ArticleBMC medicine2015
Maximizing antimalarial efficacy and the importance of dosing strategies.
Article in BMC medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Cross-Sectional Survey on the Malaria Control and Prevention Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Caregivers of Children Under-5 in the Western Area of Sierra Leone.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Adherence to Dihydroartemisinin + Piperaquine Treatment Regimen in Low and High Endemic Areas in Indonesia.Journal of tropical medicine · 2022Article
- Malaria prevalence, knowledge, perception, preventive and treatment behavior among military in Champasak and Attapeu provinces, Lao PDR: a mixed methods study.Tropical medicine and health · 2019Article
- Increasing the Strength and Production of Artemisinin and Its Derivatives.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Ferroquine and its derivatives: new generation of antimalarial agents.European journal of medicinal chemistry · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) are the cornerstone for the treatment of malaria. However, confirmed resistance to artemisinins in South-East Asia, and reports of reduced efficacy of ACTs raise major concerns for malaria treatment and control. Without new drugs to replace artemisinins, it is essential to define dosing strategies that maximize therapeutic efficacy, limit the spread of resistance, and preserve the clinical value of ACTs. It is important to determine the extent to which reduced efficacy of ACTs reflects true resistance versus sub-optimal dosing, and quantify other factors that determine treatment failure. Pooled analyses of individual patient data from multiple clinical trials, by investigators in the Worldwide Antimalarial Resistance Network, have shown high overall efficacy for three widely used ACTs, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-amodiaquine, and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. Analyses also highlight that suboptimal dosing leads to increased risk of treatment failure, especially among children. In the most recent study, an analysis of clinical trials of artesunate-amodiaquine, widely used among children in Africa, revealed a superior efficacy for fixed-dose combination tablets compared to loose non-fixed dose combinations. This highlights the benefits of fixed-dose combinations as a practical strategy for ensuring optimal antimalarial dosing and maximizing efficacy. Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/13/66.
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.