Dataset Information

An open label, randomized clinical trial to compare the tolerability and efficacy of ivermectin plus diethylcarbamazine and albendazole vs. diethylcarbamazine plus albendazole for treatment of brugian filariasis in Indonesia.

ABSTRACT: Improved treatments for lymphatic filariasis (LF) could accelerate the global elimination program for this disease. A triple drug combination of the anti-filarial drugs ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine (DEC) and albendazole (IDA) has been shown to be safe and effective for achieving sustained clearance of microfilariae (Mf) of the filarial parasite Wuchereria bancrofti from human blood. However, the triple drug combination has not been previously been evaluated for treatment of brugian filariasis, which accounts for about 10% of the global LF burden. This hospital-based clinical trial compared the safety and efficacy of IDA with that of the standard treatment (DEC plus albendazole, DA) in persons with Brugia timori infections on Sumba island, Indonesia. Fifty-five asymptomatic persons with B. timori Mf were treated with either a single oral dose of IDA (28 subjects) or with DEC plus albendazole (DA, 27 subjects). Participants were actively monitored for adverse events (AE) for two days after treatment by nurses and physicians who were masked regarding treatment assignments. Passive monitoring was performed by clinical teams that visited participant's home villages for an additional five days. Microfilaremia was assessed by membrane filtration of 1 ml night blood at baseline, at 24h and one year after treatment. IDA was more effective than DA for completely clearing Mf at 24 hours (25/28, 89% vs. 8/27, 30%, P < 0.001). By 12 months after treatment, only one of 27 IDA recipients had Mf in their blood (4%) vs. 10 of 25 (40%) in persons treated with DA (P = 0.002). Approximately 90% of participants had antibodies to recombinant filarial antigen BmR1 at baseline. Antibody prevalence decreased to approximately 30% in both treatment groups at 12 months. About 45% of persons in both treatment groups experienced AE such as fever, muscle aches, lower back, joint and abdominal pain. These were mostly mild and most common during the first two days after treatment. No participant experienced a severe or serious AE. This study showed that IDA was well-tolerated and significantly more effective for clearing B. timori Mf from the blood than DA. Larger studies should be performed to further assess the safety and efficacy of IDA as a mass drug administration regimen to eliminate brugian filariasis. Trial Registration: NCT02899936.

SUBMITTER: Supali T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8031952 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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).

Project description:BackgroundOnchocerciasis ("river blindness") has been targeted for elimination. New treatments that kill or permanently sterilize female worms could accelerate this process. Prior studies have shown that triple drug treatment with ivermectin plus diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) leads to prolonged clearance of microfilaremia in persons with lymphatic filariasis. We now report results from a randomized clinical trial that compared the tolerability and efficacy of IDA vs. a comparator treatment (ivermectin plus albendazole, IA) in persons with onchocerciasis.Methods and findingsThe study was performed in the Volta region of Ghana. Persons with microfiladermia and palpable subcutaneous nodules were pre-treated with two oral doses of ivermectin (150 μg/kg) separated by at least 6 months prior to treatment with either a single oral dose of ivermectin 150 μg/kg plus albendazole 400 mg (IA), a single oral dose of IDA (IDA1, IA plus diethylcarbamazine (DEC. 6 mg/kg) or three consecutive daily doses of IDA (IDA3). These treatments were tolerated equally well. While adverse events were common (approximately 30% overall), no severe or serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed. Skin microfilariae were absent or present with very low densities after all three treatments through 18 months, at which time nodules were excised for histological assessment. Nodule histology was evaluated by two independent assessors who were masked regarding participant infection status or treatment assignment. Significantly lower percentages of female worms were alive and fertile in nodules recovered from study participants after IDA1 (40/261, 15.3%) and IDA3 (34/281, 12.1%) than after IA (41/180, 22.8%). This corresponds to a 40% reduction in the percentage of female worms that were alive and fertile after IDA treatments relative to results observed after the IA comparator treatment (P = 0.004). Percentages of female worms that were alive (a secondary outcome of the study) were also lower after IDA treatments (301/574, 52.4%) than after IA (127/198, 64.1%) (P = 0.004). Importantly, some comparisons (including the reduced % of fertile female worms after IDA1 vs IA treatment, which was the primary endpoint for the study) were not statistically significant when results were adjusted for intraclass correlation of worm fertility and viability for worms recovered from individual study participants.ConclusionsResults from this pilot study suggest that IDA was well tolerated after ivermectin pretreatment. They also suggest that IDA was more effective than the comparator treatment IA for killing or sterilizing female O. volvulus worms. No other short-course oral treatment for onchocerciasis has been demonstrated to have macrofilaricidal activity. However, this first study was too small to provide conclusive results. Therefore, additional studies will be needed to confirm these promising findings.Trial registrationThe study is registered at Cinicaltrials.gov under the number NCT04188301.

Project description:BackgroundPapua New Guinea (PNG) has a high burden of lymphatic filariasis (LF) caused by Wuchereria bancrofti, with an estimated 4.2 million people at risk of infection. A single co-administered dose of ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) has been shown to have superior efficacy in sustained clearance of microfilariae compared to diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (DA) in small clinical trials. A community-based cluster-randomised trial of DA versus IDA was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of IDA and DA for LF in a moderately endemic, treatment-naive area in PNG.MethodologyAll consenting, eligible residents of 24 villages in Bogia district, Madang Province, PNG were enrolled, screened for W. bancrofti antigenemia and microfilaria (Mf) and randomised to receive IDA (N = 2382) or DA (N = 2181) according to their village of residence. Adverse events (AE) were assessed by active follow-up for 2 days and passive follow-up for an additional 5 days. Antigen-positive participants were re-tested one year after MDA to assess treatment efficacy.Principal findingsOf the 4,563 participants enrolled, 96% were assessed for AEs within 2 days after treatment. The overall frequency of AEs were similar after either DA (18%) or IDA (20%) treatment. For those individuals with AEs, 87% were mild (Grade 1), 13% were moderate (Grade 2) and there were no Grade 3, Grade 4, or serious AEs (SAEs). The frequency of AEs was greater in Mf-positive than Mf-negative individuals receiving IDA (39% vs 20% p<0.001) and in Mf-positive participants treated with IDA (39%), compared to those treated with DA (24%, p = 0.023). One year after treatment, 64% (645/1013) of participants who were antigen-positive at baseline were re-screened and 74% of these participants (475/645) remained antigen positive. Clearance of Mf was achieved in 96% (52/54) of infected individuals in the IDA arm versus 84% (56/67) of infected individuals in the DA arm (relative risk (RR) 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.30; p = 0.019). Participants receiving DA treatment had a 4-fold higher likelihood of failing to clear Mf (RR 4.67 (95% CI: 1.05 to 20.67; p = 0.043). In the DA arm, a significant predictor of failure to clear was baseline Mf density (RR 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09 to 2.88; p = 0.007).ConclusionIDA was well tolerated and more effective than DA for clearing Mf. Widespread use of this regimen could accelerate LF elimination in PNG.Trial registrationRegistration number NCT02899936; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02899936.

Dataset Information

An open label, randomized clinical trial to compare the tolerability and efficacy of ivermectin plus diethylcarbamazine and albendazole vs. diethylcarbamazine plus albendazole for treatment of brugian filariasis in Indonesia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets