SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2025
Antifilarial treatment strategies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The human immunome in the post-schistosomiasis mass drug administration era.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Review
- Acute Brugian filariasis in a German tourist after short-term travel to Sri Lanka, 2025.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) prescribes mass drug administration (MDA) to eradicate lymphatic filariasis within endemic populations. The WHO endorsed using ivermectin with diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) for MDA in specific settings devoid of onchocerciasis or loiasis. Still, the utilization of IDA in sub-Saharan Africa is restricted due to the potential of diethylcarbamazine to induce severe adverse ocular events in individuals with onchocerciasis.
aimWe aim to investigate all documented combinations of antifilarial drugs available in the literature using a network meta-analysis (NWM) design, focusing specifically on the treatment of Lymphatic Filariasis (LF).
methodsA meticulous search was conducted across four electronic databases to identify pertinent studies. Subsequently, a frequentist NWM was executed. Risk ratios (RRs) served as the effect size metric for categorical outcomes, each with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsOur study encompassed 45 studies, including 61,369 patients. At six months, multiple doses of diethylcarbamazine plus albendazole (multiple DA) regimens demonstrated superior efficacy in reducing microfilaremia compared to a single intake of DA, diethylcarbamazine, ivermectin, and albendazole with RR and CI as follows: 0.37 [0.19; 0.72], 0.35 [0.17; 0.69], 0.30 [0.14; 0.64], and 0.28 [0.13; 0.57]. The combination of ivermectin plus albendazole (IA) also showed significant efficacy against the use of each of these drugs alone, with RR: 0.74 [0.57; 0.96] for ivermectin and 0.69 [0.53; 0.89] for albendazole, while diethylcarbamazine combined with albendazole showed substantial superiority over albendazole alone or placebo: RR = 0.09 [0.02; 0.36] and 0.08 [0.02; 0.34], respectively. By the twelfth month, diethylcarbamazine, followed by albendazole, ranked superior to IDA and DA: 0.12 [0.02; 0.89] and 0.11 [0.01; 0.79], respectively. At 24 months, no significant differences were found among the assessed drugs in reducing microfilaremia. The comparisons revealed no significant differences between the drug combinations we studied regarding safety and adverse events.
conclusionMultiple doses of the DA regimen showed superior efficacy in reducing microfilaremia compared to combinations involving IA, diethylcarbamazine, ivermectin, and albendazole at six and twelve months. However, by the twenty-four-month, no significant differences were found. Safety profiles among interventions were generally comparable, with no specific drug showing superiority in adverse events.
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.