Albendazole alone or in combination with microfilaricidal drugs for lymphatic filariasis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Macfarlane CL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6354574 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9300473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Moxidectin (MOX) is a milbemycin endectocide recently approved by the U.S. FDA for the treatment of onchocerciasis in persons at least 12 years of age. MOX has been shown to have a good safety profile in recent clinical trials. The efficacy of MOX for the treatment of lymphatic filariasis (LF) and its potential use in mass drug administration protocols for the elimination of LF is currently under evaluation. In the context of a clinical trial, we investigated the pharmacokinetics and drug interactions of a combination of MOX plus albendazole (ALB) with or without diethylcarbamazine (DEC) compared to ivermectin (IVM) plus ALB with or without DEC in the following four different treatment arms: (I) IVM (0.2mg/kg) plus DEC (6 mg/kg) and ALB (400mg); (II) IVM plus ALB; (III) MOX (8 mg) plus DEC and ALB; and (IV) MOX plus ALB. Drug concentrations were determined using validated liquid chromatography-mass spectrometric methods. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined using standard non-compartmental analysis methods. Statistical analysis was performed using JMP software. Fifty-eight of 164 study participants (53 men and five women) were included with ages ranging from 18 to 63 yrs (mean = 37). MOX apparent oral clearance (Cl/F) ranged from 0.7 to 10.8 L/hr with Cmax values ranging from 20.8 to 314.5 ng/mL. The mean (range) area under the curve (AUC)0-∞ for MOX, 3405 ng*hr/mL (742-11376), and IVM 1906 ng*hr/mL (692-5900), varied over a ~15.3 and ~8.5-fold range, respectively. The geometric mean ratio for Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were within the no-drug interaction range of 80-125% for all drugs. This indicates that the addition of MOX to ALB alone or ALB plus DEC for LF therapy did not alter the drug exposure of co-administered drugs compared to IVM combinations. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04410406, https://clinicaltrials.gov/.
| S-EPMC10482275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBetter drug regimens for mass drug administration (MDA) could accelerate the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (LF). This community study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of MDA with IDA (ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine and albendazole) or DA (diethylcarbamazine and albendazole) in India.Methodology/principal findingsThis two-armed, open-labelled, block randomised, community study was conducted in LF endemic villages in Yadgir district, Karnataka, India. Consenting participants ≥5 years of age were tested for circulating filarial antigenemia (CFA) and microfilaremia (Mf) before treatment with a single oral dose of IDA or DA. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored actively for two days and passively for five more days. Persons with positive CFA or Mf tests at baseline were retested 12-months post-treatment to assess treatment efficacy. Baseline CFA and Mf-rates were 26.4% and 6.9% in IDA and 24.5% and 6.4% in DA villages respectively. 4758 and 4160 participants received IDA and DA. Most AEs were mild after both treatments; fewer than 0.1% of participants experienced AEs with severity > grade 1. No serious AEs were observed. Fever, headache and dizziness were the most common AEs. AE rates were slightly higher after IDA than DA (8.3% vs. 6.4%, P<0.01). AEs were more frequent in females and Mf-positives after either treatment, but significantly more frequent after IDA (40.5% vs 20.2%, P < 0.001). IDA was more effective for clearing Mf than DA (84% vs. 61.8%, P < 0.001). Geometric mean Mf counts per 60μl in retested Mf-positives decreased by 96.4% from 11.8 after IDA and by 90.0% from 9.5 after DA. Neither treatment was effective for clearing CFA.Conclusions/significanceIDA had an acceptable safety profile and was more effective for clearing Mf than DA. With adequate compliance and medical support to manage AEs, IDA has the potential to accelerate LF elimination in India.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI No/2016/10/007399).
| S-EPMC7909694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis are debilitating diseases caused by parasitic filarial nematodes infecting around 150 million people throughout the tropics with more than 1.5 billion at risk. As with other neglected tropical diseases, classical drug-discovery and development is lacking and a 50 year programme of macrofilaricidal discovery failed to deliver a drug which can be used as a public health tool. Recently, antibiotic targeting of filarial Wolbachia, an essential bacterial symbiont, has provided a novel drug treatment for filariasis with macrofilaricidal activity, although the current gold-standard, doxycycline, is unsuitable for use in mass drug administration (MDA). The anti-Wolbachia (A·WOL) Consortium aims to identify novel anti-Wolbachia drugs, compounds or combinations that are suitable for use in MDA. Development of a Wolbachia cell-based assay has enabled the screening of the approved human drug-pharmacopoeia (∼2600 drugs) for a potential repurposing. This screening strategy has revealed that approved drugs from various classes show significant bacterial load reduction equal to or superior to the gold-standard doxycycline, with 69 orally available hits from different drug categories being identified. Based on our defined hit criteria, 15 compounds were then selectively screened in a Litomosoides sigmodontis mouse model, 4 of which were active. These came from the tetracycline, fluoroquinolone and rifamycin classes. This strategy of repurposing approved drugs is a promising development in the goal of finding a novel treatment against filariasis and could also be a strategy applicable for other neglected tropical diseases.
| S-EPMC4266796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lymphatic filariasis affects approximately 3% of the whole world population. Mass drug administration is currently the major control strategy to eradicate this infection from endemic regions by year 2020. Combination drug treatments are highly efficient in controlling the infection. However, there are no effective vaccines available for human or animal lymphatic filariasis despite the identification of several subunit vaccines. Lymphatic filariasis parasites are multicellular organisms and potentially use multiple mechanisms to survive in the host. Therefore, there is a need to combine two or more vaccine candidate antigens to achieve the desired effect. In this study we combined three well characterized vaccine antigens of Brugia malayi, heat shock protein 12.6 (HSP12.6), Abundant Larval transcript-2 (ALT-2) and tetraspanin large extra cellular loop (TSP-LEL) as a multivalent fusion vaccine. Putative immune individuals carry circulating antibodies against all three antigens. Depletion of these antigen specific antibodies from the sera samples removed the ability of the sera to participate in the killing of B. malayi L3 in an antibody dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) mechanism. Vaccination trials in mice with a bivalent [HSP12.6+ALT-2 (HA), HSP12.6+TSP-LEL (HT) or TSP-LEL+ALT-2 (TA)] or trivalent [HSP12.6+ALT-2+TSP-LEL (HAT)] vaccines using DNA, protein or heterologous prime boost regimen showed that trivalent HAT vaccine either as protein alone or as heterologous prime boost vaccine could confer significant protection (95%) against B. malayi L3 challenge. Immune correlates of protection suggest a Th1/Th2 bias. These finding suggests that the trivalent HAT fusion protein is a promising prophylactic vaccine against lymphatic filariasis infection in human.
| S-EPMC3554871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of Wuchereria bancrofti, which causes lymphatic filariasis (LF) in The Gambia was among the highest in Africa in the 1950s. However, surveys conducted in 1975 and 1976 revealed a dramatic decline in LF endemicity in the absence of mass drug administration (MDA). The decline in prevalence was partly attributed to a significant reduction in mosquito density through the widespread use of insecticidal nets. Based on findings elsewhere that vector control alone can interrupt LF, we asked the question in 2013 whether the rapid scale up in the use of insecticidal nets in The Gambia had interrupted LF transmission.Methodology/principal findingWe present here the results of three independently designed filariasis surveys conducted over a period of 17 years (1997-2013), and involving over 6000 subjects in 21 districts across all administrative divisions in The Gambia. An immunochromatographic (ICT) test was used to detect W. bancrofti antigen during all three surveys. In 2001, tests performed on stored samples collected between 1997 and 2000, in three divisions, failed to show positive individuals from two divisions that were previously highly endemic for LF, suggesting a decline towards extinction in some areas. Results of the second survey conducted in 2003 showed that LF was no longer endemic in 16 of 21 districts surveyed. The 2013 survey used a WHO recommended LF transmission verification tool involving 3180 6-7 year-olds attending 60 schools across the country. We demonstrated that transmission of W. bancrofti has been interrupted in all 21 districts.ConclusionsWe conclude that LF transmission may have been interrupted in The Gambia through the extensive use of insecticidal nets for malaria control for decades. The growing evidence for the impact of malaria vector control activities on parasite transmission has been endorsed by WHO through a position statement in 2011 on integrated vector management to control malaria and LF.
| S-EPMC4364952 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the global drive for elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF), 15 countries have achieved validation of elimination as a public health problem (EPHP). Recent empirical evidence has demonstrated that EPHP does not always lead to elimination of transmission (EOT). Here we show how the probability of elimination explicitly depends on key biological parameters, many of which have been poorly characterized, leading to a poor evidence base for the elimination threshold. As more countries progress towards EPHP it is essential that this process is well-informed, as prematurely halting treatment and surveillance programs could pose a serious threat to global progress. We highlight that refinement of the weak empirical evidence base is vital to understand drivers of elimination and inform long-term policy.
| S-EPMC7413036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Improved drug regimens are needed to accelerate elimination of lymphatic filariasis in Africa. This study determined whether a single co-administered dose of ivermectin plus diethylcarbamazine plus albendazole [IDA] is noninferior to standard 3 annual doses of ivermectin plus albendazole (IA) used in many LF-endemic areas of Africa. METHODS:Treatment-naive adults with Wuchereria bancrofti microfilaremia in Côte d'Ivoire were randomized to receive a single dose of IDA (n = 43) or 3 annual doses of IA (n = 52) in an open-label, single-blinded trial. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who were microfilaria (Mf) negative at 36 months. Secondary endpoints were Mf clearance at 6, 12, and 24 months; inactivation of adult worm nests; and safety. RESULTS:At 36 months posttreatment with IDA, 18/33 (55%; 95% CI, 38-72%) cleared Mf versus 33/42 (79%; 67-91%) with IA (P = .045). At 6 and 12 months IDA was superior to IA in clearing Mf (89% [77-99%] and 71% [56-85%]), respectively, versus 34% (20-48%) and 26% (14-42%) (P < .001). IDA was equivalent to IA at 24 months (61% [45-77%] vs 54% [38-72%]; P = .53). IDA was superior to IA for inactivating adult worms at all time points. Both treatments were well tolerated, and there were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS:A single dose of IDA was superior to 2 doses of IA in reducing the overall Mf burden by 24 months. Reinfection may have contributed to the lack of sustained clearance of Mf with IDA. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:NCT02974049.
| S-EPMC7583415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Malaria and lymphatic filariasis (LF) continue to cause a considerable public health burden globally and are co-endemic in many regions of sub-Saharan Africa. These infections are transmitted by the same mosquito species which raises important questions about optimal vector control strategies in co-endemic regions, as well as the effect of the presence of each infection on endemicity of the other; there is currently little consensus on the latter. The need for comprehensive modelling studies to address such questions is therefore significant, yet very few have been undertaken to date despite the recognised explanatory power of reliable dynamic mathematical models. Here, we develop a malaria-LF co-infection modelling framework that accounts for two key interactions between these infections, namely the increase in vector mortality as LF mosquito prevalence increases and the antagonistic Th1/Th2 immune response that occurs in co-infected hosts. We consider the crucial interplay between these interactions on the resulting endemic prevalence when introducing each infection in regions where the other is already endemic (e.g. due to regional environmental change), and the associated timescale for such changes, as well as effects on the basic reproduction number R? of each disease. We also highlight potential perverse effects of vector controls on human infection prevalence in co-endemic regions, noting that understanding such effects is critical in designing optimal integrated control programmes. Hence, as well as highlighting where better data are required to more reliably address such questions, we provide an important framework that will form the basis of future scenario analysis tools used to plan and inform policy decisions on intervention measures in different transmission settings.
| S-EPMC3681634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionLymphatic filariasis (LF), a neglected tropical disease (NTD) preventable through mass drug administration (MDA), is one of six diseases deemed possibly eradicable. Previously we developed one LF elimination scenario, which assumes MDA scale-up to continue in all countries that have previously undertaken MDA. In contrast, our three previously developed eradication scenarios assume all LF endemic countries will undertake MDA at an average (eradication I), fast (eradication II), or instantaneous (eradication III) rate of scale-up. In this analysis we use a micro-costing model to project the financial and economic costs of each of these scenarios in order to provide evidence to decision makers about the investment required to eliminate and eradicate LF.Methodology/key findingsCosting was undertaken from a health system perspective, with all results expressed in 2012 US dollars (USD). A discount rate of 3% was applied to calculate the net present value of future costs. Prospective NTD budgets from LF endemic countries were reviewed to preliminarily determine activities and resources necessary to undertake a program to eliminate LF at a country level. In consultation with LF program experts, activities and resources were further reviewed and a refined list of activities and necessary resources, along with their associated quantities and costs, were determined and grouped into the following activities: advocacy and communication, capacity strengthening, coordination and strengthening partnerships, data management, ongoing surveillance, monitoring and supervision, drug delivery, and administration. The costs of mapping and undertaking transmission assessment surveys and the value of donated drugs and volunteer time were also accounted for. Using previously developed scenarios and deterministic estimates of MDA duration, the financial and economic costs of interrupting LF transmission under varying rates of MDA scale-up were then modelled using a micro-costing approach. The elimination scenario, which includes countries that previously undertook MDA, is estimated to cost 929 million USD (95% Credible Interval: 884m-972m). Proceeding to eradication is anticipated to require a higher financial investment, estimated at 1.24 billion USD (1.17bn-1.30bn) in the eradication III scenario (immediate scale-up), with eradication II (intensified scale-up) projected at 1.27 billion USD (1.21bn-1.33bn), and eradication I (slow scale-up) estimated at 1.29 billion USD (1.23bn-1.34bn). The economic costs of the eradication III scenario are estimated at approximately 7.57 billion USD (7.12bn-7.94bn), while the elimination scenario is projected to have an economic cost of 5.21 billion USD (4.91bn-5.45bn). Countries in the AFRO region will require the greatest investment to reach elimination or eradication, but also stand to gain the most in cost savings. Across all scenarios, capacity strengthening and advocacy and communication represent the greatest financial costs, whereas mapping, post-MDA surveillance, and administration comprise the least.Conclusions/significanceThough challenging to implement, our results indicate that financial and economic savings are greatest under the eradication III scenario. Thus, if eradication for LF is the objective, accelerated scale-up is projected to be the best investment.
| S-EPMC5630187 | biostudies-literature