RESUMEN
Challenges in classifying recurrent Plasmodium vivax infections constrain surveillance of antimalarial efficacy and transmission. Recurrent infections may arise from activation of dormant liver stages (relapse), blood-stage treatment failure (recrudescence) or reinfection. Molecular inference of familial relatedness (identity-by-descent or IBD) can help resolve the probable origin of recurrences. As whole genome sequencing of P. vivax remains challenging, targeted genotyping methods are needed for scalability. We describe a P. vivax marker discovery framework to identify and select panels of microhaplotypes (multi-allelic markers within small, amplifiable segments of the genome) that can accurately capture IBD. We evaluate panels of 50-250 microhaplotypes discovered in a global set of 615 P. vivax genomes. A candidate global 100-microhaplotype panel exhibits high marker diversity in the Asia-Pacific, Latin America and horn of Africa (median HE = 0.70-0.81) and identifies 89% of the polyclonal infections detected with genome-wide datasets. Data simulations reveal lower error in estimating pairwise IBD using microhaplotypes relative to traditional biallelic SNP barcodes. The candidate global panel also exhibits high accuracy in predicting geographic origin and captures local infection outbreak and bottlenecking events. Our framework is open-source enabling customised microhaplotype discovery and selection, with potential for porting to other species or data resources.
Asunto(s)
Malaria Vivax , Plasmodium vivax , Recurrencia , Plasmodium vivax/genética , Malaria Vivax/parasitología , Malaria Vivax/epidemiología , Humanos , Haplotipos/genética , Polimorfismo de Nucleótido Simple , Genoma de Protozoos/genética , GenotipoRESUMEN
Plasmodium vivax is now the main cause of malaria outside Africa. The gametocytocidal effects of antimalarial drugs are important to reduce malaria transmissibility, particularly in low-transmission settings, but they are not well characterized for P. vivax. The transmission-blocking effects of chloroquine, artesunate, and methylene blue on P. vivax gametocytes were assessed. Blood specimens were collected from patients presenting with vivax malaria, incubated with or without the tested drugs, and then fed to mosquitos from a laboratory-adapted colony of Anopheles dirus (a major malaria vector in Southeast Asia). The effects on oocyst and sporozoite development were analyzed under a multi-level Bayesian model accounting for assay variability and the heterogeneity of mosquito Plasmodium infection. Artesunate and methylene blue, but not chloroquine, exhibited potent transmission-blocking effects. Gametocyte exposures to artesunate and methylene blue reduced the mean oocyst count 469-fold (95% CI: 345 to 650) and 1,438-fold (95% CI: 970 to 2,064), respectively. The corresponding estimates for the sporozoite stage were a 148-fold reduction (95% CI: 61 to 470) and a 536-fold reduction (95% CI: 246 to 1,311) in the mean counts, respectively. In contrast, high chloroquine exposures reduced the mean oocyst count only 1.40-fold (95% CI: 1.20 to 1.64) and the mean sporozoite count 1.34-fold (95% CI: 1.12 to 1.66). This suggests that patients with vivax malaria often remain infectious to anopheline mosquitos after treatment with chloroquine. Use of artemisinin combination therapies or immediate initiation of primaquine radical cure should reduce the transmissibility of P. vivax infections.
RESUMEN
GUIDELINE TITLE: International Consensus Criteria for Pediatric Sepsis and Septic Shock RELEASE DATE: January 21, 2024 PRIOR VERSION(S): International Pediatric Sepsis Consensus Conference: Definitions for Sepsis and Organ Dysfunction in Pediatrics (2005) DEVELOPER: Society of Critical Care Medicine FUNDING SOURCE: Society of Critical Care Medicine (grant R01HD105939 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) TARGET POPULATION: Children with sepsis and septic shock.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Effective antiviral drugs prevent hospitalisation and death from COVID-19. Antiviral efficacy can be efficiently assessed in vivo by measuring rates of SARS-CoV-2 clearance estimated from serial viral genome densities quantitated in nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab eluates. We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis of unblinded arms in the PLATCOV platform trial to characterise changes in viral clearance kinetics and infer optimal design and interpretation of antiviral pharmacometric evaluations. METHODS: Serial viral density data were analysed from symptomatic, previously healthy, adult patients (within 4 days of symptom onset) enrolled in a large multicentre, randomised, adaptive, pharmacodynamic, platform trial (PLATCOV) comparing antiviral interventions for SARS-CoV-2. Viral clearance rates over 1 week were estimated under a hierarchical Bayesian linear model with B-splines used to characterise temporal changes in enrolment viral densities and clearance rates. Bootstrap re-sampling was used to assess the optimal duration of follow-up for pharmacometric assessment, where optimal was defined as maximising the expected Z score when comparing effective antivirals with no treatment. PLATCOV is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05041907. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2021, and Oct 20, 2023, 1262 patients were randomly assigned in the PLATCOV trial. Unblinded data were available from 800 patients (who provided 16â818 oropharyngeal viral quantitative PCR [qPCR] measurements), of whom 504 (63%) were female. 783 (98%) patients had received at least one vaccine dose and 703 (88%) were fully vaccinated. SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance was biphasic (bi-exponential). The first phase (α) was accelerated by effective interventions. For all the effective interventions studied, maximum discriminative power (maximum expected Z score) was obtained when evaluating serial data from the first 5 days after enrolment. Over the 2-year period studied, median viral clearance half-lives estimated over 7 days shortened from 16·6 h (IQR 15·3 to 18·2) in September, 2021, to 9·2 h (8·0 to 10·6) in October, 2023, in patients receiving no antiviral drugs, equivalent to a relative reduction of 44% (95% credible interval [CrI] 19 to 64). A parallel reduction in viral clearance half-lives over time was observed in patients receiving antiviral drugs. For example, in the 158 patients assigned to ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (3380 qPCR measurements), the median viral clearance half-life reduced from 6·4 h (IQR 5·7 to 7·3) in June, 2022, to 4·8 h (4·2 to 5·5) in October, 2023, a relative reduction of 26% (95% CrI -4 to 42). INTERPRETATION: SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance kinetics in symptomatic, vaccinated individuals accelerated substantially over 2 years of the pandemic, necessitating a change to how new SARS-CoV-2 antivirals are compared (ie, shortening the period of pharmacodynamic assessment). As of writing (October, 2023), antiviral efficacy in COVID-19 can be efficiently assessed in vivo using serial qPCRs from duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily for 5 days after drug administration. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic affected all WHO member states. We compared and contrasted the COVID-19 treatment guidelines of each member state with the WHO COVID-19 therapeutic guidelines. METHODS: Ministries of Health or accessed National Infectious Disease websites and other relevant bodies and experts were contacted to obtain national guidelines (NGs) for COVID-19 treatment. NGs were included only if they delineated specific pharmacological treatments for COVID-19, which were stratified by disease severity. We conducted a retrospective review using the adapted Reporting Checklist for Public Versions of Guidelines (RIGHT-PVG) survey checklist and a derived comparative metric based on the WHO guidelines was performed. RESULTS: COVID-19 therapeutics NGs could be obtained from 109 of the 194 WHO member states. There was considerable variation in guidelines and in disease severity stratifications. Therapeutic recommendations in many NGs differed substantially from the WHO guidelines. Overall in late 2022, 93% of NGs were recommending at least one treatment which had proved to be ineffective in large randomised trials, and was not recommended by WHO. Corticosteroids were not recommended in severe disease in nearly 10% of NGs despite overwhelming evidence of their benefit. NGs from countries with low-resource settings showed the greatest divergence when stratified by gross domestic product per year, Human Development Index and the Global Health Security Index. DISCUSSION: Our study is limited to NGs that were readily accessible, and it does not reflect the availability of recommended medicines in the field. Three years after the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, available COVID-19 NGs vary substantially in their therapeutic recommendations, often differ from the WHO guidelines, and commonly recommend ineffective, unaffordable or unavailable medicines.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Pandemias , Salud GlobalRESUMEN
In our recent paper on the clinical pharmacology of tafenoquine (Watson et al., 2022), we used all available individual patient pharmacometric data from the tafenoquine pre-registration clinical efficacy trials to characterise the determinants of anti-relapse efficacy in tropical vivax malaria. We concluded that the currently recommended dose of tafenoquine (300 mg in adults, average dose of 5 mg/kg) is insufficient for cure in all adults, and a 50% increase to 450 mg (7.5 mg/kg) would halve the risk of vivax recurrence by four months. We recommended that clinical trials of higher doses should be carried out to assess their safety and tolerability. Sharma and colleagues at the pharmaceutical company GSK defend the currently recommended adult dose of 300 mg as the optimum balance between radical curative efficacy and haemolytic toxicity (Sharma et al., 2024). We contend that the relative haemolytic risks of the 300 mg and 450 mg doses have not been sufficiently well characterised to justify this opinion. In contrast, we provided evidence that the currently recommended 300 mg dose results in sub-maximal efficacy, and that prospective clinical trials of higher doses are warranted to assess their risks and benefits.
Asunto(s)
Aminoquinolinas , Antimaláricos , Malaria Vivax , Adulto , Humanos , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Hemólisis , Malaria Vivax/tratamiento farmacológico , Primaquina/uso terapéutico , Estudios Prospectivos , Metaanálisis como AsuntoRESUMEN
Background: Primaquine is an 8-aminoquinoline antimalarial. It is the only widely available treatment to prevent relapses of Plasmodium vivax malaria. The 8-aminoquinolines cause dose-dependent haemolysis in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PDd). G6PDd is common in malaria endemic areas but testing is often not available. As a consequence primaquine is underused. Methods: We conducted an adaptive pharmacometric study to characterise the relationship between primaquine dose and haemolysis in G6PDd. The aim was to explore shorter and safer primaquine radical cure regimens compared to the currently recommended 8-weekly regimen (0.75 mg/kg once weekly), potentially obviating the need for G6PD testing. Hemizygous G6PDd healthy adult Thai and Burmese male volunteers were admitted to the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Bangkok. In Part 1, volunteers were given ascending dose primaquine regimens whereby daily doses were increased from 7.5 mg up to 45 mg over 15-20 days. In Part 2 conducted at least 6 months later, a single primaquine 45 mg dose was given. Results: 24 volunteers were enrolled in Part 1, and 16 in Part 2 (13 participated in both studies). In three volunteers, the ascending dose regimen was stopped because of haemolysis (n=1) and asymptomatic increases in transaminases (n=2; one was hepatitis E positive). Otherwise the ascending regimens were well tolerated with no drug-related serious adverse events. In Part 1, the median haemoglobin concentration decline was 3.7 g/dL (range: 2.1-5.9; relative decline of 26% [range: 15-40%]). Primaquine doses up to 0.87 mg/kg/day were tolerated subsequently without clinically significant further falls in haemoglobin. In Part 2, the median haemoglobin concentration decline was 1.7 g/dL (range 0.9-4.1; relative fall of 12% [range: 7-30% decrease]). The ascending dose primaquine regimens gave seven times more drug but resulted in only double the haemoglobin decline. Conclusions: In patients with Southeast Asian G6PDd variants, full radical cure treatment can be given in under 3 weeks compared with the current 8-week regimen. Funding: Medical Research Council of the United Kingdom (MR/R015252/1) and Wellcome (093956/Z/10/C, 223253/Z/21/Z). Clinical trial number: Thai Clinical Trial Registry: TCTR20170830002 and TCTR20220317004.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Deficiencia de Glucosafosfato Deshidrogenasa , Malaria Vivax , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Voluntarios Sanos , Hemoglobinas , Hemólisis , Malaria Vivax/tratamiento farmacológico , Malaria Vivax/prevención & control , Primaquina/efectos adversos , TailandiaRESUMEN
We characterized the spatial distribution of drug-susceptible (DS) and multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis (TB) cases in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, a major metropolis in southeastern Asia, and explored demographic and socioeconomic factors associated with local TB burden. Hot spots of DS and MDR TB incidence were observed in the central parts of Ho Chi Minh City, and substantial heterogeneity was observed across wards. Positive spatial autocorrelation was observed for both DS TB and MDR TB. Ward-level TB incidence was associated with HIV prevalence and the male proportion of the population. No ward-level demographic and socioeconomic indicators were associated with MDR TB case count relative to total TB case count. Our findings might inform spatially targeted TB control strategies and provide insights for generating hypotheses about the nature of the relationship between DS and MDR TB in Ho Chi Minh City and the wider southeastern region of Asia.
Asunto(s)
Tuberculosis Resistente a Múltiples Medicamentos , Tuberculosis , Masculino , Humanos , Vietnam/epidemiología , Tuberculosis Resistente a Múltiples Medicamentos/epidemiología , Asia , Análisis EspacialRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Effective antiviral drugs accelerate viral clearance in acute COVID-19 infections; the relationship between accelerating viral clearance and reducing severe clinical outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antiviral therapies in early symptomatic COVID-19, where viral clearance data were available. Treatment benefit was defined clinically as the relative risk of hospitalization/death during follow-up (≥14â days), and virologically as the SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance rate ratio (VCRR). The VCRR is the ratio of viral clearance rates between the intervention and control arms. The relationship between the clinical and virological treatment effects was assessed by mixed-effects meta-regression. RESULTS: From 57 potentially eligible RCTs, VCRRs were derived for 44 (52â384 participants); 32 had ≥1 clinical endpoint in each arm. Overall, 9.7% (R2) of the variation in clinical benefit was explained by variation in VCRRs with an estimated linear coefficient of -0.92 (95% CI: -1.99 to 0.13; Pâ=â0.08). However, this estimate was highly sensitive to the inclusion of the recent very large PANORAMIC trial. Omitting this outlier, half the variation in clinical benefit (R2â=â50.4%) was explained by variation in VCRRs [slope -1.47 (95% CI -2.43 to -0.51); Pâ=â0.003], i.e. higher VCRRs were associated with an increased clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: Methods of determining viral clearance in COVID-19 studies and the relationship to clinical outcomes vary greatly. As prohibitively large sample sizes are now required to show clinical treatment benefit in antiviral therapeutic assessments, viral clearance is a reasonable surrogate endpoint.
Asunto(s)
Antivirales , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Progresión de la Enfermedad , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/virología , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de los fármacos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Carga Viral/efectos de los fármacos , Resultado del Tratamiento , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
In early symptomatic COVID-19 treatment, high dose oral favipiravir did not accelerate viral clearance. BACKGROUND: Favipiravir, an anti-influenza drug, has in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Clinical trial evidence to date is inconclusive. Favipiravir has been recommended for the treatment of COVID-19 in some countries. METHODS: In a multicentre open-label, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial, low-risk adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomised to one of ten treatment arms including high dose oral favipiravir (3.6g on day 0 followed by 1.6g daily to complete 7 days treatment) or no study drug. The primary outcome was the rate of viral clearance (derived under a linear mixed-effects model from the daily log10 viral densities in standardised duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily over 8 days [18 swabs per patient]), assessed in a modified intention-to-treat population (mITT). The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of the allocated intervention. This ongoing adaptive platform trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907) on 13/09/2021. RESULTS: In the final analysis, the mITT population contained data from 114 patients randomised to favipiravir and 126 patients randomised concurrently to no study drug. Under the linear mixed-effects model fitted to all oropharyngeal viral density estimates in the first 8 days from randomisation (4,318 swabs), there was no difference in the rate of viral clearance between patients given favipiravir and patients receiving no study drug; a -1% (95% credible interval: -14 to 14%) difference. High dose favipiravir was well-tolerated. INTERPRETATION: Favipiravir does not accelerate viral clearance in early symptomatic COVID-19. The viral clearance rate estimated from quantitative measurements of oropharyngeal eluate viral densities assesses the antiviral efficacy of drugs in vivo with comparatively few studied patients.
Asunto(s)
Amidas , COVID-19 , Pirazinas , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Resultado del Tratamiento , Antivirales/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Primaquine is used to eliminate Plasmodium vivax hypnozoites, but its optimal dosing regimen remains unclear. We undertook a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of different primaquine dosing regimens to prevent P vivax recurrence. METHODS: For this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central for prospective clinical studies of uncomplicated P vivax from endemic countries published between Jan 1, 2000, and June 8, 2023. We included studies if they had active follow-up of at least 28 days, and if they included a treatment group with daily primaquine given over multiple days, where primaquine was commenced within 7 days of schizontocidal treatment and was given alone or coadministered with chloroquine or one of four artemisinin-based combination therapies (ie, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-mefloquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine). We excluded studies if they were on prevention, prophylaxis, or patients with severe malaria, or if data were extracted retrospectively from medical records outside of a planned trial. For the meta-analysis, we contacted the investigators of eligible trials to request individual patient data and we then pooled data that were made available by Aug 23, 2021. We assessed the effects of total dose and duration of primaquine regimens on the rate of first P vivax recurrence between day 7 and day 180 by Cox's proportional hazards regression (efficacy analysis). The effect of primaquine daily dose on gastrointestinal symptoms on days 5-7 was assessed by modified Poisson regression (tolerability analysis). The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019154470. FINDINGS: Of 226 identified studies, 23 studies with patient-level data from 6879 patients from 16 countries were included in the efficacy analysis. At day 180, the risk of recurrence was 51·0% (95% CI 48·2-53·9) in 1470 patients treated without primaquine, 19·3% (16·9-21·9) in 2569 patients treated with a low total dose of primaquine (approximately 3·5 mg/kg), and 8·1% (7·0-9·4) in 2811 patients treated with a high total dose of primaquine (approximately 7 mg/kg), regardless of primaquine treatment duration. Compared with treatment without primaquine, the rate of P vivax recurrence was lower after treatment with low-dose primaquine (adjusted hazard ratio 0·21, 95% CI 0·17-0·27; p<0·0001) and high-dose primaquine (0·10, 0·08-0·12; p<0·0001). High-dose primaquine had greater efficacy than low-dose primaquine in regions with high and low relapse periodicity (ie, the time from initial infection to vivax relapse). 16 studies with patient-level data from 5609 patients from ten countries were included in the tolerability analysis. Gastrointestinal symptoms on days 5-7 were reported by 4·0% (95% CI 0·0-8·7) of 893 patients treated without primaquine, 6·2% (0·5-12·0) of 737 patients treated with a low daily dose of primaquine (approximately 0·25 mg/kg per day), 5·9% (1·8-10·1) of 1123 patients treated with an intermediate daily dose (approximately 0·5 mg/kg per day) and 10·9% (5·7-16·1) of 1178 patients treated with a high daily dose (approximately 1 mg/kg per day). 20 of 23 studies included in the efficacy analysis and 15 of 16 in the tolerability analysis had a low or unclear risk of bias. INTERPRETATION: Increasing the total dose of primaquine from 3·5 mg/kg to 7 mg/kg can reduce P vivax recurrences by more than 50% in most endemic regions, with a small associated increase in gastrointestinal symptoms. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Medicines for Malaria Venture.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria Vivax , Malaria , Humanos , Primaquina/uso terapéutico , Antimaláricos/efectos adversos , Plasmodium vivax , Artesunato/uso terapéutico , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Arteméter/farmacología , Arteméter/uso terapéutico , Combinación Arteméter y Lumefantrina/uso terapéutico , Australia , Malaria Vivax/tratamiento farmacológico , Malaria Vivax/prevención & control , Malaria Vivax/epidemiología , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , RecurrenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Primaquine radical cure is used to treat dormant liver-stage parasites and prevent relapsing Plasmodium vivax malaria but is limited by concerns of haemolysis. We undertook a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the haematological safety of different primaquine regimens for P vivax radical cure. METHODS: For this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central for prospective clinical studies of uncomplicated P vivax from endemic countries published between Jan 1, 2000, and June 8, 2023. We included studies if they had active follow-up of at least 28 days, if they included a treatment group with daily primaquine given over multiple days where primaquine was commenced within 3 days of schizontocidal treatment and was given alone or coadministered with chloroquine or one of four artemisinin-based combination therapies (ie, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-mefloquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine), and if they recorded haemoglobin or haematocrit concentrations on day 0. We excluded studies if they were on prevention, prophylaxis, or patients with severe malaria, or if data were extracted retrospectively from medical records outside of a planned trial. For the meta-analysis, we contacted the investigators of eligible trials to request individual patient data and we then pooled data that were made available by Aug 23, 2021. The main outcome was haemoglobin reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL by day 14. Haemoglobin concentration changes between day 0 and days 2-3 and between day 0 and days 5-7 were assessed by mixed-effects linear regression for patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity of (1) 30% or higher and (2) between 30% and less than 70%. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019154470 and CRD42022303680. FINDINGS: Of 226 identified studies, 18 studies with patient-level data from 5462 patients from 15 countries were included in the analysis. A haemoglobin reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL occurred in one (0·1%) of 1208 patients treated without primaquine, none of 893 patients treated with a low daily dose of primaquine (<0·375 mg/kg per day), five (0·3%) of 1464 patients treated with an intermediate daily dose (0·375 mg/kg per day to <0·75 mg/kg per day), and six (0·5%) of 1269 patients treated with a high daily dose (≥0·75 mg/kg per day). The covariate-adjusted mean estimated haemoglobin changes at days 2-3 were -0·6 g/dL (95% CI -0·7 to -0·5), -0·7 g/dL (-0·8 to -0·5), -0·6 g/dL (-0·7 to -0·4), and -0·5 g/dL (-0·7 to -0·4), respectively. In 51 patients with G6PD activity between 30% and less than 70%, the adjusted mean haemoglobin concentration on days 2-3 decreased as G6PD activity decreased; two patients in this group who were treated with a high daily dose of primaquine had a reduction of more than 25% to a concentration of less than 7 g/dL. 17 of 18 included studies had a low or unclear risk of bias. INTERPRETATION: Treatment of patients with G6PD activity of 30% or higher with 0·25-0·5 mg/kg per day primaquine regimens and patients with G6PD activity of 70% or higher with 0·25-1 mg/kg per day regimens were associated with similar risks of haemolysis to those in patients treated without primaquine, supporting the safe use of primaquine radical cure at these doses. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Medicines for Malaria Venture.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria Vivax , Primaquina , Humanos , Antimaláricos/efectos adversos , Combinación Arteméter y Lumefantrina/uso terapéutico , Artesunato/uso terapéutico , Australia , Hemoglobinas , Hemólisis , Malaria Vivax/tratamiento farmacológico , Plasmodium vivax , Primaquina/efectos adversos , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir are the two leading oral COVID-19 antiviral treatments, but their antiviral activities in patients have not been compared directly. The aim of this ongoing platform trial is to compare different antiviral treatments using the rate of viral clearance as the measure of antiviral effect. METHODS: PLATCOV is an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled, adaptive pharmacometric platform trial running in Thailand, Brazil, Pakistan, and Laos. The component of the trial reported here was conducted in the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. We recruited low-risk adult patients aged 18-50 years with early symptomatic COVID-19 (<4 days of symptoms). Eligible patients were randomly assigned using block randomisation via a centralised web app to one of seven treatment groups: molnupiravir, ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, casirivimab-imdevimab, tixagevimab-cilgavimab, favipiravir, fluoxetine, or no study drug. The no study drug group comprised a minimum proportion of 20% of patients at all times, with uniform randomisation ratios applied across the active treatment groups. Results for the concurrently randomised molnupiravir, ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, and no study drug groups are reported here. The primary endpoint was the rate of oropharyngeal viral clearance assessed in a modified intention-to-treat population, defined as patients with more than 2 days of follow-up. Safety was assessed in all participants who took at least one dose of the medication. The viral clearance rate was derived under a Bayesian hierarchical linear model fitted to the log10 viral densities in standardised duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily over 1 week (18 measurements). Treatment groups with a probability of more than 0·9 that viral clearance was accelerated by more than 20% compared with no drug entered a non-inferiority comparison (with a 10% non-inferiority margin) compared with the platform's current most effective drug. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05041907. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2022, and Feb 23, 2023, 209 patients in Thailand were enrolled and concurrently randomly assigned to molnupiravir (n=65), ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (n=59), or no study drug (n=85). 129 (62%) of the patients were female and 80 (38%) were male. Relative to the no study drug group, the rates of viral clearance were 37% (95% credible interval 16-65) faster with molnupiravir and 84% (54-119) faster with ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. In the non-inferiority comparison, viral clearance was 25% (10-38) slower with molnupiravir than ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. Molnupiravir was removed from the study platform when it reached the prespecified inferiority margin of 10% compared with ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. Median estimated viral clearance half-lives were 8·5 h (IQR 6·7-10·1) with ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, 11·6 h (8·6-15·4) with molnupiravir, and 15·5 h (11·9-21·2) with no study drug. Viral rebound occurred more frequently following nirmatrelvir (six [10%] of 58) compared with the no study drug (one [1%] of 84; p=0·018) or the molnupiravir (one [2%] of 65; p=0·051) groups. Persistent infections following molnupiravir had more viral mutations (three of nine patients had an increased number of single nucleotide polymorphisms in samples collected at 7 or more days compared with those at baseline) than after nirmatrelvir (zero of three) or no study drug (zero of 19). There were no adverse events of grade 3 or worse, or serious adverse events in any of the reported treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Both molnupiravir and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir accelerate oropharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance in patients with COVID-19, but the antiviral effect of ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir was substantially greater. Measurement of oropharyngeal viral clearance rates provides a rapid and well tolerated approach to the assessment and comparison of antiviral drugs in patients with COVID-19. It should be evaluated in other acute viral respiratory infections. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator.
Asunto(s)
Fármacos Anti-VIH , COVID-19 , Infecciones por VIH , VIH-1 , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Ritonavir , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Teorema de Bayes , Resultado del Tratamiento , SARS-CoV-2 , Tailandia , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Antivirales/farmacologíaRESUMEN
Background: Snakebite clinical trials have often used heterogeneous outcome measures and there is an urgent need for standardisation. Method: A globally representative group of key stakeholders came together to reach consensus on a globally relevant set of core outcome measurements. Outcome domains and outcome measurement instruments were identified through searching the literature and a systematic review of snakebite clinical trials. Outcome domains were shortlisted by use of a questionnaire and consensus was reached among stakeholders and the patient group through facilitated discussions and voting. Results: Five universal core outcome measures should be included in all future snakebite clinical trials: mortality, WHO disability assessment scale, patient-specific functional scale, acute allergic reaction by Brown criteria, and serum sickness by formal criteria. Additional syndrome-specific core outcome measures should be used depending on the biting species. Conclusion: This core outcome measurement set provides global standardisation, supports the priorities of patients and clinicians, enables meta-analysis, and is appropriate for use in low-income and middle-income settings.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Mordeduras de Serpientes , Humanos , Consenso , Evaluación de la Discapacidad , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Mordeduras de Serpientes/diagnóstico , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
In this Policy Forum article, James A. Watson and colleagues discuss recent guidelines relating to pre-referral treatment of suspected severe malaria with rectal artesunate suppositories in remote areas.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Artemisininas , Malaria , Humanos , Artesunato/uso terapéutico , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Supositorios , Artemisininas/uso terapéutico , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Derivación y ConsultaRESUMEN
Since it emerged in the early 2000's, intensive education about 'how pain works', widely known as pain neuroscience education or explaining pain, has evolved into a new educational approach, with new content and new strategies. The substantial differences from the original have led the PETAL collaboration to call the current iteration 'Pain Science Education'. This review presents a brief historical context for Pain Science Education, the clinical trials, consumer perspective, and real-world clinical data that have pushed the field to update both content and method. We describe the key role of educational psychology in driving this change, the central role of constructivism, and the constructivist learning frameworks around which Pain Science Education is now planned and delivered. We integrate terminology and concepts from the learning frameworks currently being used across the PETAL collaboration in both research and practice-the Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive framework, transformative learning theory, and dynamic model of conceptual change. We then discuss strategies that are being used to enhance learning within clinical encounters, which focus on the skill, will, and thrill of learning. Finally, we provide practical examples of these strategies so as to assist the reader to drive their own patient pain education offerings towards more effective learning. PERSPECTIVE: Rapid progress in several fields and research groups has led to the emergence 'Pain Science Education'. This PETAL review describes challenges that have spurred the field forward, the learning frameworks and educational strategies that are addressing those challenges, and some easy wins to implement and mistakes to avoid.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Uncertainty over the therapeutic benefit of parenteral remdesivir in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in varying treatment guidelines. METHODS: In a multicenter open-label, controlled, adaptive, pharmacometric platform trial, low-risk adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to 1 of 8 treatment arms including intravenous remdesivir (200 mg followed by 100 mg daily for 5 days) or no study drug. The primary outcome was the rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) clearance (estimated under a linear model fit to the daily log10 viral densities, days 0-7) in standardized duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates, in a modified intention-to-treat population. This ongoing adaptive trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907). RESULTS: The 2 study arms enrolled 131 patients (remdesivir n = 67, no study drug n = 64) and estimated viral clearance rates from a median of 18 swab samples per patient (a total of 2356 quantitative polymerase chain reactions). Under the linear model, compared with the contemporaneous control arm (no study drug), remdesivir accelerated mean estimated viral clearance by 42% (95% credible interval, 18%-73%). CONCLUSIONS: Parenteral remdesivir accelerates viral clearance in early symptomatic COVID-19. Pharmacometric assessment of therapeutics using the method described can determine in vivo clinical antiviral efficacy rapidly and efficiently.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Resultado del Tratamiento , AntiviralesRESUMEN
Eukaryotes have a multitude of diverse mechanisms for organising and using their genomes, but the histones that make up chromatin are highly conserved. Unusually, histones from kinetoplastids are highly divergent. The structural and functional consequences of this variation are unknown. Here, we have biochemically and structurally characterised nucleosome core particles (NCPs) from the kinetoplastid parasite Trypanosoma brucei. A structure of the T. brucei NCP reveals that global histone architecture is conserved, but specific sequence alterations lead to distinct DNA and protein interaction interfaces. The T. brucei NCP is unstable and has weakened overall DNA binding. However, dramatic changes at the H2A-H2B interface introduce local reinforcement of DNA contacts. The T. brucei acidic patch has altered topology and is refractory to known binders, indicating that the nature of chromatin interactions in T. brucei may be unique. Overall, our results provide a detailed molecular basis for understanding evolutionary divergence in chromatin structure.
Asunto(s)
Histonas , Nucleosomas , Trypanosoma brucei brucei , Cromatina/genética , Cromatina/metabolismo , ADN/metabolismo , Histonas/metabolismo , Nucleosomas/genética , Nucleosomas/metabolismo , Trypanosoma brucei brucei/metabolismoRESUMEN
CARAMAL was a large observational study which recorded mortality in children with suspected severe malaria before and after the roll-out of rectal artesunate in Nigeria, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The results of CARAMAL have had a huge impact on public health policy leading to a World Health Organization moratorium on the roll-out of rectal artesunate. The conclusion reported in the abstract uses strong causal language, stating that "pre-referral RAS [rectal artesunate suppositories] had no beneficial effect on child survival". We argue that this causal interpretation of the study results is not justified. Data from the CARAMAL study inform chiefly on the strengths and weaknesses of referral systems in these three countries and do not inform reliably as to the beneficial effect of providing access to a known life-saving treatment.