4.1 Article

Efficacy of chloroquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, mefloquine plus artesunate and artemether plus lumefantrine combination therapies to treat Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.02.007

Keywords

malaria; Plasmodium falciparum; chloroquine; sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine; mefloquine; artesunate; lumefantrine; artemether; Bangladesh

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bangladesh faces growing levels of Plosmodium falciparum resistance to chloroquine (CQ) and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP). Alternative antimalarial therapies, particularly combination regimens, need to be considered. Therefore, the efficacy of three antimalarial combination therapies was assessed in Chittagong Hilt Tracts. A total of 364 P falciparum patients were recruited and randomly assigned to either CQ+SP, mefloquine+artesunate (MQ+AS) or lumefantrine+artemether (Coartem (c)). Results showed that CQ+SP therapy was less effective than the two artemisinin-based combination therapies. The day 42 PCR-corrected efficacy rate was 62.4% for CQ+SP, 100% for MQ+AS and 97.1% for Coartem. Failures occurred at a shorter interval after CQ+SP treatment than after Coartem. The artemisinin-based therapies effectively prevented development of gametocytes, whereas CQ+SP did not. All three therapies were well tolerated, although reports of mild complaints during treatment appeared higher with MQ+AS. We conclude that CQ+SP is not a viable option for replacing CQ monotherapy as first-line P falciparum treatment in this area of Bangladesh. A change to artemisinin-based combination therapy is recommended. Both Coartem and MQ+AS appear to be good options, effective in curing P falciparum malaria and in preventing recrudescences following treatment. (c) 2005 Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available