Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17631681›Full record

Trial reportMalaria journal2007

A comparative study on the efficacy of artesunate plus sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine versus artemether-lumefantrine in eastern Sudan.

Ebtihal A Mukhtar, Nahla B Gadalla, Salah-Eldin G El-Zaki, Izdihar Mukhtar, Fathi A Mansour, Ahmed Babiker, Badria B El-Sayed

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Malaria journal, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Artemisinin-based combination therapy for treating uncomplicated malaria.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ebtihal A MukhtarTropical Medicine Research Institute, Khartoum, Sudan. ebtihalalassam@hotmail.com <ebtihalalassam@hotmail.com>
Nahla B Gadalla
Salah-Eldin G El-Zaki
Izdihar Mukhtar
Fathi A Mansour
Ahmed Babiker
Badria B El-Sayed
Khartoum International Institute for Arabic Languague · SD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA combination of artesunate (AS) plus sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine (SP) as first-line and artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as second-line treatment are currently recommended against uncomplicated P. falciparum infection in Sudan. However, there is limited information on the efficacy of ACTs in the country and only one report of PCR-corrected results for AS/SP only.

methodsThe WHO protocol for the assessment of antimalarial drug efficacy for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria was employed. Artesunate plus sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine (AS/SP) was compared to artemether-lumefantrine (AL) in a 28-day follow up. Samples that were classified as early treatment failure (ETF), late treatment failure (LCF) or late parasitological failure (LPF) were genotyped for msp-1 and msp-2 genes to differentiate recrudescence from reinfection.

resultsA total of 178 patients were screened and 160 met the enrollment criteria and were recruited to the study of which 157 (98.1%) completed the follow up and had an analysed treatment outcome. On the AS/SP arm, three (0.038%) patients were lost during the follow-up, two on day 1 and one on day 7, and 77 (96.3) completed the study, while all 80 (100%) patients completed the follow up in the AL arm. In the per protocol analysis for AS/SP the treatment outcome for patients who completed the follow-up were as follows: adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR); 84.4% ETF; 1.3%, LCF; 3.9%, (LPF); 10.4%. For the AL arm the out come was as follows, ACPR; 90%, ETF; 0%, LCF; 6.3% and LPF; 3.8%. However, when PCR-corrected, 6.5% (5/77) of patients treated with AS/SP maintained parasites from their primary infection, while (7/80) in the AL group maintained their initial parasite genotype. Therefore, PCR-corrected efficacy was 93.5% in the AS/SP treated group and for AL it was 91.3%.

conclusionBoth AS/SP and AL are highly effective for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in eastern Sudan. However, AS/SP appears to have a slightly higher efficacy than AL, this may be due to patient compliance with the repeated dose rather than drug efficacy.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnimalsAntigens, ProtozoanAntimalarialsArtemether, Lumefantrine Drug CombinationArtemisininsArtesunateDrug CombinationsDrug Therapy, CombinationEthanolaminesFemaleFluorenesGenotypeHumansMalariaAntigens, ProtozoanAntimalarialsArtemether, Lumefantrine Drug CombinationArtemisininsArtesunateDrug CombinationsEthanolaminesfanasil, pyrimethamine drug combinationFluorenesMerozoite Surface Protein 1merozoite surface protein 2, PlasmodiumProtozoan ProteinsPyrimethamineSesquiterpenesSulfadoxine

Identifiers

PMID17631681
PMCPMC1940006
OpenAlexW2137451577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.