Monthly sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine versus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy: a double-blind, randomised, controlled, superiority trial.

Intermittent treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, recommended for prevention of malaria in pregnant women throughout sub-Saharan Africa, is threatened by parasite resistance. We assessed the efficacy and safety of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine as an alternative to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. We did a double-blind, randomised, controlled, superiority trial at one rural site in Uganda with high malaria transmission and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance. HIV-uninfected pregnant women between 12 and 20 weeks gestation were randomly assigned (1:1) to monthly intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. The primary endpoint was the risk of a composite adverse birth outcome defined as low birthweight, preterm birth, or small for gestational age in livebirths. Protective efficacy was defined as 1-prevalence ratio or 1-incidence rate ratio. All analyses were done by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02793622. Between Sept 6, 2016, and May 29, 2017, 782 women were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (n=391) or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=391); 666 (85·2%) women who delivered livebirths were included in the primary analysis. There was no significant difference in the risk of our composite adverse birth outcome between the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine treatment group (54 [16%] of 337 women vs 60 [18%] of 329 women; protective efficacy 12% [95% CI -23 to 37], p=0·45). Both drug regimens were well tolerated, with no significant differences in adverse events between the groups, with the exception of asymptomatic corrected QT interval prolongation, which was significantly higher in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (mean change 13 ms [SD 23]) than in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (mean change 0 ms [SD 23]; p<0·0001). Monthly intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was safe but did not lead to significant improvements in birth outcomes compared with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Kajubi R ，Ochieng T ，Kakuru A ，Jagannathan P ，Nakalembe M ，Ruel T ，Opira B ，Ochokoru H ，Ategeka J ，Nayebare P ，Clark TD ，Havlir DV ，Kamya MR ，Dorsey G ... -  《-》

Intermittent screening and treatment or intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for the control of malaria during pregnancy in western Kenya: an open-lab

Every year, more than 32 million pregnancies in sub-Saharan Africa are at risk of malaria infection and its adverse consequences. The effectiveness of the intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine strategy recommended by WHO is threatened by high levels of parasite resistance. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two alternative strategies: intermittent screening with malaria rapid diagnostic tests and treatment of women who test positive with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, and intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. We did this open-label, three-group, randomised controlled superiority trial at four sites in western Kenya with high malaria transmission and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance. HIV-negative pregnant women between 16 and 32 weeks' gestation were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via computer-generated permuted-block randomisation (block sizes of three, six, and nine), to receive intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, or intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Study participants, study clinic nurses, and the study coordinator were aware of treatment allocation, but allocation was concealed from study investigators, delivery unit nurses, and laboratory staff. The primary outcome was malaria infection at delivery, defined as a composite of peripheral or placental parasitaemia detected by placental histology, microscopy, or rapid diagnostic test. The primary analysis was by modified intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01669941. Between Aug 21, 2012, and June 19, 2014, we randomly assigned 1546 women to receive intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=515), intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (n=516), or intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (n=515); 1368 (88%) women comprised the intention-to-treat population for the primary endpoint. Prevalence of malaria infection at delivery was lower in the intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group than in the intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (15 [3%] of 457 women vs 47 [10%] of 459 women; relative risk 0·32, 95% CI 0·18-0·56; p<0·0001), but not in the intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (57 [13%] of 452 women; 1·23, 0·86-1·77; p=0·26). Compared with intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was associated with a lower incidence of malaria infection during pregnancy (192·0 vs 54·4 events per 100 person-years; incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0·28, 95% CI 0·22-0·36; p<0·0001) and clinical malaria during pregnancy (37·9 vs 6·1 events; 0·16, 0·08-0·33; p<0·0001), whereas intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was associated with a higher incidence of malaria infection (232·0 events; 1·21, 1·03-1·41; p=0·0177) and clinical malaria (53·4 events; 1·41, 1·00-1·98; p=0·0475). We recorded 303 maternal and infant serious adverse events, which were least frequent in the intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group. At current levels of rapid diagnostic test sensitivity, intermittent screening and treatment is not a suitable alternative to intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in the context of high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance and malaria transmission. However, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is a promising alternative drug to replace sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for intermittent preventive treatment. Future studies should investigate the efficacy, safety, operational feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. The Malaria in Pregnancy Consortium, which is funded through a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine.

Desai M ，Gutman J ，L'lanziva A ，Otieno K ，Juma E ，Kariuki S ，Ouma P ，Were V ，Laserson K ，Katana A ，Williamson J ，ter Kuile FO ... -  《-》

Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine for the Prevention of Malaria in Pregnancy.

Kakuru A ，Jagannathan P ，Muhindo MK ，Natureeba P ，Awori P ，Nakalembe M ，Opira B ，Olwoch P ，Ategeka J ，Nayebare P ，Clark TD ，Feeney ME ，Charlebois ED ，Rizzuto G ，Muehlenbachs A ，Havlir DV ，Kamya MR ，Dorsey G ... -  《-》

Effect of monthly intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with and without azithromycin versus monthly sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine on adverse pregnancy outcomes in Africa: a double-blind randomised, partly placebo-controlled tr

Intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is more effective than IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine at reducing malaria infection during pregnancy in areas with high-grade resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine by Plasmodium falciparum in east Africa. We aimed to assess whether IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, alone or combined with azithromycin, can reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. We did an individually randomised, double-blind, three-arm, partly placebo-controlled trial in areas of high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance in Kenya, Malawi, and Tanzania. HIV-negative women with a viable singleton pregnancy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by computer-generated block randomisation, stratified by site and gravidity, to receive monthly IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (500 mg of sulfadoxine and 25 mg of pyrimethamine for 1 day), monthly IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (dosed by weight; three to five tablets containing 40 mg of dihydroartemisinin and 320 mg of piperaquine once daily for 3 consecutive days) plus a single treatment course of placebo, or monthly IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus a single treatment course of azithromycin (two tablets containing 500 mg once daily for 2 consecutive days). Outcome assessors in the delivery units were masked to treatment group. The composite primary endpoint was adverse pregnancy outcome, defined as fetal loss, adverse newborn baby outcomes (small for gestational age, low birthweight, or preterm), or neonatal death. The primary analysis was by modified intention to treat, consisting of all randomised participants with primary endpoint data. Women who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03208179. From March-29, 2018, to July 5, 2019, 4680 women (mean age 25·0 years [SD 6·0]) were enrolled and randomly assigned: 1561 (33%; mean age 24·9 years [SD 6·1]) to the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group, 1561 (33%; mean age 25·1 years [6·1]) to the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group, and 1558 (33%; mean age 24·9 years [6.0]) to the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus azithromycin group. Compared with 335 (23·3%) of 1435 women in the sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group, the primary composite endpoint of adverse pregnancy outcomes was reported more frequently in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group (403 [27·9%] of 1442; risk ratio 1·20, 95% CI 1·06-1·36; p=0·0040) and in the dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus azithromycin group (396 [27·6%] of 1433; 1·16, 1·03-1·32; p=0·017). The incidence of serious adverse events was similar in mothers (sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group 17·7 per 100 person-years, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group 14·8 per 100 person-years, and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus azithromycin group 16·9 per 100 person-years) and infants (sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group 49·2 per 100 person-years, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine group 42·4 per 100 person-years, and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus azithromycin group 47·8 per 100 person-years) across treatment groups. 12 (0·2%) of 6685 sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, 19 (0·3%) of 7014 dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, and 23 (0·3%) of 6849 dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus azithromycin treatment courses were vomited within 30 min. Monthly IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine did not improve pregnancy outcomes, and the addition of a single course of azithromycin did not enhance the effect of monthly IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. Trials that combine sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for IPTp should be considered. European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2, supported by the EU, and the UK Joint-Global-Health-Trials-Scheme of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Medical Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care, Wellcome, and the Bill-&-Melinda-Gates-Foundation.

Madanitsa M ，Barsosio HC ，Minja DTR ，Mtove G ，Kavishe RA ，Dodd J ，Saidi Q ，Onyango ED ，Otieno K ，Wang D ，Ashorn U ，Hill J ，Mukerebe C ，Gesase S ，Msemo OA ，Mwapasa V ，Phiri KS ，Maleta K ，Klein N ，Magnussen P ，Lusingu JPA ，Kariuki S ，Mosha JF ，Alifrangis M ，Hansson H ，Schmiegelow C ，Gutman JR ，Chico RM ，Ter Kuile FO ... -  《-》

Delivery effectiveness of and adherence to intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in pregnancy with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with or without targeted information transfer or sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in western Kenya: a three-armed, pragmatic

High-level resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine threatens the efficacy of WHO-recommended intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with single-dose sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine to prevent malaria. Monthly IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, a 3-day regimen, is an emerging alternative, but this regimen poses potential implementation and adherence challenges. We aimed to assess adherence to a multiday IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine regimen and its delivery effectiveness in routine antenatal care settings in western Kenya. We conducted a pragmatic, three-armed, open-label, cluster-randomised trial in antenatal clinics in 18 health-care facilities (six facilities per group) in Kisumu County and Homa Bay County in western Kenya. Clusters were facilities offering routine antenatal care services provided by trained Ministry of Health staff with 100 or more antenatal clinic attendances per month between July, 2018, and June, 2019. Private or mission hospitals, dispensaries, referral hospitals, and trial sites were excluded. Individuals in their first trimester, living with HIV, or who were not attending a scheduled antenatal clinic visit were excluded. The 18 antenatal clinics were grouped into matched triplets stratified by location and clinics in each matched triplet were randomly assigned to one of the three study groups (1:1:1). Masking was not possible. Two groups were given IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (one group with a targeted information transfer intervention and one group without any additional interventions) and one group was given the standard of care (ie, IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine). The primary endpoint, adherence, was defined as the proportion of participants completing their most recent 3-day IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine regimen. This completion was verified by pill counts during home visits no more than 2 days after participants' 3-day regimens ended. The secondary endpoint, delivery effectiveness, was defined as the proportion of participants who received the correct number of IPTp tablets and correctly repeated dosing instructions (ie, correctly recalled the instructions they received about self-administered dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine doses and the number of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine tablets they had received) at their exit from the antenatal clinic. Individuals receiving treatment for malaria, visiting a clinic for registration only, or interviewed during IPTp drug stock-outs were excluded from analyses. We used generalised linear mixed models to compare endpoints among the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine groups. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04160026, and is complete. 15 facilities (five per group) completed the trial, with 1189 participants having exit interviews (377 in the IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group, 408 in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine only group, and 404 in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus targeted information transfer intervention group) and 586 participants having home visits (267 in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine only group and 319 in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus targeted information transfer intervention group) from Sept 8 to Dec 10, 2020. Relative to the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine only group, adherence was 16% higher in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus targeted information transfer intervention group (266 [83%] of 319 participants vs 196 [73%] of 267 participants; adjusted relative risk [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 1·03-1·31; p=0·0140). Delivery effectiveness in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus targeted information transfer intervention group was not significantly different from that in the IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (352 [87%] of 403 participants vs 335 [89%] of 375 participants; adjusted RR 0·97, 95% CI 0·90-1·05; p=0·4810). However, delivery effectiveness in the IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine only group was significantly lower than in the IPTp with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine group (300 [74%] of 404 participants vs 335 [89%] of 375 participants; 0·84, 0·75-0·95; p=0·0030). Targeted information transfer interventions to health-care providers and pregnant individuals boost antenatal care delivery adherence to a multiday regimen with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2, UK Joint Global Health Trials Scheme of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Wellcome Trust; and Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.

Barsosio HC ，Webster J ，Omiti F ，K'Oloo A ，Odero IA ，Ojuok MA ，Odiwa D ，Omondi B ，Okello E ，Dodd J ，Taegtmeyer M ，Kuile FOT ，Lesosky M ，Kariuki S ，Hill J ... -  《Lancet Global Health》