Research

A randomized trial to monitor the efficacy and effectiveness by QT-NASBA of artemether-lumefantrine versus dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for treatment and transmission control of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in western Kenya

Petra F Mens^1,2 , Patrick Sawa³ , Sandra M van Amsterdam¹ , Inge Versteeg¹ , Sabah A Omar⁴ , Henk DFH Schallig¹ and Piet A Kager²

¹  Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen (KIT)/Royal Tropical Institute, KIT Biomedical Research, Meibergdreef 39, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands

²  Centre for Infection and Immunity Amsterdam, (CINEMA), Division of Infectious Diseases, Tropical Medicine and AIDS, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands

³  International Centre for Insect physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), Mbita, Kenya

⁴  Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Centre for Biotechnology Research and Development, Nairobi, Kenya

author email corresponding author email

Malaria Journal 2008, 7:237doi:10.1186/1475-2875-7-237

Published:	18 November 2008

Abstract

Background

Many countries have implemented artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) for the first-line treatment of malaria. Although many studies have been performed on efficacy and tolerability of the combination arthemeter-lumefantrine (AL) or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP), less is known of the effect of these drugs on gametocyte development, which is an important issue in malaria control.

Methods and results

In this two-arm randomized controlled trial, 146 children were treated with either AL or DP. Both groups received directly observed therapy and were followed for 28 days after treatment. Blood samples were analysed with microscopy and NASBA. In comparison with microscopy NASBA detected much more gametocyte positive individuals. Moreover, NASBA showed a significant difference in gametocyte clearance in favour of AL compared to DP. The decline of parasitaemia was slower and persistence or development of gametocytes was significantly higher and longer at day 3, 7 and 14 in the DP group but after 28 days no difference could be observed between both treatment arms.

Conclusion

Although practical considerations could favour the use of one drug over another, the effect on gametocytogenesis should also be taken into account and studied further using molecular tools like NASBA. This also applies when a new drug is introduced.

Trial registration

Current controlled trials ISRCTN36463274