Intermittent preventive treatment regimens for malaria in HIV-positive pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Malaria and HIV infection overlap geographically in sub-Saharan Africa and share risk factors. HIV infection increases malaria's severity, especially in pregnant women. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) for pregnant women living in areas of stable malaria transmission. However, HIV-positive women on daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis (recommended for prevention of opportunistic infections in people with HIV) cannot receive SP due to adverse drug interactions, so malaria prevention in this vulnerable population currently relies on daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis alone. This review is based on a new protocol and provides an update to the 2011 Cochrane Review that evaluated alternative drugs for IPTp to prevent malaria in HIV-positive women. OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of intermittent preventive treatment regimens for malaria prevention in HIV-positive pregnant women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trial registries to 31 January 2024. To identify relevant additional studies or unpublished work, we checked references and contacted study authors and other researchers working on malaria and HIV. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any intermittent preventive treatment regimen for preventing malaria in HIV-positive pregnant women against daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis alone, placebo, current or previous standard of care, or combinations of these options. By 'standard of care' we refer to the country's recommended drug regimen to prevent malaria in pregnancy among HIV-positive women, or the treatment that a trial's research team considered to be the standard of care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors, in pairs, independently screened all records identified by the search strategy, applied inclusion criteria, assessed risk of bias in included trials, and extracted data. We contacted trial authors when additional information was required. We presented dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RRs), count outcomes as incidence rate ratios (IRRs), and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MDs). We presented all measures of effect with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach for what we considered to be the main comparisons and outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 RCTs, with a total of 4976 HIV-positive pregnant women initially randomized. All trials assessed the efficacy and safety of one antimalarial used as IPTp (mefloquine, dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine, SP, or azithromycin) with or without daily cotrimoxazole, compared to daily cotrimoxazole alone, placebo, or a standard of care regimen. We grouped the trials into nine comparisons. Our main comparison evaluated the current standard of care (daily cotrimoxazole) with another drug regimen (mefloquine or dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine) versus daily cotrimoxazole with or without placebo. In this comparison, two trials evaluated mefloquine and three evaluated dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine. We conducted meta-analyses that included trials evaluating dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine plus cotrimoxazole, and trials that evaluated mefloquine plus cotrimoxazole, as we considered there to be no qualitative or quantitative heterogeneity among trials for most outcomes. We considered drug-related adverse events and HIV-related outcomes to be drug-specific. Daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis plus another drug regimen (mefloquine or dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine) probably results in lower risk of maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.95; 2406 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). It results in little or no difference in maternal anaemia cases at delivery (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; 2417 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence). It probably results in a decrease in placental malaria measured by blood smear (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.93; 1337 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably results in little or no difference in low birth weight (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.41; 2915 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to ascertain whether daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis plus another drug regimen affects the risk of cord blood parasitaemia (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.64; 2696 participants, 5 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis plus another drug regimen probably results in little or no difference in foetal loss (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.46; 2957 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), and may result in little or no difference in neonatal mortality (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.14; 2706 participants, 4 trials; low-certainty evidence). Due to the probability of an increased risk of mother-to-child HIV transmission and some adverse drug effects noted with mefloquine, we also looked at the results for dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine specifically. Dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine plus daily contrimoxazole probably results in little to no difference in maternal peripheral parasitaemia (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.11; 1517 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence) or anaemia at delivery (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.10; 1454 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), but leads to fewer women having placental malaria when measured by histopathologic analysis (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 1570 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence). The addition of dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine to daily cotrimoxazole probably made little to no difference to rates of low birth weight (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48; 1695 participants, 3 trials), foetal loss (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.90; 1610 participants, 3 trials), or neonatal mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.72; 1467 participants, 2 trials) (all moderate-certainty evidence). We found low-certainty evidence of no increased risk of gastrointestinal drug-related adverse events (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.51 to 3.98; 1447 participants, 2 trials) or mother-to-child HIV transmission (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.26 to 9.19; 1063 participants, 2 trials). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine and mefloquine added to daily cotrimoxazole seem to be efficacious in preventing malaria infection in HIV-positive pregnant women compared to daily cotrimoxazole alone. However, increased risk of HIV transmission to the foetus and poor drug tolerability may be barriers to implementation of mefloquine in practice. In contrast, the evidence suggests that dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine does not increase the risk of HIV mother-to-child transmission and is well tolerated.

Antimalarial artesunate-mefloquine versus praziquantel in African children with schistosomiasis: an open-label, randomized controlled trial.

Schistosomiasis treatment entirely relies on a single drug, praziquantel, prompting research into alternative therapeutics. Here we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the antimalarial combination artesunate-mefloquine for the treatment of schistosomiasis in a proof-of-concept, pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled trial in primary schools of six villages endemic for schistosomiasis in northern Senegal. Children (6-14 years) were eligible if Schistosoma eggs were detected by microscopy in urine and/or stool. In total, 726 children were randomized 1:1 to praziquantel (standard care: 40 mg kg-1 single dose; n = 364) or to artesunate-mefloquine (antimalarial dosage: artesunate 4 mg kg-1 and mefloquine 8 mg kg-1 daily for three consecutive days; n = 362). Eight children not meeting the inclusion criteria were excluded from efficacy analysis. Median age of the remaining 718 participants was 9 years; 399 (55.6%) were male, and 319 (44.4%) female; 99.3% were infected with Schistosoma haematobium and 15.2% with S. mansoni. Primary outcomes were cure rate, assessed by microscopy, and frequency of drug-related adverse effects of artesunate-mefloquine versus praziquantel at 4 weeks after treatment. Cure rate was 59.6% (208/349) in the artesunate-mefloquine arm versus 62.1% (211/340) in the praziquantel arm. The difference of -2.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to 4.8) met the predefined criteria of noninferiority (margin set at 10%). All drug-related adverse events were mild or moderate, and reported in 28/361 children receiving artesunate-mefloquine (7.8%; 95% CI 5.4 to 11.0) versus 8/363 (2.2%; 95% CI 1.1 to 4.3) receiving praziquantel (P < 0.001). Artesunate-mefloquine at antimalarial dosage was moderately safe and noninferior to standard-care praziquantel for the treatment of schistosomiasis, predominantly due to S. haematobium. Multicentric trials in different populations and epidemiological settings are needed to confirm these findings. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03893097 .

Artesunate-mefloquine therapy for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety.

To provide a continuous update on the safety and efficacy of artesunate-mefloquine (ASMQ) compared with other artemisinin combination therapy (ACT) schemes used in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria caused by Plasmodium falciparum, this study updated and expanded the results of the systematic literature review published in 2016. Only randomised controlled clinical trials published from 1 January 2001 to 12 June 2023 from five databases were included in this study. The results related to efficacy, expressed through RR, were summarized in meta-analyses, performed according to the compared ACTs and with the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The results related to safety were synthesized in a descriptive manner. Thirty-two studies were included, of which 24 had been analysed in the 2016 review and eight new ones were added. Although the methodological quality of most studies was considered moderate, the body of evidence gathered indicates that ASMQ continues to be safe and effective for the treatment of uncomplicated infections caused by P. falciparum compared with other ACTs. However, the inclusion of two new studies, which identified failure rates exceeding 10%, suggests a possible reduction in the efficacy of ASMQ in the analysed locations. The incidence of serious adverse effects, such as seizure, encephalopathy and cardiac arrhythmia, was infrequent in both the ASMQ group and the comparison groups. After including new evidence, ASMQ is still recommended as a first-line treatment of uncomplicated malaria caused by P. falciparum, although local aspects need to be considered.

Mefloquine-Induced Inner Ear Damage and Preventive Effects of Electrical Stimulation: An Electrophysiological Study.

INTRODUCTION: Mefloquine is an antimalarial medicine used to prevent and treat malaria. This medicine has some side effects, including ototoxicity. This study, which was designed in two phases, aimed to investigate the side effects of mefloquine and evaluate the preventive effects of electrical stimulation on these side effects. METHODS: In the first phase, two doses of mefloquine (50 and 200 µM) were injected into male rats, and after 7 days, they were evaluated by an auditory brainstem response (ABR) test. In the second phase, electrical stimulation was applied for 10 days, and then a toxic dose of mefloquine was injected. Similar to the first phase of the study, the animals were evaluated by an ABR test after 7 days. RESULTS: In the first phase, the results showed that a high dose of mefloquine increased the ABR threshold and wave I latency; however, these changes were not observed in the second phase. CONCLUSION: Application of electrical stimulation could prevent the ototoxic effects of mefloquine. According to the findings of the present study, electrical stimulation can be used as a preconditioner to prevent the ototoxic effects of mefloquine.

Antiepileptogenic and neuroprotective effect of mefloquine after experimental status epilepticus.

Acquired temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) characterized by spontaneous recurrent seizures (SRS) and hippocampal inhibitory neuron dysfunction is often refractory to current therapies. Gap junctional or electrical coupling between inhibitory neurons has been proposed to facilitate network synchrony and intercellular molecular exchange suggesting a role in both seizures and neurodegeneration. While gap junction blockers can limit acute seizures, whether blocking neuronal gap junctions can modify development of chronic epilepsy has not been examined. This study examined whether mefloquine, a selective blocker of Connexin 36 gap junctions which are well characterized in inhibitory neurons, can limit epileptogenesis and related cellular and behavioral pathology in a model of acquired TLE. A single, systemic dose of mefloquine administered early after pilocarpine-induced status epilepticus (SE) in rat reduced both development of SRS and behavioral co-morbidities. Immunostaining for interneuron subtypes identified that mefloquine treatment likely reduced delayed inhibitory neuronal loss after SE. Uniquely, parvalbumin expressing neurons in the hippocampal dentate gyrus appeared relatively resistant to early cell loss after SE. Functionally, whole cell patch clamp recordings revealed that mefloquine treatment preserved inhibitory synaptic drive to projection neurons one week and one month after SE. These results demonstrate that mefloquine, a drug already approved for malaria prophylaxis, is potentially antiepileptogenic and can protect against progressive interneuron loss and behavioral co-morbidities of epilepsy.

[A case of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy associated with daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for multiple myeloma].

An 83-year-old man presented with visual disturbance and right hemiparalysis, one month after daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone administration for multiple myeloma (MM). Blood screens revealed a CD4+ T-lymphocyte count of 132/µl. Diffusion weighted and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery MR imaging showed high intensity signals in the both occipital lobes and left precentral area. The patient had no history of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) JC virus (JCV) was positive (83 copies/ml), as indicated by PCR. The patient was diagnosed with progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). MM treatment was discontinued, and mefloquine and mirtazapine therapy was started. However, the CSF JCV-DNA PCR count did not improve (111 copies/ml) after 30 days from starting mefloquine and mirtazapine therapy. The patient died six months after symptom onset. Conclusively, patients with decreased CD4+ T lymphocyte counts following DBd therapy for MM, the possibility of PML should be considered.

Artemether-lumefantrine, mefloquine and atovaquone-proguanil in the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in travellers: A retrospective comparative study of efficacy and treatment failures.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the rates of parasitaemia clearance and the prevalence of treatment failure in patients with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria treated with artemether-lumefantrine (AL), mefloquine (MQ), and atovaquone-proguanil (AP). METHOD: The retrospective descriptive study included adult patients with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria treated at the University Hospital Bulovka in Prague from 2006 to 2019. Parasitaemia clearance was estimated using a linear regression model. RESULTS: The study included 72 patients with a median age of 33 years (IQR 27-45) and a male to female ratio of 3.2:1. Thirty-six patients (50.0%) were treated with AL, 27 (37.5%) with MQ and 9 (12.5%) with AP. The proportion of VFR and migrants was 22.2% with no significant differences among the three groups. The median time to the parasitaemia clearance was two days (IQR 2-3) in patients treated with AL versus four days in the MQ (IQR 3-4) and AP (IQR 3-4) groups, p < 0.001. The clearance rate constant was 3.3/hour (IQR 2.5-4.0) for AL, 1.6/hour (IQR 1.3-1.9) for MQ, and 1.9/hour (IQR 1.3-2.4) for AP, p < 0.001. Malaria recrudescence occurred in 5/36 (13.9%) patients treated with AL and in no patients treated with MQ or AP. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the superior efficacy of AL compared to other oral antimalarials in early malaria treatment. However, we observed a higher rate of late treatment failure in patients treated with AL than previously reported. This issue warrants further investigation of possible dose adjustments, extended regimens, or alternative artemisinin-based combinations.

A Cross-sectional Cohort Study to Assess Long-term Neurocognitive and Psychiatric Symptoms of Mefloquine Use in Veterans.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the associations between neurocognitive and psychiatric health outcomes with mefloquine or any antimalarial exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records were systematically reviewed to identify veterans that indicated antimalarial medication use. Linear regression was performed to examine associations between mefloquine/antimalarial exposure and health outcomes. The mefloquine-exposed group was further compared with normative populations for the same health outcomes. RESULTS: In the adjusted models, no significant differences were noted between the two exposure groups and the unexposed group for any of the health measures (P-value > 0.05). When compared to normative population samples, the mefloquine-exposed group had poorer health and greater neurobehavioral symptom severity or cognitive complaints. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that mefloquine use by veterans referred for intensive evaluation of their military deployment exposures and health was not associated with increased, long-term, neurocognitive/psychiatric symptoms compared to unexposed veterans.

Mefloquine as a prophylaxis for malaria needs to be revisited.

According to WHO, 2019 witnessed 229 million cases of malaria globally, of which Africa accounted for 94% of cases. Early diagnosis and treatment are the basis of malaria management, and the need for good chemoprophylaxis especially for people travelling to endemic areas is vital. There are a number of drug options available for the prophylaxis of malaria, mefloquine being one of the drugs used. Mefloquine has been around from the 1970s, and was developed in the United States keeping in mind the soldiers that were being deployed to areas where chloroquine resistant strains of Plasmodium were discovered. Mefloquine was preferred for its once a week dosage. Within a decade of its introduction, reports of the side effects associated with its long-term use surfaced. Mefloquine is now reported to cause a myriad of neuropsychiatric side effects including anxiety, sleep disturbance, depression, dizziness and frank psychosis, especially in patients with pre-existing psychiatric disorders. Many countries like the United States and the United Kingdom have updated their drug boxes to include the warning of these potential neuropsychiatric effects. This paper reviews the side effects of mefloquine and why there is a need to revisit its use in Indian drug policy.

Efficacy of a 3-day pretravel schedule of tafenoquine for malaria chemoprophylaxis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chemoprophylaxis with weekly doses of tafenoquine (200 mg/day for 3 days before departure [loading dose], 200 mg/week during travel and 1-week post-travel [maintenance doses]) is effective in preventing malaria. Effectiveness of malaria chemoprophylaxis drugs in travellers is often compromised by poor compliance. Shorter schedules that can be completed before travel, allowing 'drug-free holidays', could increase compliance and thus reduce travel-related malaria. In this meta-analysis, we examined if a loading dose of tafenoquine alone is effective in preventing malaria in short-term travellers. METHODS: Four databases were searched in November 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed efficacy and/or safety of tafenoquine for chemoprophylaxis. Network meta-analysis using the generalized pair-wise modelling framework was utilized to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of malaria infection in long-term (>28 days) and short-term (≤28 days) travellers, as well as adverse events (AEs) associated with receiving loading dose of tafenoquine alone, loading dose of tafenoquine followed by maintenance doses, loading dose of mefloquine followed by maintenance doses, or placebo. RESULTS: Nine RCTs (1714 participants) were included. In long-term travellers, compared to mefloquine, tafenoquine with maintenance doses (OR = 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-2.46) was equally effective in preventing malaria, while there was an increased risk of infection with the loading dose of tafenoquine alone (OR = 2.89; 95% CI: 0.78-10.68) and placebo (OR = 62.91; 95% CI: 8.53-463.88). In short-term travellers, loading dose of tafenoquine alone (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.04-22.42) and tafenoquine with maintenance doses (OR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.06-16.10) were as effective as mefloquine. The risk of AEs with tafenoquine with maintenance doses (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.67-1.60) was similar to mefloquine, while loading dose of tafenoquine alone (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.20-1.66) was associated with lower risk of AEs, although the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: For short-term travellers, loading dose of tafenoquine alone was equally effective, had possibly lower rate of AEs, and likely better compliance than standard tafenoquine or mefloquine chemoprophylaxis schedules with maintenance doses. Studies are needed to confirm if short-term travellers remain free of infection after long-term follow-up. REGISTRATION: The meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021223756). HIGHLIGHT: Tafenoquine is the latest approved drug for malaria chemoprophylaxis. A loading dose of tafenoquine (200 mg/day for 3 days before departure) is as effective in preventing malaria in short-term (≤28 days) travellers as chemoprophylaxis schedules of tafenoquine or mefloquine with maintenance doses, allowing travellers to have a 'drug-free holiday'.

Efficacy and safety of malarial prophylaxis with mefloquine during pregnancy in Kisangani, Democratic Republic of Congo: A randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: Kisangani is an area with intense malaria transmission and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance. Alternative antimalaria prophylaxis medication and protocols are needed, particularly with pregnant individuals. In this study, we compare the tolerance and effectiveness of mefloquine regimen as a split dose with a meal vs. sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for the intermittent preventive treatment in pregnant individuals in Kisangani. METHODS: This study was conducted from 15 May to 30 November 2019 as a single-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing 2 regimens of intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy. The first regimen consisted of 4 doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, and the second of 2 doses of mefloquine taken as a split dose with meal. RESULTS: The occurrence of major or minor side-effects among patients treated with mefloquine and those treated with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine were not statistically significant (major side effects: Fisher exact = 0.5014; minor side effects: P = .0961). Intermittent preventive treatment using mefloquine significantly reduced the risk of placental malaria (risk ratio [RR]: 0.4315, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2201-0.8460), maternal peripheral parasitaemia (RR: 0.4397, 95% CI: 0.2377-0.8132) and low birth weight (RR: 0.4708, 95% CI: 0.2455-0.9029). CONCLUSION: Splitting dose and intake with a meal increased mefloquine tolerability while keeping its efficacy higher compared to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy using mefloquine reduces the risk of placental malaria, maternal peripheral parasitaemia and low birth weight, compared to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Thus, mefloquine is a good alternative to intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy.

Alterações auditivas e vestibulares associadas ao uso da mefloquina: uma revisão integrativa / Auditory and vestibular changes associated with the use of mefloquine: an integrative review

RESUMO Objetivo descrever, por meio de revisão da literatura, alterações auditivas e/ou vestibulares relacionadas ao uso em curto ou em longo prazo da mefloquina. Estratégia de pesquisa trata-se de uma revisão integrativa, realizada nas seguintes bases de dados: PubMed, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Embase, OpenGrey, DissOnline e OAlster. Critérios de seleção foram incluídos estudos com participantes a partir de 18 anos de idade, que fizeram uso de mefloquina e que foram submetidos à avaliação auditiva e/ou questionário referente à função auditiva e vestibular. Foram excluídas revisões de literatura, capítulos de livros e estudos que utilizaram a mefloquina combinada a outros medicamentos. Resultados foram identificados 1.267 estudos nas bases de dados utilizadas, sendo selecionados 28 artigos para leitura completa. Destes, 12 foram incluídos na revisão, de acordo com os critérios de elegibilidade. Quatro artigos apontaram a presença de alterações vestibulares e auditivas, 2 indicaram apenas alterações auditivas e 6 apenas desordens vestibulares. No que se refere às manifestações auditivas, zumbido e perda auditiva foram os sintomas mais frequentes. Vertigem/tontura e desequilíbrio corresponderam às alterações vestibulares comumente apresentadas. Conclusão manifestações auditivas e vestibulares foram referidas em curto e longo prazo, após o tratamento com a droga. A descontinuação de seu uso possibilitou a reversão das manifestações, porém, em alguns casos, foi observada a permanência das afecções. Considera-se importante a realização de acompanhamento audiológico e vestibular durante a ingestão da mefloquina, visto o seu perfil de toxicidade e possíveis manifestações colaterais de caráter auditivo e vestibular.

ABSTRACT Objective To describe through a literature review auditory and/or vestibular alterations associated with the short or long-term use of mefloquine. Research strategy Integrative review performed on the following databases: Pubmed, Web of Science, Scielo, Lilacs, Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, Embase, Open Grey, DissOnline, OAlster. Selection Criteria The articles selected included studies with participants that were 18 years old or over, who used mefloquine and who were submitted to an auditory evaluation and/or a questionnaire regarding auditory and vestibular function. Literature reviews, book chapters, and studies using mefloquine associated with other drugs were excluded. Results 1,267 studies were identified in the databases used, 28 articles were selected for full reading, and out of these, twelve were included in the review according to the eligibility criteria. Four articles pointed out the presence of vestibular and auditory diseases, two indicated only auditory disorders, and six solely vestibular disorders. Regarding auditory manifestations, tinnitus and hearing loss (HL) were the most frequent symptoms. Vertigo/dizziness and imbalance matched to the vestibular changes were commonly observed. Conclusion Auditory and vestibular manifestations were referred to in the short and long-term after treatment with the drug. The discontinuation of its use made it possible to reverse the manifestations; however, in some cases, the permanence of the disorders was reported. Audiological and vestibular follow-up during mefloquine use is considered important, given its toxicity profile and possible side manifestations of an auditory and vestibular nature.

Sequential Open-Label Study of the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetic Interactions between Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine and Mefloquine in Healthy Thai Adults.

Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) have contributed substantially to the global decline in Plasmodium falciparum morbidity and mortality, but resistance to artemisinins and their partner drugs is increasing in Southeast Asia, threatening malaria control. New antimalarial compounds will not be generally available soon. Combining three existing antimalarials in the form of triple ACTs, including dihydroartemisinin (DHA)-piperaquine + mefloquine, is a potential treatment option for multidrug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria. In a sequential open-label study, healthy Thai volunteers were treated with DHA-piperaquine (120 to 960 mg), mefloquine (500 mg), and DHA-piperaquine + mefloquine (120 to 960 mg + 500 mg), and serial symptom questionnaires, biochemistry, full blood counts, pharmacokinetic profiles, and electrocardiographic measurements were performed. Fifteen healthy subjects were enrolled. There was no difference in the incidence or severity of adverse events between the three treatment arms. The slight prolongation in QTc (QT interval corrected for heart rate) associated with DHA-piperaquine administration did not increase after administration of DHA-piperaquine + mefloquine. The addition of mefloquine had no significant effect on the pharmacokinetic properties of piperaquine. However, coadministration of mefloquine significantly reduced the exposures to dihydroartemisinin for area under the concentration-time curve (-22.6%; 90% confidence interval [CI], -33.1, -10.4; P = 0.0039) and maximum concentration of drug in serum (-29.0%; 90% CI, -40.6, -15.1; P = 0.0079). Mefloquine can be added safely to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in malaria treatment. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02324738.).

Pyronaridine-artesunate for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) to treat uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum (P falciparum) malaria. Concerns about artemisinin resistance have led to global initiatives to develop new partner drugs to protect artemisinin derivatives in ACT. Pyronaridine-artesunate is a novel ACT. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of pyronaridine-artesunate compared to alternative ACTs for treating people with uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, and to evaluate the safety of pyronaridine-artesunate and other pyronaridine treatments compared to alternative treatments. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; and LILACS. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry for ongoing or recently completed trials. The date of the last search was 8 May 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: Efficacy analysis: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pyronaridine-artesunate for treating uncomplicated P falciparum malaria.Safety analysis: RCTs of pyronaridine-artesunate or pyronaridine for treating P falciparum or P vivax malaria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update, two review authors independently re-extracted all data and assessed certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for treatment failures between comparisons, and for safety outcomes between and across comparisons. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 relevant studies. Seven studies were co-funded by Shin Poong Pharmaceuticals which manufactures the drug. Three studies were funded by government agencies.For efficacy analysis we identified five RCTs with 5711 participants. This included 4465 participants from 13 sites in Africa, and 1246 participants from five sites in Asia. It included 541 children aged less than five years.For polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-adjusted failures at day 28, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.31; 4 RCTs, 3068 participants, low-certainty evidence), artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.77; 1 RCT, 1245 participants, low-certainty evidence), and mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 1117 participants, low-certainty evidence).For unadjusted failures at day 28, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.58; 4 RCTs, 3149 participants, low-certainty evidence), and probably has fewer failures compared to artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.81; 1 RCT, 1257 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.78; 1 RCT, 1120 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).For PCR-adjusted failures at day 42, pyronaridine-artesunate may make little or no difference compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.51; 4 RCTs, 2575 participants, low-certainty evidence) and artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.83; 1 RCT, 1091 participants, low-certainty evidence), but may have higher failures than mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.57; 1 RCT, 1037 participants, low-certainty evidence). Overall, pyronaridine-artesunate had a PCR-adjusted treatment failure rate of less than 5%.For unadjusted failures at day 42, pyronaridine-artesunate may have fewer failures compared to artemether-lumefantrine (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.82; 4 RCTs, 3080 participants, low-certainty evidence), may make little or no difference compared to mefloquine plus artesunate (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.31; 1 RCT, 1059 participants, low-certainty evidence), and probably makes little or no difference compared to artesunate-amodiaquine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.23; 1 RCT, 1235 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).For the safety analysis of severe adverse events and liver function, we identified eight RCTs with 6614 participants comparing pyronaridine-artesunate to other antimalarials, four of which were not in the previous version of this review. A further two RCTs, comparing pyronaridine alone to other treatments, contributed to the synthesis of all adverse events.Raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT) greater than five times the upper limit of normal (> 5 x ULN) is more frequent with pyronaridine-artesunate compared to other antimalarials (RR 3.34, 95% CI 1.63 to 6.84; 8 RCTS, 6581 participants, high-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference for raised bilirubin > 2.5 x ULN between pyronaridine-artesunate and other antimalarials (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.18; 7 RCTs, 6384 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). There was one reported case in which raised ALT occurred with raised bilirubin, meeting criteria for moderate drug-induced liver injury. No study reported severe drug-induced liver injury. Electrocardiograph (ECG) abnormalities were less common with pyronaridine-artesunate compared to other antimalarials. We identified no other safety concerns. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Pyronaridine-artesunate was efficacious against uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, achieved a PCR-adjusted treatment failure rate of less than 5% at days 28 and 42, and may be at least as good as, or better than other marketed ACTs.Pyronaridine-artesunate increases the risk of episodes of raised ALT > 5 x ULN. This meets criteria for mild drug-induced liver injury. On one instance this was linked to raised bilirubin, indicating moderate drug-induced liver injury. No episodes of severe drug-induced liver injury were reported. The findings of this review cannot fully inform a risk-benefit assessment for an unselected population. Readers should remain aware of this uncertainty when considering use of pyronaridine-artesunate in patients with known or suspected pre-existing liver dysfunction, and when co-administering with other medications which may cause liver dysfunction.

Phase 1 lead-in to a phase 2 factorial study of temozolomide plus memantine, mefloquine, and metformin as postradiation adjuvant therapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: Repurposed memantine, mefloquine, and metformin have putative anticancer activity. The objective of this phase 1 study was to determine the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) of combinations of these agents with temozolomide (TMZ). METHODS: Adults with newly diagnosed glioblastoma who completed chemoradiation were eligible. The patients were assigned to receive doublet, triplet, or quadruplet therapy with TMZ combined with mefloquine, memantine, and/or metformin. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were determined, using a 3 + 3 study design. RESULTS: Of 85 enrolled patients, 4 did not complete cycle 1 (the DLT observation period) for nontoxicity reasons, and 81 were evaluable for DLT. The MTDs for doublet therapy were memantine 20 mg twice daily, mefloquine 250 mg 3 times weekly, and metformin 850 mg twice daily. For triplet therapy, the MTDs were memantine 10 mg twice daily, mefloquine 250 mg 3 times weekly, and metformin 850 mg twice daily. For quadruplet therapy, the MTDs were memantine 10 mg twice daily, mefloquine 250 mg 3 times weekly, and metformin 500 mg twice daily. DLTs included dizziness (memantine) and gastrointestinal effects (metformin). Lymphopenia was the most common adverse event (66%). From study entry, the median survival was 21 months, and the 2-year survival rate was 43%. CONCLUSIONS: Memantine, mefloquine, and metformin can be combined safely with TMZ in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Mefloquine for preventing malaria in pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for malaria for all women who live in moderate to high malaria transmission areas in Africa. However, parasite resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine has been increasing steadily in some areas of the region. Moreover, HIV-infected women on cotrimoxazole prophylaxis cannot receive sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine because of potential drug interactions. Thus, there is an urgent need to identify alternative drugs for prevention of malaria in pregnancy. One such candidate is mefloquine. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of mefloquine for preventing malaria in pregnant women, specifically, to evaluate:• the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of mefloquine for preventing malaria in pregnant women; and• the impact of HIV status, gravidity, and use of insecticide-treated nets on the effects of mefloquine. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), the Malaria in Pregnancy Library, and two trial registers up to 31 January 2018. In addition, we checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies, unpublished data, confidential reports, and raw data from published trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing mefloquine IPT or mefloquine prophylaxis against placebo, no treatment, or an alternative drug regimen. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all records identified by the search strategy, applied inclusion criteria, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted trial authors to ask for additional information when required. Dichotomous outcomes were compared using risk ratios (RRs), count outcomes as incidence rate ratios (IRRs), and continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs). We have presented all measures of effect with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following main outcomes of analysis: maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery, clinical malaria episodes during pregnancy, placental malaria, maternal anaemia at delivery, low birth weight, spontaneous abortions and stillbirths, dizziness, and vomiting. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials conducted between 1987 and 2013 from Thailand (1), Benin (3), Gabon (1), Tanzania (1), Mozambique (2), and Kenya (1) that included 8192 pregnant women met our inclusion criteria.Two trials (with 6350 HIV-uninfected pregnant women) compared two IPTp doses of mefloquine with two IPTp doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. Two other trials involving 1363 HIV-infected women compared three IPTp doses of mefloquine plus cotrimoxazole with cotrimoxazole. One trial in 140 HIV-infected women compared three doses of IPTp-mefloquine with cotrimoxazole. Finally, one trial enrolling 339 of unknown HIV status compared mefloquine prophylaxis with placebo.Study participants included women of all gravidities and of all ages (four trials) or > 18 years (two trials). Gestational age at recruitment was > 20 weeks (one trial), between 16 and 28 weeks (three trials), or ≤ 28 weeks (two trials). Two of the six trials blinded participants and personnel, and only one had low risk of detection bias for safety outcomes.When compared with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, IPTp-mefloquine results in a 35% reduction in maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.86; 5455 participants, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence) but may have little or no effect on placental malaria infections (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.86; 4668 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Mefloquine results in little or no difference in the incidence of clinical malaria episodes during pregnancy (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.05, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence). Mefloquine decreased maternal anaemia at delivery (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94; 5469 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Data show little or no difference in the proportions of low birth weight infants (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.17; 5641 participants, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence) and in stillbirth and spontaneous abortion rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; 6219 participants, 2 studies; I2 statistic = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). IPTp-mefloquine increased drug-related vomiting (RR 4.76, 95% CI 4.13 to 5.49; 6272 participants, 2 studies; high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (RR 4.21, 95% CI 3.36 to 5.27; participants = 6272, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence).When compared with cotrimoxazole, IPTp-mefloquine plus cotrimoxazole probably results in a 48% reduction in maternal peripheral parasitaemia at delivery (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.93; 989 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and a 72% reduction in placental malaria (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 977 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) but has little or no effect on the incidence of clinical malaria episodes during pregnancy (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.76, 1 study; high-certainty evidence) and probably no effect on maternal anaemia at delivery (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.20; 1197 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), low birth weight rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.60; 1220 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), and rates of spontaneous abortion and stillbirth (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.98; 1347 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Mefloquine was associated with higher risks of drug-related vomiting (RR 7.95, 95% CI 4.79 to 13.18; 1055 participants, one study; high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (RR 3.94, 95% CI 2.85 to 5.46; 1055 participants, 1 study; high-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Mefloquine was more efficacious than sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in HIV-uninfected women or daily cotrimoxazole prophylaxis in HIV-infected pregnant women for prevention of malaria infection and was associated with lower risk of maternal anaemia, no adverse effects on pregnancy outcomes (such as stillbirths and abortions), and no effects on low birth weight and prematurity. However, the high proportion of mefloquine-related adverse events constitutes an important barrier to its effectiveness for malaria preventive treatment in pregnant women.

Short Communication: Reduced Nevirapine Concentrations Among HIV-Positive Women Receiving Mefloquine for Intermittent Preventive Treatment for Malaria Control During Pregnancy.

Clinical trials demonstrated intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy with mefloquine (MQ) reduced malaria rates among pregnant women, yet an unexpected higher risk of mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of HIV among HIV-positive women receiving MQ has also been observed. To determine if interactions between antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) and MQ could contribute to the increased MTCT observed in women receiving MQ, we performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of ARV plasma concentrations in peripheral blood (maternal plasma) and cord blood (cord plasma) collected at delivery from 186 mothers participating in a randomized clinical trial of MQ (n = 102) compared with placebo (n = 84) in Kenya. Plasma zidovudine (AZT), lamivudine (3TC), and nevirapine (NVP) concentrations were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Although only 4% (7/186) reported not using these ARVs, AZT, 3TC, and NVP were all below the limit of detection in 44% of maternal plasma and 42% of cord plasma samples, and proportions were similar between the two study arms. Median concentrations of AZT and 3TC were not significantly lower in the MQ arm compared with the placebo arm for maternal plasma and cord plasma (p > .05). However, median NVP concentrations were significantly lower in the MQ study arm compared with the placebo study arm in both maternal plasma (1,597 ng/mL vs. 2,353 ng/mL, Mann-Whitney Rank Sum, p = .023) and cord plasma (2,038 ng/mL vs. 2,434 ng/mL, p = .048). Reduced NVP concentrations in maternal and cord plasma of women receiving MQ suggest MQ may affect NVP metabolism for both mother and infant. These results highlight the need to evaluate potential drug-drug interactions between candidate antimalarials and ARVs for use in pregnant women.