| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
ABSTRACT |
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
), the largest city in the Peruvian Amazon region (population approximately 350,000), during the peak malaria transmission season of 2000. Both health facilities draw their patient population from the city and surrounding periurban and rural areas. The study was approved by the institutional review boards of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Navy, and the Instituto Nacional de Salud.
|
Patients and procedures.
The methods used followed the recommendations of the Pan American Health Organization for in vivo antimalarial drug efficacy testing in the Americas with minor exceptions.4 Sample size was calculated based on an expected rate of treatment failure of 2% in the study population, a precision of 5%, and a 5% level of significance. Patients between 5 and 50 years of age with suspected malaria attending the two health facilities were screened for malaria parasitemia with thick blood smears. Those with P. falciparum monoinfections between 500 and 30,000 parasites/µL of blood and an axillary temperature 
37.5°C and/or a history of fever within the previous 48 hours who gave informed consent were enrolled. Subjects were excluded if they had symptoms or signs of severe malaria, had another cause for their fever, had a history of allergy to either of the study drugs, or were pregnant or had a positive urine pregnancy test result.
Subjects were assigned, using a table of random numbers, to receive MQ monotherapy or combination therapy with MQ-AS. Mefloquine (Mephaquin®; Mepha, Ltd., Aesch-Basel, Switzerland) was administered in a single oral dose of 15 mg/kg on day 0. Patients in the MQ-AS group received a similar dose of MQ on day 0 plus AS (Plasmotrin®; Mepha, Ltd.) in a dose of 4 mg/kg/day on days 0, 1, and 2. All drug administration was supervised by study staff. Subjects were observed for vomiting for 30 minutes after ingesting the drugs; those who vomited the first dose were re-treated with an identical dose. Subjects who vomited the re-treatment dose were dropped from the study. Patients with axillary temperatures 37.5°C were treated with paracetamol.
Subjects were asked to return to the health facilities for follow-up histories of symptoms and possible adverse drug reactions, including vomiting, rash, pruritis, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28. Temperatures were measured and thick blood smears were prepared at the same time. Patients who failed to return were followed-up to their homes.
Thick blood smears were stained with Giemsa and the parasite density was calculated by counting the number of asexual parasites per 300 white blood cells, assuming a mean white blood cell count of 6,000/µL. Each blood smear was independently examined by two microscopists. In the case of a difference in results (positive/negative; species diagnosis; or 50% difference in parasite density), the blood smear was re-examined by a third independent microscopist. The final parasite density was an average of the densities of the two concordant microscopists. The gametocyte density was estimated by counting the number of gametocytes per 500 white blood cells. A total of 200 oil-immersion fields were examined before a blood smear was considered negative.
Outcome measures.
The subject’s parasitologic response to therapy was classified as follows: RIII = a day 2 parasite density 100% of day 0 or a day 3 parasite density 25% of day 0; RII = a positive day 3 blood smear with a parasite density < 25% of day 0 and a positive day 7 blood smear; RI (early) = a negative day 3 blood smear with the reappearance of parasitemia between days 4 and 14 or a positive day 3 blood smear with a parasite density < 25% of day 0, and a negative day 7 blood smear with the reappearance of para-sitemia between days 8 and 14 inclusive; RI (late) = a negative day 3 blood smear or a parasite density < 25% of day 0, negative day 7 and 14 blood smears, and the reappearance of parasitemia between days 15 and 28; S (sensitive) = a negative day 3 blood smear or density < 25% of day 0 with negative blood smears between days 4 and 28.
The patient’s therapeutic response was classified as recommended by the World Health Organization and Pan American Health Organization guidelines for in vivo drug testing.4,5 These were defined as follows. An early treatment failure (ETF) was defined as the development of signs of severe malaria with parasitemia on days 1, 2, or 3, a day 2 parasite density 100% of day 0, or a day 3 parasite density 25% of day 0. a late treatment failure (LTF) was defined as the development of signs of severe malaria with parasitemia after day 3 or clinical deterioration in the presence of parasitemia, or the reappearance of parasitemia between days 7 and 28. An adequate clinical response (ACR) included subjects who did not fulfill the criteria of ETF or LTF with negative blood smears on days 7, 14, 21, and 28.
Statistical analysis. Data were double-entered. Statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS software (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). Dichotomous variables were compared with chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to test for normality of continuous variables, and the Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare means. Relative risk was used to evaluate incidence rates.
|
RESULTS |
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
37.5°C) on enrollment and 96% had a history of fever in the previous 48 hours. Subjects had a history of 4.5 ± 2.9 (mean ± SD) days of fever before they were enrolled. Their geometric mean parasite density was 7,798/µL. Ninety-eight (85.2%) of the 115 patients enrolled in the study completed the 28-day follow-up period. Seventeen subjects were excluded from analysis, 10 in the MQ group and 7 in the MQ-AS group. Thirteen of these subjects were lost to follow-up (five on or before day 7, four on day 14, three on day 21, and one on day 28), one took a dose quinine plus clindamycin on day 14, and three had low parasite densities on re-examination of their day 0 blood smears.
The characteristics of the 47 subjects who received MQ monotherapy and the 51 who received MQ-AS combination treatment are shown in Table 1. No significant differences were observed on enrollment in terms of age, sex, presence of documented fever (axillary temperature 37.5°C). or history of fever. However, subjects treated with MQ-AS had significantly lower geometric mean parasite densities (P = 0.039).
|
). On day 2, 13 (27.6%) of the patients treated with MQ had negative blood smears compared with 42 (82.3%) of those who had received MQ-AS (relative risk = 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.84–4.81, P < 0.0001). By day 3, 35 (74.5%) of the patients treated with MQ had negative blood smears in comparison to 50 (98.0%) of those treated with combination therapy (relative risk = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.11–1.56, P = 0.0006). All patients were aparasitemic by day 7. Because of the significant difference in parasite densities on enrollment in the two treatment groups, a sub-analysis was performed in patients with day 0 parasite densities 10,000/µL. Once again, on both days 2 and 3, patients treated with MQ-AS were more likely to have negative blood smears than those treated with MQ alone (relative risk = 3.65, 95% CI = 1.56–8.53, P < 0.001 and relative risk = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.04–1.72, P = 0.03, respectively).
|
). Among patients who had no gametocytes in their blood smears on enrollment, significantly fewer of those treated with combination therapy than MQ alone had gametocytemia on day 3 (7.1% versus 31.7%; P = 0.01), day 7 (0% versus 26.8%; P = 0.001), and day 14 (0% versus 17.1%; P = 0.005).
|
No severe adverse drug reactions were observed. One 32-year-old subject vomited the first but not the second dose of MQ; a second subject complained of insomnia. No other patients complained of new symptoms or an increase in the severity of pre-existing symptoms after the initiation of therapy.
|
DISCUSSION |
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
We have no explanation for the significantly higher asexual parasite densities at the time of enrollment among those treated with MQ alone, since patients were randomly assigned to the two drug regimens. When this difference was controlled for, however, combination therapy with MQ-AS reduced asexual parasitemia significantly faster than MQ alone, as has been reported from studies in Thailand.10 In addition, as reported previously, combination therapy with MQ-AS reduced the proportion of patients with gametocytemia significantly faster than MQ alone.11 We did not observe any difference in fever clearance times in patients treated with the two regimens, but the infrequent temperature measurements during the first three days of therapy may account for this.
The rationale for using combination therapy for malaria is similar to that for the treatment of tuberculosis, cancer, and infections with human immunodeficiency virus.2 Mefloquine, when used alone, is likely to select resistant parasites because of its long half-life and slow elimination from the blood. Addition of a rapidly acting and highly effective drug, such as artemisinin or one of its derivatives, greatly reduces the probability of selecting parasites that are resistant to both drugs. In Thailand, the addition of AS to MQ therapy for P. falciparum infections has been temporally associated with a halt in the steady increase in MQ resistance that had been observed when that drug was used alone.3 Based on these premises and the experiences in Thailand, the World Health Organization now strongly recommends that antimalarial drugs always be used in combination.1
Although it was initially recommended that in areas with low levels of MQ resistance a dose of 15 mg/kg of MQ should be used in combination with an artemisinin drug,1 many authorities now believe that MQ should always be used at a dose of 25 mg/kg. This recommendation is based on mathematical modeling of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data from Thailand, which has shown that initial use of a 15 mg/kg dose provides a greater opportunity for selection of resistant mutations and could thus lead more rapidly to resistance than a dose of 25 mg/kg.12
Different commercial preparations of MQ are known to vary in terms of their bioavailability.13 A recent study in Thailand comparing Lariam® (F. Hoffmann La Roche, Basel, Switzerland) with two other commercial preparations, Mephaquin® and Eloquine® (Medochemie, Ltd., Limassol, Cyprus) showed that blood levels and the area under the curve with Mephaquin® were 50% lower that those with Lariam®.14 If the relative bioavailability of Mephaquin® to Lariam® in South America is similar to that in the Thai study, then our subjects received a dose equivalent to only 7.5 mg/kg. This would mean that strains of P. falciparum from the Iquitos area are, at present, highly sensitive to MQ. This finding of 100% efficacy has been confirmed in a smaller 28-day study of 16 patients treated with 15 mg/kg of Mephaquin® at another site in the northeastern Peruvian Amazon region, near the borders with Colombia and Brazil (Ruebush TK, unpublished data).
Commonly reported adverse reactions to MQ include anorexia, nausea, and vomiting;15 vomiting is more frequent in children less than five years of age.16 The side effects most commonly observed with the artemisinin drugs are headache, nausea, abdominal pain, vomiting, and occasional diarrhea.1 In this trial, adverse reactions to both MQ monotherapy and MQ-AS combination therapy were rare. This may have been due to the 15 mg/kg dose, the lower bioavailabilty of Mephaquin®, and/or the fact that no children less than five years of age were enrolled in the study.
Based on the high levels of P. falciparum resistance to both chloroquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in the Peruvian Amazon region, the safety and efficacy of MQ-AS demonstrated in this trial, and the goal of preventing or slowing the selection of resistant strains, the Ministry of Health of Peru changed to MQ (25 mg/kg) plus AS as the first-line therapy for uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in most of the Peruvian Amazon region in November 2001.17 Mefloquine-artesunate therapy will be used in patients of all ages except pregnant women, who will continue to be treated with a seven-day course of quinine plus clindamycin.
It has been shown that the frequency of vomiting associated with MQ can be significantly reduced by administering the drug on the second or third day of the three-day combination treatment.18 Additionally, the risk of a treatment failure in patients with enrollment parasite densities > 40,000/µL is significantly lower when MQ is administered on the second and third days.19 In Peru, the decision to administer MQ on the first and second days of the three-day treatment regimen was based largely on practical considerations. In the Amazon Basin, where the population is very scattered, it is not always possible to administer all drug doses under supervision, especially to patients who live far from a health facility or over weekends or holidays when health staff are only available on an emergency basis. To ensure that at least the first day’s doses of MQ and AS are ingested, it was felt advisable to begin MQ dosing the first day of therapy.
With implementation of MQ-AS combination therapy for uncomplicated P. falciparum infections in the Peruvian Amazon region, Peru has become the first country in the Americas to use this regimen as first-line therapy in their National Malaria Control Program. Plans have already been made to conduct regular surveillance of the efficacy of the new combination therapy regimen through in vivo efficacy testing of MQ alone, the component with the longest half-life and, therefore, presumably the most susceptible to selection pressure.20
Received March 5, 2002. Accepted for publication December 12, 2002.
Acknowledgments: Dr. Carlos Vidal acted as medical monitor for the study. We thank Ever Alvarez, Anibal Sanchez, and Dolores Rimarachin for the microscopic diagnoses and Ernesto Arevelo, Rosario Pinedo, Gonzalo Reátegui, and the staff of the Moronacocha Health Center and the Hospital de Apoyo Iquitos for their assistance with the enrollment, treatment, and follow-up of patients. The statistical analysis was carried out by Christian Bautista.
Financial support: This study was supported by the U.S. Agency for International Development–Government of Peru VIGIA Project "Addressing Threats of Emerging and Re-Emerging Infectious Diseases" (Activity 527-0391) and the U.S. Naval Medical Research and Development Command, National Naval Medical Center (Bethesda, MD), Work Unit No. 847705 82000 25GB B0016 GEIS Lima.
Disclaimer: The opinions and assertions contained herein are the private ones of the writers and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Navy Department or the naval service at large.
Authors’ addresses: Wilmer Marquiño, María Huilca, Eduardo Falconí, and César Cabezas, Instituto Nacional de Salud, Capac Yupanqui 1400, Jesus Maria 11, Lima, Peru. Carlos Calampa and Rubén Naupay, Dirección Regional de Salud Loreto, Avenida 28 de Julio S/N, Punchana, Iquitos, Peru. Trenton K. Ruebush II, U.S. Naval Medical Research Center Detachment, Unit 3800, APO AA 34031.
Reprint requests: Trenton K. Ruebush II, U.S. Naval Medical Research Center Detachment, Unit 3800, APO AA 34031, Telephone: 51-1-561-2733, Fax: 51-1-561-3042, E-mail: ruebush{at}namrid.sld.pe
|
REFERENCES |
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  Z. Zhou, S. M. Griffing, A. M. de Oliveira, A. M. McCollum, W. M. Quezada, N. Arrospide, A. A. Escalante, and V. Udhayakumar Decline in Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine-Resistant Alleles after Change in Drug Policy in the Amazon Region of Peru Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., February 1, 2008; 52(2): 739 - 741. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. K. Baird Effectiveness of Antimalarial Drugs N. Engl. J. Med., April 14, 2005; 352(15): 1565 - 1577. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
0.05.