In Vivo Efficacy and Tolerability of Artesunate-Azithromycin for the Treatment of Falciparum Malaria in Vietnam

Australian Defence Force Global Health Engagement through malaria and other vectorborne disease programmes in the Pacific and Southeast Asia

Global Health Engagement is one method employed by the Australian Defence Force (ADF) in pursuit of its objectives to shape Australia's strategic environment and to deter actions against Australia's interests. Two recent examples of such engagements are malaria mitigation programmes led by the ADF Malaria and Infectious Disease Institute in partnership with the Vietnam People's Army and the Papua New Guinea Defence Force. Both programmes were designed with extensive collaboration with host nation stakeholders, empowered local institutions and governance systems, built the capacity of the host nation with the aim of achieving independence from Australian support and met the strategic policy requirements of all nations involved. Process and outcome measures were built into both programmes, providing partner nations with the necessary assurance that funding was being used effectively. The long-term nature of each programme engendered personal trust between individuals and cultural understanding between military units. Recognising the value of formal education in the design and conduct of such programmes, ADF officers participate as students and instructors in the US Uniformed University of the Health Sciences course in Global Health and Global Health Engagement. Critically, this educational opportunity is afforded to future leaders in all professions related to health, including clinicians, military health planners and commanders. While an essential prerequisite to Global Health Engagement Programmes is their technical viability and validity, the most important key to success in the military context is a widespread understanding of how they achieve desired strategic effects for all involved.

Evaluation of the Combination of Azithromycin and Naphthoquine in Animal Malaria Models

Combination therapy using drugs with different mechanisms of action is the current state of the art in antimalarial treatment. However, except for artemisinin-based combination therapies, only a few other combinations are now available. Increasing concern regarding the emergence and spread of artemisinin resistance in Plasmodium falciparum has led to a need for the development of new antimalarials. Moreover, the efficacy of current available chemoprophylaxis is compromised by drug resistance and noncompliance due to intolerable adverse effects or complicated dosing regimens.

A Randomized Open-Label Evaluation of the Antimalarial Prophylactic Efficacy of Azithromycin-Piperaquine versus Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine in Pregnant Papua New Guinean Women

Emerging malaria parasite sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) resistance has prompted assessment of alternatives for intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp). The objective was to evaluate the tolerability and prophylactic efficacy of azithromycin (AZ) plus piperaquine (PQ) in pregnant women in Papua New Guinea. The study was an open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial. A total of 122 women (median gestation, 26 weeks [range, 14 to 32 weeks]) were randomized 1:1 to three daily doses of 1 g AZ plus 960 mg PQ tetraphosphate or single-dose SP (4,500 mg sulfadoxine plus 225 mg pyrimethamine), based on computer-generated block randomization. Tolerability was assessed to day 7, and efficacy was assessed to day 42 (when participants were returned to usual care) and at delivery. Data for 119 participants (AZ-PQ, n = 61; SP, n = 58) were analyzed. Both regimens were well tolerated, but AZ-PQ was associated with more gastrointestinal side effects (31%) and dizziness (21%). Eight women (6.7%) were parasitemic at recruitment but all were aparasitemic by 72 h. There were no differences in blood smear positivity rates between AZ-PQ and SP up to day 42 (0% versus 5.2%; relative risk [RR], 0.14 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01 to 2.58] [P = 0.18]; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 5.2% [95% CI, -1.3 to 11.6%]) and at the time of delivery (0% versus 8.7%; RR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01 to 2.01] [P = 0.14]; ARR, 8.7% [95% CI, -0.2 to 17.6%]). Of 92 women who were monitored to parturition, 89 (97%) delivered healthy babies; there were 3 stillbirths (SP, n = 1; AZ-PQ, n = 2 [twins]). There was a higher live birth weight (mean ± standard deviation) in the AZ-PQ group (3.13 ± 0.42 versus 2.88 ± 0.55 kg [P = 0.016]; mean difference, 0.25 kg [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.48 kg]). AZ-PQ is a promising candidate for IPTp.

Biannual mass azithromycin distributions and malaria parasitemia in pre-school children in Niger: A cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Mass azithromycin distributions have been shown to reduce mortality in preschool children, although the factors mediating this mortality reduction are not clear. This study was performed to determine whether mass distribution of azithromycin, which has modest antimalarial activity, reduces the community burden of malaria.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In a cluster-randomized trial conducted from 23 November 2014 until 31 July 2017, 30 rural communities in Niger were randomized to 2 years of biannual mass distributions of either azithromycin (20 mg/kg oral suspension) or placebo to children aged 1 to 59 months. Participants, field staff, and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary malaria outcome was the community prevalence of parasitemia on thick blood smear, assessed in a random sample of children from each community at study visits 12 and 24 months after randomization. Analyses were performed in an intention-to-treat fashion. At the baseline visit, a total of 1,695 children were enumerated in the 15 azithromycin communities, and 3,029 children were enumerated in the 15 placebo communities. No communities were lost to follow-up. The mean prevalence of malaria parasitemia at baseline was 8.9% (95% CI 5.1%-15.7%; 52 of 552 children across all communities) in the azithromycin-treated group and 6.7% (95% CI 4.0%-12.6%; 36 of 542 children across all communities) in the placebo-treated group. In the prespecified primary analysis, parasitemia was lower in the azithromycin-treated group at month 12 (mean prevalence 8.8%, 95% CI 5.1%-14.3%; 51 of 551 children across all communities) and month 24 (mean 3.5%, 95% CI 1.9%-5.5%; 21 of 567 children across all communities) than it was in the placebo-treated group at month 12 (mean 15.3%, 95% CI 10.8%-20.6%; 81 of 548 children across all communities) and month 24 (mean 4.8%, 95% CI 3.3%-6.4%; 28 of 592 children across all communities) (P = 0.02). Communities treated with azithromycin had approximately half the odds of parasitemia compared to those treated with placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0.54, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.97). Parasite density was lower in the azithromycin group than the placebo group at 12 and 24 months (square root-transformed outcome; density estimates were 7,540 parasites/μl lower [95% CI -350 to -12,550 parasites/μl; P = 0.02] at a mean parasite density of 17,000, as was observed in the placebo arm). No significant difference in hemoglobin was observed between the 2 treatment groups at 12 and 24 months (mean 0.34 g/dL higher in the azithromycin arm, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.75 g/dL; P = 0.10). No serious adverse events were reported in either group, and among children aged 1 to 5 months, the most commonly reported nonserious adverse events (i.e., diarrhea, vomiting, and rash) were less common in the azithromycin-treated communities. Limitations of the trial include the timing of the treatments and monitoring visits, both of which took place before the peak malaria season, as well as the uncertain generalizability to areas with different malaria transmission dynamics.

CONCLUSIONS

Mass azithromycin distributions were associated with a reduced prevalence of malaria parasitemia in this trial, suggesting one possible mechanism for the mortality benefit observed with this intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02048007).

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies to Assess Safety and Prophylactic Efficacy of Naphthoquine-Azithromycin Combination for Malaria Prophylaxis in Southeast Asia

New prophylactic drugs against malaria infections are urgently needed. We conducted randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trials of a new antimalarial drug combination, naphthoquine-azithromycin (NQAZ), to determine its safety and protective efficacy in a low-endemicity area of Southeast Asia. In the first trial, 127 healthy volunteers were randomized to receive two single doses of either 400 mg of NQAZ (200 mg of each drug), 800 mg of NQAZ (400 mg of each drug), or placebo on day 0 and day 30. Weekly follow-ups were performed for 2 months, and physical and clinical laboratory exams were done during the second and eighth week. Both drug regimens were well tolerated, without any serious adverse events. Four adverse events (transient and slight elevations of serum transaminase concentrations) were found only in the two drug-treated groups and thus might be drug-related. In the second trial, 353 volunteer villagers were randomized into the same three groups as in the first trial, and malaria infections were followed for a month. For the intention-to-treat analysis, both regimens offered greater than 90% prophylactic efficacies against all malaria infections. When the analysis was done according to parasite species, 400 mg and 800 mg NQAZ provided 81.63 and 90.59% prophylactic efficacies, respectively, against Plasmodium falciparum infections, whereas both offered 100% prophylactic efficacy against Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium ovale These trials showed that NQAZ had a good safety profile, and monthly single doses of 400 mg or 800 mg for adults offered excellent prophylaxis against malaria infections, especially the two relapsing species.