Review of pyronaridine anti-malarial properties and product characteristics.

Pyronaridine was synthesized in 1970 at the Institute of Chinese Parasitic Disease and has been used in China for over 30 years for the treatment of malaria. Pyronaridine has high potency against Plasmodium falciparum, including chloroquine-resistant strains. Studies in various animal models have shown pyronaridine to be effective against strains resistant to other anti-malarials, including chloroquine. Resistance to pyronaridine appears to emerge slowly and is further retarded when pyronaridine is used in combination with other anti-malarials, in particular, artesunate. Pyronaridine toxicity is generally less than that of chloroquine, though evidence of embryotoxicity in rodents suggests use with caution in pregnancy. Clinical pharmacokinetic data for pyronaridine indicates an elimination T1/2 of 13.2 and 9.6 days, respectively, in adults and children with acute uncomplicated falciparum and vivax malaria in artemisinin-combination therapy. Clinical data for mono or combined pyronaridine therapy show excellent anti-malarial effects against P. falciparum and studies of combination therapy also show promise against Plasmodium vivax. Pyronaridine has been developed as a fixed dose combination therapy, in a 3:1 ratio, with artesunate for the treatment of acute uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria and blood stage P. vivax malaria with the name of Pyramax® and has received Positive Opinion by European Medicines Agency under the Article 58 procedure

Safety and efficacy of four drug regimens versus standard-of-care for the treatment of symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19: A randomised, open-label, multi-arm, phase 2 clinical trial

BackgroundThis exploratory study investigated four repurposed anti-infective drug regimens in outpatients with COVID-19.MethodsThis phase 2, single centre, randomised, open-label, clinical trial was conducted in South Africa between 3rd September 2020 and 23rd August 2021. Symptomatic outpatients aged 18-65 years, with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were computer randomised (1:1:1:1:1) to standard-of-care (SOC) with paracetamol, or SOC plus artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ), pyronaridine-artesunate (PA), favipiravir plus nitazoxanide (FPV + NTZ), or sofosbuvir-daclatasvir (SOF-DCV). The primary endpoint was the incidence of viral clearance, i.e., the proportion of patients with a negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on day 7, compared to SOC using a log-binomial model in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population.FindingsThe mITT population included 186 patients: mean age (SD) 34.9 (10.3) years, body weight 78.2 (17.1) kg. Day 7 SARS-CoV-2 clearance rates (n/N; risk ratio [95% CI]) were: SOC 34.2% (13/38), ASAQ 38.5% (15/39; 0.80 [0.44, 1.47]), PA 30.3% (10/33; 0.69 [0.37, 1.29]), FPV + NTZ 27.0% (10/37; 0.60 [0.31, 1.18]) and SOF-DCV 23.5% (8/34; 0.47 [0.22, 1.00]). Three lower respiratory tract infections occurred (PA 6.1% [2/33]; SOF-DCV 2.9% [1/34]); two required hospitalisation (PA, SOF-DCV). There were no deaths. Adverse events occurred in 55.3% (105/190) of patients, including one serious adverse event (pancytopenia; FPV + NTZ).InterpretationThere was no statistical difference in viral clearance for any regimen compared to SOC. All treatments were well tolerated.FundingMedicines for Malaria Venture, with funding from the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, within the Covid-19 Therapeutics Accelerator in partnership with Wellcome, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Mastercard

Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Pyronaridine-artesunate in Asymptomatic Malaria-infected Individuals: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Pyronaridine-artesunate (PA) is a registered artemisinin-based combination therapy, potentially useful for mass drug administration campaigns. However, further data are needed to evaluate its efficacy, safety and tolerability as full or incomplete treatment in asymptomatic Plasmodium falciparum-infected individuals. METHODS: This phase II, multi-center, open label, randomized clinical trial was conducted in The Gambia and Zambia. Participants with microscopically confirmed asymptomatic P. falciparum infection were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive a 3-day, 2-day, or 1-day treatment regimen of PA (180:60 mg), dosed according to bodyweight. The primary efficacy outcome was polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-adjusted adequate parasitological response (APR) at day 28 in the per-protocol population. RESULTS: A total of 303 participants were randomized. Day 28 PCR-adjusted APR was 100% for both the 3-day (98/98) and 2-day regimens (96/96), and 96.8% (89/94) for the 1-day regimen. Efficacy was maintained at 100% until day 63 for the 3-day and 2-day regimens but declined to 94.4% (84/89) with the 1-day regimen. Adverse event frequency was similar between the 3-day (51.5% [52/101]), 2-day (52.5% [52/99]), and 1-day (54.4% [56/103]) regimens; the majority of adverse events were of grade 1 or 2 severity (85% [136/160]). Asymptomatic, transient increases (>3 times the upper limit of normal) in alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase were observed for 6/301 (2.0%) participants. CONCLUSIONS: PA had high efficacy and good tolerability in asymptomatic P. falciparum-infected individuals, with similar efficacy for the full 3-day and incomplete 2-day regimens. Although good adherence to the 3-day regimen should be encouraged, these results support the further investigation of PA for mass drug administration campaigns. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03814616

Pyronaridine–artesunate real-world safety, tolerability, and effectiveness in malaria patients in 5 African countries: A single-arm, open-label, cohort event monitoring study

BACKGROUND In Phase II/III randomized controlled clinical trials for the treatment of acute uncomplicated malaria, pyronaridine-artesunate demonstrated high efficacy and a safety profile consistent with that of comparators, except that asymptomatic, mainly mild-to-moderate transient increases in liver aminotransferases were reported for some patients. Hepatic safety, tolerability, and effectiveness have not been previously assessed under real-world conditions in Africa. METHODS AND FINDINGS This single-arm, open-label, cohort event monitoring study was conducted at 6 health centers in Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon, Ivory Coast, and Republic of Congo between June 2017 and April 2019. The trial protocol as closely as possible resembled real-world clinical practice for the treatment of malaria at the centers. Eligible patients were adults or children of either sex, weighing at least 5 kg, with acute uncomplicated malaria who did not have contraindications for pyronaridine-artesunate treatment as per the summary of product characteristics. Patients received fixed-dose pyronaridine-artesunate once daily for 3 days, dosed by body weight, without regard to food intake. A tablet formulation was used in adults and adolescents and a pediatric granule formulation in children and infants under 20 kg body weight. The primary outcome was the hepatic event incidence, defined as the appearance of the clinical signs and symptoms of hepatotoxicity confirmed by a >2× rise in alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (ALT/AST) versus baseline in patients with baseline ALT/AST >2× the upper limit of normal (ULN). As a secondary outcome, this was assessed in patients with ALT/AST >2× ULN prior to treatment versus a matched cohort of patients with normal baseline ALT/AST. The safety population comprised 7,154 patients, of mean age 13.9 years (standard deviation (SD) 14.6), around half of whom were male (3,569 [49.9%]). Patients experienced 8,560 malaria episodes; 158 occurred in patients with baseline ALT/AST elevations >2×ULN. No protocol-defined hepatic events occurred following pyronaridine-artesunate treatment of malaria patients with or without baseline hepatic dysfunction. Thus, no cohort comparison could be undertaken. Also, as postbaseline clinical chemistry was only performed where clinically indicated, postbaseline ALT/AST levels were not systematically assessed for all patients. Adverse events of any cause occurred in 20.8% (1,490/7,154) of patients, most frequently pyrexia (5.1% [366/7,154]) and vomiting (4.2% [303/7,154]). Adjusting for Plasmodium falciparum reinfection, clinical effectiveness at day 28 was 98.6% ([7,369/7,746] 95% confidence interval (CI) 98.3 to 98.9) in the per-protocol population. There was no indication that comorbidities or malnutrition adversely affected outcomes. The key study limitation was that postbaseline clinical biochemistry was only evaluated when clinically indicated. CONCLUSIONS Pyronaridine-artesunate had good tolerability and effectiveness in a representative African population under conditions similar to everyday clinical practice. These findings support pyronaridine-artesunate as an operationally useful addition to the management of acute uncomplicated malaria. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03201770

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Safety and efficacy of pyronaridine-artesunate in uncomplicated acute malaria: an integrated analysis of individual patient data from six randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND: Pyronaridine-artesunate (PA) is indicated for the treatment of acute uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax malaria. METHODS: Individual patient data on safety outcomes were integrated from six randomized clinical trials conducted in Africa and Asia in patients with microscopically confirmed P. falciparum (five studies) or P. vivax (one study) malaria. Efficacy against P. falciparum was evaluated across three Phase III clinical trials. RESULTS: The safety population included 2,815 patients randomized to PA, 1,254 to comparators: mefloquine + artesunate (MQ + AS), artemether-lumefantrine (AL), or chloroquine. All treatments were generally well tolerated. Adverse events occurred in 57.2% (1,611/2,815) of patients with PA versus 51.5% (646/1,254) for comparators, most commonly (PA; comparators): headache (10.6%; 9.9%), cough (5.9%; 5.6%) and anaemia (4.5%; 2.9%). Serious averse events were uncommon for all treatments (0–0.7%). Transient increases in alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase were observed with PA but did not lead to any clinical sequelae. For P. falciparum malaria, day-28 PCR-corrected adequate clinical and parasitological response with PA was 93.6% ([1,921/2,052] 95% CI 92.6, 94.7) in the intent-to-treat population and 98.5% ([1,852/1,880] 95% CI 98.0, 99.1) in the per-protocol population. Median parasite clearance time was 24.1 h with PA, 31.9 h with MQ + AS, and 24.0 h with AL. Median fever clearance time was 15.5 h with PA, 15.8 h with MQ + AS, and 14.0 h with AL. By day 42, P. falciparum gametocytes had declined to near zero for all treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Pyronaridine-artesunate was well tolerated with no safety concerns with the exception of mostly mild transient rises in transaminases. Efficacy was high and met the requirements for use as first-line therapy. Pyronaridine-artesunate should be considered for inclusion in malaria treatment programmes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00331136; NCT00403260; NCT00422084; NCT00440999; NCT00541385; NCT0159493

Safety and efficacy of pyronaridine–artesunate paediatric granules in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in children: insights from randomized clinical trials and a real-world study

Abstract Background Children are particularly at risk of malaria. This analysis consolidates the clinical data for pyronaridine–artesunate (PA) paediatric granules in children from three randomized clinical trials and a real-world study (CANTAM). Methods An integrated safety analysis of individual patient data from three randomized clinical trials included patients with microscopically-confirmed Plasmodium falciparum, body weight ≥ 5 kg to < 20 kg, who received at least one dose of study drug (paediatric safety population). PA was administered once daily for 3 days; two trials included the comparator artemether–lumefantrine (AL). PCR-adjusted day 28 adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) was evaluated. Real-world PA granules safety and effectiveness was also considered. Results In the integrated safety analysis, 63.9% (95% CI 60.2, 67.4; 426/667) of patients had adverse events following PA and 62.0% (95% CI 56.9, 66.9; 222/358) with AL. Vomiting was more common with PA (7.8% [95% CI 6.0, 10.1; 52/667]) than AL (3.4% [95% CI 1.9, 5.8; 12/358]), relative risk 2.3 (95% CI 1.3, 4.3; P = 0.004), occurring mainly following the first PA dose (6.7%, 45/667), without affecting re-dosing or adherence. Prolonged QT interval occurred less frequently with PA (3.1% [95% CI 2.1, 4.8; 21/667]) than AL (8.1% [95% CI 5.7, 11.4; 29/358]), relative risk 0.39 (95% CI 0.22, 0.67; P = 0.0007). In CANTAM, adverse events were reported for 17.7% (95% CI 16.3, 19.2; 460/2599) of patients, most commonly vomiting (5.4% [95% CI 4.6, 6.4; 141/2599]), mainly following the first dose, (4.5% [117/2599]), with all patients successfully re-dosed, and pyrexia (5.4% [95% CI 4.6, 6.3; 140/2599]). In the two comparative clinical trials, Day 28 ACPR in the per-protocol population for PA was 97.1% (95% CI 94.6, 98.6; 329/339) and 100% (95% CI 99.3, 100; 514/514) versus 98.8% (95% CI 95.7, 99.9; 165/167) and 98.4% (95% CI 95.5, 99.7; 188/191) for AL, respectively. In CANTAM, PA clinical effectiveness was 98.0% (95% CI 97.3, 98.5; 2273/2320). Conclusions Anti-malarial treatment with PA paediatric granules administered once daily for 3 days was well tolerated in children and displayed good clinical efficacy in clinical trials, with effectiveness confirmed in a real-world study. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: SP-C-003-05: identifier NCT00331136; SP-C-007-07: identifier NCT0541385; SP-C-021-15: identifier NCT03201770. Pan African Clinical Trials Registry: SP-C-013-11: identifier PACTR20110500028687

Additional file 1 of Safety and efficacy of pyronaridine–artesunate paediatric granules in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in children: insights from randomized clinical trials and a real-world study

Additional file 1. Statistical analysis plan for the integrated safety analysis

Community health workers in clinical research at the example of a phase IIIb/ IV antimalarial drug trial conducted in five African countries

Global health, particularly in underserved settings can benefit immensely from well-trained community health workers (CHWs) supporting primary healthcare interventions. They can reduce morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases like malaria. Disease control programs can particularly benefit from a tight link between CHWs and communities and several studies have shown the benefit of the participation of non-facility-based CHWs in malaria control program activities for reducing malaria-related mortality in children. Because CHWs are often part of and trusted by served communities, they can also be an important resource to address challenges faced by their communities. Where post-marketing surveillance systems are underserved, they can relay important information about suspected safety signals and factors affecting therapeutic effectiveness in their communities. The CANTAM-Pyramax® trial was a phase IIIb/ IV cohort event monitoring study conducted at six centers in five African countries. To assess real-world effectiveness and safety of the anti-malarial pyronaridine-artesunate in 8560 malaria episodes, follow-up was not primarily conducted by medical staff but by specifically trained CHWs. This perspective paper discusses how the participation of a CHW workforce can be of benefit for effectiveness trials in limited-resource settings, using the example of the CANTAM-Pyramax trial