Primacy of effective communication and its influence on adherence to artemether-lumefantrine treatment for children under five years of age: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND\ud \ud Prompt access to artemesinin-combination therapy (ACT) is not adequate unless the drug is taken according to treatment guidelines. Adherence to the treatment schedule is important to preserve efficacy of the drug. Although some community based studies have reported fairly high levels of adherence, data on factors influencing adherence to artemether-lumefantrine (AL) treatment schedule remain inadequate. This study was carried-out to explore the provider's instructions to caretakers, caretakers' understanding of the instructions and how that understanding was likely to influence their practice with regard to adhering to AL treatment schedule.\ud \ud METHODS\ud \ud A qualitative study was conducted in five villages in Kilosa district, Tanzania. In-depth interviews were held with providers that included prescribers and dispensers; and caretakers whose children had just received AL treatment. Information was collected on providers' instructions to caretakers regarding dose timing and how to administer AL; and caretakers' understanding of providers' instructions.\ud \ud RESULTS\ud \ud Mismatch was found on providers' instructions as regards to dose timing. Some providers' (dogmatists) instructions were based on strict hourly schedule (conventional) which was likely to lead to administering some doses in awkward hours and completing treatment several hours before the scheduled time. Other providers (pragmatists) based their instruction on the existing circumstances (contextual) which was likely to lead to delays in administering the initial dose with serious treatment outcomes. Findings suggest that, the national treatment guidelines do not provide explicit information on how to address the various scenarios found in the field. A communication gap was also noted in which some important instructions on how to administer the doses were sometimes not provided or were given with false reasons.\ud \ud CONCLUSIONS\ud \ud There is need for a review of the national malaria treatment guidelines to address local context. In the review, emphasis should be put on on-the-job training to address practical problems faced by providers in the course of their work. Further research is needed to determine the implication of completing AL treatment prior to scheduled time

Imatinib and Nilotinib Inhibit Hematopoietic Progenitor Cell Growth, but Do Not Prevent Adhesion, Migration and Engraftment of Human Cord Blood CD34+ Cells

Background: The availability of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has considerably changed the management of Philadelphia chromosome positive leukemia. The BCR-ABL inhibitor imatinib is also known to inhibit the tyrosine kinase of the stem cell factor receptor, c-Kit. Nilotinib is 30 times more potent than imatinib towards BCR-ABL in vitro. Studies in healthy volunteers and patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia or gastrointestinal stromal tumors have shown that therapeutic doses of nilotinib deliver drug levels similar to those of imatinib. The aim of this study was to compare the inhibitory effects of imatinib and nilotinib on proliferation, differentiation, adhesion, migration and engraftment capacities of human cord blood CD34+ cells. Design and Methods: After a 48-hour cell culture with or without TKIs, CFC, LTC-IC, migration, adhesion and cell cycle analysis were performed. In a second time, the impact of these TKIs on engraftment was assessed in a xenotransplantation model using NOD/SCID/IL-2Rc (null) mice. Results: TKIs did not affect LTC-IC frequencies despite in vitro inhibition of CFC formation due to inhibition of CD34+ cell cycle entry. Adhesion of CD34+ cells to retronectin was reduced in the presence of either imatinib or nilotinib but only at high concentrations. Migration through a SDF-1a gradient was not changed by cell culture in the presence of TKIs. Finally, bone marrow cellularity and human chimerism were not affected by daily doses of imatinib and nilotinib in a xenogenic transplantation model. No significant difference was seen between TKIs given the equivalent affinity of imatinib and nilotinib for KIT. Conclusions: These data suggest that combining non-myeloablative conditioning regimen with TKIs starting the day of the transplantation could be safe