Dataset Information

Intermittent preventive treatment of malaria delivered to primary schoolchildren provided effective individual protection in Jinja, Uganda: secondary outcomes of a cluster-randomized trial (START-IPT).

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) of malaria is recommended as policy for certain high-risk populations, but not currently for schoolchildren. A cluster-randomized trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of IPT with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) on primary schoolchildren in Jinja, Uganda. Results of the impact of IPT of schoolchildren on community-level transmission have been reported previously. Here, secondary outcomes from a school-based survey are presented. METHODS:Eighty-four clusters (one primary school plus 100 households) were randomized to intervention and control (1:1 ratio). Participants from intervention schools received monthly IPT with DP for up to 6 rounds (June-December 2014). At endline (November-December 2014), randomly selected children from all 84 schools were surveyed (13 per school) and thick blood smears were done. Those with fever or history of fever were tested with rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for malaria. Haemoglobin was measured in every fifth participant. Outcome measures included prevalence of asexual parasites and gametocytes (by microscopy), and prevalence of anaemia. Prevalence outcomes were analysed using generalized linear Poisson models with log link function, incorporating a cluster-level random intercept and quantified using prevalence risk ratios. RESULTS:Among 23,280 students listed on the 42 intervention school registers, 10,079 (43.3%) aged 5-20 years were enrolled into the IPT intervention and received at least one dose of DP; of these, 9286 (92.1%) received at least one full (3-day) course. In total, 1092 children were enrolled into the final school survey (546 per arm) and had a thick blood smear done; of these, 255 had haemoglobin measured (129 intervention, 126 control). Children in the intervention arm were less likely to have asexual parasites (9.2% intervention vs 44.1% control, adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.22 [95% CI 0.16-0.30] p?

SUBMITTER: Rehman AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6751800 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intermittent preventive treatment of malaria delivered to primary schoolchildren provided effective individual protection in Jinja, Uganda: secondary outcomes of a cluster-randomized trial (START-IPT).

Rehman Andrea M AM Maiteki-Sebuguzi Catherine C Gonahasa Samuel S Okiring Jaffer J Kigozi Simon P SP Chandler Clare I R CIR Drakeley Chris C Dorsey Grant G Kamya Moses R MR Staedke Sarah G SG

Malaria journal 20190918 1

<h4>Background</h4>Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) of malaria is recommended as policy for certain high-risk populations, but not currently for schoolchildren. A cluster-randomized trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of IPT with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) on primary schoolchildren in Jinja, Uganda. Results of the impact of IPT of schoolchildren on community-level transmission have been reported previously. Here, secondary outcomes from a school-based survey are presented. ...[more]

PMID: 31533845

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntermittent preventive treatment (IPT) is a well established malaria control intervention. Evidence that delivering IPT to schoolchildren could provide community-level benefits is limited. We did a cluster-randomised controlled trial to assess the effect of IPT of primary schoolchildren with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) on indicators of malaria transmission in the community, in Jinja, Uganda.MethodsWe included 84 clusters, each comprising one primary school and the 100 closest available households. The clusters were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive IPT with DP or standard care (control) by restricted randomisation to ensure balance by geography and school type. Children in intervention schools received IPT monthly for up to six rounds (June to December, 2014). We did cross-sectional community surveys in randomly selected households at baseline and in January to April, 2015, during which we measured participants' temperatures and obtained finger-prick blood smears for measurement of parasite prevalence by microscopy. We also did entomological surveys 1 night per month in households from 20 randomly selected IPT and 20 control clusters. The primary trial outcome was parasite prevalence in the final community survey. The primary entomological survey outcome was the annual entomological inoculation rate (aEIR) from July, 2014, to April, 2015. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02009215.FindingsAmong 23 280 students registered in the 42 intervention schools, 10 079 (43%) aged 5-20 years were enrolled and received at least one dose of DP. 9286 (92%) of 10 079 received at least one full course of DP (three doses). Community-level parasite prevalence was lower in the intervention clusters than in the control clusters (19% vs 23%, adjusted risk ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·73-1·00, p=0·05). The aEIR was lower in the intervention group than in the control group, but not significantly so (10·1 vs 15·2 infective bites per person, adjusted incidence rate ratio 0·80, 95% CI 0·36-1·80, p=0·59).InterpretationIPT of schoolchildren with DP might have a positive effect on community-level malaria indicators and be operationally feasible. Studies with greater IPT coverage are needed.FundingUK Medical Research Council, UK Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust.

Project description:BackgroundIntermittent preventive treatment in infants (IPTi) is a new malaria control tool. However, it is uncertain whether IPTi works mainly through chemoprophylaxis or treatment of existing infections. Understanding the mechanism is essential for development of replacements for sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) where it is no longer effective. This study investigated how protection against malaria given by SP, chlorproguanil-dapsone (CD) and mefloquine (MQ), varied with time since administration of IPTi.Methods and findingsA secondary analysis of data from a randomised, placebo-controlled trial in an area of high antifolate resistance in Tanzania was conducted. IPTi using SP, CD, MQ or placebo was given to 1280 infants at 2, 3 and 9 months of age. Poisson regression with random effects to adjust for potential clustering of malaria episodes within children was used to calculate incidence rate ratios for clinical malaria in defined time strata following IPTi. The short-acting antimalarial CD gave no protection against clinical malaria, whereas long-acting MQ gave two months of substantial protection (protective efficacy (PE) 73.1% (95% CI: 23.9, 90.5) and 73.3% (95% CI: 0, 92.9) in the first and second month respectively). SP gave some protection in the first month after treatment (PE 64.5% (95% CI: 10.6, 85.9)) although it did not reduce the incidence of malaria up to 12 months of age. There was no evidence of either long-term protection or increased risk of malaria for any of the regimens.ConclusionPost-treatment chemoprophylaxis appears to be the main mechanism by which IPTi protects children against malaria. Long-acting antimalarials are therefore likely to be the most effective drugs for IPTi, but as monotherapies could be vulnerable to development of drug resistance. Due to concerns about tolerability, the mefloquine formulation used in this study is not suitable for IPTi. Further investigation of combinations of long-acting antimalarials for IPTi is needed.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00158574.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment of asymptomatic individuals, regardless of their malaria infection status, with regularly spaced therapeutic doses of antimalarial drugs has been proposed as a method for reducing malaria morbidity and mortality. This strategy, called intermittent preventive treatment (IPT), is currently employed for pregnant women and is being studied for infants (IPTi) as well. As with any drug-based intervention strategy, it is important to understand how implementation may affect the spread of drug-resistant parasites. This is a difficult issue to address experimentally because of the limited size and duration of IPTi trials as well as the intractability of distinguishing the spread of resistance due to conventional treatment of malaria episodes versus that due to IPTi when the same drug is used in both contexts.Methods and findingsUsing a mathematical model, we evaluated the possible impact of treating individuals with antimalarial drugs at regular intervals regardless of their infection status. We translated individual treatment strategies and drug pharmacokinetics into parasite population dynamic effects and show that immunity, treatment rate, drug decay kinetics, and presumptive treatment rate are important factors in the spread of drug-resistant parasites. Our model predicts that partially resistant parasites are more likely to spread in low-transmission areas, but fully resistant parasites are more likely to spread under conditions of high transmission, which is consistent with some epidemiological observations. We were also able to distinguish between spread of resistance due to treatment of symptomatic infections and that due to IPTi. We showed that IPTi could accelerate the spread of resistant parasites, but this effect was only likely to be significant in areas of low or unstable transmission.ConclusionsThe results presented here demonstrate the importance of considering both the half-life of a drug and the existing level of resistance when choosing a drug for IPTi. Drugs to which little or no resistance exists are not advisable for IPT in high-transmission areas, but IPTi is not likely to significantly impact the spread of highly resistant parasites in areas where partial resistance is already established. IPTi is more likely to accelerate the spread of resistance in high-transmission areas than is IPT in adults (i.e., pregnant women).

Project description:BackgroundThe benefits of integrated control of malaria, schistosomiasis, and soil-transmitted helminth infections have not been fully explored in Ghanaian schoolchildren.ObjectiveTo assess the impact of co-administered artemether-lumefantrine plus albendazole, and artemether-lumefantrine plus albendazole plus praziquantel compared to albendazole plus praziquantel on anaemia, sustained attention, and recall in schoolchildren.DesignThis three-arm, open-label intervention study was carried out in Ghana among class three schoolchildren. Artemether-lumefantrine and albendazole were co-administered to 131 schoolchildren in Study Arm 1; artemether-lumefantrine, albendazole, and praziquantel to 90 children in Study Arm 2 versus albendazole and praziquantel to 127 children in Control Arm 3. Medicines were administered to all children at least 30 min after a meal. A HemoCue(®) photometer was used to measure haemoglobin (Hb), while the code transmission test (CTT), adapted from the Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch), was used to measure sustained attention and recall before-and-after interventions in June 2011 and June 2012.ResultsWe observed significant malaria parasite prevalence reductions of 62.8 and 59.2% in Study Arm 1 from 24.2 to 9.0%, p<0.01, and 59.2% in Study Arm 2 from 26.7 to 10.9%, p<0.01), respectively, compared to 8.93% in Control Arm 3 (from 34.7 to 31.6%, p>0.05). Meanwhile, anaemia prevalence reduced significantly (p<0.01) in all three study arms after interventions by 38.4% (from 19.8 to 12.2%), 20.7% (from 26.6 to 21.1%), and 36.0% (from 28.3 to 18.1%) in Study Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Although the interventions had no significant effects on Hb levels, anaemia prevalence reduced insignificantly by 38.4 and 20.7% in Study Arms 1 and 2, respectively, compared to 36.0% in Control Arm 3. Among schoolchildren in Study Arms 1 and 2, mean CTT score improved significantly after interventions by 10.4% (from 3.18 to 3.55, p=0.01) and 20.5% (from 2.83 to 3.56, p=0.01) respectively, compared to 5.75% in Control Arm 3 (from 2.95 to 3.13, p=0.09). Likewise, mean recall test score improvements after interventions were 16.9% (from 2.07 to 2.49, p=0.01) and 27.9% (from 1.91 to 2.65, p=0.01) in Study Arms 1 and 2, respectively, compared to 18.3% (from 1.92 to 2.35, p=0.01) in Control Arm 3.ConclusionCombined intermittent preventive treatment of malaria and deworming reduced prevalence of anaemia and improved sustained attention and recall in schoolchildren. Best results for sustained attention and recall were seen in Study Arm 2.

Project description:BackgroundMalaria is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in early childhood, yet its consequences for health and education during the school-age years remain poorly understood. We examined the effect of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) in reducing anaemia and improving classroom attention and educational achievement in semi-immune schoolchildren in an area of high perennial transmission.MethodsA stratified, cluster-randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of IPT was done in 30 primary schools in western Kenya. Schools were randomly assigned to treatment (sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in combination with amodiaquine or dual placebo) by use of a computer-generated list. Children aged 5-18 years received three treatments at 4-month intervals (IPT n=3535, placebo n=3223). The primary endpoint was the prevalence of anaemia, defined as a haemoglobin concentration below 110 g/L. This outcome was assessed through cross-sectional surveys 12 months post-intervention. Analysis was by both intention to treat, excluding children with missing data, and per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00142246.Findings2604 children in the IPT group and 2302 in the placebo group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome; the main reason for exclusion was loss to follow-up. Prevalence of anaemia at 12 months averaged 6.3% in the IPT group and 12.6% in the placebo group (adjusted risk ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.93; p=0.028). Significant improvements were also seen in two of the class-based tests of sustained attention, with a mean increase in code transmission test score of 6.05 (95% CI 2.83-9.27; p=0.0007) and counting sounds test score of 1.80 (0.19-3.41; p=0.03), compared with controls. No effect was shown for inattentive or hyperactive-compulsive behaviours or on educational achievement. The per-protocol analysis yielded similar results. 23 serious adverse events were reported within 28 days of any treatment (19 in the IPT group and four in the placebo group); the main side-effects were problems of balance, dizziness, feeling faint, nausea, and/or vomiting shortly after treatment.InterpretationIPT of malaria improves the health and cognitive ability of semi-immune schoolchildren. Effective malaria interventions could be a valuable addition to school health programmes.

Dataset Information

Intermittent preventive treatment of malaria delivered to primary schoolchildren provided effective individual protection in Jinja, Uganda: secondary outcomes of a cluster-randomized trial (START-IPT).

Publications

Intermittent preventive treatment of malaria delivered to primary schoolchildren provided effective individual protection in Jinja, Uganda: secondary outcomes of a cluster-randomized trial (START-IPT).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets