Safety of mefloquine and other antimalarial agents in the first trimester of pregnancy

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 In addition, we checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies, unpublished data, confidential reports, and raw data from published trials.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.

Antimalarial drugs for treating and preventing malaria in pregnant and lactating women

INTRODUCTION

Malaria in pregnancy and postpartum cause maternal mortality and adverse fetal outcomes. Efficacious and safe antimalarials are needed to treat and prevent such serious consequences. However, because of the lack of evidence on fetal safety, quinine, an old and less efficacious drug has long been recommended for pregnant women. Uncertainty about safety in relation to breastfeeding leads to withholding of efficacious treatments postpartum or cessation of breastfeeding. Areas covered: A search identified literature on humans in three databases (MEDLINE, Embase and Global health) using pregnancy or lactation, and the names of antimalarial drugs as search terms. Adverse reactions to the mother, fetus or breastfed infant were summarized together with efficacies. Expert opinion: Artemisinins are more efficacious and well-tolerated than quinine in pregnancy. Furthermore, the risks of miscarriage, stillbirth or congenital abnormality were not higher in pregnancies exposed to artemisinin derivatives for treatment of malaria than in pregnancies exposed to quinine or in the comparable background population unexposed to any antimalarials, and this was true for treatment in any trimester. Assessment of safety and efficacy of antimalarials including dose optimization for pregnant women is incomplete. Resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in Plasmodium falciparum and long unprotected intervals between intermittent treatment doses begs reconsideration of current preventative recommendations in pregnancy. Data remain limited on antimalarials during breastfeeding; while most first-line drugs appear safe, further research is needed.

Pharmacotherapy for the prevention of malaria in pregnant women: currently available drugs and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Malaria in pregnancy continues to be a significant public health burden globally, with over 100 million women at risk each year. Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) is the only antimalarial recommended for intermittent preventive therapy in pregnancy (IPTp) but increasing parasite resistance threatens its viability. There are few other available antimalarial therapies that currently have sufficient evidence of tolerability, safety, and efficacy to replace SP.

AREAS COVERED

Novel antimalarial combinations are under investigation for potential use as chemoprophylaxis and in IPTp regimens. The present review summarizes currently available therapies, emerging candidate combination therapies, and the potential challenges to integrating these into mainstream policy.

EXPERT OPINION

Alternative drugs or combination therapies to SP for IPTp are desperately required. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and azithromycin-based combinations are showing great promise as potential candidates for IPTp but pharmacokinetic data suggest that dose modification may be required to ensure adequate prophylactic efficacy. If a suitable candidate regimen is not identified in the near future, the success of chemopreventive strategies such as IPTp may be in jeopardy.

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%; high-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; high-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; high-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.

Mefloquine for preventing malaria during travel to endemic areas

BACKGROUND

Mefloquine is one of four antimalarial agents commonly recommended for preventing malaria in travellers to malaria-endemic areas. Despite its high efficacy, there is controversy about its psychological side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the efficacy and safety of mefloquine used as prophylaxis for malaria in travellers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published on the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase (OVID); TOXLINE (https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/newtoxnet/toxline.htm); and LILACS. We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) and ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home) for trials in progress, using 'mefloquine', 'Lariam', and 'malaria' as search terms. The search date was 22 June 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (for efficacy and safety) and non-randomized cohort studies (for safety). We compared prophylactic mefloquine with placebo, no treatment, or an alternative recommended antimalarial agent. Our study populations included all adults and children, including pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials, extracted and analysed data. We compared dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Prespecified adverse outcomes are included in 'Summary of findings' tables, with the best available estimate of the absolute frequency of each outcome in short-term international travellers. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs (11,470 participants); 35 cohort studies (198,493 participants); and four large retrospective analyses of health records (800,652 participants). Nine RCTs explicitly excluded participants with a psychiatric history, and 25 cohort studies stated that the choice of antimalarial agent was based on medical history and personal preference. Most RCTs and cohort studies collected data on self-reported or clinician-assessed symptoms, rather than formal medical diagnoses. Mefloquine efficacyOf 12 trials comparing mefloquine and placebo, none were performed in short-term international travellers, and most populations had a degree of immunity to malaria. The percentage of people developing a malaria episode in the control arm varied from 1% to 82% (median 22%) and 0% to 13% in the mefloquine group (median 1%).In four RCTs that directly compared mefloquine, atovaquone-proguanil and doxycycline in non-immune, short-term international travellers, only one clinical case of malaria occurred (4 trials, 1822 participants). Mefloquine safety versus atovaquone-proguanil Participants receiving mefloquine were more likely to discontinue their medication due to adverse effects than atovaquone-proguanil users (RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.31; 3 RCTs, 1438 participants; high-certainty evidence). There were few serious adverse effects reported with mefloquine (15/2651 travellers) and none with atovaquone-proguanil (940 travellers).One RCT and six cohort studies reported on our prespecified adverse effects. In the RCT with short-term travellers, mefloquine users were more likely to report abnormal dreams (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.37 to 3.04, moderate-certainty evidence), insomnia (RR 4.42, 95% CI 2.56 to 7.64, moderate-certainty evidence), anxiety (RR 6.12, 95% CI 1.82 to 20.66, moderate-certainty evidence), and depressed mood during travel (RR 5.78, 95% CI 1.71 to 19.61, moderate-certainty evidence). The cohort studies in longer-term travellers were consistent with this finding but most had larger effect sizes. Mefloquine users were also more likely to report nausea (high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (high-certainty evidence).Based on the available evidence, our best estimates of absolute effect sizes for mefloquine versus atovaquone-proguanil are 6% versus 2% for discontinuation of the drug, 13% versus 3% for insomnia, 14% versus 7% for abnormal dreams, 6% versus 1% for anxiety, and 6% versus 1% for depressed mood. Mefloquine safety versus doxycyclineNo difference was found in numbers of serious adverse effects with mefloquine and doxycycline (low-certainty evidence) or numbers of discontinuations due to adverse effects (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.87; 4 RCTs, 763 participants; low-certainty evidence).Six cohort studies in longer-term occupational travellers reported our prespecified adverse effects; one RCT in military personnel and one cohort study in short-term travellers reported adverse events. Mefloquine users were more likely to report abnormal dreams (RR 10.49, 95% CI 3.79 to 29.10; 4 cohort studies, 2588 participants, very low-certainty evidence), insomnia (RR 4.14, 95% CI 1.19 to 14.44; 4 cohort studies, 3212 participants, very low-certainty evidence), anxiety (RR 18.04, 95% CI 9.32 to 34.93; 3 cohort studies, 2559 participants, very low-certainty evidence), and depressed mood (RR 11.43, 95% CI 5.21 to 25.07; 2 cohort studies, 2445 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The findings of the single cohort study reporting adverse events in short-term international travellers were consistent with this finding but the single RCT in military personnel did not demonstrate a difference between groups in frequencies of abnormal dreams or insomnia.Mefloquine users were less likely to report dyspepsia (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74; 5 cohort studies, 5104 participants, low certainty-evidence), photosensitivity (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11; 2 cohort studies, 1875 participants, very low-certainty evidence), vomiting (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.27; 4 cohort studies, 5071 participants, very low-certainty evidence), and vaginal thrush (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.16; 1 cohort study, 1761 participants, very low-certainty evidence).Based on the available evidence, our best estimates of absolute effect for mefloquine versus doxycyline were: 2% versus 2% for discontinuation, 12% versus 3% for insomnia, 31% versus 3% for abnormal dreams, 18% versus 1% for anxiety, 11% versus 1% for depressed mood, 4% versus 14% for dyspepsia, 2% versus 19% for photosensitivity, 1% versus 5% for vomiting, and 2% versus 16% for vaginal thrush.Additional analyses, including comparisons of mefloquine with chloroquine, added no new information. Subgroup analysis by study design, duration of travel, and military versus non-military participants, provided no conclusive findings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The absolute risk of malaria during short-term travel appears low with all three established antimalarial agents (mefloquine, doxycycline, and atovaquone-proguanil).The choice of antimalarial agent depends on how individual travellers assess the importance of specific adverse effects, pill burden, and cost. Some travellers will prefer mefloquine for its once-weekly regimen, but this should be balanced against the increased frequency of abnormal dreams, anxiety, insomnia, and depressed mood.

Travel During Pregnancy: Considerations for the Obstetric Provider

Importance

Travel among US citizens is becoming increasingly common, and travel during pregnancy is also speculated to be increasingly common. During pregnancy, the obstetric provider may be the first or only clinician approached with questions regarding travel.

Objective

In this review, we discuss the reasons women travel during pregnancy, medical considerations for long-haul air travel, destination-specific medical complications, and precautions for pregnant women to take both before travel and while abroad. To improve the quality of pretravel counseling for patients before or during pregnancy, we have created 2 tools: a guide for assessing the pregnant patient's risk during travel and a pretravel checklist for the obstetric provider.

Evidence Acquisition

A PubMed search for English-language publications about travel during pregnancy was performed using the search terms "travel" and "pregnancy" and was limited to those published since the year 2000. Studies on subtopics were not limited by year of publication.

Results

Eight review articles were identified. Three additional studies that analyzed data from travel clinics were found, and 2 studies reported on the frequency of international travel during pregnancy. Additional publications addressed air travel during pregnancy (10 reviews, 16 studies), high-altitude travel during pregnancy (5 reviews, 5 studies), and destination-specific illnesses in pregnant travelers.

Conclusions and Relevance

Travel during pregnancy including international travel is common. Pregnant travelers have unique travel-related and destination-specific risks. We review those risks and provide tools for obstetric providers to use in counseling pregnant travelers.

Risks of miscarriage and inadvertent exposure to artemisinin derivatives in the first trimester of pregnancy: a prospective cohort study in western Kenya

BACKGROUND

The artemisinin anti-malarials are widely deployed as artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). However, they are not recommended for uncomplicated malaria during the first trimester because safety data from humans are scarce.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of women of child-bearing age carried out in 2011-2013, evaluating the relationship between inadvertent ACT exposure during first trimester and miscarriage. Community-based surveillance was used to identify 1134 early pregnancies. Cox proportional hazard models with left truncation were used.

RESULTS

The risk of miscarriage among pregnancies exposed to ACT (confirmed + unconfirmed) in the first trimester, or during the embryo-sensitive period (≥6 to <13 weeks gestation) was higher than among pregnancies unexposed to anti-malarials in the first trimester: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.70, 95 % CI (1.08-2.68) and HR = 1.61 (0.96-2.70). For confirmed ACT-exposures (primary analysis) the corresponding values were: HR = 1.24 (0.56-2.74) and HR = 0.73 (0.19-2.82) relative to unexposed women, and HR = 0.99 (0.12-8.33) and HR = 0.32 (0.03-3.61) relative to quinine exposure, but the numbers of quinine exposures were very small.

CONCLUSION

ACT exposure in early pregnancy was more common than quinine exposure. Confirmed inadvertent artemisinin exposure during the potential embryo-sensitive period was not associated with increased risk of miscarriage. Confirmatory studies are needed to rule out a smaller than three-fold increase in risk.

Safety of antimalarial drugs exposure during early pregnancy

Introduction

Inadequately controlled malaria infection in pregnancy is associated with poor maternal and fetal outcomes. However, there are important questions about drug safety for mothers with malaria and their fetuses as, currently, there is limited safety data on many of the medications used. The objective of this review is to determine from published evidence the safety of antimalarial drugs exposure during early pregnancy, focusing on abortions, stillbirths, and congenital abnormalities.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Malaria in Pregnancy databases from their inception to June 2013, inclusive, for reports published in English only. Data were extracted on exposure to antimalarial drugs during early pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes including congenital abnormalities, stillbirth, and miscarriage.

Results

Twenty-two publications including one abstract with a total of 6,333 early pregnancy exposures to antimalarial agents used for treatment and/or prevention of malaria in pregnancy met the inclusion criteria. More than 40% of the pregnancies were exposed to mefloquine, about 10% to artemisinin based regimens and, 15.2% and 14.7% were exposed to chloroquine and quinine, respectively. A total of 1,199 adverse outcomes including abortions, stillbirths, and congenital abnormalities were reported. The reported absolute risks of adverse outcomes were similar for all the antimalarial exposures, but, in two publications, increased risk of stillbirths was linked to mefloquine exposure. Extensive heterogeneity and variability in the way in which authors assessed, recorded, and reported safety data precluded formal meta-analysis.

Conclusion

The absolute estimates of risks obtained in the included studies are difficult to interpret and the clinical significance of any association of adverse outcomes reported with antimalarial exposure in early pregnancy is uncertain. Well planned, executed, and analyzed studies are needed to confirm whether there is increased risk for adverse fetal outcomes attributable to exposure of first trimester pregnancies to antimalarials compared to relevant controls.

Mefloquine safety and tolerability in pregnancy: a systematic literature review

Background

Control of malaria in pregnant women is still a major challenge as it constitutes an important cause of maternal and neonatal mortality. Mefloquine (MQ) has been used for malaria chemoprophylaxis in non-immune travellers for several decades and it constitutes a potential candidate for intermittent preventive treatment in pregnant women (IPTp).

Methods

The safety of MQ, including its safety in pregnancy, is controversial and a continuing subject of debate. Published studies which evaluated the use of MQ for malaria prevention or treatment in pregnant women and which reported data on drug tolerability and/or pregnancy outcomes have been reviewed systematically.

Results

Eighteen articles fitted the inclusion criteria, only one study was double-blind and placebo controlled. No differences were found in the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women exposed to MQ compared to those exposed to other anti-malarials or to the general population. MQ combined with artesunate seems to be better tolerated than standard quinine therapy for treatment of non-severe falciparum malaria, but a MQ loading dose (10 mg/kg) is associated with more dizziness compared with placebo. When used for IPTp, MQ (15 mg/kg) may have more side effects than sulphadoxine- pyrimethamine.

Conclusions

In the published literature there are no indications that MQ use during pregnancy carries an increased risk for the foetus. Ideally, the use of MQ to prevent malaria should be based on a risk-benefit analysis of adverse effects against the risk of acquiring the infection. For this purpose double-blinded randomized controlled trials in African pregnant women are much needed.

Treatment and prevention of malaria in pregnancy: opportunities and challenges

Control of malaria in pregnancy through prevention or treatment may save lives of mothers and babies. Selection of drugs for treatment of infected pregnant women, or for prevention in exposed populations is problematic owing to resistance to established drugs and lack of pregnancy-specific safety and pharmacological data for new drugs. Encouragingly, a number of new drugs and combinations of drugs hold promise for effective treatment, but adequate data on their safety in pregnancy is currently lacking. Our principal challenges are to decide which drugs to develop for use in malaria treatment and prevention in pregnancy and to develop mechanisms to rapidly and comprehensively evaluate their safety. Prevention of pregnancy malaria by vaccination may also become possible, but targets must be closely defined, and strategies developed to test candidates against meaningful end points.

Pregnancy course and outcome in women traveling to developing countries

BACKGROUND

The issue of travel to developing countries during pregnancy has not been sufficiently studied. The aim of this study is to investigate the rate, course, and outcome of pregnancies in women who traveled to developing countries while pregnant, or became pregnant during such travel.

METHODS

Women visiting two major travel clinics in Israel for consultation within the years 2004 to 2009, who were pregnant or declared an intention of becoming pregnant during travel were contacted. This was followed by a telephone interview by an obstetrician with those women who were actually pregnant. Background characteristics, morbidity during travel, and pregnancy course and outcome were collected.

RESULTS

Overall 52,430 travelers' records had been screened. Of these, we identified 49 women who were pregnant during their trip, but 3 declined participation. Of the remaining 46 women, 33 were pregnant at departure, and 13 conceived during travel. The incidence of pregnancy during travel was thus 0.93/1000 travelers. Thirty-three women traveled to East Asia, 8 to South and Central America, 5 to Africa. More than two thirds of women received pretravel vaccinations. Adherence to the World Health Organization recommendations regarding food and drink was high (87%) and travelers' diarrhea occurred in only 11% of women. Five of 22 women traveling to malarious areas had taken antimalarial prophylaxis. Six women required medical therapy during travel. Pregnancy outcome was not different from the normal population except for an unusually low rate of preterm delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, travel to developing countries was not associated with adverse pregnancy outcome. Larger studies are needed to support these findings.

Intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnant women and infants: making best use of the available evidence

INTRODUCTION

Malaria continues to represent a huge global health burden on the most vulnerable populations. The Intermittent Preventive Treatment (IPT) strategy has been shown to be an efficacious intervention in preventing most of the deleterious effects of malaria in pregnant women and infants. Yet, the effectiveness of the IPT strategy may be impaired by the increasing resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), and the scarcity of alternative antimalarial drugs.

AREAS COVERED

This review examines all the available information on IPT, in an aim to provide the scientific community with a framework to understand the benefits and limitations of this malaria control strategy. It includes the understanding of the historical background of the IPT strategy, the drug's mechanisms of actions, updated information on current available evidence, the implications of drug resistance and choice of alternative drugs, and a comprehensive discussion on the perspectives of IPT for malaria control in pregnant women and infants.

EXPERT OPINION

IPT in pregnancy and infants is a cost-effective strategy that can contribute significantly to the control of malaria in endemic areas. Monitoring its effectiveness will allow tracking of progress, evaluation of the adequacy of currently used drugs and will highlight the eventual need for new therapies or alternative interventions.

Pregnancy and fetal outcomes after exposure to mefloquine in the pre- and periconception period and during pregnancy

Pregnant women who travel to malarious areas and their clinicians need data on the safety of malaria chemoprophylaxis. The drug safety database analysis of mefloquine exposure in pregnancy showed that the birth defect prevalence and fetal loss in maternal, prospectively-monitored cases were comparable to background rates.

Background. Pregnant women who travel to malarious areas and their clinicians need data on the safety of malaria chemoprophylaxis.

Methods. The effect of exposure to mefloquine on pregnancy and offspring outcomes was evaluated using the F. Hoffmann–La Roche global drug safety database for the time frame 31 January 1986 through 26 October 2010. We investigated pregnancy and fetal outcomes in maternal, paternal, and both-parent exposure cases with a focus on congenital malformations and fetal loss. The main outcome measures were birth defect prevalence and types of malformations.

Results. A total of 2506 cases of mefloquine exposure during pregnancy or in the pre- and periconception period were evaluated. Most cases were maternal prospective (outcome of the pregnancy unknown at the time of reporting; n = 2246 [89.6%]) followed by maternal retrospective cases (outcome of the pregnancy known at the time of reporting; n = 227 [9.0%]), with small numbers of paternal and both-parent exposure cases. Of the total 2246 mefloquine maternal prospective exposures (95.2%), 2139 occurred before conception and/or during the first trimester. Of 1383 maternal prospective cases with known outcome, 978 (70.7%) resulted in delivery, 405 (29.3%) resulted in abortion (112 spontaneous, 293 therapeutic), and 43 resulted in birth defects, corresponding to a birth defect prevalence of 4.39% (43 of 978). Prospective cases overall showed no specific pattern of birth malformations.

Conclusions. The drug safety database analysis of mefloquine exposure in pregnancy showed that the birth defect prevalence and fetal loss in maternal, prospectively monitored cases were comparable to background rates.

Current knowledge and challenges of antimalarial drugs for treatment and prevention in pregnancy

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Malaria infection during pregnancy is a major public health problem worldwide, with 50 million pregnancies exposed to the infection every year. Approximately 25,000 maternal deaths and between 75,000 and 200,000 infant deaths could be prevented each year by effective malaria control in pregnancy. Antimalarial drug treatment and prevention has been hampered by the appearance of drug resistance, which has been a particular problem in pregnancy due to the inherent safety issues.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

New antimalarial drugs and combinations are being studied but there is not yet sufficient information on their efficacy or, more importantly, on their safety in pregnancy. This article provides an overview of the relevance of the topic and reviews the current antimalarial drugs recommended for pregnancy, as well as the guidelines for both treatment and prevention in women living in endemic areas and for travellers.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Updated information on the drugs currently used for malaria treatment and prevention in pregnancy, including new drugs under development, is provided. The gaps on efficacy and safety information for use during pregnancy are also discussed.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Prevention and case management of malaria during pregnancy is based on risk-benefit criteria and poses one of the greatest challenges to current malaria control.

Pre-travel vaccination and medical prophylaxis in the pregnant traveler

BACKGROUND

Practitioners are often fearful of giving vaccinations and prophylactic medications to pregnant travelers. And yet pregnancy is often a time of heightened danger from travel-related infections and illnesses.

METHOD

Literature search and communication with researchers.

RESULTS

With a few exceptions, there is little systematic research regarding the use of prophylactic medications and vaccines during pregnancy. Case reports and small studies do, however, indicate an increased risk in pregnancy from many of the preventable illnesses, and there is some data to support the use of preventive measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors present some non-medical interventions that may be used to limit exposure to a number of disease processes. They then review the available information regarding the safety and efficacy of routine and travel-related vaccines as well as prophylactic medications for malaria, diarrhea, motion sickness and altitude sickness. When there are no obstetrical or medical contraindications, travel-related illness can usually be safely prevented during pregnancy in much the same ways as in the non-pregnant state.

Treatment and prevention of malaria in pregnancy and newborn

Pregnant women are at increased risk for malaria infection. Although important advances have been made in the last years, the mechanisms that explain the increased susceptibility are not yet fully understood. Malaria infection in pregnancy is associated with maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. The severity of the disease depends on the level of pre-pregnancy acquired immunity against malaria, and the consequences of infection are more severe in non-immune women. In highly endemic areas, the frequency and severity of the infection is higher in primigravida and decreases with increasing parity. In non-immune women, the risk is similar across the parity and malaria may be an important direct cause of maternal mortality. Malaria infection during pregnancy has important negative effects on infant's health, causing intrauterine growth retardation and prematurity or directly through congenital infection. In this paper, we review the pathology, diagnosis, and current recommendations for treatment and prevention of malaria in the pregnant woman and her infant.

Treating malaria in pregnancy in developing countries: priorities in clinical research and drug development

Reducing the burden of falciparum malaria in pregnancy is an urgent international public health priority but one that involves considerable challenges. The rapidly declining effectiveness of agents known to be safe in pregnancy, and the limited efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetic data available for many other antimalarial drugs, mean that current options for the treatment of both severe and uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy are limited. This report summarizes the literature on this subject and recommends drug combinations for evaluation in Phase II/III treatment trials in pregnancy.

Intermittent preventive treatment for the prevention of malaria during pregnancy in high transmission areas

Malaria in pregnancy is one of the major causes of maternal morbidity and adverse birth outcomes. In high transmission areas, its prevention has recently changed, moving from a weekly or bimonthly chemoprophylaxis to intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp). IPTp consists in the administration of a single curative dose of an efficacious anti-malarial drug at least twice during pregnancy - regardless of whether the woman is infected or not. The drug is administered under supervision during antenatal care visits. Sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) is the drug currently recommended by the WHO. While SP-IPTp seems an adequate strategy, there are many issues still to be explored to optimize it. This paper reviewed data on IPTp efficacy and discussed how to improve it. In particular, the determination of both the optimal number of doses and time of administration of the drug is essential, and this has not yet been done. As both foetal growth and deleterious effects of malaria are maximum in late pregnancy women should particularly be protected during this period. Monitoring of IPTp efficacy should be applied to all women, and not only to primi- and secondigravidae, as it has not been definitively established that multigravidae are not at risk for malaria morbidity and mortality. In HIV-positive women, there is an urgent need for specific information on drug administration patterns (need for higher doses, possible interference with sulpha-based prophylaxis of opportunistic infections). Because of the growing level of resistance of parasites to SP, alternative drugs for IPTp are urgently needed. Mefloquine is presently one of the most attractive options because of its long half life, high efficacy in sub-Saharan Africa and safety during pregnancy. Also, efforts should be made to increase IPTp coverage by improving the practices of health care workers, the motivation of women and their perception of malaria complications in pregnancy. Because IPTp is not applicable in early pregnancy, which is a period when malaria may also be deleterious for women and their offspring, there is a necessity to integrate this strategy with other preventive measures which can be applied earlier in pregnancy such as insecticide-treated nets.

Assessment of safety of the major antimalarial drugs

Antimalarial drugs remain the major intervention tool for the global malaria control efforts that save millions of lives. Nonetheless, emergence and spread of Plasmodium parasites resistant against chloroquine and other major antimalarial drugs has brought the urgency to develop a new generation of safe and effective drugs against malaria. In this article, the safety data for major antimalarial drugs is reviewed. Although an ample amount of clinical data regarding the safety and tolerability of several of these drugs in older children and adults is available, more critical safety and tolerability studies in pregnant women and young children is desirable. To offset the partial loss in efficacy due to drug resistance in malaria parasites acquired against specific drugs, treatment regimens often rely upon the combination of two or more drugs. However, combination therapy requires additional safety, toxicity and tolerability studies in all population groups where these drugs are administered. A uniform standard in assessing the safety and tolerability of antimalarial drugs will be useful in the formulation and implementation of malaria treatment policies that are based on the drug effectiveness, safety and tolerability.

Safety and toxicity of sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine: implications for malaria prevention in pregnancy using intermittent preventive treatment

Plasmodium falciparum infection during pregnancy is strongly associated with maternal anaemia and low birth weight, contributing to substantial morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. Intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy with sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine (IPTp-SP) has been one of the most effective approaches to reduce the burden of malaria during pregnancy in Africa. IPTp-SP is based on administering >or=2 treatment doses of sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine to pregnant women at predefined intervals after quickening (around 18-20 weeks). Randomised, controlled trials have demonstrated decreased rates of maternal anaemia and low birth weight with this approach. The WHO currently recommends IPTp-SP in malaria-endemic areas of sub-Saharan Africa. However, implementation has been suboptimal in part because of concerns of potential drug toxicities. This review evaluates the toxicity data of sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine, including severe cutaneous adverse reactions, teratogenicity and alterations in bilirubin metabolism. Weekly sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine prophylaxis is associated with rare but potentially fatal cutaneous reactions. Fortunately, sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine use in IPTp programmes in Africa, with 2-4 treatment doses over 6 months, has been well tolerated in multiple IPTp trials. However, sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine should not be administered concurrently with cotrimoxazole given their redundant mechanisms of action and synergistic worsening of adverse drug reactions. Therefore, HIV-infected pregnant women in malaria endemic areas who are already receiving cotrimoxazole prophylaxis should not also receive IPTp-SP. Although folate antagonist use in the first trimester is associated with neural tube defects, large case-control studies have demonstrated that sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine administered as IPTp (exclusively in the second and third trimesters and after organogenesis) does not result in an increased risk of teratogenesis. Folic acid supplementation is recommended for all pregnant women to reduce the rate of congenital anomalies but high doses of folic acid (5 mg/day) may interfere with the antimalarial efficacy of sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine. However, the recommended standard dose of folic acid supplementation (0.4 mg/day) does not affect antimalarial efficacy and may provide the optimal balance to prevent neural tube defects and maintain the effectiveness of IPTp-SP. No clinical association between sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine use and kernicterus has been reported despite the extensive use of sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine and related compounds to treat maternal malaria and congenital toxoplasmosis in near-term pregnant women and newborns. Although few drugs in pregnancy can be considered completely safe, sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine - when delivered as IPTp - has a favourable safety profile. Improved pharmacovigilance programmes throughout Africa are now needed to confirm its safety as access to IPTp-SP increases. Given the documented benefits of IPTp-SP in malaria endemic areas of Africa, access to this treatment for pregnant women should continue to expand.

An update on malaria prevention, diagnosis and treatment for the returning traveller

The diagnosis of malaria needs to be considered for every returning traveller with a fever. Compliance with prevention, both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical, is essential for every traveller. New tests for diagnosis are now available. Treatment options have recently expanded to include the artemisinin derivatives that used to be unavailable in the western countries.

Intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in pregnancy in Africa: what's new, what's needed?

Falciparum malaria is an important cause of maternal, perinatal and neonatal morbidity in high transmission settings in Sub-Saharan Africa. Intermittent preventive treatment with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP-IPT) has proven efficacious in reducing the burden of pregnancy-associated malaria but increasing levels of parasite resistance mean that the benefits of national SP-IPT programmes may soon be seriously undermined in much of the region. Hence, there is an urgent need to develop alternative drug regimens for IPT in pregnancy. This paper reviews published safety and efficacy data on various antimalarials and proposes several candidate combination regimens for assessment in phase II/III clinical trials.

The safety of artemisinins during pregnancy: a pressing question

Background

An increasing number of countries in sub-Saharan Africa are changing to artemisinins combination therapy (ACT) as first or second line treatment for malaria. There is an urgent need to assess the safety of these drugs in pregnant women who may be inadvertently exposed to or actively treated with ACTs.

Objectives

To examine existing published evidence on the relationship between artemisinin compounds and adverse pregnancy outcomes and consider the published evidence with regard to the safety of these compounds when administered during pregnancy.

Methods

Studies on ACT use in pregnancy were identified via searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and Current Contents databases. Data on study characteristics, maternal adverse events, pregnancy outcomes and infant follow up were extracted.

Results

Fourteen relevant studies (nine descriptive/case reports and five controlled trials) were identified. Numbers of participants in these studies ranged from six to 461. Overall there were reports on 945 women exposed to an artemisinin during pregnancy, 123 in the 1st trimester and 822 in 2nd or 3rd trimesters. The primary end points for these studies were drug efficacy and parasite clearance. Secondary endpoints were birth outcomes including low birth weight, pre-term birth, pregnancy loss, congenital anomalies and developmental milestones. While none of the studies found evidence for an association between the use of artemisinin compounds and increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, none were of sufficient size to detect small differences in event rates that could be of public health importance. Heterogeneity between studies in the artemisinin and comparator drugs used, and in definitions of adverse pregnancy outcomes, limited any pooled analysis.

Conclusion

The limited data available suggest that artemisinins are effective and unlikely to be cause of foetal loss or abnormalities, when used in late pregnancy. However, none of these studies had adequate power to rule out rare serious adverse events, even in 2^nd and 3^rd trimesters and there is not enough evidence to effectively assess the risk-benefit profile of artemisinin compounds for pregnant women particularly for 1^st trimester exposure. Methodologically rigorous, larger studies and post-marketing pharmacovigilance are urgently required.

Travel medicine

This review covers significant recent developments in the field of travel medicine. New vaccines related to travel are discussed: cholera, Lyme disease, and rotavirus. Pertinent travel vaccine-related issues with varicella, polio, meningitis, Japanese encephalitis, and tick-borne encephalitis are described. New developments in malaria prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment are discussed. Imported cases of African tick bite fever, arboviruses, African trypanosomiasis, and Helicobacter pylori, and diarrheal illness are reviewed.

Malaria in pregnancy

Malaria in pregnancy is one of the major causes of maternal morbidity worldwide, and leads to poor birth outcomes. There is a complex interaction between pregnancy and parasite-all favour the parasite and disadvantage the pregnant woman. Women who are semi-immune lose much of that immunity. They may present with placental malaria but with no parasites in their peripheral blood. A non-immune pregnant women and her fetus are at serious risk from falciparum malaria. The diagnosis and management of malaria in pregnancy, including the safety of antimalarial drugs and interactions of malaria with HIV in pregnancy are reviewed.

Perceptions on use of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in pregnancy and the policy implications for malaria control in Uganda

In malaria endemic areas intermittent treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) is recommended for malaria prevention in pregnancy. Yet, data on perceptions regarding use of this drug are scarce. An exploratory study was conducted to assess perceptions on SP in Mukono district, Uganda. This is an initial step towards a review of the policy aimed at improving access and use of SP in pregnancy, which is currently low. Results show that SP is perceived to be an effective drug that cures malaria quickly. However there are negative perceptions related to its use in pregnancy. SP is believed to be strong and weakens pregnant women, causes abortions and foetal abnormalities. There is also a perception that resorting first to SP for malaria treatment may lead to the development of drug resistance. This perception may limit access to effective treatment of malaria in this community since the policy in Uganda recommends SP in combination with chloroquine as the first-line treatment. The policy implications of these findings include developing a health promotion package to demystify the misconceptions on the strength of SP, to explain its benefits and side-effects. This package will involve giving health workers refresher training on communication and counselling on use of SP in pregnancy targeting special groups like pregnant adolescents. These results provide important lessons to policy makers and programme managers who aim at scaling up access of SP for malaria prevention in pregnancy.

The pregnant wilderness traveler

BACKGROUND

Travel during pregnancy, especially, when it involves potentially hazardous activities in remote areas, often raises serious concerns regarding the health and safety risks involved.

METHOD

The authors have researched the available medical literature to identify these risks and present the current recommendations for their prevention and treatment.

RESULTS

Topics addressed include some political and social issues, insurance, basic comfort measures, complications of pregnancy, infectious diseases, environmental exposures, and trauma. Preventive measures include pre-travel evaluation and teaching, possible modifications of the itinerary, vaccinations and medications. Also briefly discussed are the handling of obstetrical emergencies in the field and medical evacuation of the pregnant patient.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors conclude that many trips of this nature can be made relatively safe for the pregnant traveler, but she may need to accept some precautions and modifications of the itinerary that might not otherwise be necessary.

Antimalarial Drug Toxicity

Malaria, caused mostly by Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax, remains one of the most important infectious diseases in the world. Antimalarial drug toxicity is one side of the risk-benefit equation and is viewed differently depending upon whether the clinical indication for drug administration is malaria treatment or prophylaxis. Drug toxicity must be acceptable to patients and cause less harm than the disease itself. Research that leads to drug registration tends to omit two important groups who are particularly vulnerable to malaria--very young children and pregnant women. Prescribing in pregnancy is a particular problem for clinicians because the risk-benefit ratio is often very unclear. The number of antimalarial drugs in use is very small. Despite its decreasing efficacy against P. falciparum, chloroquine continues to be used widely because of its low cost and good tolerability. It remains the drug of first choice for treating P. vivax malaria. Pruritus is a common adverse effect in African patients. As prophylaxis, chloroquine is usually combined with proguanil. This combination has good overall tolerability but mouth ulcers and gastrointestinal upset are more common than with other prophylactic regimens. Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine is well tolerated as treatment and when used as intermittent preventive treatment in pregnant African women. Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine is no longer used as prophylaxis because it may cause toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens Johnson syndrome. Mefloquine remains a valuable drug for prophylaxis and treatment. Tolerability is acceptable to most patients and travellers despite the impression given by the lay press. Dose-related serious neuropsychiatric toxicity can occur; mefloquine is contraindicated in individuals with a history of epilepsy or psychiatric disease. Quinine is the mainstay for treating severe malaria in many countries. Cardiovascular or CNS toxicity is rare, but hypoglycaemia may be problematic and blood glucose levels should be monitored. Halofantrine is unsuitable for widespread use because of its potential for cardiotoxicity. There is renewed interest in two old drugs, primaquine and amodiaquine. Primaquine is being developed as prophylaxis, and amodiaquine, which was withdrawn from prophylactic use because of neutropenia and hepatitis, is a potentially good partner drug for artesunate against falciparum malaria. Atovaquone/proguanil is a new antimalarial combination with good efficacy and tolerability as prophylaxis and treatment. The most important class of drugs that could have a major impact on malaria control is the artemisinin derivatives. They have remarkable efficacy and an excellent safety record. They have no identifiable dose-related adverse effects in humans and only very rarely produce allergic reactions. Combining an artemisinin derivative with another efficacious antimalarial drug is increasingly being viewed as the optimal therapeutic strategy for malaria.

Safety, efficacy and determinants of effectiveness of antimalarial drugs during pregnancy: implications for prevention programmes in Plasmodium falciparum-endemic sub-Saharan Africa

Plasmodium falciparum malaria in pregnancy poses substantial risk to a pregnant woman and her neonate through anaemia and low birth weight (LBW), respectively, and is responsible for up to 35% of preventable LBW in malaria-endemic areas. Chemoprophylaxis or intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with an effective antimalarial can ameliorate the adverse effects of malaria during pregnancy. Current guidelines from the WHO recommend that women in highly malarious areas receive IPT with an effective antimalarial. Two central considerations in evaluating drugs for use during pregnancy are safety for the mother and her foetus and effectiveness, which is determined by efficacy, cost, availability, deliverability and acceptability of the drug. These factors may be scored and potential drugs or drug combinations ranked in order of potential effectiveness for use in prevention programmes. The seven most promising regimens are all IPT, primarily because they are more easily delivered and less expensive than chemoprophylaxis. Currently, IPT with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) is more likely to have the best overall effectiveness in preventing adverse outcomes associated with malaria in pregnancy. Its low cost, wide availability, easy deliverability and acceptability make it the clear choice in countries where efficacy of the drug remains good. For countries where resistance to SP is rising or already high, amodiaquine (alone or in combination with SP or artesunate) artesunate + SP, chlorproguanil-dapsone (with and without artesunate) and artemether-lumefantrine require urgent evaluation for use in pregnancy.

The prevention of malaria

Long before the advent of modern chemoprophylaxis drugs, many practitioners successfully prevented the debilitating and fatal outcomes associated with infection by the Plasmodium parasites that cause malaria. Today, with effective insect repellents and several excellent medications available for chemoprophylaxis, there has never been a better array of quality products to prevent mosquito bites and infection and to suppress parasites once in the blood stream; however, there are thousands of imported cases into nonendemic countries and scores of deaths and near-fatal outcomes every year in returning travelers, soldiers, immigrants, and refugees. In this article, the author focuses on practical uses of currently available prevention tools.

The traveling family

Traveling as a family can be an extraordinarily rewarding experience. Providing good pretravel counsel--and travelers' adherence to it--can decrease the likelihood that illness or injury of the more vulnerable family members will disrupt the adventure!

The effects of quinine and chloroquine antimalarial treatments in the first trimester of pregnancy

Quinine (n = 246) was used to treat uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum and chloroquine (n = 130) was used to treat P. vivax, in a total of 376 episodes of malaria in the first trimester of pregnancy, in 300 Karen women (Thailand, 1995-2000). Parasites were still present on day 6 or 7 in 4.7% (11/234) of episodes treated with quinine. The overall 28 day parasite reappearance rate following quinine was 28.7% (60/209) for primary treatments and 44% (11/25) for re-treatments. Quinine treatment resulted in a high rate of gametocyte carriage: person-gametocyte-weeks = 42.5 (95% CI 27.8-62.1) per 1000 woman-weeks. For P. vivax, the reappearance rate for all episodes by day 28 was 4.5% (5/111). Significantly more women complained of tinnitus following quinine treatment compared to on admission: 64.5% (78/121) vs 31.6% (59/187), P < 0.001. Using survival analysis, the community rate of spontaneous abortion in women who never had malaria in pregnancy, 17.8% (16.5-19.0), did not differ significantly from rates in women treated with quinine: 22.9% (95% CI 15.5-30.3), or chloroquine: 18.3% (95% CI 9.3-27.3), P = 0.42. Pregnancies exposed to quinine or chloroquine and carried to term did not have increased rates of congenital abnormality, stillbirth or low birthweight. These results suggest that therapeutic doses of quinine and chloroquine are safe to use in the first trimester of pregnancy.

[Followup of pregnant women in the context of malaria: two case reports]

Whether or not a pregnant women should travel to regions where malaria is highly endemic will always be open to question as no prophlaxis can guarantee complete protection in every case. No chemoprophylaxis is 100% effective or entirely without side-effects, particularly for pregnant women whose immune status provides a favourable environment for the emergence of this parasitosis. The advice given will depend on the country and the region, a possible resistance of the parasite to treatment, the season, the length and circumstances of the stay and individual factors. The choice of treatment is very limited as many therapies are contra-indicated in pregnancy; in addition it is extremely important to give a sufficiently clear explanation concerning precautions and prophylaxis as well as of how a possible bout of malaria should be treated, particularly in case of extended stay.