Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28558061›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2017

Low versus high dose of antimony for American cutaneous leishmaniasis: A randomized controlled blind non-inferiority trial in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Mauricio Naoto Saheki, Marcelo Rosandiski Lyra, Sandro Javier Bedoya-Pacheco, Liliane de Fátima Antônio, Maria Inês Fernandes Pimentel, Mariza de Matos Salgueiro, Érica de Camargo Ferreira E Vasconcellos, Sonia Regina Lambert Passos, Ginelza Peres Lima Dos Santos, Madelon Novato Ribeiro and 6 more

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

Trial report in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01301924 (Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT01301924 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis: Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis

TypeinterventionalSponsorOswaldo Cruz FoundationRan2008 to 2017Enrolled72ConditionsCutaneous LeishmaniasisArmsMeglumine antimoniate
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. ThePathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Clinical Presentation and Response to Therapy in Children with Cutaneous Leishmaniasis.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mauricio Naoto SahekiLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0951-2849
Marcelo Rosandiski LyraLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Sandro Javier Bedoya-PachecoLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Liliane de Fátima AntônioLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Maria Inês Fernandes PimentelLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Mariza de Matos SalgueiroLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Érica de Camargo Ferreira E VasconcellosLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Sonia Regina Lambert PassosClinical Epidemiology Laboratory, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Ginelza Peres Lima Dos SantosLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Madelon Novato RibeiroLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Aline FagundesLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Maria de Fátima MadeiraLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Eliame Mouta-ConfortLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Mauro Célio de Almeida MarzochiLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Cláudia Maria Valete-RosalinoLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Armando de Oliveira SchubachLaboratory for Leishmaniasis Surveillance, Evandro Chagas National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz · BREscola Nacional de Saúde Pública · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough high dose of antimony is the mainstay for treatment of American cutaneous leishmaniasis (ACL), ongoing major concerns remain over its toxicity. Whether or not low dose antimony regimens provide non-inferior effectiveness and lower toxicity has long been a question of dispute.

methodsA single-blind, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing high dose with low dose of antimony in subjects with ACL treated at a referral center in Rio de Janeiro, an endemic area of Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis transmission. The primary outcome was clinical cure at 360 days of follow-up in the modified-intention-to-treat (mITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. Non-inferiority margin was 15%. Secondary objectives included occurrence of epithelialization, adverse events and drug discontinuations. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01301924.

resultsOverall, 72 patients were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment arms during October 2008 to July 2014. In mITT, clinical cure was observed in 77.8% of subjects in the low dose antimony group and 94.4% in the high dose antimony group after one series of treatment (risk difference 16.7%; 90% CI, 3.7-29.7). The results were confirmed in PP analysis, with 77.8% of subjects with clinical cure in the low dose antimony group and 97.1% in the high dose antimony group (risk difference 19.4%; 90% CI, 7.1-31.7). The upper limit of the confidence interval exceeded the 15% threshold and was also above zero supporting the hypothesis that low dose is inferior to high dose of antimony after one series of treatment. Nevertheless, more major adverse events, a greater number of adverse events and major adverse events per subject, and more drug discontinuations were observed in the high dose antimony group (all p<0.05). Interestingly, of all the subjects who were originally allocated to the low dose antimony group and were followed up after clinical failure, 85.7% achieved cure after a further treatment with local therapy or low dose of antimony.

conclusionsCompared with high dose, low dose of antimony was inferior at the pre-specified margin after one series of treatment of ACL, but was associated with a significantly lower toxicity. While high dose of antimony should remain the standard treatment for ACL, low dose antimony treatment might be preferred when toxicity is a primary concern.

Indexed as

BrazilDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansLeishmaniasis, CutaneousMeglumineMeglumine AntimoniateOrganometallic CompoundsMeglumineMeglumine AntimoniateOrganometallic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID28558061
PMCPMC5448803
OpenAlexW2616887559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.