ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Therapeutic efficacy of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and artesunate-pyronaridine combinations in the treatment of uncomplicated
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Malaria case management in Ghana is a key intervention within the national malaria elimination agenda. Currently, artesunate-amodiaquine (AS-AQ), artemetherlumefantrine (AL), and artesunate-pyronaridine (AP) are the first-line medicines for treating uncomplicated malaria whilst dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHAP) is the second-line medicine. Methods: This was a one-arm prospective evaluation of the clinical, parasitological and haematological responses of children (6 months to 9 years old) treated with DHAP in five (5) sentinel sites and AP in four (4) sentinel sites between August and December, 2023 using the WHO protocol on surveillance of antimalarial drug efficacy. The DHAP study was a follow-up to the baseline conducted in 2020/2021, and the AP study was to provide baseline data after its introduction in 2022. The 3/3 PCR-genotyping approach distinguished between reinfection and recrudescence using merozoite surface protein 1 ( Results: PCR-uncorrected cure rates on day-42 ranged between 98.8% (95% CI: 93.2-100) and 100% for DHAP with an overall PCR-uncorrected cure rate of 99.2% (95% CI: 97.6-99.8); and between 85.0% (95% CI: 70.2-94.3) and 100% for AP with an overall PCR-uncorrected cure rate of 96.2% (95% CI: 92.9-98.0). PCR-corrected cure rates on day-42 was 100% in all DHAP sites; and ranged between 91.9% (95% CI: 78.1-98.3) and 100% for AP with an overall PCR-corrected cure rate of 97.3% (95% CI: 94.3-98.8). Day-3 parasitemia was prevalent in only one (1) DHAP site (1/60 - 1.7%) and one (1) AP site (1/65 - 1.5%) with an overall prevalence of 0.3% for DHAP and 0.4% for AP. Neither treatment with DHAP nor AP resulted in an early treatment failure (ETF). Conclusion: We conclude that the therapeutic efficacy level of DHAP has remained high (>90%) since the baseline study in 2020/2021. Also, the baseline efficacy level of AP is high (>90%) warranting the use of both DHAP and AP in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in the country.
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.