Efficacy and safety of albendazole alone versus albendazole in combination with ivermectin for the treatment of Trichuris trichiura infections: An open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial in south-western Uganda.

Trichuris trichiura, a soil-transmitted helminth (STH), often persists after a single dose of anthelminthic treatment. To overcome limited efficacy against T. trichiura of benzimidazoles (albendazole or mebendazole), the primary drugs used in mass drug administration (MDA) campaigns, the World Health Organization endorses the use of a combination of ivermectin and albendazole as a more effective treatment to be used for preventive chemotherapy. Given observed considerable differences in efficacy of the combination therapy over albendazole monotherapy between different settings, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of the combination before introducing it on a larger scale. This open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial in two Ugandan primary schools enrolled eligible 6- to 12-year-olds positive for T. trichiura. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either a single dose of albendazole alone or co-administered albendazole and ivermectin. Adverse events were monitored at three and 24h post-treatment. Follow-up samples were collected 14 to 21 days post-treatment for efficacy assessment. The combination of albendazole with ivermectin showed superior efficacy against T. trichiura compared to albendazole alone, both in terms of cure rates (31.3% versus 12.3%, difference 18.9%-points, 95% CI 6.2-31.2, p < 0.004) and in terms of egg reduction rates (ERRs; 91.4% versus 52.7%). A higher cure rate against co-infecting Ascaris lumbricoides was observed in the combination compared to the albendazole monotherapy arm (100% versus 83.9%). Both therapies showed an excellent safety profile with few and only mild and transient treatment emergent adverse events observed in the albendazole monotherapy and albendazole plus ivermectin arm (total of 22 and 19 events, respectively). In conclusion, the efficacy of the combination therapy against T. trichiura in Uganda is superior to that of albendazole alone. Given the high ERRs observed, albendazole-ivermectin might aid in eliminating morbidity, an important target of STH control programs. Trial registration (clinicaltrials.gov): NCT06037876.

Palmeirim MS ，Hürlimann E ，Beinamaryo P ，Kyarisiima H ，Nabatte B ，Hattendorf J ，Steinmann P ，Keiser J ... -  《PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases》

Egg excretion patterns of soil-transmitted helminth infections in humans following albendazole-ivermectin and albendazole treatment.

Control efforts of soil-transmitted helminthiases rely primarily on large scale administration of anthelminthic drugs. The assessment of drug efficacies and understanding of drug behavior is pivotal to the evaluation of treatment successes, both in preventive chemo-therapy programs as well as in research of novel treatment options. The current WHO guidelines recommend an interval of 14-21 days between the treatment and follow-up, yet no in-depth analysis of egg excretion patterns of Trichuris trichiura after treatment has been conducted to date. Within the framework of a multi-country trial to assess the efficacy and safety of albendazole-ivermectin combination therapy vs albendazole monotherapy against T. trichiura infections, we conducted a study collecting daily stool samples over the period of 28 days post-treatment in 87 participants in Pak Khan, Lao PDR. Egg counts were derived by duplicate Kato-Katz on-site for T. trichiura, hookworm and Ascaris lumbricoides and stool sample aliquots were subsequently analyzed by qPCR for the detection of T. trichiura infections. Sensitivity and specificity was calculated for each day separately using data derived by Kato-Katz to determine the optimal timepoint at which to assess drug efficacy. Egg excretion patterns varied across treatment arms. For T. trichiura, only the albendazole-ivermectin treatment led to a considerable reduction in mean egg counts, whereas both treatments reduced hookworm egg counts and A. lumbricoides were cleared in all participants after day 7. For T. trichiura, we found sensitivity to be highest at days 18 and 22 when using egg counts as outcome and days 19 and 24 when using qPCR. Specificity was high (>0.9) from day 14 onwards. For hookworm, the highest sensitivity and specificity were found at days 17 and 25, respectively. Based on our study, the ideal time period to assess drug efficacy for soil-transmitted helminth infections would be between day 18 and 24. The current WHO recommendation of 14 to 21 days is likely to yield acceptable outcome measures for soil-transmitted helminth infections. NCT03527732.

Welsche S ，Schneeberger PHH ，Hattendorf J ，Sayasone S ，Hürlimann E ，Keiser J ... -  《PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases》

A comparison of the diagnostic capability of Kato-Katz and real-time PCR for the assessment of treatment efficacy of ivermectin and albendazole combination against T. trichiura infections.

Trichuris trichiura is humans' second most prevalent soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infection after Ascaris lumbricoides, affecting approximately 460 million people worldwide. Despite its sub-optimal sensitivity, especially in low prevalence and infection intensity settings, the modified Kato-Katz (K-K) is still recommended as a diagnostic method by the World Health organization (WHO) guidelines. Within a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comprising four treatment arms with two different anthelmintics, the present study reports an important secondary research objective to determine the diagnostic agreement between K-K and real-time PCR evaluating treatment efficacy against T. trichiura. The parasitological results were analyzed, including cure rates (CR) of a subgroup of 94 participants positive at baseline for T. trichiura eggs for both techniques. The single-dose albendazole (ALB) arm resulted in significantly lower CRs than experimental arms of albendazole/ivermectin (ALB/IVM) combinations. The overall diagnostic agreement between both techniques was 88.7% [κ = 0.8 (P<0.001)]. Concordance between eggs per gram and Ct values was moderate, with the discordance source likely stemming from lighter infection intensities. These findings indicate that real-time PCR is a suitable alternative for CR estimation in helminthiasis clinical trials. It also highlights the need to identify the most accurate diagnostic tools for RCTs, that would benefit from guiding principles to achieve harmonization across studies and are not necessarily the same as those used for epidemiological surveys. Clinical Trials.gov (NCT04041453).

Matamoros G ，Sanchez A ，Cimino R ，Krolewiecki A ，Mejia R ... -  《PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases》

Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac disease: systematic review and economic modelling.

Elwenspoek MM ，Thom H ，Sheppard AL ，Keeney E ，O'Donnell R ，Jackson J ，Roadevin C ，Dawson S ，Lane D ，Stubbs J ，Everitt H ，Watson JC ，Hay AD ，Gillett P ，Robins G ，Jones HE ，Mallett S ，Whiting PF ... -  《-》

Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.

Survival estimation for patients with symptomatic skeletal metastases ideally should be made before a type of local treatment has already been determined. Currently available survival prediction tools, however, were generated using data from patients treated either operatively or with local radiation alone, raising concerns about whether they would generalize well to all patients presenting for assessment. The Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine-learning algorithm (SORG-MLA), trained with institution-based data of surgically treated patients, and the Metastases location, Elderly, Tumor primary, Sex, Sickness/comorbidity, and Site of radiotherapy model (METSSS), trained with registry-based data of patients treated with radiotherapy alone, are two of the most recently developed survival prediction models, but they have not been tested on patients whose local treatment strategy is not yet decided. (1) Which of these two survival prediction models performed better in a mixed cohort made up both of patients who received local treatment with surgery followed by radiotherapy and who had radiation alone for symptomatic bone metastases? (2) Which model performed better among patients whose local treatment consisted of only palliative radiotherapy? (3) Are laboratory values used by SORG-MLA, which are not included in METSSS, independently associated with survival after controlling for predictions made by METSSS? Between 2010 and 2018, we provided local treatment for 2113 adult patients with skeletal metastases in the extremities at an urban tertiary referral academic medical center using one of two strategies: (1) surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy or (2) palliative radiotherapy alone. Every patient's survivorship status was ascertained either by their medical records or the national death registry from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration. After applying a priori designated exclusion criteria, 91% (1920) were analyzed here. Among them, 48% (920) of the patients were female, and the median (IQR) age was 62 years (53 to 70 years). Lung was the most common primary tumor site (41% [782]), and 59% (1128) of patients had other skeletal metastases in addition to the treated lesion(s). In general, the indications for surgery were the presence of a complete pathologic fracture or an impending pathologic fracture, defined as having a Mirels score of ≥ 9, in patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of less than or equal to IV and who were considered fit for surgery. The indications for radiotherapy were relief of pain, local tumor control, prevention of skeletal-related events, and any combination of the above. In all, 84% (1610) of the patients received palliative radiotherapy alone as local treatment for the target lesion(s), and 16% (310) underwent surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy. Neither METSSS nor SORG-MLA was used at the point of care to aid clinical decision-making during the treatment period. Survival was retrospectively estimated by these two models to test their potential for providing survival probabilities. We first compared SORG to METSSS in the entire population. Then, we repeated the comparison in patients who received local treatment with palliative radiation alone. We assessed model performance by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration analysis, Brier score, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The AUROC measures discrimination, which is the ability to distinguish patients with the event of interest (such as death at a particular time point) from those without. AUROC typically ranges from 0.5 to 1.0, with 0.5 indicating random guessing and 1.0 a perfect prediction, and in general, an AUROC of ≥ 0.7 indicates adequate discrimination for clinical use. Calibration refers to the agreement between the predicted outcomes (in this case, survival probabilities) and the actual outcomes, with a perfect calibration curve having an intercept of 0 and a slope of 1. A positive intercept indicates that the actual survival is generally underestimated by the prediction model, and a negative intercept suggests the opposite (overestimation). When comparing models, an intercept closer to 0 typically indicates better calibration. Calibration can also be summarized as log(O:E), the logarithm scale of the ratio of observed (O) to expected (E) survivors. A log(O:E) > 0 signals an underestimation (the observed survival is greater than the predicted survival); and a log(O:E) < 0 indicates the opposite (the observed survival is lower than the predicted survival). A model with a log(O:E) closer to 0 is generally considered better calibrated. The Brier score is the mean squared difference between the model predictions and the observed outcomes, and it ranges from 0 (best prediction) to 1 (worst prediction). The Brier score captures both discrimination and calibration, and it is considered a measure of overall model performance. In Brier score analysis, the "null model" assigns a predicted probability equal to the prevalence of the outcome and represents a model that adds no new information. A prediction model should achieve a Brier score at least lower than the null-model Brier score to be considered as useful. The DCA was developed as a method to determine whether using a model to inform treatment decisions would do more good than harm. It plots the net benefit of making decisions based on the model's predictions across all possible risk thresholds (or cost-to-benefit ratios) in relation to the two default strategies of treating all or no patients. The care provider can decide on an acceptable risk threshold for the proposed treatment in an individual and assess the corresponding net benefit to determine whether consulting with the model is superior to adopting the default strategies. Finally, we examined whether laboratory data, which were not included in the METSSS model, would have been independently associated with survival after controlling for the METSSS model's predictions by using the multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Between the two models, only SORG-MLA achieved adequate discrimination (an AUROC of > 0.7) in the entire cohort (of patients treated operatively or with radiation alone) and in the subgroup of patients treated with palliative radiotherapy alone. SORG-MLA outperformed METSSS by a wide margin on discrimination, calibration, and Brier score analyses in not only the entire cohort but also the subgroup of patients whose local treatment consisted of radiotherapy alone. In both the entire cohort and the subgroup, DCA demonstrated that SORG-MLA provided more net benefit compared with the two default strategies (of treating all or no patients) and compared with METSSS when risk thresholds ranged from 0.2 to 0.9 at both 90 days and 1 year, indicating that using SORG-MLA as a decision-making aid was beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting for treatment was 0.2 to 0.9. Higher albumin, lower alkaline phosphatase, lower calcium, higher hemoglobin, lower international normalized ratio, higher lymphocytes, lower neutrophils, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lower platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, higher sodium, and lower white blood cells were independently associated with better 1-year and overall survival after adjusting for the predictions made by METSSS. Based on these discoveries, clinicians might choose to consult SORG-MLA instead of METSSS for survival estimation in patients with long-bone metastases presenting for evaluation of local treatment. Basing a treatment decision on the predictions of SORG-MLA could be beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting to undergo a particular treatment strategy ranged from 0.2 to 0.9. Future studies might investigate relevant laboratory items when constructing or refining a survival estimation model because these data demonstrated prognostic value independent of the predictions of the METSSS model, and future studies might also seek to keep these models up to date using data from diverse, contemporary patients undergoing both modern operative and nonoperative treatments. Level III, diagnostic study.

Lee CC ，Chen CW ，Yen HK ，Lin YP ，Lai CY ，Wang JL ，Groot OQ ，Janssen SJ ，Schwab JH ，Hsu FM ，Lin WH ... -  《-》