Trial reportThe Journal of infectious diseases2015
A Randomized Trial to Compare the Safety, Tolerability, and Effectiveness of 3 Antimalarial Regimens for the Prevention of Malaria in Nigerian Patients With Sickle Cell Disease.
Trial report in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01319448 (Safety and Tolerability of Bi-monthly Intermittent Preventive Treatment With Mefloquine-Artesunate or Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine Plus Amodiaquine for Prevention of Malaria and Related Complications in Patients With Sickle Cell Anaemia.), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Safety and Tolerability of Bi-monthly Intermittent Preventive Treatment With Mefloquine-Artesunate or Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine Plus Amodiaquine for Prevention of Malaria and Related Complications in Patients With Sickle Cell Anaemia.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Safety and effectiveness of antimalarial therapy in sickle cell disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2018Pooled it
- "I want to help my body": Acceptability of malaria chemoprevention among children with sickle cell anaemia and their caregivers in Malawi and Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Evidence-based interventions for reducing sickle cell disease-associated morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review.SAGE open medicine · 2023Article
- Sickle Cell Disease in Children and Adolescents: A Review of the Historical, Clinical, and Public Health Perspective of Sub-Saharan Africa and Beyond.International journal of pediatrics · 2022Review
- Sickle cell disease and malaria: decreased exposure and asplenia can modulate the risk from Plasmodium falciparum.Malaria journal · 2020Article
- Utilization patterns of malaria chemoprophylaxis among Tanzanian children attending sickle cell clinic in Dar es Salaam tertiary hospitals.Malaria journal · 2019Article
- Sickle Cell Disease Clinical Trials and Phenotypes.Journal of tropical diseases & public health · 2018Article
- Secondhand Smoke Is an Important Modifiable Risk Factor in Sickle Cell Disease: A Review of the Current Literature and Areas for Future Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Review
- Sickle cell disease.BMJ clinical evidence · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMalaria prophylaxis is recommended for persons with sickle cell disease (SCD), but the value of this has been questioned. The aim of this study was to find out whether intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with a fixed-dose combination of mefloquine-artesunate (MQAS) or sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine (SPAQ) was more effective than daily proguanil for malaria prevention in subjects with SCD.
methodsPatients with SCD were randomized to receive daily treatment with proguanil or IPT with either MQAS or SPAQ once every 2 months at routine clinic visits. Patients were followed up for 14 months.
findingsA total of 270 patients with SCD were studied, with 90 in each group. Adherence to the IPT regimens was excellent, but 57% of patients took <75% of their daily doses of proguanil. IPT was well tolerated; the most common side effects were vomiting and abdominal pain. Protective efficacy against malaria, compared with daily proguanil, was 61% (95% confidence interval, 3%-84%) for MQAS and 36% (40%-70%) for SPAQ. There were fewer outpatient illness episodes in children who received IPT than those who received proguanil.
conclusionsIPT with MQAS administered to patients with SCD during routine clinic visits was well tolerated and more effective in preventing malaria than daily prophylaxis with proguanil. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01319448 and ISRCTN46158146.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.