Efficacy and safety of a combination of azithromycin and chloroquine for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in two multi-country randomised clinical trials in African adults.

BACKGROUND: Given increasing rates of resistance to existing therapy, new options for treatment and prophylaxis of malaria are needed. METHODS: Two randomised, comparative, non-inferiority studies were conducted in Africa, one double-blinded and one open-label. Adults with fever, a positive peripheral blood smear, and a positive rapid diagnostic test for Plasmodium falciparum were randomised in both studies to either azithromycin (AZ) 1,000 mg plus chloroquine (CQ) 600-mg base (AZCQ 1,000 mg) once daily for three days or mefloquine hydrochloride (MQ) 1,250 mg (split dose). In the first study, an additional regimen of AZ 500 mg plus CQ 600-mg base (AZCQ 500 mg) once daily for three days was included. All study participants were hospitalised until three consecutive daily blood smears were negative for asexual P. falciparum parasitaemia. Study participants were evaluated weekly for 42 days, with Day 28 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-corrected parasitological clearance rate as primary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 467 subjects were randomised in the two studies. At 28 days' follow-up, PCR-corrected parasitological clearance rates in the per protocol population in the first study were 101/103 (98%) with AZCQ 1,000 mg compared with 102/103 (99%) with MQ (95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.2, 3.3). The AZCQ 500-mg regimen was stopped during an interim study review (six [86%] clearance of seven evaluable; two lost to follow-up). In the second study, clearance rates were similar: AZCQ 1,000 mg 107/107 (100%) vs MQ 111/112 (99%; 95% CI: -1.8, 3.6). Among the participating countries, in vitro CQ resistance based on pfcrt mutation frequency in the baseline isolates across both studies ranged from 20.8% (Zambia) to 96.1% (Uganda). Serious adverse events (AEs; all causality) were observed more frequently with MQ compared with AZCQ (four vs one, respectively), though discontinuations for AEs were similar (four vs three, respectively). Common AEs in the AZ-containing arms included pruritus, vomiting, dizziness, and headache. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with symptomatic uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Africa, the combination of AZ 1,000 mg and CQ 600-mg base once daily for three days resulted in Day 28 PCR-corrected parasitological clearance rates of ≥98% and was non-inferior to treatment with MQ. AZCQ was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT00082576 and NCT00367653.

Cost-effectiveness study comparing cefoperazone-sulbactam to a three-drug combination for treating intraabdominal infections in an Indian health-care setting.

OBJECTIVE: This article presents the methodology and results of the pharmacoeconomic analysis of the Magnex Against Standard COmbination Therapy study comparing cefoperazone-sulbactam (Magnex) versus ceftazidime+ amikacin+metronidazole, in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. METHODS: This prospective, open label, phase IV study was conducted at 17 study sites in India and randomized subjects to receive either cefoperazone-sulbactam or the combination. Pharmacoeconomic analysis was included as a secondary objective and conducted in the clinical efficacy-evaluable (CEE) and the successfully treated patients. All comparisons between treatment groups were conducted using analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Wilcoxon Two-Sample tests. All costs were reported as Indian Rupee (INR) and actual unit costs collected in 2006 were used for the analyses [1 USD approximately 40 INR; 1 Euro approximately 56 INR]. RESULTS: In the CEE and the successfully treated subset of patients, the average cost of treatment was numerically lower in the cefoperazone-sulbactam arm (not statistically significant). The analyses found that the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) for cefoperazone-sulbactam was INR 17,640.53 and that for the comparator group was INR 22,075.16. Additionally, the incremental CER results showed that the cost of treatment was INR 21,505.59 lower per additional successfully treated patient in the cefoperazone-sulbactam group. CONCLUSIONS: The present study was the first of its kind to be conducted in the "price sensitive" Indian health-care setting. Though study was not powered for the difference in average cost of treatments, there was a trend favoring cefoperazone sulbactam. The findings from this study should encourage further conduct of similar analyses and increase the knowledge regarding pharmacoeconomics in India.

Treatment of adults with acute uncomplicated malaria with azithromycin and chloroquine in India, Colombia, and Suriname.

BACKGROUND: To explore the use of azithromycin-chloroquine (AZCQ) for the treatment of malaria, we conducted double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority studies in India, Colombia, and Suriname comparing the combination of azithromycin 1 g and chloroquine (CQ) 600 mg base once daily (QD) for 3 days versus atovaquone-proguanil (AP) or chloroquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SPCQ) in adults with acute uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. METHODS: Patients were hospitalized until three documented negative blood smears and followed through Day 42. The primary end point was parasitologic cure at Day 28. RESULTS: In India, parasite clearance rates were 84% and 94% for AZCQ and SPCQ, respectively (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference: -22.6, 0.8). In Colombia and Suriname, parasite clearance rates were 57% and 99% for AZCQ and AP, respectively (95% CI: -52, -32). A subsequent open-label, non-comparative third study using a 2 g dose of azithromycin and 600 mg of CQ in India and Colombia resulted in an overall efficacy rate of 97%. CONCLUSION: In India, Colombia, and Suriname, 1 g azithromycin with CQ QD for 3 days was inferior to established comparator agents. An improved response rate was observed when the dose of azithromycin was increased to 2 g.