Efficacy and safety of three regimens for the prevention of malaria in young HIV-exposed Ugandan children: a randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT: Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis is recommended for HIV-exposed infants until breastfeeding ends and HIV infection has been excluded. Extending prophylaxis with a focus on preventing malaria may be beneficial in high transmission areas. We investigated three regimens for the prevention of malaria in young HIV-exposed children.An open-label, randomized controlled trial.Tororo, Uganda, a rural area with intense, year-round, malaria transmission.Two hundred infants aged 4-5 months enrolled and 186 randomized after cessation of breastfeeding and confirmed to be HIV uninfected (median 10 months of age).No chemoprevention, monthly sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, daily trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole or monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine given from randomization to 24 months of age.The primary outcome was the incidence of malaria during the intervention period. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of hospitalization, diarrhoeal illness, or respiratory tract infection; prevalence of anaemia and asymptomatic parasitemia; measures of safety; and incidence of malaria over 1 year after the intervention was stopped.During the intervention, the incidence of malaria in the no chemoprevention group was 6.28 episodes per person-year at risk. Protective efficacy was 69% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 53-80, P?
Project description:Intermittent treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is widely recommended for the prevention of malaria in pregnant women in Africa. However, with the spread of resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, new interventions are needed.We conducted a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving 300 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-uninfected pregnant adolescents or women in Uganda, where sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance is widespread. We randomly assigned participants to a sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine regimen (106 participants), a three-dose dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine regimen (94 participants), or a monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine regimen (100 participants). The primary outcome was the prevalence of histopathologically confirmed placental malaria.The prevalence of histopathologically confirmed placental malaria was significantly higher in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (50.0%) than in the three-dose dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (34.1%, P=0.03) or the monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (27.1%, P=0.001). The prevalence of a composite adverse birth outcome was lower in the monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (9.2%) than in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (18.6%, P=0.05) or the three-dose dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (21.3%, P=0.02). During pregnancy, the incidence of symptomatic malaria was significantly higher in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (41 episodes over 43.0 person-years at risk) than in the three-dose dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (12 episodes over 38.2 person-years at risk, P=0.001) or the monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (0 episodes over 42.3 person-years at risk, P<0.001), as was the prevalence of parasitemia (40.5% in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group vs. 16.6% in the three-dose dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group [P<0.001] and 5.2% in the monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group [P<0.001]). In each treatment group, the risk of vomiting after administration of any dose of the study agents was less than 0.4%, and there were no significant differences among the groups in the risk of adverse events.The burden of malaria in pregnancy was significantly lower among adolescent girls or women who received intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine than among those who received sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, and monthly treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was superior to three-dose dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with regard to several outcomes. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02163447.).
Project description:BACKGROUND:Trials of intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) of malaria in pregnant women that compared dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with the standard of care, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, showed dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was superior at preventing malaria infection, but not at improving birthweight. We aimed to assess whether sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine shows greater non-malarial benefits for birth outcomes than does dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, and whether dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine shows greater antimalarial benefits for birth outcomes than does sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. METHODS:We defined treatment as random assignment to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine before pooling individual participant-level data from 1617 HIV-uninfected pregnant women in Kenya (one trial; n=806) and Uganda (two trials; n=811). We quantified the relative effect of treatment on birthweight (primary outcome) attributed to preventing placental malaria infection (mediator). We estimated antimalarial (indirect) and non-malarial (direct) effects of IPTp on birth outcomes using causal mediation analyses, accounting for confounders. We used two-stage individual participant data meta-analyses to calculate pooled-effect sizes. FINDINGS:Overall, birthweight was higher among neonates of women randomly assigned to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine compared with women assigned to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (mean difference 69 g, 95% CI 26 to 112), despite placental malaria infection being lower in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (relative risk [RR] 0·64, 95% CI 0·39 to 1·04). Mediation analyses showed sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine conferred a greater non-malarial effect than did dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (mean difference 87 g, 95% CI 43 to 131), whereas dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine conferred a slightly larger antimalarial effect than did sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (8 g, -9 to 26), although more frequent dosing increased the antimalarial effect (31 g, 3 to 60). INTERPRETATION:IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine appears to have potent non-malarial effects on birthweight. Further research is needed to evaluate monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (or another compound with non-malarial effects) to achieve greater protection against malarial and non-malarial causes of low birthweight. FUNDING:Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Worldwide Antimalarial Resistance Network.
Project description:Chemoprevention offers a promising strategy for prevention of malaria in African children. However, the optimal chemoprevention drug and dosing strategy is unclear in areas of year-round transmission and resistance to many antimalarial drugs. To compare three available regimens, we conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial of chemoprevention in Ugandan children.This study was conducted between June 28, 2010, and September 25, 2013. 400 infants were enrolled and 393 randomized at 6 mo of age to no chemoprevention, monthly sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), daily trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TS), or monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP). Study drugs were administered at home without supervision. Piperaquine (PQ) levels were used as a measure of compliance in the DP arm. Participants were given insecticide-treated bednets, and caregivers were encouraged to bring their child to a study clinic whenever they were ill. Chemoprevention was stopped at 24 mo of age, and participants followed-up an additional year. Primary outcome was the incidence of malaria during the intervention period. During the intervention, the incidence of malaria in the no chemoprevention arm was 6.95 episodes per person-year at risk. Protective efficacy was 58% (95% CI, 45%-67%, p<0.001) for DP, 28% (95% CI, 7%-44%, p = 0.01) for TS, and 7% for SP (95% CI, -19% to 28%, p = 0.57). PQ levels were below the detection limit 52% of the time when malaria was diagnosed in the DP arm, suggesting non-adherence. There were no differences between the study arms in the incidence of serious adverse events during the intervention and the incidence of malaria during the 1-y period after the intervention was stopped.For preventing malaria in children living in an area of high transmission intensity, monthly DP was the most efficacious and safe, although adherence may pose a problem. Monthly SP and daily TS may not be appropriate in areas with high transmission intensity and frequent resistance to antifolates.www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00948896 Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Asymptomatic falciparum malaria is associated with poorer cognitive performance in African schoolchildren and intermittent preventive treatment of malaria improves cognitive outcomes. However, the developmental benefits of chemoprevention in early childhood are unknown. Early child development was evaluated as a major outcome in an open-label, randomized, clinical trial of anti-malarial chemoprevention in an area of intense, year-round transmission in Uganda. METHODS:Infants were randomized to one of four treatment arms: no chemoprevention, daily trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, monthly sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, or monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP), to be given between enrollment (4-6 mos) and 24 months of age. Number of malaria episodes, anaemia (Hb < 10) and neurodevelopment [Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL)] were assessed at 2 years (N = 469) and at 3 years of age (N = 453); at enrollment 70 % were HIV-unexposed uninfected (HUU) and 30 % were HIV-exposed uninfected (HEU). RESULTS:DP was highly protective against malaria and anaemia, although trial arm was not associated with MSEL outcomes. Across all treatment arms, episodes of malarial illness were negatively predictive of MSEL cognitive performance both at 2 and 3 years of age (P = 0.02). This relationship was mediated by episodes of anaemia. This regression model was stronger for the HEU than for the HUU cohort. Compared to HUU, HEU was significantly poorer on MSEL receptive language development irrespective of malaria and anaemia (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Malaria with anaemia and HIV exposure are significant risk factors for poor early childhood neurodevelopment in malaria-endemic areas in rural Africa. Because of this, comprehensive and cost/effective intervention is needed for malaria prevention in very young children in these settings.
Project description:Young children are the population most severely affected by Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) with amodiaquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine provides substantial benefit to this vulnerable population, but resistance to the drugs will develop. Here, we evaluate the use of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine as an alternative regimen in 179 children (aged 2.33-58.1 months). Allometrically scaled body weight on pharmacokinetic parameters of piperaquine result in lower drug exposures in small children after a standard mg per kg dosage. A covariate-free sigmoidal EMAX-model describes the interval to malaria re-infections satisfactorily. Population-based simulations suggest that small children would benefit from a higher dosage according to the WHO 2015 guideline. Increasing the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine dosage and extending the dose schedule to four monthly doses result in a predicted relative reduction in malaria incidence of up to 58% during the high transmission season. The higher and extended dosing schedule to cover the high transmission period for SMC could improve the preventive efficacy substantially.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Primaquine and methylene blue are gametocytocidal compounds that could prevent Plasmodium falciparum transmission to mosquitoes. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of primaquine and methylene blue in preventing human to mosquito transmission of P falciparum among glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD)-normal, gametocytaemic male participants. METHODS:This was a phase 2, single-blind, randomised controlled trial done at the Clinical Research Centre of the Malaria Research and Training Centre (MRTC) of the University of Bamako (Bamako, Mali). We enrolled male participants aged 5-50 years with asymptomatic P falciparum malaria. G6PD-normal participants with gametocytes detected by blood smear were randomised 1:1:1:1 in block sizes of eight, using a sealed-envelope design, to receive either sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine plus a single dose of 0·25 mg/kg primaquine, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus 15 mg/kg per day methylene blue for 3 days. Laboratory staff, investigators, and insectary technicians were masked to the treatment group and gametocyte density of study participants. The study pharmacist and treating physician were not masked. Participants could request unmasking. The primary efficacy endpoint, analysed in all infected patients with at least one infectivity measure before and after treatment, was median within-person percentage change in mosquito infectivity 2 and 7 days after treatment, assessed by membrane feeding. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02831023. FINDINGS:Between June 27, 2016, and Nov 1, 2016, 80 participants were enrolled and assigned to the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine (n=20), sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine plus primaquine (n=20), dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=20), or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus methylene blue (n=20) groups. Among participants infectious at baseline (54 [68%] of 80), those in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine plus primaquine group (n=19) had a median 100% (IQR 100 to 100) within-person reduction in mosquito infectivity on day 2, a larger reduction than was noted with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine alone (n=12; -10·2%, IQR -143·9 to 56·6; p<0·0001). The dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus methylene blue (n=11) group had a median 100% (IQR 100 to 100) within-person reduction in mosquito infectivity on day 2, a larger reduction than was noted with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine alone (n=12; -6·0%, IQR -126·1 to 86·9; p<0·0001). Haemoglobin changes were similar between gametocytocidal arms and their respective controls. After exclusion of blue urine, adverse events were similar across all groups (59 [74%] of 80 participants had 162 adverse events overall, 145 [90%] of which were mild). INTERPRETATION:Adding a single dose of 0·25 mg/kg primaquine to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine or 3 days of 15 mg/kg per day methylene blue to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was highly efficacious for preventing P falciparum transmission. Both primaquine and methylene blue were well tolerated. FUNDING:Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, European Research Council.
Project description:Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) for malaria is used in infants, children, adults, and pregnant women. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) is an effective, well tolerated artemisinin-based combination therapy. The long half-life of piperaquine makes it attractive for IPT. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to establish the efficacy and safety of repeated treatment with DP.Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched multiple databases on Sept 1, 2016, with the terms: "human" AND "dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine" OR "DHA-PPQ". Studies were eligible if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies involving repeat exposures to standard 3-day courses of DP for either seasonal malaria chemoprevention, mass drug administration, or treatment of clinical malaria, conducted at any time and in any geographic location. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to generate pooled incidence rate ratios and relative risks, or risk differences.11 studies were included: two repeat treatment studies (one in children younger than 5 years and one in pregnant women), and nine IPT trials (five in children younger than 5 years, one in schoolchildren, one in adults, two in pregnant women). Comparator interventions included placebo, artemether-lumefantrine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), SP+amodiaquine, SP+piperaquine, SP+chloroquine, and co-trimoxazole. Of 14?628 participants, 3935 received multiple DP courses (2-18). Monthly IPT-DP was associated with an 84% reduction in the incidence of malaria parasitaemia measured by microscopy compared with placebo. Monthly IPT-DP was associated with fewer serious adverse events than placebo, daily co-trimoxazole, or monthly SP. Among 56 IPT-DP recipients (26 children, 30 pregnant women) with cardiac parameters, all QTc intervals were within normal limits, with no significant increase in QTc prolongation with increasing courses of DP.Monthly DP appears well tolerated and effective for IPT. Additional data are needed in pregnancy and to further explore the cardiac safety with monthly dosing.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and NIH.
Project description:In malaria endemic areas, schoolchildren usually have asymptomatic malaria infections and consequently remain untreated. Therefore, intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in schoolchildren would be a plausible strategy in malaria stable transmission areas to prevent anaemia and malnutrition. However, in contrast to infancy and pregnancy, antimalaria intermittent preventive treatment in children has been barely investigated. As the implementation of intermittent preventive treatment may be challenged by sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine combined with piperaquine may be a better alternative than sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine monotherapy. A clinical trial is being conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of intermittent preventive treatments versus controls in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRCongo) schoolchildren and their impact on sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance.A phase IIIb, randomised, controlled trial will enroll asymptomatic schoolchildren. For interventions, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is compared to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus piperaquine and to a control group. The two treatments are given four-monthly from baseline for a year as a single dose for sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and two doses at 24-hour intervals for piperaquine. All participants receive praziquantel and albendazole as mass-treatment for helminthiasis at enrolment. The primary endpoint is haemoglobin concentration change at 12 months follow-up. Secondary endpoints are malaria parasite load and malaria prevalence, at baseline and at month 12. Malaria and helminthiasis incidence will be monitored throughout the study. Statistical analysis will use multilevel modelling due to repeated measurements and clustering effect of participants.The very few studies on intermittent preventive treatment in schoolchildren in malaria stable transmission areas have contradictory results. This randomised controlled trial is unique in comparing efficacy and safety of a prophylactic combination therapy to monotherapy or a control group after 12 months follow-up. Resistance markers for sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (including break through parasitaemias) will also be recorded. Its uniqueness lies also in the fact that we use piperaquine, a long acting antimalarial, in combination with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Artemisinin derivatives have been excluded as it is part of the treatment policies in virtually all malaria endemic countries. Our findings may, therefore, contribute to the public health of youngsters who fail to thrive and grow due to multiple morbidities.NCT01722539; PACTR201211000449323.
Project description:Intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy with sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine is contra-indicated in HIV-positive pregnant women receiving sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim prophylaxis. Since mefloquine is being considered as a replacement for sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine in this vulnerable population, an investigation on the pharmacokinetic interactions of mefloquine, sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim in pregnant, HIV-infected women was performed.A double-blinded, placebo-controlled study was conducted with 124 HIV-infected, pregnant women on a standard regimen of sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim prophylaxis. Seventy-two subjects received three doses of mefloquine (15 mg/kg) at monthly intervals. Dried blood spots were collected from both placebo and mefloquine arms four to 672 h post-administration and on day 7 following a second monthly dose of mefloquine. A novel high-performance liquid chromatographic method was developed to simultaneously measure mefloquine, sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim from each blood spot. Non-compartmental methods using a naïve-pooled data approach were used to determine mefloquine pharmacokinetic parameters.Sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim prophylaxis did not noticeably influence mefloquine pharmacokinetics relative to reported values. The mefloquine half-life, observed clearance (CL/f), and area-under-the-curve (AUC0??) were 12.0 days, 0.035 l/h/kg and 431 µg-h/ml, respectively. Although trimethoprim steady-state levels were not significantly different between arms, sulfamethoxazole levels showed a significant 53% decrease after mefloquine administration relative to the placebo group and returning to pre-dose levels at 28 days.Although a transient decrease in sulfamethoxazole levels was observed, there was no change in hospital admissions due to secondary bacterial infections, implying that mefloquine may have provided antimicrobial protection.
Project description: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.