Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29237461›Full record

SynthesisMalaria journal2017

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatments for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy: methodological challenges.

Makoto Saito, Mary Ellen Gilder, François Nosten, Rose McGready, Philippe J Guérin

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Malaria journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Makoto SaitoWorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network (WWARN), Oxford, UK. makoto.saito@wwarn.org.
Mary Ellen GilderShoklo Malaria Research Unit (SMRU), Mahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Mae Sot, Tak, Thailand.
François NostenCentre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
Rose McGreadyCentre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
Philippe J GuérinWorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network (WWARN), Oxford, UK.
Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit · THShoklo Malaria Research Unit · THUniversity of Oxford · GBWorldwide Veterinary Service · GB

Funding

Gates Foundation OPP1099191
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is no agreed standard method to assess the efficacy of anti-malarials for uncomplicated falciparum in pregnancy despite an increased risk of adverse outcomes for the mother and the fetus. The aim of this review is to present the currently available evidence from both observational and interventional cohort studies on anti-malarial efficacy in pregnancy and summarize the variability of assessment and reporting found in the review process.

methodsEfficacy methodology and assessment of artemisinin-based treatments (ABT) and quinine-based treatments (QBT) were reviewed systematically using seven databases and two clinical trial registries (protocol registration-PROSPERO: CRD42017054808). Pregnant women in all trimesters with parasitologically confirmed uncomplicated falciparum malaria were included irrespective of symptoms. This review attempted to re-calculate proportions of treatment success applying the same definition as the standard WHO methodology for non-pregnant populations. Aggregated data meta-analyses using data from randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments were performed by random effects model.

resultsA total of 48 eligible efficacy studies were identified including 7279 treated Plasmodium falciparum episodes. While polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used in 24 studies for differentiating recurrence, the assessment and reporting of treatment efficacy was heterogeneous. When the same definition could be applied, PCR-corrected treatment failure of ≥ 10% at any time points was observed in 3/30 ABT and 3/7 QBT arms. Ten RCTs compared different combinations of ABT but there was a maximum of two published RCTs with PCR-corrected outcomes for each comparison. Five RCTs compared ABT and QBT. Overall, the risk of treatment failure was significantly lower in ABT than in QBT (risk ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.63), although the actual drug combinations and outcome endpoints were different. First trimester women were included in 12 studies none of which were RCTs of ABT.

conclusionsEfficacy studies in pregnancy are not only limited in number but use varied methodological assessments. In five RCTs with comparable methodology, ABT resulted in higher efficacy than QBT in the second and third trimester of pregnancy. Individual patient data meta-analysis can include data from observational cohort studies and could overcome some of the limitations of the current assessment given the paucity of data in this vulnerable group.

Indexed as

AntimalarialsArtemisininsDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansMalaria, FalciparumPregnancyPregnancy Complications, ParasiticQuinineAntimalarialsArtemisininsQuinineArtemisininEfficacyMalariaMethodologyPregnancyQuinineReview

Identifiers

PMID29237461
PMCPMC5729448
OpenAlexW2771554855

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.