Dataset Information

Intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and intermittent preventive therapy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine have similar effects on malaria antibody in pregnant Malawian women.

ABSTRACT: In a randomised trial comparing intermittent screening and treatment (IST) with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) and intermittent preventive therapy against malaria in pregnancy (IPT) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) in Malawi, the impacts of IST-DP and IPT-SP on the development and maintenance of malaria antibody immunity were compared. Pregnant Malawian women were randomised to receive IST-DP or IPT-SP. In a nested study, paired enrolment and delivery plasma samples from 681 women were assayed for antibodies against recombinant antigens and for IgG and opsonising antibodies to antigens found on infected erythrocytes (IEs). At delivery, antibody responses did not differ between study arms. Between enrolment and delivery, antibodies to recombinant antigens decreased, whereas antibodies to IEs including opsonising antibodies remained stable. Overall, changes in antibody responses over pregnancy did not differ by treatment arm. Stratifying by gravidity, antibody to schizont extract decreased more in multigravidae receiving IST-DP than IPT-SP. There was minimal impact of treatment arm on the development and maintenance of malaria immunity. While antibodies to recombinant antigens declined between enrolment and delivery, antibodies directed against IEs tended to be more stable, suggesting longer-lasting protection.Clinical trial registration: Pa n African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR201103000280319) 14/03/2011. URL: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN69800930 .

SUBMITTER: Teo A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6536723 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntermittent preventive treatment of malaria during pregnancy (IPTp) with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) significantly reduces the burden of malaria during pregnancy compared to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), the current standard of care, but its impact on the incidence of malaria during infancy is unknown.MethodsWe conducted a double-blind randomized trial to compare the incidence of malaria during infancy among infants born to HIV-uninfected pregnant women who were randomized to monthly IPTp with either DP or SP. Infants were followed for all their medical care in a dedicated study clinic, and routine assessments were conducted every 4 weeks. At all visits, infants with fever and a positive thick blood smear were diagnosed and treated for malaria. The primary outcome was malaria incidence during the first 12 months of life. All analyses were done by modified intention to treat.ResultsOf the 782 women enrolled, 687 were followed through delivery from December 9, 2016, to December 5, 2017, resulting in 678 live births: 339 born to mothers randomized to SP and 339 born to those randomized to DP. Of these, 581 infants (85.7%) were followed up to 12 months of age. Overall, the incidence of malaria was lower among infants born to mothers randomized to DP compared to SP, but the difference was not statistically significant (1.71 vs 1.98 episodes per person-year, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-1.03, p = 0.11). Stratifying by infant sex, IPTp with DP was associated with a lower incidence of malaria among male infants (IRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.98, p = 0.03) but not female infants (IRR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79-1.24, p = 0.93).ConclusionDespite the superiority of DP for IPTp, there was no evidence of a difference in malaria incidence during infancy in infants born to mothers who received DP compared to those born to mothers who received SP. Only male infants appeared to benefit from IPTp-DP suggesting that IPTp-DP may provide additional benefits beyond birth. Further research is needed to further explore the benefits of DP versus SP for IPTp on the health outcomes of infants.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02793622 . Registered on June 8, 2016.

Project description:BackgroundIn Africa, most plasmodium infections during pregnancy remain asymptomatic, yet are associated with maternal anemia and low birthweight. WHO recommends intermittent preventive therapy in pregnancy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (IPTp-SP). However, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) efficacy is threatened by high-level parasite resistance. We conducted a trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of scheduled intermittent screening with malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and treatment of RDT-positive women with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) as an alternative strategy to IPTp-SP.Methods and findingsThis was an open-label, two-arm individually randomized superiority trial among HIV-seronegative women at three sites in Malawi with high SP resistance. The intervention consisted of three or four scheduled visits in the second and third trimester, 4 to 6 wk apart. Women in the IPTp-SP arm received SP at each visit. Women in the intermittent screening and treatment in pregnancy with DP (ISTp-DP) arm were screened for malaria at every visit and treated with DP if RDT-positive. The primary outcomes were adverse live birth outcome (composite of small for gestational age, low birthweight [<2,500 g], or preterm birth [<37 wk]) in paucigravidae (first or second pregnancy) and maternal or placental plasmodium infection at delivery in multigravidae (third pregnancy or higher). Analysis was by intention to treat. Between 21 July 2011 and 18 March 2013, 1,873 women were recruited (1,155 paucigravidae and 718 multigravidae). The prevalence of adverse live birth outcome was similar in the ISTp-DP (29.9%) and IPTp-SP (28.8%) arms (risk difference = 1.08% [95% CI -3.25% to 5.41%]; all women: relative risk [RR] = 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], p = 0.625; paucigravidae: RR = 1.10 [95% CI 0.92-1.31], p = 0.282; multigravidae: RR = 0.92 [95% CI 0.71-1.20], p = 0.543). The prevalence of malaria at delivery was higher in the ISTp-DP arm (48.7% versus 40.8%; risk difference = 7.85%, [95% CI 3.07%-12.63%]; all women: RR = 1.19 [95% CI 1.07-1.33], p = 0.007; paucigravidae: RR = 1.16 [95% CI 1.04-1.31], p = 0.011; multigravidae: RR = 1.29 [95% CI 1.02-1.63], p = 0.037). Fetal loss was more common with ISTp-DP (2.6% versus 1.3%; RR = 2.06 [95% CI 1.01-4.21], p = 0.046) and highest among non-DP-recipients (3.1%) in the ISTp-DP arm. Limitations included the open-label design.ConclusionsScheduled screening for malaria parasites with the current generation of RDTs three to four times during pregnancy as part of focused antenatal care was not superior to IPTp-SP in this area with high malaria transmission and high SP resistance and was associated with higher fetal loss and more malaria at delivery.Trial registrationPan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201103000280319; ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN69800930.

Project description:BackgroundIntermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) is recommended in HIV-negative women to avert malaria, while this relies on cotrimoxazole prophylaxis (CTXp) in HIV-positive women. Alternative antimalarials are required in areas where parasite resistance to antifolate drugs is high. The cost-effectiveness of IPTp with alternative drugs is needed to inform policy.MethodsThe cost-effectiveness of 2-dose IPTp-mefloquine (MQ) was compared with IPTp-SP in HIV-negative women (Benin, Gabon, Mozambique and Tanzania). In HIV-positive women the cost-effectiveness of 3-dose IPTp-MQ added to CTXp was compared with CTXp alone (Kenya, Mozambique and Tanzania). The outcomes used were maternal clinical malaria, anaemia at delivery and non-obstetric hospital admissions. The poor tolerability to MQ was included as the value of women's loss of working days. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and threshold analysis undertaken.ResultsFor HIV-negative women, the ICER for IPTp-MQ versus IPTp-SP was 136.30 US$ (2012 US$) (95%CI 131.41; 141.18) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, or 237.78 US$ (95%CI 230.99; 244.57), depending on whether estimates from Gabon were included or not. For HIV-positive women, the ICER per DALY averted for IPTp-MQ added to CTXp, versus CTXp alone was 6.96 US$ (95%CI 4.22; 9.70). In HIV-negative women, moderate shifts of variables such as malaria incidence, drug cost, and IPTp efficacy increased the ICERs above the cost-effectiveness threshold. In HIV-positive women the intervention remained cost-effective for a substantial (up to 21 times) increase in cost per tablet.ConclusionsAddition of IPTp with an effective antimalarial to CTXp was very cost-effective in HIV-positive women. IPTp with an efficacious antimalarial was more cost-effective than IPTp-SP in HIV-negative women. However, the poor tolerability of MQ does not favour its use as IPTp. Regardless of HIV status, prevention of malaria in pregnancy with a highly efficacious, well tolerated antimalarial would be cost-effective despite its high price.Trials registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT 00811421; Pan African Trials Registry PACTR2010020001429343 and PACTR2010020001813440.

Project description:BackgroundIn malaria endemic areas, schoolchildren usually have asymptomatic malaria infections and consequently remain untreated. Therefore, intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in schoolchildren would be a plausible strategy in malaria stable transmission areas to prevent anaemia and malnutrition. However, in contrast to infancy and pregnancy, antimalaria intermittent preventive treatment in children has been barely investigated. As the implementation of intermittent preventive treatment may be challenged by sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine combined with piperaquine may be a better alternative than sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine monotherapy. A clinical trial is being conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of intermittent preventive treatments versus controls in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRCongo) schoolchildren and their impact on sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance.Methods/designA phase IIIb, randomised, controlled trial will enroll asymptomatic schoolchildren. For interventions, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is compared to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus piperaquine and to a control group. The two treatments are given four-monthly from baseline for a year as a single dose for sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and two doses at 24-hour intervals for piperaquine. All participants receive praziquantel and albendazole as mass-treatment for helminthiasis at enrolment. The primary endpoint is haemoglobin concentration change at 12 months follow-up. Secondary endpoints are malaria parasite load and malaria prevalence, at baseline and at month 12. Malaria and helminthiasis incidence will be monitored throughout the study. Statistical analysis will use multilevel modelling due to repeated measurements and clustering effect of participants.DiscussionThe very few studies on intermittent preventive treatment in schoolchildren in malaria stable transmission areas have contradictory results. This randomised controlled trial is unique in comparing efficacy and safety of a prophylactic combination therapy to monotherapy or a control group after 12 months follow-up. Resistance markers for sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (including break through parasitaemias) will also be recorded. Its uniqueness lies also in the fact that we use piperaquine, a long acting antimalarial, in combination with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Artemisinin derivatives have been excluded as it is part of the treatment policies in virtually all malaria endemic countries. Our findings may, therefore, contribute to the public health of youngsters who fail to thrive and grow due to multiple morbidities.Trial registrationNCT01722539; PACTR201211000449323.

Dataset Information

Intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and intermittent preventive therapy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine have similar effects on malaria antibody in pregnant Malawian women.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets