-
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 To include recently published and unpublished trials, we also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal.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 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2020The World Health Organization recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria to improve the therapeutic efficacy...
OBJECTIVE
The World Health Organization recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria to improve the therapeutic efficacy and limit the choice of drug-resistant parasites. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of artemisinin-piperaquine (AP) in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria relative to other commonly used ACTs.
METHODS
As per the PRISMA guidelines, the EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Google Scholar Library, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched from inception until July 2020 with the following terms: "artemisinin-piperaquine" or "AP." Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. The competing interventions included dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHA-PPQ), artemether-lumefantrine (AL, Coartem), artesunate-melfloquine (ASAM) and artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ, Artekin). Single-arm clinical trial on AP was also assessed. The reported outcomes, including the overall response, cure rate, fever and parasite clearance time, hematology, biochemistry, electrocardiogram (ECG), adverse events, recurrence rate, and sensitivity analyses, were systematically investigated. All data were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3.
RESULTS
A total of seven studies were reviewed, including five RCTs and two single-arm studies. A pooled analysis of 5 RCTs (n = 772) revealed a comparable efficacy on polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed cure rate between AP and competing interventions in treating uncomplicated malaria. As for the fever and parasite clearance time, due to the lack of complete data in some studies, only 3 studies' data could be used. The patients showed good tolerance to all drugs, and some side-effects (such as headache, anoxia, vomiting, nausea, and dizziness) were reported for every group, but they were self-limited and showed no significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS
AP appeared to show similar efficacy and safety, with a simpler mode of administration and easier compliance when compared with other ACTs used in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria. Considering that the potential evolution of drug resistance is of a great concern, additional RCTs with high-quality and more rigorous design are warranted to substantiate the efficacy and safety in different populations and epidemiological regions.
PubMed: 33013398
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.562363 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Aug 2020Malaria in pregnancy affects both the mother and the fetus. However, evidence supporting treatment guidelines for uncomplicated (including asymptomatic) falciparum... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and tolerability of artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatments for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Malaria in pregnancy affects both the mother and the fetus. However, evidence supporting treatment guidelines for uncomplicated (including asymptomatic) falciparum malaria in pregnant women is scarce and assessed in varied ways. We did a systematic literature review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and tolerability of different artemisinin-based or quinine-based treatments for malaria in pregnant women.
METHODS
We did a systematic review of interventional or observational cohort studies assessing the efficacy of artemisinin-based or quinine-based treatments in pregnancy. Seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciencias da Saude) and two clinical trial registries (International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched. The final search was done on April 26, 2019. Studies that assessed PCR-corrected treatment efficacy in pregnancy with follow-up of 28 days or more were included. Investigators of identified studies were invited to share data from individual patients. The outcomes assessed included PCR-corrected efficacy, PCR-uncorrected efficacy, parasite clearance, fever clearance, gametocyte development, and acute adverse events. One-stage IPD meta-analysis using Cox and logistic regression with random-effects was done to estimate the risk factors associated with PCR-corrected treatment failure, using artemether-lumefantrine as the reference. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018104013.
FINDINGS
Of the 30 studies assessed, 19 were included, representing 92% of patients in the literature (4968 of 5360 episodes). Risk of PCR-corrected treatment failure was higher for the quinine monotherapy (n=244, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 6·11, 95% CI 2·57-14·54, p<0·0001) but lower for artesunate-amodiaquine (n=840, 0·27, 95% 0·14-0·52, p<0·0001), artesunate-mefloquine (n=1028, 0·56, 95% 0·34-0·94, p=0·03), and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=872, 0·35, 95% CI 0·18-0·68, p=0·002) than artemether-lumefantrine (n=1278) after adjustment for baseline asexual parasitaemia and parity. The risk of gametocyte carriage on day 7 was higher after quinine-based therapy than artemisinin-based treatment (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 7·38, 95% CI 2·29-23·82).
INTERPRETATION
Efficacy and tolerability of artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) in pregnant women are better than quinine. The lower efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine compared with other ACTs might require dose optimisation.
FUNDING
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, ExxonMobil Foundation, and the University of Oxford Clarendon Fund.
Topics: Amodiaquine; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Artesunate; Atovaquone; Clindamycin; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Mefloquine; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Parasitic; Proguanil; Pyrimethamine; Quinine; Quinolines; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 32530424
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30064-5 -
BMC Medicine Jun 2020Malaria in pregnancy, including asymptomatic infection, has a detrimental impact on foetal development. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was conducted to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Pregnancy outcomes and risk of placental malaria after artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatment for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy: a WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Malaria in pregnancy, including asymptomatic infection, has a detrimental impact on foetal development. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was conducted to compare the association between antimalarial treatments and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including placental malaria, accompanied with the gestational age at diagnosis of uncomplicated falciparum malaria infection.
METHODS
A systematic review and one-stage IPD meta-analysis of studies assessing the efficacy of artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatments for patent microscopic uncomplicated falciparum malaria infection (hereinafter uncomplicated falciparum malaria) in pregnancy was conducted. The risks of stillbirth (pregnancy loss at ≥ 28.0 weeks of gestation), moderate to late preterm birth (PTB, live birth between 32.0 and < 37.0 weeks), small for gestational age (SGA, birthweight of < 10th percentile), and placental malaria (defined as deposition of malaria pigment in the placenta with or without parasites) after different treatments of uncomplicated falciparum malaria were assessed by mixed-effects logistic regression, using artemether-lumefantrine, the most used antimalarial, as the reference standard. Registration PROSPERO: CRD42018104013.
RESULTS
Of the 22 eligible studies (n = 5015), IPD from16 studies were shared, representing 95.0% (n = 4765) of the women enrolled in literature. Malaria treatment in this pooled analysis mostly occurred in the second (68.4%, 3064/4501) or third trimester (31.6%, 1421/4501), with gestational age confirmed by ultrasound in 91.5% (4120/4503). Quinine (n = 184) and five commonly used artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) were included: artemether-lumefantrine (n = 1087), artesunate-amodiaquine (n = 775), artesunate-mefloquine (n = 965), and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n = 837). The overall pooled proportion of stillbirth was 1.1% (84/4361), PTB 10.0% (619/4131), SGA 32.3% (1007/3707), and placental malaria 80.1% (2543/3035), and there were no significant differences of considered outcomes by ACT. Higher parasitaemia before treatment was associated with a higher risk of SGA (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.14 per 10-fold increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03 to 1.26, p = 0.009) and deposition of malaria pigment in the placenta (aOR 1.67 per 10-fold increase, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.96, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The risks of stillbirth, PTB, SGA, and placental malaria were not different between the commonly used ACTs. The risk of SGA was high among pregnant women infected with falciparum malaria despite treatment with highly effective drugs. Reduction of malaria-associated adverse birth outcomes requires effective prevention in pregnant women.
Topics: Adult; Antimalarials; Artemisinins; Female; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Placenta; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Quinine; Young Adult
PubMed: 32482173
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-020-01592-z -
PloS One 2019The WHO recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Hence, monitoring the efficacy of antimalarial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The WHO recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Hence, monitoring the efficacy of antimalarial drugs is a key component of malaria control and elimination. The published randomized trials that assessed comparisons of ACTs for treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria reported conflicting results in treatment efficacy. A network meta-analysis is an extension of pairwise meta-analysis that can synthesize evidence simultaneously from both direct and indirect treatment comparisons. The objective was to synthesize evidence on the comparative efficacy of antimalarial drugs for treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Asian region.
METHODS
Relevant randomized trials that assessed efficacy of antimalarial drugs for patients having uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Asian region were searched in health-related databases. We evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Main outcome was treatment success at day 28 as determined by the absence of parasiteamia. We performed network meta-analysis of the interventions in the trials, and assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
Seventeen randomized trials (n = 5043) were included in this network meta-analysis study. A network geometry was formed with 14 antimalarial treatment options such as artemether-lumefantrine (AL), artemisinin-piperaquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, artesunate-mefloquine (ASMQ), artesunate-chloroquine, artesunate-mefloquine home treatment, artesunate-mefloquine 2-day course, artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, chloroquine, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHP), dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine home treatment, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine 4-day course, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and added artesunate, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. A maximum number of trials included was DHP compared to ASMQ (n = 5). In general, DHP had better efficacy than AL at day 28 (DHP vs AL: OR 2.5, 95%CI:1.08-5.8). There is low certainty evidence due to limited number of studies and small trials.
DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest the superiority of DHP (3-day course) to AL and other comparator ACTs are with the overall low/very low quality of evidence judgements. Moreover, one drug regimen is better than another is only if current drug-resistance patterns are at play. For example, the AL might be better than DHP in areas where both artemisinin and piperaquine resistance patterns are prevalent. For substantiation, well-designed larger trials from endemic countries are needed. In the light of benefit versus harm concept, future analysis with safety information is recommended.
Topics: Antimalarials; Asia; Databases, Factual; Drug Resistance; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31856172
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225882 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Intermittent 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 27% reduction (rate ratio 0.73, 0.65 to 0.82; 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 0.79, 0.74 to 0.85; 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. 2 December 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All eligible published studies found in the last search (3 Dec, 2018) were included.
Topics: Africa South of the Sahara; Antimalarials; Disease Eradication; Drug Combinations; Endemic Diseases; Humans; Infant; Malaria; Parasitemia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31792925
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011525.pub2 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2019Management of Ebola virus disease (EVD) has historically focused on infection prevention, case detection and supportive care. Several specific anti-Ebola therapies have...
BACKGROUND
Management of Ebola virus disease (EVD) has historically focused on infection prevention, case detection and supportive care. Several specific anti-Ebola therapies have been investigated, including during the 2014-2016 West African outbreak. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the effect of anti-Ebola virus therapies on clinical outcomes to guide their potential use and future evaluation.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Global Health, Cochrane Library, African Index Medicus, WHOLIS (inception-9 April 2018), and trial registries for observational studies or clinical trials, in any language, that enrolled patients with confirmed EVD who received therapy targeting Ebola virus and reported on mortality, symptom duration, or adverse effects.
RESULTS
From 11,257 citations and registered trials, we reviewed 55 full-text citations, of which 35 met eligibility criteria (1 randomized clinical trial (RCT), 8 non-randomized comparative studies, 9 case series and 17 case reports) and collectively examined 21 anti-Ebola virus agents. The 31 studies performed during the West African outbreak reported on 4.8% (1377/28616) of all patients with Ebola. The only RCT enrolled 72 patients (0.25% of all patients with Ebola) and compared the monoclonal antibody ZMapp vs. standard care (mortality, 22% vs. 37%; 95% confidence interval for risk difference, - 36 to 7%). Studies of convalescent plasma, interferon-β-1a, favipiravir, brincidofovir, artesunate-amodiaquine and TKM-130803 were associated with at least moderate risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Research evaluating anti-Ebola virus agents has reached very few patients with EVD, and inferences are limited by non-randomized study designs. ZMapp has the most promising treatment signal.
Topics: Amides; Amodiaquine; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antiviral Agents; Artemisinins; Databases, Factual; Drug Combinations; Ebolavirus; Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola; Humans; Pyrazines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31046707
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-3980-9 -
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 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Dec 2018About 80% of all reported sickle cell disease (SCD) cases in children anually are recorded in Africa. Although malaria is considered a major cause of death in SCD... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
About 80% of all reported sickle cell disease (SCD) cases in children anually are recorded in Africa. Although malaria is considered a major cause of death in SCD children, there is limited data on the safety and effectiveness of the available antimalarial drugs used for prophylaxis. Also, previous systematic reviews have not provided quantitative measures of preventive effectiveness. The purpose of this research was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature to determine the safety and effectiveness of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis used in SCD patients.
METHODS
We searched in PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, POPLine and Cochrane library, for the period spanning January 1990 to April 2018. We considered randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing any antimalarial chemoprophylaxis to, 1) other antimalarial chemoprophylaxis, 2) placebo or 3) no intervention, in SCD patients. Studies comparing at least two treatment arms, for a minimum duration of three months, with no restriction on the number of patients per arm were reviewed. The data were extracted and expressed as odds ratios. Direct pairwise comparisons were performed using fixed effect models and the heterogeneity assessed using the I-square.
RESULTS
Six qualified studies that highlighted the importance of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis in SCD children were identified. In total, seven different interventions (Chloroquine, Mefloquine, Mefloquine artesunate, Proguanil, Pyrimethamine, Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine amodiaquine) were evaluated in 912 children with SCD. Overall, the meta-analysis showed that antimalarial chemoprophylaxis provided protection against parasitemia and clinical malaria episodes in children with SCD. Nevertheless, the risk of hospitalization (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.267-1.959; I = 0.0%), blood transfusion (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.542-1.280; I = 29.733%), vaso-occlusive crisis (OR = 19, 95% CI = 1.713-2.792; I = 93.637%), and mortality (OR = 0.511, 95% CI = 0.189-1.384; I = 0.0%) did not differ between the intervention and placebo groups.
CONCLUSION
The data shows that antimalarial prophylaxis reduces the incidence of clinical malaria in children with SCD. However, there was no difference between the occurrence of adverse events in children who received placebo and those who received prophylaxis. This creates an urgent need to assess the efficacy of new antimalarial drug regimens as potential prophylactic agents in SCD patients.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42016052514).
Topics: Africa; Anemia, Sickle Cell; Antimalarials; Chemoprevention; Child; Humans; Malaria; Network Meta-Analysis; Parasitemia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30541465
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-018-3556-0 -
BMC Medicine Nov 2018Several quinoline and structurally related antimalarial drugs are associated with cardiovascular side effects, particularly hypotension and electrocardiographic QT...
BACKGROUND
Several quinoline and structurally related antimalarial drugs are associated with cardiovascular side effects, particularly hypotension and electrocardiographic QT interval prolongation. A prolonged QT interval is a sensitive but not specific risk marker for the development of Torsade de Pointes-a potentially lethal polymorphic ventricular tachyarrhythmia. The increasing use of quinoline and structurally related antimalarials in mass treatments to eliminate malaria rapidly highlights the need to review their cardiovascular safety profiles.
METHODS
The primary objective of this systematic review was to describe the documented clinical and electrocardiographic cardiovascular side effects of quinine, mefloquine, lumefantrine, piperaquine, halofantrine, chloroquine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, amodiaquine, and primaquine. Trials in healthy subjects or patients with Plasmodium falciparum or P. vivax infection were included if at least two ECGs were conducted during the trial. All trial designs were included except case reports and pooled analyses. Secondary outcomes were the methods adopted by trials for measuring and reporting the QT interval.
RESULTS
Data from trials published between 1982 and July 2016 were included. A total of 177 trials met the inclusion criteria. 35,448 participants received quinoline antimalarials in these trials, of which 18,436 participants underwent ECG evaluation. Subjects with co-medication use or comorbidities including cardiovascular disease were excluded from the majority of trials. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was the drug most studied (5083 participants). Despite enormous use over the past 60 years, only 1076, 452, and 150 patients had ECG recordings reported in studies of chloroquine, amodiaquine, and primaquine respectively. Transiently high concentrations of quinine, quinidine, and chloroquine following parenteral administration have all been associated with hypotension, but there were no documented reports of death or syncope attributable to a cardiovascular cause, nor of electrocardiographic recordings of ventricular arrhythmia in these trials. The large volume of missing outcome information and the heterogeneity of ECG interval reporting and measurement methodology did not allow pooled quantitative analysis of QT interval changes.
CONCLUSIONS
No serious cardiac adverse effects were recorded in malaria clinical trials of 35,548 participants who received quinoline and structurally related antimalarials with close follow-up including 18,436 individuals who underwent ECG evaluation. While these findings provide further evidence of the rarity of serious cardiovascular events after treatment with these drugs, they also underscore the need for continued strengthening of pharmacovigilance systems for robust detection of rare drug adverse events in real-world populations. A standardised approach to measurement and reporting of ECG data in malaria trials is also needed.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42016036678.
Topics: Adult; Antimalarials; Cardiotoxicity; Female; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Male; Quinolines; Young Adult
PubMed: 30400791
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-018-1188-2