Search

Background: In high transmission settings, most school-aged children harbour malaria parasites without showing symptoms, often leading to anaemia and possibly impaired psychomotor and cognitive abilities. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in school-aged children (IPTsc) living in highly endemic areas., Methods: We did an open-label randomised controlled trial in seven primary schools in northeastern Tanzania. Schoolchildren aged 5-15 years were individually randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, or standard of care (control) using a balanced block design. Drugs were administered by schoolteachers, with supervision from study nurses, at months 0 (baseline), 4, and 8, and were given in line with manufacturer's recommendations with dose based on the child's bodyweight. The primary endpoints were change from baseline in mean haemoglobin concentration at months 12 and 20, and clinical incidence of malaria and prevalence of parasitaemia at months 12 and 20 in the intervention groups versus the control group. The outcome data were collected through longitudinal surveys conducted every 4 months. Data were analysed on the basis of intention to treat (including all randomised participants) and per protocol (comprising children who completed the full 3-day regimen of all three IPTsc treatment rounds as assigned). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03640403)., Findings: Of the 1797 children scheduled for clinical screening, 1566 were enrolled and randomly allocated (526 to receive dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, 527 to receive artesunate-amodiaquine, and 513 to receive standard of care). Due to COVID-19-related school closures, only two schools were visited at month 12 (135 children in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group, 131 in the artesunate-amodiaquine group, and 118 in the control group). At month 12, compared with the control group, the change from baseline in mean haemoglobin concentration was increased by 0·5 g/dL (95% CI 0·2 to 0·8; p<0·0001) in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group and 0·5 g/dL (0·2 to 0·7; p=0·0020) in the artesunate-amodiaquine group in the intention-to-treat analysis (with similar findings in the per protocol analysis). In the same period, in the intention-to-treat analysis, the prevalence of malaria parasitaemia increased from 28·5% (138 of 485 participants) to 33·6% (39 of 116) in the control group, but decreased from 28·0% (139 of 497) to 12·0% (15 of 125) in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (-21·6 percentage points [95% CI -31·9 to -11·3], p=0·0001 vs control at month 12) and from 24·7% (124 of 502) to 16·0% (20 of 125) in the artesunate-amodiaquine group (-17·6 percentage points [-28·4 to -6·9], p=0·0015). The decrease for artesunate-amodiaquine was larger in the per protocol analysis (-25·3 percentage points [-36·3 to -14·2], p<0·0001). The protective effect of IPTsc against malaria parasitaemia was 64% (95% CI 39 to 79; p<0·0001) for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and 52% (23 to 70; p=0·0015) for artesunate-amodiaquine in the intention-to-treat analysis, and was slightly higher on per protocol analysis. The protective effect against clinical malaria at month 12 was 20% (95% CI 9 to 29; p=0·0002) for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and 19% (8 to 28; p=0·0004) for artesunate-amodiaquine. No significant differences in any primary outcomes between the intervention and control groups were noted at month 20. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and artesunate-amodiaquine were associated with a small number of mild adverse events, and there were no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths., Interpretation: IPTsc with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine or artesunate-amodiaquine is a safe and effective approach to reducing malaria parasitaemia, clinical malaria, and related morbidities, and is feasible to implement through programmes delivered by schoolteachers., Funding: Flemish Interuniversity Council (VLIRUOS), EU EDCTP2 programme (MaReCa project), and Global Minds 2019., Translation: For the Swahili translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quinine or alternative artemisinin-based combination treatment (ACT) is the recommended rescue treatment for uncomplicated malaria. However, patients are often re-treated with the same ACT though it is unclear whether this is the most suitable approach. We assessed the efficacy and safety of re-treating malaria patients with uncomplicated failures with the same ACT used for the primary episode, compared with other rescue treatments., Methods: This was a bicentre, open-label, randomised, three-arm phase 3 trial done in Lisungi health centre in DR Congo, and Kazo health centre in Uganda in 2012-14. Children aged 12-60 months with recurrent malaria infection after treatment with the first-line ACT were randomly assigned to either re-treatment with the same first-line ACT, an alternative ACT, which were given for 3 days, or quinine-clindamycin (QnC), which was given for 5-7 days, following a 2:2:1 ratio. Randomisation was done by computer-generated randomisation list in a block design by country. The three treatment groups were assumed to have equivalent efficacy above 90%. Both the research team and parents or guardians were aware of treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with an adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) at day 28, in the per-protocol population. This trial was registered under the numbers NCT01374581 in ClinicalTrials.gov and PACTR201203000351114 in the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry., Findings: From May 22, 2012, to Jan 31, 2014, 571 children were included in the trial. 240 children were randomly assigned to the re-treatment ACT group, 233 to the alternative ACT group, and 98 to the QnC group. 500 children were assessed for the primary outcome. 71 others were not included because they did not complete the follow-up or PCR genotyping result was not conclusive. The ACPR response was similar in the three groups: 91·4% (95% CI 87·5-95·2) for the re-treatment ACT, 91·3% (95% CI 87·4-95·1) for the alternative ACT, and 89·5% (95% CI 83·0-96·0) for QnC. The estimates for rates of malaria recrudescence in the three treatment groups were similar (log-rank test: χ 2 =0·22, p=0·894). Artemether-lumefantrine was better tolerated than QnC (p=0·0005) and artesunate-amodiaquine (p<0·0001) in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. No serious adverse events were observed. The most common adverse events reported in the re-treatment ACT group were anorexia (31 [13%] of 240 patients), asthenia (20 [8%]), coughing (16 [7%]), abnormal behaviour (13 [5%]), and diarrhoea (12 [5%]). Anorexia (13 [6%] of 233 patients) was the most frequently reported adverse event in the alternative ACT group. The most commonly reported adverse events in the QnC group were anorexia (12 [12%] of 98 patients), abnormal behaviour (6 [6%]), asthenia (6 [6%]), and pruritus (5 [5%])., Interpretation: Re-treatment with the same ACT shows similar efficacy as recommended rescue treatments and could be considered for rescue treatment for Plasmodium falciparum malaria. However, the effect of this approach on the selection of resistant strains should be monitored to ensure that re-treatment with the same ACT does not contribute to P falciparum resistance., Funding: Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad-Universitaire Ontwikkelings Samenwerking, European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, and the Belgian Technical Cooperation-Programme d'Etudes et d'Expertises-in the Democratic Republic of Congo., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)