Efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine versus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria among children in Rwanda: an open-label, randomized controlled trial.

Mar 20, 2019; Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. https://doi.org/10.1093/trstmh/trz009

Abstract

Abstract
Background
Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) have proven highly effective in reducing malaria morbidity in sub-Saharan Africa. Artemether–lumefantrine (AL) was introduced in 2005 as a first-line ACT for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Rwanda. Monitoring the therapeutic efficacy of ACTs is necessary to ensure effective malaria case management.

Methods
A comparative study on the efficacy of AL and dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine (DHP) was conducted in two sites, Masaka and Ruhuha, between September 2013 and December 2015. Clinical and parasitological responses were assessed at days 28 and 42.

Results
A total of 534 children were treated with AL (n=267) or DHP (n=267). After polymerase chain reaction (PCR) adjustment, 98.3% and 98.9% of children in the AL and DHP arms, respectively, achieved an adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) at day 28. At day 42, PCR-adjusted ACPR proportions were 97.3% and 98.4% for AL and DHP, respectively. PCR-adjusted ACPR was 99% for both drugs at days 28 and 42 in Ruhuha. The PCR-adjusted ACPR proportions in Masaka were 97.3% for AL and 98.5% for DHP at day 28 and 95.2% for AL and 97.5% for DHP at day 42.

Conclusions
AL remains efficacious in Rwanda 10 y after its adoption. The probability of new infections occurring among patients in the DHP arm was significantly lower than those in the AL arm. DHP also demonstrated a greater post-treatment prophylactic effect against new infections compared with AL.

Other publication from the same publishing house

None

Login
Support