evidence), and probably has fewer failures compared to artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.81; 1 RCT, 1257 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.78; 1 RCT, 1120 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).For PCR-adjusted failures at day 42, pyronaridine-artesunate may make little or no difference compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.51; 4 RCTs, 2575 participants, low-certainty evidence) and artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.83; 1 RCT, 1091 participants, low-certainty evidence), but may have higher failures than mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.57; 1 RCT, 1037 participants, low-certainty evidence). Overall, pyronaridine-artesunate had a PCR-adjusted treatment failure rate of less than 5%.For unadjusted failures at day 42, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.82; 4 RCTs, 3080 participants, low-certainty evidence), may make little or no difference compared to mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.31; 1 RCT, 1059 participants, low-certainty evidence), and probably makes little or no difference compared to artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.23; 1 RCT, 1235 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).For the safety analysis of severe adverse events and liver function, we identified eight RCTs with 6614 participants comparing pyronaridine-artesunate to other antimalarials, four of which were not in the previous version of this review. A further two RCTs, comparing pyronaridine alone to other treatments, contributed to the synthesis of all adverse events.Raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT) greater than five times the upper limit of normal (> 5 x ULN) is more frequent with pyronaridine-artesunate compared to other antimalarials (RR 3.34, 95% CI 1.63 to 6.84; 8 RCTS, 6581 participants, high-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference for raised bilirubin > 2.5 x ULN between pyronaridine-artesunate and other antimalarials (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.18; 7 RCTs, 6384 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). There was one reported case in which raised ALT occurred with raised bilirubin, meeting criteria for moderate drug-induced liver injury. No study reported severe drug-induced liver injury. Electrocardiograph (ECG) abnormalities were less common with pyronaridine-artesunate compared to other antimalarials. We identified no other safety concerns.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Pyronaridine-artesunate was efficacious against uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, achieved a PCR-adjusted treatment failure rate of less than 5% at days 28 and 42, and may be at least as good as, or better than other marketed ACTs.Pyronaridine-artesunate increases the risk of episodes of raised ALT > 5 x ULN. This meets criteria for mild drug-induced liver injury. On one instance this was linked to raised bilirubin, indicating moderate drug-induced liver injury. No episodes of severe drug-induced liver injury were reported. The findings of this review cannot fully inform a risk-benefit assessment for an unselected population. Readers should remain aware of this uncertainty when considering use of pyronaridine-artesunate in patients with known or suspected pre-existing liver dysfunction, and when co-administering with other medications which may cause liver dysfunction.
Topics: Adult; Amodiaquine; Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Artesunate; Child; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Liver; Lumefantrine; Malaria, Falciparum; Mefloquine; Naphthyridines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30620055
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006404.pub3