Effectiveness of antimalarial drug combinations in treating concomitant urogenital schistosomiasis in malaria patients in Lambaréné, Gabon: A non-randomised event-monitoring study.

BACKGROUND: Urogenital schistosomiasis is prevalent in many malaria endemic regions of sub-Saharan Africa and can lead to long-term health consequences if untreated. Antimalarial drugs used to treat uncomplicated malaria have shown to exert some activity against Schistosoma haematobium. Here, we explore the efficacy on concomitant urogenital schistosomiasis of first-line recommended artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) and investigational second-generation ACTs when administered for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Gabon. METHODS: Microscopic determination of urogenital schistosomiasis was performed from urine samples collected from patients with confirmed uncomplicated malaria. Egg excretion reduction rate and cure rate were determined at 4-weeks and 6-weeks post-treatment with either artesunate-pyronaridine, artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-amodiaquine or artefenomel-ferroquine. RESULTS: Fifty-two (16%) out of 322 malaria patients were co-infected with urogenital schistosomiasis and were treated with antimalarial drug combinations. Schistosoma haematobium egg excretion rates showed a median reduction of 100% (interquartile range (IQR), 17% to 100%) and 65% (IQR, -133% to 100%) at 4-weeks and 6-weeks post-treatment, respectively, in the artesunate-pyronaridine group (n = 20) compared to 35% (IQR, -250% to 70%) and 65% (IQR, -65% to 79%) in the artemether-lumefantrine group (n = 18). Artesunate-amodiaquine (n = 2) and artefenomel-ferroquine combination (n = 3) were not able to reduce the rate of eggs excreted in this limited number of patients. In addition, cure rates were 56% and 37% at 4- and 6-weeks post-treatment, respectively, with artesunate-pyronaridine and no cases of cure were observed for the other antimalarial combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Antimalarial treatments with artesunate-pyronaridine and artemether-lumefantrine reduced the excretion of S. haematobium eggs, comforting the hypothesis that antimalarial drugs could play a role in the control of schistosomiasis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, under the Identifier NCT04264130.

A comparison of different scores for diagnosis and mortality prediction of adults with sepsis in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Clinical scores for sepsis have been primarily developed for, and applied in High-Income Countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the performance of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and Universal Vital Assessment (UVA) scores for diagnosis and prediction of mortality in patients with suspected infection in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries. Methods: PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched until May 18, 2021. Studies reporting the performance of at least one of the above-mentioned scores for predicting mortality in patients of 15 years of age and older with suspected infection or sepsis were eligible. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment. PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020153906). The bivariate random-effects regression model was used to pool the individual sensitivities, specificities and areas-under-the-curve (AUC). Findings: Twenty-four articles (of 5669 identified) with 27,237 patients were eligible for inclusion. qSOFA pooled sensitivity was 0·70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0·60-0·78), specificity 0·73 (95% CI 0·67-0·79), and AUC 0·77 (95% CI 0·72-0·82). SIRS pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0·88 (95% CI 0·79 -0·93), 0·34 (95% CI 0·25-0·44), and 0·69 (95% CI 0·50-0·83), respectively. MEWS pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0·70 (95% CI 0·57 -0·81), 0·61 (95% CI 0·42-0·77), and 0·72 (95% CI 0·64-0·77), respectively. UVA pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0·49 (95% CI 0·33 -0·65), 0·91(95% CI 0·84-0·96), and 0·76 (95% CI 0·44-0·93), respectively. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the pooled analysis. Interpretation: Individual score performances ranged from poor to acceptable. Future studies should combine selected or modified elements of different scores. Funding: Partially funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (17/63/42).