Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35917364›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2022

Egg excretion indicators for the measurement of soil-transmitted helminth response to treatment.

Piero L Olliaro, Michel T Vaillant, Aïssatou Diawara, Benjamin Speich, Marco Albonico, Jürg Utzinger, Jennifer Keiser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Piero L OlliaroInternational Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium, Pandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Michel T VaillantCentre of Competence for Methodology and Statistics, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.ORCID 0000-0003-4714-8128
Aïssatou DiawaraProgram in Biology, Division of Science and Mathematics, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Benjamin SpeichBasel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Marco AlbonicoNational Health System, Turin, Italy.
Jürg UtzingerSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Jennifer KeiserSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CHLuxembourg Institute of Health · LUNew York University Abu Dhabi · AEUniversity of Basel · CHUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeriodic administration of anthelmintic drugs is a cost-effective intervention for morbidity control of soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infections. However, with programs expanding, drug pressure potentially selecting for drug-resistant parasites increases. While monitoring anthelmintic drug efficacy is crucial to inform country control program strategies, different factors must be taken into consideration that influence drug efficacy and make it difficult to standardize treatment outcome measures. We aimed to identify suitable approaches to assess and compare the efficacy of different anthelmintic treatments. METHODOLOGY: We built an individual participant-level database from 11 randomized controlled trials and two observational studies in which subjects received single-agent or combination therapy, or placebo. Eggs per gram of stool were calculated from egg counts at baseline and post-treatment. Egg reduction rates (ERR; based on mean group egg counts) and individual-patient ERR (iERR) were utilized to express drug efficacy and analyzed after log-transformation with a linear mixed effect model. The analyses were separated by follow-up duration (14-21 and 22-45 days) after drug administration. PRINCIPAL

findingsThe 13 studies enrolled 5,759 STH stool-positive individuals; 5,688 received active medication or placebo contributing a total of 11,103 STH infections (65% had two or three concurrent infections), of whom 3,904 (8,503 infections) and 1,784 (2,550 infections) had efficacy assessed at 14-21 days and 22-45 days post-treatment, respectively. Neither the number of helminth co-infections nor duration of follow-up affected ERR for any helminth species. The number of participants treated with single-dose albendazole was 689 (18%), with single-dose mebendazole 658 (17%), and with albendazole-based co-administrations 775 (23%). The overall mean ERR assessed by day 14-21 for albendazole and mebendazole was 94.5% and 87.4%, respectively on Ascaris lumbricoides, 86.8% and 40.8% on hookworm, and 44.9% and 23.8% on Trichuris trichiura. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended criteria for efficacy were met in 50%, 62%, and 33% studies of albendazole for A. lumbricoides, T. trichiura, and hookworm, respectively and 25% of mebendazole studies. iERR analyses showed similar results, with cure achieved in 92% of A. lumbricoides-infected subjects treated with albendazole and 93% with mebendazole; corresponding figures for hookworm were 70% and 17%, and for T. trichiura 22% and 20%. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Combining the traditional efficacy assessment using group averages with individual responses provides a more complete picture of how anthelmintic treatments perform. Most treatments analyzed fail to meet the WHO minimal criteria for efficacy based on group means. Drug combinations (i.e., albendazole-ivermectin and albendazole-oxantel pamoate) are promising treatments for STH infections.

Indexed as

AnthelminticsHelminthiasisHelminthsHookworm InfectionsTrichuriasisAlbendazoleAncylostomatoideaAnimalsHumansMebendazoleSoilTrichurisAlbendazoleAnthelminticsMebendazoleSoil

Identifiers

PMID35917364
PMCPMC9374261
OpenAlexW2921920361

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.