Transmission of Plasmodium vivax in South-Western Uganda: Report of Three Cases in Pregnant Women

Plasmodium vivax is considered to be rare in the predominantly Duffy negative populations of Sub-Saharan Africa, as this red blood cell surface antigen is essential for invasion by the parasite. However, despite only very few reports of molecularly confirmed P. vivax from tropical Africa, serological evidence indicated that 13% of the persons sampled in Congo had been exposed to P. vivax. We identified P. vivax by microscopy in 8 smears from Ugandan pregnant women who had been enrolled in a longitudinal study of malaria in pregnancy. A nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocol was used to detect and identify the Plasmodium parasites present. PCR analysis confirmed the presence of P. vivax for three of the women and analysis of all available samples from these women revealed clinically silent chronic low-grade vivax infections for two of them. The parasites in one woman carried pyrimethamine resistance-associated double non-synonymous mutations in the P. vivax dihydrofolate reductase gene. The three women found infected with P. vivax were Duffy positive as were nine of 68 women randomly selected from the cohort. The data presented from these three case reports is consistent with stable transmission of malaria in a predominantly Duffy negative African population. Given the substantial morbidity associated with vivax infection in non-African endemic areas, it will be important to investigate whether the distribution and prevalence of P. vivax have been underestimated in Sub-Saharan Africa. This is particularly important in the context of the drive to eliminate malaria and its morbidity

Varying efficacy of artesunate+amodiaquine and artesunate+sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in the Democratic Republic of Congo: a report of two in-vivo studies

BACKGROUND: Very few data on anti-malarial efficacy are available from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). DRC changed its anti-malarial treatment policy to amodiaquine (AQ) and artesunate (AS) in 2005. METHODS: The results of two in vivo efficacy studies, which tested AQ and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) monotherapies and AS+SP and AS+AQ combinations in Boende (Equatorial province), and AS+SP, AS+AQ and SP in Kabalo (Katanga province), between 2003 and 2004 are presented. The methodology followed the WHO 2003 protocol for assessing the efficacy of anti-malarials in areas of high transmission. RESULTS: Out of 394 included patients in Boende, the failure rates on day 28 after PCR-genotyping adjustment of AS+SP and AS+AQ were estimated as 24.6% [95% CI: 16.6-35.5] and 15.1% [95% CI: 8.6-25.7], respectively. For the monotherapies, failure rates were 35.9% [95% CI: 27.0-46.7] for SP and 18.3% [95% CI: 11.6-28.1] for AQ. Out of 207 patients enrolled in Kabalo, the failure rate on day 28 after PCR-genotyping adjustment was 0 [1-sided 95% CI: 5.8] for AS+SP and AS+AQ [1-sided 95% CI: 6.2]. It was 19.6% [95% CI: 11.4-32.7] for SP monotherapy. CONCLUSION: The finding of varying efficacy of the same combinations at two sites in one country highlights one difficulty of implementing a uniform national treatment policy in a large country. The poor efficacy of AS+AQ in Boende should alert the national programme to foci of resistance and emphasizes the need for systems for the prospective monitoring of treatment efficacy at sentinel sites in the country

Understanding the pharmacokinetics of Coartem®

Artemether and lumefantrine (AL), the active constituents of Coartem® exhibit complementary pharmacokinetic profiles. Artemether is absorbed quickly; peak concentrations of artemether and its main active metabolite, dihydroartemisinin (DHA) occur at approximately two hours post-dose, leading to a rapid reduction in asexual parasite mass and a prompt resolution of symptoms. Lumefantrine is absorbed and cleared more slowly (terminal elimination half-life 3-4 days in malaria patients), and accumulates with successive doses, acting to prevent recrudescence by destroying any residual parasites that remain after artemether and DHA have been cleared from the body. Food intake significantly enhances the bioavailability of both artemether and lumefantrine, an effect which is more apparent for the highly lipophilic lumefantrine. However, a meal with only a small amount of fat (1.6 g) is considered sufficient to achieve adequate exposure to lumefantrine. The pharmacokinetics of artemether or lumefantrine are similar in children, when dosed according to their body weight, compared with adults. No randomized study has compared the pharmacokinetics of either agent in pregnant versus non-pregnant women. Studies in healthy volunteers and in children with malaria have confirmed that the pharmacokinetic characteristics of crushed standard AL tablets and the newly-developed Coartem® Dispersible tablet formulation are similar. Studies to date in healthy volunteers have not identified any clinically relevant drug-drug interactions; data relating to concomitant administration of HIV therapies are limited. While dose-response analyses are difficult to undertake because of the low rate of treatment failures under AL, it appears that artemether and DHA exposure impact on parasite clearance time while lumefantrine exposure is associated with cure rate, consistent with their respective modes of action. In conclusion, knowledge of the pharmacokinetic profiles of artemether and lumefantrine is increasing within a range of settings, including infants and children. However, additional data would be warranted to better characterize artemether and lumefantrine pharmacokinetics in patients with hepatic impairment, in pregnant women, and in patients undergoing HIV/AIDS chemotherapy

Nifurtimox plus Eflornithine for Late-Stage Sleeping Sickness in Uganda: A Case Series

African sleeping sickness (Human African Trypanosomiasis, or HAT), due to the parasite Trypanosoma brucei gambiense, threatens millions across remote and conflict-affected regions of sub-Saharan Africa, and causes about 15 000 reported cases every year. Untreated HAT progresses from stage 1 (infection of the blood and lymph) to stage 2 (invasion of the central nervous system), and ultimately death. Drugs for stage 2 are few. The historical mainstay, melarsoprol, is highly toxic and inefficacious in some areas due to parasite resistance. Eflornithine is the only viable alternative, already established as safe and efficacious, but difficult to administer and at risk of resistance if used in monotherapy. This paper reports on a series of 48 Ugandan patients treated with a novel combination of nifurtimox (a drug registered for Chagas disease) and eflornithine, 17 as part of a terminated trial, and 31 in a subsequent case series study. Despite the low sample size, findings are promising: no cases of treatment failure, no treatment terminations, and no HAT- or treatment-related deaths. Nifurtimox plus eflornithine may be the best treatment hope for stage 2 HAT patients in the next decade, while new drugs are developed. A larger, multi-centric trial of the combination is ongoing

Artemether-Lumefantrine versus Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine for Treating Uncomplicated Malaria: A Randomized Trial to Guide Policy in Uganda

BACKGROUND: Uganda recently adopted artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as the recommended first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria. However, AL has several limitations, including a twice-daily dosing regimen, recommendation for administration with fatty food, and a high risk of reinfection soon after therapy in high transmission areas. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) is a new alternative artemisinin-based combination therapy that is dosed once daily and has a long post-treatment prophylactic effect. We compared the efficacy and safety of AL with DP in Kanungu, an area of moderate malaria transmission. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients aged 6 months to 10 years with uncomplicated falciparum malaria were randomized to therapy and followed for 42 days. Genotyping was used to distinguish recrudescence from new infection. Of 414 patients enrolled, 408 completed follow-up. Compared to patients treated with artemether-lumefantrine, patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine had a significantly lower risk of recurrent parasitaemia (33.2% vs. 12.2%; risk difference = 20.9%, 95% CI 13.0-28.8%) but no statistically significant difference in the risk of treatment failure due to recrudescence (5.8% vs. 2.0%; risk difference = 3.8%, 95% CI -0.2-7.8%). Patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine also had a lower risk of developing gametocytaemia after therapy (4.2% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.01). Both drugs were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: DP is highly efficacious, and operationally preferable to AL because of a less intensive dosing schedule and requirements. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine should be considered for a role in the antimalarial treatment policy of Uganda. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN75606663

Artemether-Lumefantrine versus Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine for Treatment of Malaria: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) for treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Uganda. DESIGN: Randomized single-blinded clinical trial. SETTING: Apac, Uganda, an area of very high malaria transmission intensity. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 6 mo to 10 y with uncomplicated falciparum malaria. INTERVENTION: Treatment of malaria with AL or DP, each following standard 3-d dosing regimens. OUTCOME MEASURES: Risks of recurrent parasitemia at 28 and 42 d, unadjusted and adjusted by genotyping to distinguish recrudescences and new infections. RESULTS: Of 421 enrolled participants, 417 (99%) completed follow-up. The unadjusted risk of recurrent falciparum parasitemia was significantly lower for participants treated with DP than for those treated with AL after 28 d (11% versus 29%; risk difference [RD] 18%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11%-26%) and 42 d (43% versus 53%; RD 9.6%, 95% CI 0%-19%) of follow-up. Similarly, the risk of recurrent parasitemia due to possible recrudescence (adjusted by genotyping) was significantly lower for participants treated with DP than for those treated with AL after 28 d (1.9% versus 8.9%; RD 7.0%, 95% CI 2.5%-12%) and 42 d (6.9% versus 16%; RD 9.5%, 95% CI 2.8%-16%). Patients treated with DP had a lower risk of recurrent parasitemia due to non-falciparum species, development of gametocytemia, and higher mean increase in hemoglobin compared to patients treated with AL. Both drugs were well tolerated; serious adverse events were uncommon and unrelated to study drugs. CONCLUSION: DP was superior to AL for reducing the risk of recurrent parasitemia and gametocytemia, and provided improved hemoglobin recovery. DP thus appears to be a good alternative to AL as first-line treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Uganda. To maximize the benefit of artemisinin-based combination therapy in Africa, treatment should be integrated with aggressive strategies to reduce malaria transmission intensity

Pharmacovigilance of antimalarial treatment in Africa: is it possible?

Pharmacovigilance, defined as "the science and activities relating to the detection, assessment, understanding and prevention of adverse effects or any other possible drug related problem", is increasingly being recognized in Africa. Many African countries have simultaneously adopted artemisinin derivative based combination therapy (ACT) as first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria, offering an opportunity to assess the safety of these drugs when used widely. While ACTs appear to be safe and well-tolerated, there is little experience with these medicines in Africa, outside clinical trials. Pharmacovigilance for ACTs and other combination treatments in Africa is essential. Malaria transmission intensity is high and antimalarial medicines are used frequently. Presumptive treatment of fever with antimalarials is common, often in the absence of a confirmed diagnosis, using drugs obtained without a prescription. Informal use of antimalarial drugs may increase the risk of incorrect dosing, inappropriate treatment, and drug interactions, which may impact negatively on drug safety. Furthermore, the administration of antimalarial treatments in patients with a concomitant illness, including HIV/AIDs, tuberculosis and malnutrition, is a concern. African countries are being encouraged to establish pharmacovigilance systems as ACTs are rolled out. However, pharmacovigilance is difficult, even in countries with a well-developed health care system. The rationale for pharmacovigilance of antimalarial drugs is discussed here, outlining the practical challenges and proposing approaches that could be adopted in Africa

Artemisinin Combination Therapies for Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in Uganda

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of artemisinin combination therapies for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Uganda. DESIGN: Randomized single-blind controlled trial. SETTING: Tororo, Uganda, an area of high-level malaria transmission. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged one to ten years with confirmed uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria. INTERVENTIONS: Amodiaquine + artesunate or artemether–lumefantrine. OUTCOME MEASURES: Risks of recurrent symptomatic malaria and recurrent parasitemia at 28 days, unadjusted and adjusted by genotyping to distinguish recrudescences and new infections. RESULTS: Of 408 participants enrolled, 403 with unadjusted efficacy outcomes were included in the per-protocol analysis. Both treatment regimens were highly efficacious; no recrudescences occurred in patients treated with amodiaquine + artesunate, and only two occurred in those treated with artemether–lumefantrine. However, recurrent malaria due to new infections was common. The unadjusted risk of recurrent symptomatic malaria was significantly lower for participants treated with artemether–lumefantrine than for those treated with amodiaquine + artesunate (27% versus 42%, risk difference 15%, 95% CI 5.9%–24.2%). Similar results were seen for the risk of recurrent parasitemia (51% artemether–lumefantrine versus 66% amodiaquine + artesunate, risk difference 16%, 95% CI 6.2%–25.2%). Amodiaquine + artesunate and artemether–lumefantrine were both well-tolerated. Serious adverse events were uncommon with both regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Amodiaquine + artesunate and artemether–lumefantrine were both highly efficacious for treatment of uncomplicated malaria. However, in this holoendemic area, despite the excellent performance of both regimens in terms of efficacy, many patients experienced recurrent parasitemia due to new infections. Artemether–lumefantrine was superior to amodiaquine + artesunate for prevention of new infections. To maximize the benefit of artemisinin combination therapy in Africa, treatment should be integrated with strategies to prevent malaria transmission. The impact of frequent repeated therapy on the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of new artemisinin regimens should be further investigated

Coartem®: the journey to the clinic

Artemisinin, from which the artemether component of Coartem®(artemether/lumefantrine, AL) is derived, is obtained from the plant sweet wormwood (Artemisia annua) which has been used for over 2,000 years as a Chinese herbal remedy. Artemisinin was first identified by Chinese researchers as the active anti-malarial constituent of A. annua and its derivatives were found to be the most potent of all anti-malarial drugs. Artemether acts rapidly, reducing the infecting parasite biomass by approximately 10,000-fold per asexual life cycle. Lumefantrine, the other active constituent of AL, acts over a longer period to eliminate the residual 100-100,000 parasites that remain after artemether is cleared from the body and thus minimizes the risk of recrudescence. The two agents have different modes of action and act at different points in the parasite life cycle and show a synergistic action against Plasmodium falciparum in vitro. The combination of artemether and lumefantrine reduces the risk of resistance developing to either agent, and to date there are no reports of resistance to AL combined therapy in the malaria parasite that infects humans. Following a unique partnership agreement between Chinese authorities and Novartis, the manufacturer of AL, over 20 sponsored clinical studies have been undertaken in various malaria endemic regions and in travellers. These trials have involved more than 3,500 patients (including over 2,000 children), and led to identification of a six-dose, three-day regimen as the optimal dosing strategy for AL in uncomplicated falciparum malaria. AL has consistently shown 28-day polymerase chain (PCR)-corrected cure rates greater than 95% in the evaluable population, meeting WHO recommendations. More recently, Novartis and the Medicines for Malaria Venture have worked in partnership to develop Coartem® Dispersible, a new formulation designed specifically to meet the specific needs of children with malaria. The dispersible tablets have shown similar high response rates to those observed with crushed standard tablets of AL. A partnership agreement between Novartis and WHO has seen over 250 million AL (Coartem®) treatments (75% for children) being distributed to malaria patients in developing countries without profit, supported by training programmes and educational resources