| Literature DB >> 28510573 |
Tesfay Abreha1, Jimee Hwang2,3, Kamala Thriemer4, Yehualashet Tadesse1, Samuel Girma1, Zenebe Melaku1, Ashenafi Assef5, Moges Kassa5, Mark D Chatfield4, Keren Z Landman6, Stella M Chenet6, Naomi W Lucchi6, Venkatachalam Udhayakumar6, Zhiyong Zhou6, Ya Ping Shi6, S Patrick Kachur6, Daddi Jima5, Amha Kebede5, Hiwot Solomon7, Addis Mekasha8, Bereket Hailegiorgis Alemayehu1, Joseph L Malone2, Gunewardena Dissanayake9, Hiwot Teka9, Sarah Auburn4, Lorenz von Seidlein10, Ric N Price4,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent efforts in malaria control have resulted in great gains in reducing the burden of Plasmodium falciparum, but P. vivax has been more refractory. Its ability to form dormant liver stages confounds control and elimination efforts. To compare the efficacy and safety of primaquine regimens for radical cure, we undertook a randomized controlled trial in Ethiopia. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28510573 PMCID: PMC5433686 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002299
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Med ISSN: 1549-1277 Impact factor: 11.069
Fig 1CONSORT flowchart of patient allocation for the day 42 outcome.
AL, artemether-lumefantrine; AL+PQ, artemether-lumefantrine + primaquine; CQ, chloroquine; CQ+PQ, chloroquine + primaquine; G6PD, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase; Lost, lost to follow-up.
Baseline characteristics of the study population.
| Characteristic | Chloroquine ( | Artemether-lumefantrine ( | Chloroquine plus primaquine ( | Artemether-lumefantrine plus primaquine ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bishoftu | 79 (76.0%) | 73 (73.0%) | 79 (77.5%) | 76 (82.6%) |
| Batu | 25 (24.0%) | 27 (27.0%) | 23 (22.5%) | 16 (17.4%) |
| 64 (61.5%) | 70 (70.0%) | 68 (66.7%) | 51 (55.4%) | |
| 18 (IQR 10.5–19.0) | 18 (IQR 10.0–26.0) | 17 (IQR 9.0–25.0) | 18 (IQR 9.0–27.0) | |
| ≤5 y | 7 (6.7%) | 12 (12.0%) | 10 (9.8%) | 8 (8.7%) |
| 5–15 y | 31 (29.8%) | 31 (31.0%) | 37 (36.3%) | 28 (30.4%) |
| >15 y | 66 (63.5%) | 57 (57.0%) | 55 (53.9%) | 56 (60.9%) |
| 50.0 (29.0–56.0) | 48.0 (24.5–56.5) | 46.0 (22.0–54.0) | 45.5 (22.0–57.0) | |
| 36.8 (36.1–38.4) | 37.3 (36.4–39.0) | 37.3 (36.2–38.8) | 37.0 (36.4–38.2) | |
| 37 (35.6%) | 46 (46.0%) | 43 (42.1%) | 50 (54.3%) | |
| 100 (98.0%) | 98 (99.0%) | 100 (99.0%) | 90 (97.8%) | |
| 136 (±17) | 137 (±20) | 134 (±19) | 135 (±18) | |
| 6,378 (5,133.1–7,924.3) | 6,691 (5,464.7–8,193.0) | 5,598 (4,492.6–6,975.4) | 5,132 (4,036.8–6,523.6) | |
| 42 (40.4%) | 47 (47.0%) | 39 (38.2%) | 43 (46.7%) | |
| Normal | 100 (97.1%) | 90 (93.8%) | 102 (100.0%) | 92 (100.0%) |
| Intermediate | 3 (2.9%) | 6 (6.3%) | 0 | 0 |
| Deficient | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Household ownership of a bednet | 33 (34.7%) | 42 (42.0%) | 36 (35.3%) | 37 (40.7%) |
| Patient slept under bednet on the night before enrolment | 14 (13.5%) | 17 (17.0%) | 22 (21.6%) | 22 (23.9%) |
| House was sprayed with insecticides | 23 (22.1%) | 22 (22.0%) | 19 (18.6%) | 18 (19.6%) |
IQR, interquartile range; SD, standard deviation.
Treatment failure and risk and incidence of recurrent parasitaemia.
| Time point | Outcome measure | CQ ( | CQ+PQ ( | AL ( | AL+PQ ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lost to follow-up | 6 | 8 | 8 | 6 | |
| Early treatment failure | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Late treatment failure | 3 | 0 | 11 | 2 | |
| 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Adequate clinical and parasitological response | 92 | 91 | 81 | 84 | |
| Cumulative risk of | 4.0 (1.5–10.4) | 0 (0–4.0) | 12.0 (6.8–20.6) | 2.3 (0.6–9.0) | |
| Lost to follow-up | 7 | 12 | 11 | 10 | |
| Early treatment failure | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Late treatment failure | 17 | 1 | 27 | 5 | |
| 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Adequate clinical and parasitological response | 77 | 85 | 62 | 77 | |
| Cumulative risk of | 18.7 (12.2–28.0) | 1.2 (0.2–8.0) | 29.9 (21.6–40.5) | 5.9 (2.4–13.5) | |
| Lost to follow-up | 15 | 39 | 22 | 28 | |
| Early treatment failure | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Late treatment failure | 56 | 14 | 62 | 17 | |
| 3 | 5 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Adequate clinical and parasitological response | 29 | 44 | 16 | 47 | |
| Cumulative risk of | 61.7 (51.9–71.7) | 20.5 (13–31.5) | 72.4 (62.5–81.6) | 22.0 (14.2–33.1) | |
| Incidence of | 2.2 (1.8–2.6) | 0.4 (0.3–0.6) | 2.3 (1.9–2.7) | 0.5 (0.3–0.7) | |
| Adjusted incidence of | 2.3 (1.9–2.7) | — | 2.2 (1.8–2.6) | — | |
| Incidence of any | 2.2 (1.9–2.7) | 0.5 (0.4–0.7) | 2.3 (1.9–2.7) | 0.5 (0.4–0.7) | |
| Adjusted incidence of any | 2.3 (1.9–2.8) | — | 2.2 (1.9–2.7) | — |
aCumulative risk derived from survival analysis, percent (95% CI).
bEpisodes per person-year of observation (95% CI); calculated from the duration of follow-up from first to last visit. Patients receiving antimalarial treatment were assumed to have a period of 28 d of post-treatment prophylaxis after CQ treatment and 14 d of post-treatment prophylaxis after AL treatment, and this period was subtracted from their total period of observation. This analysis included patients not randomized to PQ or no PQ.
cExcluding patients not randomized to PQ or no PQ.
AL, artemether-lumefantrine; AL+PQ, artemether-lumefantrine + primaquine; CQ, chloroquine; CQ+PQ, chloroquine + primaquine.
Fig 2Cumulative risk of P. vivax recurrence in all four treatment arms over the entire follow-up time.
AL, artemether-lumefantrine; AL+PQ, artemether-lumefantrine + primaquine; CQ, chloroquine; CQ+PQ, chloroquine + primaquine.
Hazard ratios and incidence rate ratios.
| Time point | Measure | CQ versus CQ+PQ | AL versus AL+PQ | AL versus CQ | AL+PQ versus CQ+PQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio | —, | 5.1 (1.1–23.5), | 2.9 (0.9–9.0), | —, | |
| Hazard ratio | 18.5 (2.5–138.5), | 5.9 (2.3–15.3), | 1.8 (1.0–3.2), | 5.4 (0.6–46.6), | |
| Hazard ratio | 5.4 (3.0–9.7), | 5.2 (3.0–9.0), | 1.3 (0.9–1.9), | 1.3 (0.6–2.6), | |
| Incidence rate ratio | 5.1 (2.9–9.1), | 6.4 (3.6–11.3), | 0.9 (0.6–1.4), | 1.1 (0.5–1.9), |
Hazard ratios (95% CIs) calculated from Cox regression. Incidence rate ratios (95% CIs) calculated at the end of follow-up.
aExcluding patients not randomized to PQ versus no PQ.
AL, artemether-lumefantrine; AL+PQ, artemether-lumefantrine + primaquine; CQ, chloroquine; CQ+PQ, chloroquine + primaquine.
Parasite and fever clearance by treatment arm.
| Time point | Chloroquine | Artemether-lumefantrine | Chloroquine plus primaquine | Artemether-lumefantrine plus primaquine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 1 | 64.4% (67/104) | 35.0% (35/100) | 55.9% (57/102) | 28.3% (26/92) |
| Day 2 | 4.8% (5/104) | 5.0% (5/100) | 8.8% (9/102) | 0% (0/92) |
| Day 3 | 1.9% (2/104) | 0% (0/100) | 0% (0/102) | 0% (0/92) |
| Day 1 | 10.5% (4/38) | 0% (0/46) | 2.4% (1/42) | 2.6% (1/39) |
| Day 2 | 0% (0/37) | 0% (0/45) | 0% (0/43) | 2.6% (1/39) |
| Day 3 | 0% (0/36) | 0% (0/45) | 0% (0/42) | 2.6% (1/38) |
Fig 3Histogram of the distribution of the number of recurrent P. vivax infections occurring during the 1-y follow-up period.
AL, artemether-lumefantrine; AL+PQ, artemether-lumefantrine + primaquine; CQ, chloroquine; CQ+PQ, chloroquine + primaquine.
Adverse events by treatment arm.
| Adverse events ( | Total | Chloroquine | Artemether-lumefantrine | Chloroquine plus primaquine | Artemether-lumefantrine plus primaquine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 91 (25.5%) | 27 (29.7%) | 29 (31.9%) | 19 (20.9%) | 16 (17.6%) | 0.68 | |
| 67 (18.8%) | 13 (19.4%) | 18 (26.9%) | 16 (23.9%) | 20 (29.9%) | 0.16 | |
| 33 (9.2%) | 11 (33.3%) | 12 (36.4%) | 5 (15.2%) | 5 (15.2%) | 0.43 | |
| 25 (7.0%) | 8 (32.0%) | 5 (20.0%) | 8 (32.0%) | 4 (16.0%) | 0.53 | |
| 24 (6.7%) | 7 (29.2%) | 5 (20.8%) | 7 (29.2%) | 5 (20.8%) | 0.79 | |
| 18 (5.0%) | 3 (16.7%) | 6 (3.3%) | 5 (27.8%) | 4 (22.2%) | 0.77 | |
| 17 (4.8%) | 7 (41.2%) | 3 (17.6%) | 4 (23.5%) | 3 (17.6%) | 0.55 | |
| 15 (4.2%) | 5 (33.3%) | 5 (33.3%) | 4 (26.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 0.59 | |
| 15 (4.0%) | 4 (26.7%) | 3 (20.0%) | 4 (26.7%) | 4 (26.7%) | 0.86 | |
| 13 (3.6%) | 1 (7.7%) | 5 (38.5%) | 2 (15.4%) | 5 (38.5%) | 0.20 | |
| 12 (3.4%) | 4 (33.3%) | 5 (41.7%) | 1 (8.3%) | 2 (16.7%) | 0.54 |
Data are given as n (percent).