Search

Abstract Background European travellers to endemic countries are at risk of malaria and may be affected by a different range of co-morbidities than natives of endemic regions. The safety profile, especially cardiac issues, of artenimol (previously dihydroartemisinin)–piperaquine (APQ) Eurartesim® during treatment of uncomplicated imported falciparum malaria is not adequately described due to the lack of longitudinal studies in this population. The present study was conducted to partially fill this gap. Methods Participants were recruited through Health Care Provider’s safety registry in 15 centres across 6 European countries in the period 2013–2016. Adverse events (AE) were collected, with a special focus on cardiovascular safety by including electrocardiogram QT intervals evaluated after correction with either Bazett’s (QTcB) or Fridericia’s (QTcF) methods, at baseline and after treatment. QTcB and/or QTcF prolongation were defined by a value > 450 ms for males and children and > 470 ms for females. Results Among 294 participants, 30.3% were women, 13.7% of Caucasian origin, 13.5% were current smoker, 13.6% current alcohol consumer and 42.2% declared at least one illness history. The mean (SD) age and body mass index were 39.8 years old (13.2) and 25.9 kg/m2 (4.7). Among them, 75 reported a total of 129 AE (27 serious), 46 being suspected to be related to APQ (11 serious) and mostly labelled as due to haematological, gastrointestinal, or infection. Women and Non-African participants had significantly (p 500 ms (milliseconds) but no clinical symptoms. Using QTcB correction increases of > 60 ms were present in 9 participants (6.3%). A trend towards increased prolongation was observed in those over 65 years of age but only a few subjects were in this group. No new safety signal was reported. The overall efficacy rate was 255/257 (99.2%). Conclusions APQ appears as an effective and well-tolerated drug for treatment of malaria in patients recruited in European countries. AEs and QT prolongation were in the range of those obtained in larger cohorts from endemic countries. Trial registration This study has been registered in EU Post-Authorization Studies Register as EUPAS6942

Abstract Background There is no consensus on the most accurate combination of diagnostic criteria to define community acquired pneumonia (CAP). We describe inclusion criteria in randomized controlled trials (RCT) of CAP and assess their performance for the diagnosis of formally identified CAP. Methods RCTs related to CAP recorded on ClinicalTrials.gov were analysed. Due to high heterogeneity, we divided close CAP inclusion criteria into patterns (i.e. combinations of inclusion criteria). To assess their diagnostic performances, these CAP definition patterns were applied to a reference population of 319 suspected CAP patients, in whom the CAP diagnosis had been confirmed (n = 163) or excluded (n = 156) by an adjudication committee after a systematic thoracic CT-scan and a 28-day follow-up period. Results In the 47 RCTs included in the analysis, 42 different CAP inclusion criteria combinations were identified and 8 patterns created. This heterogeneity was not explained either by the trials’ methodology or by their objectives. When applied to the reference population, the performance ranges of the 8 definition patterns were 9.8–56.4% for sensitivities, 56.4 97.4% for specificities, 63.6 83.6% for positive predictive values and 50.8–66.7% for negative predictive values. None of the CAP definitions had both sensitivity and specificity superior to 65%. Depending on the CAP definition, the rate of included patients without CAP (“false positives”) ranged from 1 to 21%. Conclusions CAP diagnostic criteria within RCTs are heterogeneous, which may have far-reaching consequences on validity of RCT results.