BACKGROUND:Chloroquine plus proguanil is widely used for malaria chemoprophylaxis despite low effectiveness in areas where multidrug-resistant malaria occurs. Studies have shown that atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride is safe and effective for prevention of falciparum malaria in lifelong residents of malaria-endemic countries, but little is known about non-immune travellers. METHODS: In a double-blind equivalence trial, 1083 participants travelling to a malaria-endemic area were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: atovaquone-proguanil plus placebos for chloroquine and proguanil, or chloroquine, proguanil, and placebo for atovaquone-proguanil. Follow-up was by telephone 7 and 60 days after travel and at a clinic at 28 days. Serum samples were tested for antibodies to a malaria circumsporozoite protein. Blood and serum samples of participants with a potential malaria diagnosis were tested in a reference laboratory. FINDINGS: 7 days after travel, at least one adverse event was reported by 311 (61%) of 511 participants who received atovaquone-proguanil and 329 (64%) of 511 who received chloroquine-proguanil. People receiving atovaquone-proguanil had a lower frequency of treatment-related gastrointestinal adverse events (59 [12%] vs 100 [20%], p=0.001), and of treatment-related adverse events of moderate or severe intensity (37 [7%] vs 56 [11%], p=0.05). There were fewer treatment-related adverse events that caused prophylaxis to be discontinued in the atovaquone-proguanil group than in the chloroquine-proguanil group (one [0.2%] vs ten [2%], p=0.015). INTERPRETATION: Overall the two preparations were similarly tolerated. However, significantly fewer adverse gastrointestinal events were observed in the atovaquone-proguanil group in than in the chloroquine-proguanil group.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Chloroquine plus proguanil is widely used for malaria chemoprophylaxis despite low effectiveness in areas where multidrug-resistant malaria occurs. Studies have shown that atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride is safe and effective for prevention of falciparum malaria in lifelong residents of malaria-endemic countries, but little is known about non-immune travellers. METHODS: In a double-blind equivalence trial, 1083 participants travelling to a malaria-endemic area were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: atovaquone-proguanil plus placebos for chloroquine and proguanil, or chloroquine, proguanil, and placebo for atovaquone-proguanil. Follow-up was by telephone 7 and 60 days after travel and at a clinic at 28 days. Serum samples were tested for antibodies to a malaria circumsporozoite protein. Blood and serum samples of participants with a potential malaria diagnosis were tested in a reference laboratory. FINDINGS: 7 days after travel, at least one adverse event was reported by 311 (61%) of 511 participants who received atovaquone-proguanil and 329 (64%) of 511 who received chloroquine-proguanil. People receiving atovaquone-proguanil had a lower frequency of treatment-related gastrointestinal adverse events (59 [12%] vs 100 [20%], p=0.001), and of treatment-related adverse events of moderate or severe intensity (37 [7%] vs 56 [11%], p=0.05). There were fewer treatment-related adverse events that caused prophylaxis to be discontinued in the atovaquone-proguanil group than in the chloroquine-proguanil group (one [0.2%] vs ten [2%], p=0.015). INTERPRETATION: Overall the two preparations were similarly tolerated. However, significantly fewer adverse gastrointestinal events were observed in the atovaquone-proguanil group in than in the chloroquine-proguanil group.
Authors: Rhett J Stoney; Lin H Chen; Emily S Jentes; Mary E Wilson; Pauline V Han; Christine M Benoit; William B MacLeod; Davidson H Hamer; Elizabeth D Barnett Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: John E Gimnig; Edward D Walker; Peter Otieno; Jackline Kosgei; George Olang; Maurice Ombok; John Williamson; Doris Marwanga; Daisy Abong'o; Meghna Desai; Simon Kariuki; Mary J Hamel; Neil F Lobo; John Vulule; M Nabie Bayoh Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2012-12-18 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Geoffrey S Dow; Jun Liu; Gina Lin; Brian Hetzell; Sarah Thieling; William F McCarthy; Douglas Tang; Bryan Smith Journal: Malar J Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 2.979