-
Malaria Journal Feb 2014Control of malaria in pregnant women is still a major challenge as it constitutes an important cause of maternal and neonatal mortality. Mefloquine (MQ) has been used... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Control of malaria in pregnant women is still a major challenge as it constitutes an important cause of maternal and neonatal mortality. Mefloquine (MQ) has been used for malaria chemoprophylaxis in non-immune travellers for several decades and it constitutes a potential candidate for intermittent preventive treatment in pregnant women (IPTp).
METHODS
The safety of MQ, including its safety in pregnancy, is controversial and a continuing subject of debate. Published studies which evaluated the use of MQ for malaria prevention or treatment in pregnant women and which reported data on drug tolerability and/or pregnancy outcomes have been reviewed systematically.
RESULTS
Eighteen articles fitted the inclusion criteria, only one study was double-blind and placebo controlled. No differences were found in the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women exposed to MQ compared to those exposed to other anti-malarials or to the general population. MQ combined with artesunate seems to be better tolerated than standard quinine therapy for treatment of non-severe falciparum malaria, but a MQ loading dose (10 mg/kg) is associated with more dizziness compared with placebo. When used for IPTp, MQ (15 mg/kg) may have more side effects than sulphadoxine- pyrimethamine.
CONCLUSIONS
In the published literature there are no indications that MQ use during pregnancy carries an increased risk for the foetus. Ideally, the use of MQ to prevent malaria should be based on a risk-benefit analysis of adverse effects against the risk of acquiring the infection. For this purpose double-blinded randomized controlled trials in African pregnant women are much needed.
Topics: Antimalarials; Chemoprevention; Female; Humans; Malaria; Mefloquine; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious
PubMed: 24581338
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-13-75 -
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 -
Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy Dec 2013The WHO recommends the administration of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) to all pregnant women living in areas of moderate (stable) to high malaria transmission during... (Review)
Review
The WHO recommends the administration of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) to all pregnant women living in areas of moderate (stable) to high malaria transmission during scheduled antenatal visits, beginning in the second trimester and continuing to delivery. Malaria parasites have lost sensitivity to SP in many endemic areas, prompting the investigation of alternatives that include azithromycin-based combination (ABC) therapies. Use of ABC therapies may also confer protection against curable sexually transmitted infections and reproductive tract infections (STIs/RTIs). The magnitude of protection at the population level would depend on the efficacy of the azithromycin-based regimen used and the underlying prevalence of curable STIs/RTIs among pregnant women who receive preventive treatment. This systematic review summarizes the efficacy data of azithromycin against curable STIs/RTIs.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Combinations; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Female; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Male; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Pyrimethamine; Reproductive Tract Infections; Sexually Transmitted Diseases; Sulfadoxine; Treatment Outcome; Vaginosis, Bacterial
PubMed: 24191955
DOI: 10.1586/14787210.2013.851601 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2013Plasmodium vivax is an important cause of malaria in many parts of Asia and South America, and parasite resistance to the standard treatment (chloroquine) is now high in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Plasmodium vivax is an important cause of malaria in many parts of Asia and South America, and parasite resistance to the standard treatment (chloroquine) is now high in some parts of Oceania. This review aims to assess the current treatment options in the light of increasing chloroquine resistance.
OBJECTIVES
To compare artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) with alternative antimalarial regimens for treating acute uncomplicated P. vivax malaria.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) up to 28 March 2013 using "vivax" and "arte* OR dihydroarte*" as search terms.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials comparing ACTs versus standard therapy, or comparing alternative ACTs, in adults and children with uncomplicated P. vivax malaria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We used recurrent parasitaemia prior to day 28 as a proxy for effective treatment of the blood stage parasite, and compared drug treatments using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used trials following patients for longer than 28 days to assess the duration of the post-treatment prophylactic effect of ACTs. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 trials, that enrolled 2592 participants, and were all conducted in Asia and Oceania between 2002 and 2011. ACTs versus chloroquine: ACTs clear parasites from the peripheral blood quicker than chloroquine monotherapy (parasitaemia after 24 hours of treatment: RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.50, four trials, 1652 participants, high quality evidence).In settings where chloroquine remains effective, ACTs are as effective as chloroquine at preventing recurrent parasitaemias before day 28 (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.90, five trials, 1622 participants, high quality evidence). In four of these trials, recurrent parasitaemias before day 28 were very low following treatment with both chloroquine and ACTs. The fifth trial, from Thailand in 2011, found increased recurrent parasitaemias following treatment with chloroquine (9%), while they remained low following ACT (2%) (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.66, one trial, 437 participants).ACT combinations with long half-lives probably also provide a longer prophylactic effect after treatment, with significantly fewer recurrent parasitaemias between day 28 and day 42 or day 63 (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.82, three trials, 1066 participants, moderate quality evidence). One trial, from Cambodia, Thailand, India and Indonesia, gave additional primaquine to both treatment groups to reduce the risk of spontaneous relapses. Recurrent parasitaemias after day 28 were lower than seen in the trials that did not give primaquine, but the ACT still appeared to have an advantage (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.94, one trial, 376 participants, low quality evidence). ACTs versus alternative ACTs: In high transmission settings, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is probably superior to artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate plus sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine and artesunate plus amodiaquine at preventing recurrent parasitaemias before day 28 (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.49, three trials, 334 participants, moderate quality evidence).Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine may also have an improved post-treatment prophylactic effect lasting for up to six weeks, and this effect may be present even when primaquine is also given to achieve radical cure (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.46, two trials, 179 participants, low quality evidence).The data available from low transmission settings is too limited to reliably assess the relative effectiveness of ACTs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
ACTs appear at least equivalent to chloroquine at effectively treating the blood stage of P. vivax infection. Even in areas where chloroquine remains effective, this finding may allow for simplified protocols for treating all forms of malaria with ACTs. In areas where chloroquine no longer cures the infection, ACTs offer an effective alternative.Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is the most studied ACT. It may provide a longer period of post-treatment prophylaxis than artemether-lumefantrine or artesunate plus amodiaquine. This effect may be clinically important in high transmission settings whether primaquine is also given or not.
Topics: Antimalarials; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artemisinins; Drug Combinations; Drug Resistance; Drug Therapy, Combination; Ethanolamines; Fluorenes; Humans; Malaria, Vivax; Parasitemia; Primaquine; Pyrimethamine; Quinolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 24163021
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008492.pub3 -
PLoS Medicine 2013Malaria in pregnancy has important consequences for mother and baby. Coverage with the World Health Organization-recommended prevention strategy for pregnant women in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Malaria in pregnancy has important consequences for mother and baby. Coverage with the World Health Organization-recommended prevention strategy for pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa of intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) is low. We conducted a systematic review to explore factors affecting delivery, access, and use of IPTp and ITNs among healthcare providers and women.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We searched the Malaria in Pregnancy Library and Global Health Database from 1 January 1990 to 23 April 2013, without language restriction. Data extraction was performed by two investigators independently, and data was appraised for quality and content. Data on barriers and facilitators, and the effect of interventions, were explored using content analysis and narrative synthesis. We conducted a meta-analysis of determinants of IPTp and ITN uptake using random effects models, and performed subgroup analysis to evaluate consistency across interventions and study populations, countries, and enrolment sites. We did not perform a meta-ethnography of qualitative data. Ninety-eight articles were included, of which 20 were intervention studies. Key barriers to the provision of IPTp and ITNs were unclear policy and guidance on IPTp; general healthcare system issues, such as stockouts and user fees; health facility issues stemming from poor organisation, leading to poor quality of care; poor healthcare provider performance, including confusion over the timing of each IPTp dose; and women's poor antenatal attendance, affecting IPTp uptake. Key determinants of IPTp coverage were education, knowledge about malaria/IPTp, socio-economic status, parity, and number and timing of antenatal clinic visits. Key determinants of ITN coverage were employment status, education, knowledge about malaria/ITNs, age, and marital status. Predictors showed regional variations.
CONCLUSIONS
Delivery of ITNs through antenatal clinics presents fewer problems than delivery of IPTp. Many obstacles to IPTp delivery are relatively simple barriers that could be resolved in the short term. Other barriers are more entrenched within the overall healthcare system or socio-economic/cultural contexts, and will require medium- to long-term strategies. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
Topics: Africa South of the Sahara; Antimalarials; Delivery of Health Care; Drug Combinations; Female; Humans; Insecticide-Treated Bednets; Malaria; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Parasitic; Pyrimethamine; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 23935459
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001488 -
PloS One 2013Cotrimoxazole (CTX) has been used for half a century. It is inexpensive hence the reason for its almost universal availability and wide clinical spectrum of use. In the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Cotrimoxazole (CTX) has been used for half a century. It is inexpensive hence the reason for its almost universal availability and wide clinical spectrum of use. In the last decade, CTX was used for prophylaxis of opportunistic infections in HIV infected people. It also had an impact on the malaria risk in this specific group.
OBJECTIVE
We performed a systematic review to explore the efficacy and safety of CTX used for P.falciparum malaria treatment and prophylaxis.
RESULT
CTX is safe and efficacious against malaria. Up to 75% of the safety concerns relate to skin reactions and this increases in HIV/AIDs patients. In different study areas, in HIV negative individuals, CTX used as malaria treatment cleared 56%-97% of the malaria infections, reduced fever and improved anaemia. CTX prophylaxis reduces the incidence of clinical malaria in HIV-1 infected individuals from 46%-97%. In HIV negative non pregnant participants, CTX prophylaxis had 39.5%-99.5% protective efficacy against clinical malaria. The lowest figures were observed in zones of high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance. There were no data reported on CTX prophylaxis in HIV negative pregnant women.
CONCLUSION
CTX is safe and still efficacious for the treatment of P.falciparum malaria in non-pregnant adults and children irrespective of HIV status and antifolate resistance profiles. There is need to explore its effect in pregnant women, irrespective of HIV status. CTX prophylaxis in HIV infected individuals protects against malaria and CTX may have a role for malaria prophylaxis in specific HIV negative target groups.
Topics: Antimalarials; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination
PubMed: 23451110
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056916 -
JAMA Feb 2013Intermittent preventive therapy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine to control malaria during pregnancy is used in 37 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, and 31 of those... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Intermittent preventive therapy for malaria during pregnancy using 2 vs 3 or more doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and risk of low birth weight in Africa: systematic review and meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
Intermittent preventive therapy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine to control malaria during pregnancy is used in 37 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, and 31 of those countries use the standard 2-dose regimen. However, 2 doses may not provide protection during the last 4 to 10 weeks of pregnancy, a pivotal period for fetal weight gain.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials to determine whether regimens containing 3 or more doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for intermittent preventive therapy during pregnancy are associated with a higher birth weight or lower risk of low birth weight (LBW) (<2500 g) than standard 2-dose regimens.
DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION
ISI Web of Knowledge, EMBASE, SCOPUS, PubMed, LILACS, the Malaria in Pregnancy Library, Cochrane CENTRAL, and trial registries from their inception to December 2012, without language restriction. Eligible studies included randomized and quasi-randomized trials of intermittent preventive therapy during pregnancy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine monotherapy.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data were independently abstracted by 2 investigators. Relative risk (RR), mean differences, and 95% CIs were calculated with random-effects models.
RESULTS
Of 241 screened studies, 7 trials of 6281 pregnancies were included. The median birth weight in the 2-dose group was 2870 g (range, 2722-3239 g) and on average 56 g higher (95% CI, 29-83 g; I2 = 0%) in the ≥3-dose group. Three or more doses were associated with fewer LBW births (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.94; I 2 = 0%), with a median LBW risk per 1000 women in the 2-dose group (assumed control group risk) of 167 per 1000 vs 134 per 1000 in the ≥3-dose group (absolute risk reduction, 33 per 1000 [95% CI, 10-52]; number needed to treat = 31). The association was consistent across a wide range of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance (0% to 96% dihydropteroate-synthase K540E mutations). There was no evidence of small-study bias. The ≥3-dose group had less placental malaria (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.68; I 2 = 0%, in 6 trials, 63 vs 32 per 1000; absolute risk reduction, 31 per 1000 [95% CI, 20-39]). In primigravid plus secundigravid women, the risk of moderate to severe maternal anemia was lower in the ≥3-dose group (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36-0.99; I2 = 20%; in 6 trials, 36 vs 22 per 1000; absolute risk reduction, 14 per 1000 [95% CI, 0.4-23]). There were no differences in rates of serious adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa, intermittent preventive therapy with 3 or more doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was associated with a higher birth weight and lower risk of LBW than the standard 2-dose regimens. These data provide support for the new WHO recommendations to provide at least 3 doses of intermittent preventive therapy during pregnancy at each scheduled antenatal care visit in the second and third trimester.
Topics: Africa; Antimalarials; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Combinations; Female; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Malaria; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pyrimethamine; Risk; Sulfadoxine
PubMed: 23403684
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.216231 -
PloS One 2012Chemotherapy based on repeated doses of praziquantel is still the most effective control strategy against Schistosomiasis, however artemisinin derivatives emerged as a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chemotherapy based on repeated doses of praziquantel is still the most effective control strategy against Schistosomiasis, however artemisinin derivatives emerged as a family of compounds with schistomicide activity. The aim of the present work is to compare the efficacy of artemisinin-based therapies in the treatment and prophylaxis of human schistosomiasis. The design of this work involved a quantitative systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
Retrieval of published studies was carried out through an electronic search of the PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases. This included reports comparing the therapeutic efficacy of artesunate alone, artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and a combination of artemisinin derivatives plus praziquantel against praziquantel alone on different types of schistosomiasis. Moreover, studies on artesunate and artemether used as preventive drugs were also analyzed against placebo. The primary outcome measure for schistosomiasis treatment was "parasitological cure", whereas for the prophylaxis the outcome evaluated was "infection rate". Our results show that patients treated with artesunate alone have significantly lower cure rates than those treated with praziquantel (OR = 0.27 (95% C.I. 0.13-0.53; p<0.001)) and that the combined therapy of artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is also significantly less effective than praziquantel treatment (OR = 0.14 (95% C.I. 0.02-0.92; p = 0.04)). However, the combination of an artemisinin derivatives plus praziquantel showed a higher cure rate than praziquantel monotherapy with OR = 2.07 (95% C.I. 1.27-3.36; p = 0.003). Finally, chemoprophylaxis with either artesunate (RR = 0.11 (95% C.I. 0.06-0.22; p<0.001)) or artemether (RR = 0.25 (95% C.I. 0.16-0.40; p<0.001)) was significantly better than a placebo in both cases.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE
This meta-analysis confirms that artemisinin derivatives used in combination with praziquantel have the potential to increase the cure rates in schistosomiasis treatment, but not artesunate alone. It is also confirmed that repeated doses of artemisinin derivatives play a prophylactic role, significantly reducing the incidence of Schistosoma japonicum infections compared with placebo.
Topics: Antiprotozoal Agents; Artemisinins; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Praziquantel; Pyrimethamine; Schistosomiasis; Sulfadoxine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23029285
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045867 -
Malaria Journal May 2012Malaria during pregnancy, particularly Plasmodium falciparum malaria, has been linked to increased morbidity and mortality, which must be reduced by both preventive... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Malaria during pregnancy, particularly Plasmodium falciparum malaria, has been linked to increased morbidity and mortality, which must be reduced by both preventive measures and effective case management. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) to treat uncomplicated falciparum malaria during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy, and quinine plus clindamycin during the first trimester. However, the national policies of many African countries currently recommend quinine throughout pregnancy. Therefore, the aim of this article is to provide a summary of the available data on the safety and efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) in pregnancy. An English-language search identified 16 publications from 1989 to October 2011 with reports of artemether or AL exposure in pregnancy, including randomized clinical trials, observational studies and systematic reviews. Overall, there were 1,103 reports of AL use in pregnant women: 890 second/third trimester exposures; 212 first trimester exposures; and one case where the trimester of exposure was not reported. In the second and third trimesters, AL was not associated with increased adverse pregnancy outcomes as compared with quinine or sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine, showed improved tolerability relative to quinine, and its efficacy was non-inferior to quinine. There is evidence to suggest that the pharmacokinetics of anti-malarial drugs may change in pregnancy, although the impact on efficacy and safety needs to be studied further, especially since the majority of studies report high cure rates and adequate tolerability. As there are fewer reports of AL safety in the first trimester, additional data are required to assess the potential to use AL in the first trimester. Though the available safety and efficacy data support the use of AL in the second and third trimesters, there is still a need for further information. These findings reinforce the WHO recommendation to treat uncomplicated falciparum malaria with quinine plus clindamycin in early pregnancy and ACT in later pregnancy.
Topics: Antimalarials; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Artemisinins; Drug Combinations; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Ethanolamines; Female; Fluorenes; Humans; Malaria, Falciparum; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pyrimethamine; Quinine; Sulfadoxine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22548983
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-11-141 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2012In malaria endemic areas, pre-school children are at high risk of severe and repeated malaria illness. One possible public health strategy, known as Intermittent... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In malaria endemic areas, pre-school children are at high risk of severe and repeated malaria illness. One possible public health strategy, known as Intermittent Preventive Treatment in children (IPTc), is to treat all children for malaria at regular intervals during the transmission season, regardless of whether they are infected or not.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of IPTc to prevent malaria in preschool children living in endemic areas with seasonal malaria transmission.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (July 2011), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2011), EMBASE (1974 to July 2011), LILACS (1982 to July 2011), mRCT (July 2011), and reference lists of identified trials. We also contacted researchers working in the field for unpublished and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Individually randomized and cluster-randomized controlled trials of full therapeutic dose of antimalarial or antimalarial drug combinations given at regular intervals compared with placebo or no preventive treatment in children aged six years or less living in an area with seasonal malaria transmission.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. Data were meta-analysed and measures of effects (ie rate ratio, risk ratio and mean difference) are presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven trials (12,589 participants), including one cluster-randomized trial, met the inclusion criteria. All were conducted in West Africa, and six of seven trials were restricted to children aged less than 5 years.IPTc prevents approximately three quarters of all clinical malaria episodes (rate ratio 0.26; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.38; 9321 participants, six trials, high quality evidence), and a similar proportion of severe malaria episodes (rate ratio 0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.76; 5964 participants, two trials, high quality evidence). These effects remain present even where insecticide treated net (ITN) usage is high (two trials, 5964 participants, high quality evidence).IPTc probably produces a small reduction in all-cause mortality consistent with the effect on severe malaria, but the trials were underpowered to reach statistical significance (risk ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.39, moderate quality evidence).The effect on anaemia varied between studies, but the risk of moderately severe anaemia is probably lower with IPTc (risk ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98; 8805 participants, five trials, moderate quality evidence).Serious drug-related adverse events, if they occur, are probably rare, with none reported in the six trials (9533 participants, six trials, moderate quality evidence). Amodiaquine plus sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine is the most studied drug combination for seasonal chemoprevention. Although effective, it causes increased vomiting in this age-group (risk ratio 2.78, 95% CI 2.31 to 3.35; two trials, 3544 participants, high quality evidence).When antimalarial IPTc was stopped, no rebound increase in malaria was observed in the three trials which continued follow-up for one season after IPTc.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In areas with seasonal malaria transmission, giving antimalarial drugs to preschool children (age < 6 years) as IPTc during the malaria transmission season markedly reduces episodes of clinical malaria, including severe malaria. This benefit occurs even in areas where insecticide treated net usage is high.
Topics: Anemia; Antimalarials; Child, Preschool; Endemic Diseases; Humans; Infant; Insecticide-Treated Bednets; Malaria; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22336792
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003756.pub4