Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus chloroquine to treat vivax malaria in Afghanistan: an open randomized, non-inferiority, trial. Blood stage antimalarial efficacy of primaquine in Plasmodium vivax malaria. Clinical efficacy of chloroquine versus artemether-lumefantrine for Plasmodium vivax treatment in Thailand. Two fixed-dose artemisinin combinations for drug-resistant falciparum and vivax malaria in Papua, Indonesia: an open-label randomised comparison. A trial of combination antimalarial therapies in children from Papua New Guinea. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus artesunate-amodiaquine: superior efficacy and posttreatment prophylaxis against multidrug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax malaria. A randomised controlled trial to assess the efficacy of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Peru. Efficacy and effectiveness of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus artesunate-mefloquine in falciparum malaria: an open-label randomised comparison. Randomized controlled trials of 5- and 14-days primaquine therapy against relapses of vivax malaria in an Afghan refugee settlement in Pakistan. An open, randomized comparison of artesunate plus mefloquine vs. dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the Lao People's Democratic Republic (Laos). Artemether-lumefantrine versus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for treating uncomplicated malaria: a randomized trial to guide policy in Uganda. CV8, a new combination of dihydroartemisinin, piperaquine, trimethoprim and primaquine, compared with atovaquone-proguanil against falciparum malaria in Vietnam.
Afghanistan's national guidelines recommend chloroquine for the treatment of Plasmodium vivax infection, the parasite responsible for the majority of its malaria burden. Chloroquine resistance in P. vivax is emerging in Asia. Therapeutic responses across Afghanistan have not been evaluated in detail.
                Between July 2007 and February 2009, an open-label, randomized controlled trial of chloroquine and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in patients aged three months and over with slide-confirmed P. vivax mono-infections was conducted. Consistent with current national guidelines, primaquine was not administered. Subjects were followed up daily during the acute phase of illness (days 0-3) and weekly until day 56. The primary endpoint was the overall cumulative parasitological failure rate at day 56 after the start of treatment, with the hypothesis being that dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was non-inferior compared to chloroquine (Delta = 5% difference in proportion of failures).
                Of 2,182 individuals with positive blood films for P. vivax, 536 were enrolled in the trial. The day 28 cure rate was 100% in both treatment groups. Parasite clearance was more rapid with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine than chloroquine. At day 56, there were more recurrent infections in the chloroquine arm (8.9%, 95% CI 6.0-13.1%) than the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine arm (2.8%, 95% CI 1.4-5.8%), a difference in cumulative recurrence rate of 6.1% (2-sided 90%CI +2.6 to +9.7%). The log-rank test comparing the survival curves confirmed the superiority of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine over chloroquine (p = 0.003). Multivariate analysis showed that a lower initial haemoglobin concentration was also independently associated with recurrence. Both regimens were well tolerated and no serious adverse events were reported.
                Chloroquine remains an efficacious treatment for the treatment of vivax malaria in Afghanistan. In a setting where radical therapy cannot be administered, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine provides additional benefit in terms of post-treatment prophylaxis, reducing the incidence of recurrence from 4-8 weeks after treatment. The blood stage antimalarial efficacy of primaquine (0.25 mg of base/kg of body weight/day over 14 days) and chloroquine (25 mg of base/kg over 3 days) were compared in 85 adult Thai men with acute Plasmodium vivax malaria. Most (75%) had at least one malaria episode previously. Parasite clearance times after primaquine alone (n = 30) were slower than after chloroquine (n = 30) or combined chloroquine-primaquine (n = 25), but all patients had a satisfactory initial therapeutic response. P. vivax malaria recurred in 10 (17%) of 60 patients followed for > or = 2 months and Plasmodium falciparum malaria developed in another 5 (8%) without reexposure to infection. Recurrences occurred < or = 5 weeks after primaquine treatment (n = 4), suggesting recrudescence, whereas recurrences after chloroquine treatment (n = 6) occurred > or = 5 weeks later, suggesting relapse. Vivax malaria responds well initially to either primaquine or chloroquine. The blood stage antimalarial activity of primaquine may mask chloroquine resistance in combined regimens. Chloroquine remains the drug of choice for the treatment of vivax malaria in Thailand. Mixed infections of falciparum and vivax malaria are also common in South-East Asia. Laboratory confirmation of malaria species is not generally available. This study aimed to find alternative regimens for treating both malaria species by using falciparum antimalarial drugs. From June 2004 to May 2005, 98 patients with Plasmodium vivax were randomly treated with either artemether-lumefantrine (n = 47) or chloroquine (n = 51). Both treatments were followed by 15 mg of primaquine over 14 days. Adverse events and clinical and parasitological outcomes were recorded and revealed similar in both groups. The cure rate was 97.4% for the artemether-lumefantrine treated group and 100% for the chloroquine treated group. We concluded that the combination of artemether-lumefantrine and primaquine was well tolerated, as effective as chloroquine and primaquine, and can be an alternative regimen for treatment of vivax malaria especially in the event that a mixed infection of falciparum and vivax malaria could not be ruled out. The burden of Plasmodium vivax infections has been underappreciated, especially in southeast Asia where chloroquine resistant strains have emerged. Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with that of artemether-lumefantrine in patients with uncomplicated malaria caused by multidrug-resistant P falciparum and P vivax.
                774 patients in southern Papua, Indonesia, with slide-confirmed malaria were randomly assigned to receive either artemether-lumefantrine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and followed up for at least 42 days. The primary endpoint was the overall cumulative risk of parasitological failure at day 42 with a modified intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, trial number 00157833.
                Of the 754 evaluable patients enrolled, 466 had infections with P falciparum, 175 with P vivax, and 113 with a mixture of both species. The overall risk of failure at day 42 was 43% (95% CI 38-48) for artemether-lumefantrine and 19% (14-23) for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (hazard ratio=3.0, 95% CI 2.2-4.1, p<0.0001). After correcting for reinfections, the risk of recrudescence of P falciparum was 4.4% (2.6-6.2) with no difference between regimens. Recurrence of vivax occurred in 38% (33-44) of patients given artemether-lumefantrine compared with 10% (6.9-14.0) given dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (p<0.0001). At the end of the study, patients receiving dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine were 2.0 times (1.2-3.6) less likely to be anaemic and 6.6 times (2.8-16) less likely to carry vivax gametocytes than were those given artemether-lumefantrine.
                Both dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and artemether-lumefantrine were safe and effective for the treatment of multidrug-resistant uncomplicated malaria. However, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine provided greater post-treatment prophylaxis than did artemether-lumefantrine, reducing P falciparum reinfections and P vivax recurrences, the clinical public-health importance of which should not be ignored. Malaria control is difficult where there is intense year-round transmission of multiple plasmodium species, such as in Papua New Guinea.
                Between April 2005 and July 2007, we conducted an open-label, randomized, parallel-group study of conventional chloroquine-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and artesunate-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, and artemether-lumefantrine in children in Papua New Guinea 0.5 to 5 years of age who had falciparum or vivax malaria. The primary end point was the rate of adequate clinical and parasitologic response at day 42 after the start of treatment with regard to Plasmodium falciparum, after correction for reinfections identified through polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) genotyping of polymorphic loci in parasite DNA. Secondary end points included the rate of adequate clinical and parasitologic response at day 42 with regard to P. vivax without correction through PCR genotyping.
                Of 2802 febrile children screened, 482 with falciparum malaria and 195 with vivax malaria were included. The highest rate of adequate clinical and parasitologic response for P. falciparum was in the artemether-lumefantrine group (95.2%), as compared with 81.5% in the chloroquine-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (P=0.003), 85.4% in the artesunate-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (P=0.02), and 88.0% in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (P=0.06). The rate of adequate clinical and parasitologic response for P. vivax in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (69.4%) was more than twice that in each of the other three treatment groups. The in vitro chloroquine and piperaquine levels that inhibited growth of local P. falciparum isolates by 50% correlated significantly (P<0.001). Rash occurred more often with artesunate-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine than with chloroquine-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (P=0.004 for both comparisons).
                The most effective regimens were artemether-lumefantrine against P. falciparum and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine against P. vivax. The relatively high rate of treatment failure with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine against P. falciparum may reflect cross-resistance between chloroquine and piperaquine. (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12605000550606.)
                2008 Massachusetts Medical Society Antimalarial drug resistance is now well established in both Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax. In southern Papua, Indonesia, where both strains of plasmodia coexist, we have been conducting a series of studies to optimize treatment strategies.
                We conducted a randomized trial that compared the efficacy and safety of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHP) with artesunate-amodiaquine (AAQ). The primary end point was the overall cumulative parasitological failure rate at day 42.
                Of the 334 patients in the evaluable patient population, 185 were infected with P. falciparum, 80 were infected with P. vivax, and 69 were infected with both species. The overall parasitological failure rate at day 42 was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36%-53%) for AAQ and 13% (95% CI, 7.2%-19%) for DHP (hazard ratio [HR], 4.3; 95% CI, 2.5-7.2; P<.001). Rates of both recrudescence of P. falciparum infection and recurrence of P. vivax infection were significantly higher after receipt of AAQ than after receipt of DHP (HR, 3.4 [95% CI, 1.2-9.4] and 4.3 [95% CI, 2.2-8.2], respectively; P<.001). By the end of the study, AAQ recipients were 2.95-fold (95% CI, 1.2- to 4.9-fold) more likely to be anemic and 14.5-fold (95% CI, 3.4- to 61-fold) more likely to have carried P. vivax gametocytes.
                DHP was more effective and better tolerated than AAQ against multidrug-resistant P. falciparum and P. vivax infections. The prolonged therapeutic effect of piperaquine delayed the time to P. falciparum reinfection, decreased the rate of recurrence of P. vivax infection, and reduced the risk of P. vivax gametocyte carriage and anemia. Multi-drug resistant falciparum malaria is an important health problem in the Peruvian Amazon region. We carried out a randomised open label clinical trial comparing mefloquine-artesunate, the current first line treatment in this region, with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine.
                Between July 2003 and July 2005, 522 patients with P. falciparum uncomplicated malaria were recruited, randomized (260 with mefloquine-artesunate and 262 with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine), treated and followed up for 63 days. PCR-adjusted adequate clinical and parasitological response, estimated by Kaplan Meier survival and Per Protocol analysis, was extremely high for both drugs (99.6% for mefloquine-artesunate and 98.4% and for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine) (RR: 0.99, 95%CI [0.97-1.01], Fisher Exact p = 0.21). All recrudescences were late parasitological failures. Overall, gametocytes were cleared faster in the mefloquine-artesunate group (28 vs 35 days) and new gametocytes tended to appear more frequently in patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (day 7: 8 (3.6%) vs 2 (0.9%), RR: 3.84, 95%CI [0.82-17.87]). Adverse events such as anxiety and insomnia were significantly more frequent in the mefloquine-artesunate group, both in adults and children.
                Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is as effective as mefloquine-artesunate in treating uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria but it is better tolerated and more affordable than mefloquine-artesunate (US$1.0 versus US$18.65 on the local market). Therefore, it should be considered as a potential candidate for the first line treatment of P. falciparum malaria in Peru.
                ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00373607. Artemisinin-based combinations are judged the best treatments for multidrug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Artesunate-mefloquine is widely recommended in southeast Asia, but its high cost and tolerability profile remain obstacles to widespread deployment. To assess whether dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is a suitable alternative to artesunate-mefloquine, we compared the safety, tolerability, efficacy, and effectiveness of the two regimens for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum in western Myanmar (Burma).
                We did an open randomised comparison of 3-day regimens of artesunate-mefloquine (12/25 mg/kg) versus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (6.3/50 mg/kg) for the treatment of children aged 1 year or older and in adults with uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Rakhine State, western Myanmar. Within each group, patients were randomly assigned supervised or non-supervised treatment. The primary endpoint was the PCR-confirmed parasitological failure rate by day 42. Failure rates at day 42 were estimated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN27914471.
                Of 652 patients enrolled, 327 were assigned dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (156 supervised and 171 not supervised), and 325 artesunate-mefloquine (162 and 163, respectively). 16 patients were lost to follow-up, and one patient died 22 days after receiving dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. Recrudescent parasitaemias were confirmed in only two patients; the day 42 failure rate was 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-2.5) for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and 0 (0-1.2) for artesunate-mefloquine. Whole-blood piperaquine concentrations at day 7 were similar for patients with observed and non-observed dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine treatment. Gametocytaemia developed more frequently in patients who had received dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine than in those on artesunate-mefloquine: day 7, 18 (10%) of 188 versus five (2%) of 218; relative risk 4.2 (1.6-11.0) p=0.011.
                Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is a highly efficacious and inexpensive treatment of multidrug-resistant falciparum malaria and is well tolerated by all age groups. The effectiveness of the unsupervised treatment, as in the usual context of use, equalled its supervised efficacy, indicating good adherence without supervision. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is a good alternative to artesunate-mefloquine. Primaquine is the only drug available that can eliminate hypnozoites from the liver and prevent relapses of vivax malaria. The World Health Organization recommends a course of 14-21 days depending on region and strain. The National Malaria Control and Eradication Programmes of Pakistan and India have adhered to a 5-day course as their standard as it is deemed more practical to implement and because facility for detecting glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is seldom available at the periphery. Evidence for the efficacy of the 5-day regimen is controversial or lacking. Two, year-long, randomized controlled trials were undertaken in an Afghan refugee camp in north-western Pakistan using a process of passive case detection and treatment at the camp's clinic: the first trial compared treatment with chloroquine alone versus chloroquine plus 5-days primaquine, the second trial compared chloroquine alone versus chloroquine plus 14-days primaquine. Chloroquine is not hypnozoitocidal and was administered to eliminate the erythrocytic stages and to alleviate clinical symptoms. The daily primaquine dose was 0.25 mg/kg bodyweight and the total chloroquine dose was 25 mg/kg over 3 days. During the first trial 52% (129/250) of the non-primaquine group recorded a 2nd clinical-parasitaemic episode and 23% recorded a 3rd, whereas 51% (128/250) of the 5-days primaquine group reported a 2nd episode and 21% recorded a 3rd. During the second trial 49% (49/100) of the non-primaquine group recorded a 2nd episode and 25% recorded a 3rd, whereas only 32% (32/100) of the 14-days primaquine group recorded a 2nd and only 2% recorded a 3rd. The 5-days primaquine regimen has no value as an anti-relapse therapy and should be abandoned. In extended tests in vivo in which vivax cases (n = 31) were treated with chloroquine 25 mg/kg and 14-days primaquine, there was no parasite recrudescence within 28 days and hence no evidence of resistance to chloroquine. To determine the efficacy and safety of oral dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP, Artekin) in the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in southern Laos.
                An open, randomized clinical trial of oral artesunate-mefloquine (AM) vs. DP in 220 patients with acute uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Savannakhet Province, Laos.
                The 42-day cure rates (95% CI), as determined by survival analysis and adjusted for reinfection, were excellent and similar for the two groups [99 (94-100)% and 100 (100-100)% for AM and DP, respectively]. The median (range) fever and parasite clearance times for the AM and DP groups were also similar [20 (4-63) h and 2 (1-4) days vs. 20 (7-57) and 2 (1-4) days, logrank P = 0.4 and 0.17, respectively]. There were more patients with at least one potential side effect following treatment in the AM group when compared with the DP group [64/110 (58%) vs. 48/110 (44%), respectively, P = 0.031].
                Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine did not have superior efficacy to AM for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Laos but was associated with fewer adverse effects. Uganda recently adopted artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as the recommended first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria. However, AL has several limitations, including a twice-daily dosing regimen, recommendation for administration with fatty food, and a high risk of reinfection soon after therapy in high transmission areas. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) is a new alternative artemisinin-based combination therapy that is dosed once daily and has a long post-treatment prophylactic effect. We compared the efficacy and safety of AL with DP in Kanungu, an area of moderate malaria transmission.
                Patients aged 6 months to 10 years with uncomplicated falciparum malaria were randomized to therapy and followed for 42 days. Genotyping was used to distinguish recrudescence from new infection. Of 414 patients enrolled, 408 completed follow-up. Compared to patients treated with artemether-lumefantrine, patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine had a significantly lower risk of recurrent parasitaemia (33.2% vs. 12.2%; risk difference = 20.9%, 95% CI 13.0-28.8%) but no statistically significant difference in the risk of treatment failure due to recrudescence (5.8% vs. 2.0%; risk difference = 3.8%, 95% CI -0.2-7.8%). Patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine also had a lower risk of developing gametocytaemia after therapy (4.2% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.01). Both drugs were safe and well tolerated.
                DP is highly efficacious, and operationally preferable to AL because of a less intensive dosing schedule and requirements. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine should be considered for a role in the antimalarial treatment policy of Uganda.
                Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN75606663. To study a new combination, based on dihydroartemisinin and piperaquine (CV8) and atovaquone/proguanil (Malarone) for treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Vietnam.
                Vietnamese adults with falciparum malaria were allocated randomly to treatment with dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine/trimethoprim/primaquine 256/2560/720/40 mg (CV8, n = 84) or Malarone 3000/1200 mg (n = 81), both over 3 days. Patients were followed-up for 28 days.
                All patients recovered rapidly. The mean (95% CI) parasite elimination half-life of CV8 was 6.8 h (6.2-7.4) and of Malarone 6.5 h (6.1-6.9) (P = 0.4). Complete parasite clearance time was 35 (31-39) and 34 h (31-38) (P = 0.9). The 28-day cure rate was 94% and 95%, respectively (odds ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.18-3.81). No significant side-effects were found.
                CV8 and Malarone are effective combinations against multi-drug resistant falciparum malaria. CV8 has the advantage of a low price.
ACTs appear at least equivalent to chloroquine at effectively treating the blood stage P. vivax infection. Even where chloroquine remains effective this finding may allow for simplified protocols treating all forms of malaria with ACTs.
Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine may provide a longer period of post-treatment prophylaxis than artemether-lumefantrine or artesunate plus amodiaquine, which is likely to be a function of the long elimination half-life of piperaquine. This effect may be clinically important in high transmission settings whether primaquine is also given or not.