Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24667662›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2014

Efficacy of two versus three-day regimens of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for uncomplicated malaria in military personnel in northern Cambodia: an open-label randomized trial.

Chanthap Lon, Jessica E Manning, Pattaraporn Vanachayangkul, Mary So, Darapiseth Sea, Youry Se, Panita Gosi, Charlotte Lanteri, Suwanna Chaorattanakawee, Sabaithip Sriwichai and 15 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01280162 (An Active Malaria Epidemiology Cohort Study With Evaluation of a 2 Day Versus 3 Day Treatment Regimen of Dihydroartemisinin), which is not on this map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT01280162 nacompletednot on this map

An Active Malaria Epidemiology Cohort Study With Evaluation of a 2 Day Versus 3 Day Treatment Regimen of Dihydroartemisinin (DHA)-Piperaquine for Patients With Uncomplicated Malaria

TypeinterventionalSponsorArmed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, ThailandRan2010 to 2012Enrolled222ConditionsMalariaArmsDihydroartemisinin piperaquine
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Artemisinin-resistant malaria.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Dynamic Classification ofJournal of data science : JDS · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Malaria in Cambodia: A Retrospective Analysis of a Changing Epidemiology 2006-2019.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Unsymmetrical Bisquinolines with High Potency againstMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    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

25 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Chanthap LonUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand; US Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Jessica E ManningUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Pattaraporn VanachayangkulUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Mary SoRoyal Cambodian Armed Forces, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Darapiseth SeaNational Center for Parasitology, Entomology and Malaria Control, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Youry SeUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand; US Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Panita GosiUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Charlotte LanteriUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Suwanna ChaorattanakaweeUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sabaithip SriwichaiUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Soklyda ChannUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Worachet KuntawunginnUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nillawan BuathongUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Samon NouUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Douglas S WalshUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Stuart D TynerUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jonathan J JulianoDepartment of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Jessica LinDepartment of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Michele SpringUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Delia BethellUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jaranit KaewkungwalCenter of Excellence for Biomedical and Public Health Informatics (BIOPHICS), Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Douglas TangFast Track Biologics, Potomac, Maryland, United States of America.
Char Meng ChuorNational Center for Parasitology, Entomology and Malaria Control, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Prom SatharathRoyal Cambodian Armed Forces, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
David SaundersUS Army Medical Component, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Immunology & Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand.
Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Science · THCambodia National Malaria Center · KHCambodia-Oxford Medical Research Unit · KHUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USFast Track Drugs and Biologics · USMahidol University · TH

Funding

Genetic determinants of Plasmodium vivax relapseK08AI110651 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LIN, JESSICA · 2014 to 2018
$869k
NIAID NIH HHS K08 AI110651
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEmerging antimalarial drug resistance in mobile populations remains a significant public health concern. We compared two regimens of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in military and civilians on the Thai-Cambodian border to evaluate national treatment policy.

methodsEfficacy and safety of two and three-day regimens of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine were compared as a nested open-label evaluation within a malaria cohort study in 222 otherwise healthy volunteers (18% malaria-infected at baseline). The first 80 volunteers with slide-confirmed Plasmodium falciparum or vivax malaria were randomized 1:1 to receive either regimen (total dose 360 mg dihydroartemisinin and 2880 mg piperaquine) and followed weekly for up to 6 months. The primary endpoint was malaria recurrence by day 42. Volunteers with vivax infection received primaquine at study discharge with six months follow-up.

resultsEighty patients (60 vivax, 15 falciparum, and 5 mixed) were randomized to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. Intention-to-treat all-species efficacy at Day 42 was 85% for the two-day regimen (95% CI 69-94) and 90% for the three-day regimen (95% CI 75-97). PCR-adjusted falciparum efficacy was 75% in both groups with nearly half (45%) still parasitemic at Day 3. Plasma piperaquine levels were comparable to prior published reports, but on the day of recrudescence were below measurable in vitro piperaquine IC50 levels in all falciparum treatment failures.

conclusionsIn the brief period since introduction of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, there is early evidence suggesting declining efficacy relative to previous reports. Parasite IC50 levels in excess of plasma piperaquine levels seen only in treatment failures raises concern for clinically significant piperaquine resistance in Cambodia. These findings warrant improved monitoring of clinical outcomes and follow-up, given few available alternative drugs.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01280162.

Indexed as

Military PersonnelAdultAntimalarialsArtemisininsCambodiaDrug Administration ScheduleDrug Resistance, MultipleHumansMalaria, FalciparumMalaria, VivaxMaleModels, BiologicalPiperazinesQuinolinesRecurrenceAntimalarialsArtemisininsartenimolpiperaquinePiperazinesQuinolines

Identifiers

PMID24667662
PMCPMC3965521
OpenAlexW2040159048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.