ArticleMalaria journal2018
A survey on outcomes of accidental atovaquone-proguanil exposure in pregnancy.
Article in Malaria journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The safety of atovaquone-proguanil for the prevention and treatment of malaria in pregnancy: A systematic review.Travel medicine and infectious diseasePooled it
- Uridine Prevents Negative Effects of OXPHOS Xenobiotics on Dopaminergic Neuronal Differentiation.Cells · 2019Article
- Safety of atovaquone-proguanil during pregnancy.Journal of travel medicine · 2019Article
- Atovaquone Inhibits Arbovirus Replication through the Depletion of Intracellular Nucleotides.Journal of virology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalaria chemoprophylaxis options in pregnancy are limited, and atovaquone-proguanil (AP) is not recommended because of insufficient safety evidence. An anonymous, internet-based survey was disseminated to describe outcomes of pregnancies accidentally exposed to AP. Outcomes of interest included miscarriage (defined as pregnancy loss before 20 weeks), stillbirth (defined as pregnancy loss at or after 20 weeks), preterm birth or live birth prior to 37 weeks, and the presence of congenital anomalies.
resultsA total of 487 women responded and reported on 822 pregnancies. Of the 807 pregnancies with information available on exposure and outcomes, 10 (1.2%) had atovaquone-proguanil exposure, all in the first trimester, and all resulted in term births with no birth defects.
conclusionsUse of an anti-malarial not recommended in pregnancy is likely to occur before the woman knows of her pregnancy. This study adds to the limited evidence of the safety of AP in pregnancy. Further study on use of AP in pregnancy should be a high priority, as an alternative option for the prevention of malaria in pregnancy in non-immune travellers is urgently needed.
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.