Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30726224›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2019

Adherence to intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in Papua New Guinean infants: A pharmacological study alongside the randomized controlled trial.

Oriane Sottas, Monia Guidi, Benjamin Thieffry, Marie Schneider, Laurent Décosterd, Ivo Mueller, Blaise Genton, Chantal Csajka, Nicolas Senn

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Oriane SottasDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Monia GuidiService of Clinical Pharmacology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Benjamin ThieffryService of Clinical Pharmacology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Marie SchneiderDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7557-9278
Laurent DécosterdService of Clinical Pharmacology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Ivo MuellerWalter and Eliza Hall Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Blaise GentonDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Chantal CsajkaService of Clinical Pharmacology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nicolas SennDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Lausanne, Switzerland.
University of Geneva · CHSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CHUniversity of Lausanne · CHWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe intermittent preventive treatment in infants (IPTi) trial that took place in Papua New Guinea showed an overall reduction of 29% of the risk of malaria when delivering single-dose sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) associated to 3 days of amodiaquine (AQ) every three months to children during the first year of life. The aim of the present study was to assess if the last two doses of AQ were truly administered as prescribed by the parents at home based on drug level measurement and PK modelling, which is a good proxy of medication adherence. It provides also important information to discuss the efficacy of the intervention and on feasibility of self-administered preventive malaria treatment. METHODS AND

findingsDuring the three-arm randomized double-blinded IPTi trial, each child was prescribed one dose of SP (day 0) and 3 doses of either AQ or artesunate (AS) at day 0, 1 & 2 adjusted to weight or placebo. Treatments were given at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of age. The first day of treatment was delivered by nursing staff (initiation under directly observed treatment (DOT)) and the two last doses of AQ or AS by parents at home without supervision. For this cross-sectional study, 206 consecutive children already involved in the IPTi trial were enrolled over a 2-month period. At the time of the survey, allocation of the children to one of the three arms was not known. Blood samples for drug level measurement were collected from finger pricks one day after the planned last third dose intake. Only children allocated to the SP-AQ arm were included in the present analysis. Indeed, the half-life of AS is too short to assess if drugs were given on not. Because of the short half-life of AQ, desethyl-AQ (metabolite of AQ (DAQ)) measurements were used to investigate AQ medication adherence. Two PK (PK) models from previously published studies in paediatric populations were applied to the dataset using non-linear mixed effect modelling (NONMEM) to estimate the number of doses really given by the parents. The study nurse reported the administration time for the first AQ dose while it was estimated by the parents for the remaining two doses. Out of 206 children, 64 were in the SP-AQ arm. The adjusted dosing history for each individual was identified as the one with the lowest difference between observed and individual predicted concentrations estimated by the two PK models for all the possible adherence schemes. The median (range) blood concentration AQ in AQ arm was 9.3 ng/mL (0-1427.8 ng/mL), (Quartiles 1-3: 2.4 ng/mL -22.2 ng/mL). The median (range) for DAQ was 162.0 ng/mL (0-712 ng/mL), (Quartiles 1-3: 80.4 ng/mL-267.7 ng/mL). Under the assumption of full adherence for all participants, a marked underprediction of concentrations was observed using both PK models. Our results suggest that only 39-50% of children received the three scheduled doses of AQ as prescribed, 33-37% two doses and 17-24% received only the first dose administered by the study nurse. Both models were highly congruent to classify adherence patterns.

conclusionsConsidering the IPTi intervention, our results seem to indicate that medication adherence is low in the ideal trial research setting and is likely to be even lower if given in day-to-day practice, questioning the real impact that this intervention might have. More generally, the estimation of the number of doses truly administered, a proxy measure of adherence and an assessment of the feasibility of the mode of administration, should be more thoroughly studied when discussing the efficacy of the interventions in trials investigating self-administered malaria preventive treatments.

Indexed as

Drug MonitoringAntimalarialsCross-Sectional StudiesDrug CombinationsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansInfantMalariaMalePapua New GuineaParentsPyrimethamineSelf AdministrationSulfadoxineAntimalarialsDrug Combinationsfanasil, pyrimethamine drug combinationPyrimethamineSulfadoxine

Identifiers

PMID30726224
PMCPMC6364960
OpenAlexW2914955278

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.