Methodological Issues in the Assessment of Antimalarial Drug Treatment: Analysis of 13 Studies in Eight African Countries from 2001 to 2004

Author:

Guthmann Jean-Paul1,Pinoges Loretxu1,Checchi Francesco12,Cousens Simon2,Balkan Suna3,van Herp Michel4,Legros Dominique15,Olliaro Piero67

Affiliation:

1. Epicentre, Paris, France

2. Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom

3. Médecins Sans Frontières, Paris, France

4. Médecins Sans Frontières, Brussels, Belgium

5. Risk Assessment and Field Operations, CSR Office of Alert and Response Operations, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland

6. UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme on Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), Geneva, Switzerland

7. University of Oxford, Centre for Tropical Medicine and Vaccinology, Churchill Hospital, United Kingdom

Abstract

ABSTRACT The objectives of these analyses were to assess the feasibility of the latest WHO recommendations (28-day follow-up with PCR genotyping) for the assessment of antimalarial drug efficacy in vivo and to examine how different statistical approaches affect results. We used individual-patient data from 13 studies of uncomplicated pediatric falciparum malaria conducted in sub-Saharan Africa, using chloroquine (CQ), sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine (SP), or amodiaquine (AQ). We assessed the use effectiveness and test performance of PCR genotyping in distinguishing recurrent infections. In analyzing data, we compared (i) the risk of failure on target days (days 14 and 28) by using Kaplan-Meier and per-protocol evaluable patient analyses, (ii) PCR-corrected results allowing (method 1) or excluding (method 2) new infections, (iii) and day 14 versus day 28 results. Of the 2,576 patients treated, 2,287 (89%) were evaluable on day 28. Of the 695 recurrences occurring post-day 14, 650 could be processed and 584 were resolved (PCR use effectiveness, 84%; test performance, 90%). The risks of failure on day 28 with Kaplan-Meier and evaluable-patient analyses tended to be generally close (except in smaller studies) because the numbers of dropouts were minimal, but attrition rates on day 28 were higher with the latter method. Method 2 yielded higher risks of failure than method 1. Extending observation to 28 days produced higher estimated risks of failure for SP and AQ but not for CQ (high failure rates by day 14). Results support the implementation of the current WHO protocol and favor analyzing PCR-corrected outcomes by Kaplan-Meier analysis (which allows for dropouts) and retaining new infections (which minimizes losses).

Publisher

American Society for Microbiology

Subject

Infectious Diseases,Pharmacology (medical),Pharmacology

Reference21 articles.

1. Bachy C. F. Checchi and P. Cavailler. 2003. Chloroquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine drug sensitivity study for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria due to Plasmodium falciparum in Mapel Sudan. Epicentre/MSF Paris France.

2. Basco, L. K., and P. Ringwald. 2000. Molecular epidemiology of malaria in Yaounde, Cameroon. VII. Analysis of recrudescence and reinfection in patients with uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.63:215-221.

3. Bonnet M. 2004. Efficacité de la sulfadoxine-pyriméthamine amodiaquine artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyriméthamine et artesunate plus amodiaquine pour le traitement du paludisme non-compliqué à Plasmodium falciparum dans le Centre de Santé de Boende République Démocratique du Congo. Epicentre/MSF Report Paris France.

4. Checchi, F., S. Balkan, B. T. Vonhm, M. Massaquoi, P. Biberson, P. Eldin de Pecoulas, P. Brasseur, and J.-P. Guthmann. 2002. Efficacy of amodiaquine for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Harper, Liberia. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg.96:670-673.

5. Checchi, F., P. Piola, C. Kosack, E. Ardizzoni, D. Klarkowski, E. Kwezi, G. Priotto, S. Balkan, N. Bakyaita, A. Brockman, and J.-P. Guthmann. 2004. Antimalarial efficacy of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, amodiaquine and a combination of chloroquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in Bundi Bugyo, western Uganda. Trop. Med. Int. Health9:445-450.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3