Artesunate + amodiaquine versus artemether-lumefantrine for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the Colombian Pacific region: a noninferiority trial / Artesunato + amodiaquina versus artemether-limefantrina para o tratamento da malaria não complicada por Plamodium falciparum no Pacifico Colombiano: um estudo de não inferioridade

INTRODUCTION: In Colombia, there are no published studies for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria comparing artemisinin combination therapies. Hence, it is intended to demonstrate the non-inferior efficacy/safety profiles of artesunate + amodiaquine versus artemether-lumefantrine treatments. METHODS: A randomized, controlled, open-label, noninferiority (Δ≤5%) clinical trial was performed in adults with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria using the 28‑day World Health Organization validated design/definitions. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either oral artesunate + amodiaquine or artemether-lumefantrine. The primary efficacy endpoint: adequate clinical and parasitological response; secondary endpoints: - treatment failures defined per the World Health Organization. Safety: assessed through adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients was included in each group: zero censored observations. Mean (95%CI - Confidence interval) adequate clinical and parasitological response rates: 100% for artesunate + amodiaquine and 99% for artemether-lumefantrine; the noninferiority criteria was met (Δ=1.7%). There was one late parasitological therapeutic failure (1%; artemether-lumefantrine group), typified by polymerase chain reaction as the MAD20 MSP1 allele. The fever clearance time (artesunate + amodiaquine group) was significantly shorter (p=0.002). Respectively, abdominal pain for artesunate + amodiaquine and artemether-lumefantrine was 1.9% and 3.8% at baseline (p=0.68) and 1% and 13.3% after treatment (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria treatment with artesunate + amodiaquine is noninferior to the artemether-lumefantrine standard treatment. The efficacy/safety profiles grant further studies in this and similar populations.

INTRODUÇÃO: Na Colômbia não existem estudos publicados sobre o tratamento da malária não complicada por Plasmodium falciparum comparando as terapias combinadas com artemisinina. Destarte, quer se demonstrar a não inferioridade dos perfis de eficácia/segurança dos tratamentos com artesunato+amodiaquina versus artemeter-lumefantrina. MÉTODOS: Foi realizado um estudo clínico de não inferioridade (∆≤5%), aleatório, controlado, aberto, em adultos com malária não complicada por P. falciparum usando o desenho validado de 28 dias e os desenhos validados/definidos pela Organização Mundial da Saúde. Os pacientes foram aleatorizados (1:1) para ambos artesunato+amodiaquina ou artemeter-lumefantrina orais. Critérios primários de eficácia: resposta clínica e parasitológica adequada; Criterios de eficácia secundários: as falhas de tratamento definidos pela Organização Mundial da Saúde. A segurança: avaliada através de eventos adversos. RESULTADOS: Foram incursos 105 pacientes em cada grupo: zero observações censuradas. As taxas médias da resposta clínica e parasitológica adequada (95% IC - intervalo de confiança): 100% para artesunato+amodiaquina e 99% para artemeter-lumefantrina; atingiu-se o critério de não inferioridade (∆=1.7%). Houve uma falha terapêutica parasitológica tardia (1%; grupo artemeter-lumefantrina), caracterizada mediante reação em cadeia da polimerase como o alelo MAD20 MSP1. Tempo de remissão da febre (grupo artesunato+amodiaquina), foi significativamente mais curto (p=0.002). Dor abdominal, para artesunato+amodiaquina e artemeter-lumefantrina, respectivamente, 1.9% e 3.8% (p=0.68) na linha de base, 1% e 13.3% pós-tratamento (p<0.001). CONCLUSÕES: O tratamento com artesunato+amodiaquina da malária não complicada por P. falciparum é não inferior ao tratamento normal com artemeter-lumefantrina. Os perfis de eficácia/segurança justificam estudos adicionais nesta e outras populações semelhantes.

[Synthesis and evaluation of 4-fleuroamodiaquine, a novel antimalarial drug against sensitive and resistant strains of plasmodium falciparum]

Resistance to chloroquine [CQ] in Plasmodium falciparum malaria has become a major health concern in the developing countries. This problem has prompted investigators for finding alternative antimalarials that may be effective against resistant strains. Amodiaquine [AQ] is an antimalarial which is effective against many choloroquine-resistant strains of P. falciparum. However, clinical use of AQ has severely been restricted because of its hepatotoxicity and agranulocytosis side effects. The aim of this study was to design and examine the effects of new analogues of amodiaquine. A successful four-step synthesis of a new series of 4-fluoro analogues was designed and applied to the synthesis of an array of 10 analogues. Antimalarial activity of these agents was assessed against chloroquine-resistant [TM6] and sensitive strains [3D7] of P. falciparum. Several analogues have shown potent antimalarial activity against sensitive 3D7 strain of the parasite. The 6h analogue was superior to the pyrollidino analogue 6b against all of the strains examined. The N-tert butyl analogue 6b was potent against choloroquine resistant strains, though it was not quite as active as amodiaquine [AQ] against both chloroquine sensitive and resistant parasites. From the different analogues made, it was shown that the analogue 6h was more potent than the others. However, this analogue has equal or slightly less potent than amodiaquine and chloroquine against P. falciparum. Further studies on the metabolism and pharmacokinetics of 6h are recommended

Biological and Haematological Safety Profile of Oral Amodiaquine and Chloroquine in Healthy Volunteers with or without Plasmodium falciparum Infection in Northeast Tanzania

Amodiaquine (AQ); an effective antimalarial drug for uncomplicated malaria; has been greatly restricted after cases of life-threatening agranulocytosis and hepatic toxicity during prophylactic use. We conducted a hospital based open-label randomised clinical trial in 40 indigenous semi-immune healthy adult male volunteers with and without malaria parasites. The objective was to collect data on biological and haematological safety; tolerability; and parasitological efficacy to serve as baseline in the evaluation of the effectiveness of AQ preventive intermittent treatment against malaria morbidity in infants. Volunteers were stratified according to parasitaemia status and randomly assigned 20 participants each arm to three days treatment with either AQ or chloroquine (CQ). The level of difference of selected haematological and hepatological values pre-and post-trial were marginal and within the normal limits. Clinical adverse effects mostly mild and transient were noticed in 33.3CQ treated-aparasitaemic; 23.8of CQ treated-parasitaemic; 28.6of AQ-treated parasitaemic and 14.3of aparasitaemic receiving AQ. Amodiaquine attained 100parasitological clearance rate versus 70in CQ-treated volunteers. The findings indicate that there was no agranulocytosis or hepatic toxicity suggesting that AQ may pose no public health risk in its wide therapeutic dosage uses. Larger studies are needed to exclude rare adverse effects

La quinina y sus congéneres. Interacciones y reacciones adversas de importancia clínica / Quinine and its congenerous. Clinically important interactions and adverse drug reactions

Muy a pesar de la existencia de variados grupos de fármacos antimaláricos, en muchas partes del mundo continúan siendo fármacos de primera línea para el tratamiento de la malaria o paludismo la Quinina y sus congéneres. Dado que esta patología es capaz de afectar al ser humano expuesto en cualquier etapa de la vida, la posibilidad de interacción de los fármacos antimaláricos conjuntamente con cualquier otro tipo de medicación, ya por la presencia en el paciente afecto de malaria, de alguna otra patología, sea esta de carácter agudo o crónico, nos motivaron a la ejecución de la presente revisión, sumándole a ello además variadas reacciones adversas de importancia clínica. En lo que respecta al embarazo y lactancia podemos considerar que, en general, la mayoría de estos antimaláricos son seguros y eficaces durante el embarazo, no constituyendo este estado fisiológico una contraindicación absoluta para su empleo, sin embargo, debe valorarse en cada caso la relación riesgo/beneficio.