Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34252299›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2021

Should Deep-Sequenced Amplicons Become the New Gold Standard for Analyzing Malaria Drug Clinical Trials?

Sam Jones, Katherine Kay, Eva Maria Hodel, Maria Gruenberg, Anita Lerch, Ingrid Felger, Ian Hastings

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Genotypic analysis of RTS,S/AS01The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2024
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. UnderstandingiScience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. UnderstandingmedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Detection of novelMicrobial genomics · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors.

Sam JonesDepartment of Tropical Disease Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicinegrid.48004.38, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5084-527X
Katherine KayMetrum Research Group, Tariffville, Connecticut, USA.
Eva Maria HodelInstitute of Infection, Veterinary & Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Maria GruenbergMedical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institutegrid.416786.a, Basel, Switzerland.
Anita LerchMedical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institutegrid.416786.a, Basel, Switzerland.
Ingrid FelgerMedical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institutegrid.416786.a, Basel, Switzerland.
Ian HastingsDepartment of Tropical Disease Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicinegrid.48004.38, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1332-742X

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) 1032350Malaria Modelling Consortium UWSC9757Medical Research Council G1100522Medical Research Council MR/L022508/1Swiss National Science Foundation 310030_159580UKRI | Medical Research Council (MRC) G1100522
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regulatory clinical trials are required to ensure the continued supply and deployment of effective antimalarial drugs. Patient follow-up in such trials typically lasts several weeks, as the drugs have long half-lives and new infections often occur during this period. "Molecular correction" is therefore used to distinguish drug failures from new infections. The current WHO-recommended method for molecular correction uses length-polymorphic alleles at highly diverse loci but is inherently poor at detecting low-density clones in polyclonal infections. This likely leads to substantial underestimates of failure rates, delaying the replacement of failing drugs with potentially lethal consequences. Deep-sequenced amplicons (AmpSeq) substantially increase the detectability of low-density clones and may offer a new "gold standard" for molecular correction. Pharmacological simulation of clinical trials was used to evaluate the suitability of AmpSeq for molecular correction. We investigated the impact of factors such as the number of amplicon loci analyzed, the informatics criteria used to distinguish genotyping "noise" from real low-density signals, the local epidemiology of malaria transmission, and the potential impact of genetic signals from gametocytes. AmpSeq greatly improved molecular correction and provided accurate drug failure rate estimates. The use of 3 to 5 amplicons was sufficient, and simple, nonstatistical criteria could be used to classify recurrent infections as drug failures or new infections. These results suggest AmpSeq is strongly placed to become the new standard for molecular correction in regulatory trials, with potential extension into routine surveillance once the requisite technical support becomes established.

Indexed as

AntimalarialsMalariaMalaria, FalciparumPharmaceutical PreparationsHumansPlasmodium falciparumAntimalarialsPharmaceutical Preparationsdrug resistancedrug trialsmalariamolecular correctionPCR correctionP. falciparumPlasmodium falciparumTES

Identifiers

PMID34252299
PMCPMC8448141

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.