• Login
    View Item 
    •   Mak IR Home
    • College of Health Sciences (CHS)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences) Collections
    • View Item
    •   Mak IR Home
    • College of Health Sciences (CHS)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences)
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences) Collections
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Artemether-lumefantrine versus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for treatment of malaria: a randomized trial.

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    kamya-yeka-chs-res1.pdf (555.3Kb)
    Date
    2007-05-18
    Author
    Kamya, Moses.R
    Yeka, Adoke
    Bukirwa, Hasifa
    Lugemwa, Myers
    Rwakimari, John B.
    Staedke, Sarah G.
    Talisuna, Ambrose O.
    Greenhouse, Bryan
    Nosten, Francois
    Rosenthal, Philip J.
    Wabwire-Mangen, Fred
    Dorsey, Grant
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) for treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Uganda. Design: Randomized single-blinded clinical trial. Setting: Apac, Uganda, an area of very high malaria transmission intensity. Participants: Children aged 6 mo to 10 y with uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Intervention: Treatment of malaria with AL or DP, each following standard 3-d dosing regimens. Outcome measures: Risks of recurrent parasitemia at 28 and 42 d, unadjusted and adjusted by genotyping to distinguish recrudescences and new infections. Results: Of 421 enrolled participants, 417 (99%) completed follow-up. The unadjusted risk of recurrent falciparum parasitemia was significantly lower for participants treated with DP than for those treated with AL after 28 d (11% versus 29%; risk difference [RD] 18%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11%–26%) and 42 d (43% versus 53%; RD 9.6%, 95% CI 0%–19%) of follow-up. Similarly, the risk of recurrent parasitemia due to possible recrudescence (adjusted by genotyping) was significantly lower for participants treated with DP than for those treated with AL after 28 d (1.9% versus 8.9%; RD 7.0%, 95% CI 2.5%–12%) and 42 d (6.9% versus 16%; RD 9.5%, 95% CI 2.8%–16%). Patients treated with DP had a lower risk of recurrent parasitemia due to non-falciparum species, development of gametocytemia, and higher mean increase in hemoglobin compared to patients treated with AL. Both drugs were well tolerated; serious adverse events were uncommon and unrelated to study drugs. Conclusion: DP was superior to AL for reducing the risk of recurrent parasitemia and gametocytemia, and provided improved hemoglobin recovery. DP thus appears to be a good alternative to AL as first-line treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Uganda. To maximize the benefit of artemisinin-based combination therapy in Africa, treatment should be integrated with aggressive strategies to reduce malaria transmission intensity.
    URI
    doi:10. 1371/journal.pctr.0020020
    http://hdl.handle.net/10570/377
    Collections
    • School of Health Sciences (Health-Sciences) Collections

    DSpace 5.8 copyright © Makerere University 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of Mak IRCommunities & CollectionsTitlesAuthorsBy AdvisorBy Issue DateSubjectsBy TypeThis CollectionTitlesAuthorsBy AdvisorBy Issue DateSubjectsBy Type

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    DSpace 5.8 copyright © Makerere University 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV