Home management of malaria is recommended for prompt, effective antimalarial treatment in children less than five years of age. Compliance, safety, and effectiveness of the new fixed-dose artesunate-amodiaquine regimen used to treat suspected malaria were assessed in febrile children enrolled in a 24-month cohort study in two settings in Madagascar. Children with fever were asked to visit community health workers. Presumptive antimalarial treatment was given and further visits were scheduled for follow-up. The primary endpoint was the risk of clinical/parasitologic treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included fever/parasite clearance, change in hemoglobin levels, and frequency of adverse events. The global clinical cure rate was 98.4% by day 28 and 97.9% by day 42. Reported compliance was 83.4%. No severe adverse effects were observed. This study provides comprehensive data concerning the clinical cure rate obtained with artesunate-amodiaquine and evidence supporting the scaling up of home management of malaria.

BACKGROUND Many countries in Africa are considering a change to combination treatment for falciparum malaria because of the increase in drug resistance. However, there are few effectiveness data for these combinations. Our aim was to study the effectiveness of three drug combinations that have proven efficacious in east Africa compared with amodiaquine monotherapy. METHODS We undertook a randomised trial of antimalarial drug combinations for children (aged 4-59 months) with uncomplicated malaria in Muheza, Tanzania, an area with a high prevalence of resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and chloroquine. Children were randomly allocated 3 days of amodiaquine (n=270), amodiaquine +sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (n=507), or amodiaquine+artesunate (n=515), or a 3-day six-dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine (n=519). Drugs were taken orally, at home, unobserved by medical staff. The primary endpoint was parasitological failure by day 14 assessed blind to treatment allocation. Secondary endpoints included day 28 follow-up and gametocyte carriage. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS Of 3158 children screened, 1811 were randomly assigned treatment and 1717 (95%) reached the 14-day follow-up. The amodiaquine group was stopped early by the data and safety monitoring board. By day 14, the parasitological failure rates were 103 of 248 (42%) for amodiaquine, 97 of 476 (20%) for amodiaquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, 54 of 491 (11%) for amodiaquine+artesunate, and seven of 502 (1%) for artemether-lumefantrine. By day 28, the parasitological failure rates were 182 of 239 (76%), 282 of 476 (61%), 193 of 472 (40%), and 103 of 485 (21%), respectively. The difference between individual treatment groups and the next best treatment combination was significant (p<0.001) in every case. Recrudescence rates by day 28, after correction by genotyping, were 48.4%, 34.5%, 11.2%, and 2.8%, respectively. INTERPRETATION The study shows how few the options are for treating malaria where there is already a high level of resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine. The WHO-packaged six-dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine is effective taken unsupervised, although cost is a major limitation.

BACKGROUND: Increasing drug resistance limits the choice of efficacious chemotherapy against Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Africa. Amodiaquine still retains efficacy against P falciparum in many African countries. We assessed the safety, treatment efficacy, and effect on gametocyte carriage of adding artesunate to amodiaquine in three randomised trials in Kenya, Sénégal, and Gabon. METHODS: We enrolled 941 children (400 in Kenya, 321 in Sénégal, and 220 in Gabon) who were 10 years or older and who had uncomplicated P falciparum malaria. Patients were randomly assigned amodiaquine (10 mg/kg per day for 3 days) plus artesunate (4 mg/kg per day for 3 days) or amodiaquine (as above) and placebo (for 3 days). The primary endpoints were parasitological cure rates at days 14 and 28. Analysis was by intention to treat and by an evaluability method. FINDINGS: Both regimens were well tolerated. Six patients in the amodiaquine-artesunate group and five in the amodiaquine group developed early, drug-induced vomiting, necessitating alternative treatment. By intention-to-treat analysis, the day-14 cure rates for amodiaquine-artesunate versus amodiaquine were: 175/192 (91%) versus 140/188 (74%) in Kenya (D=16.7%[95% CI 9.3-24.1], p<0.0001), 148/160 (93%) versus 147/157 (94%) in Sénégal (-1.1%[-6.7 to 4.5], p=0.7), and 92/94 (98%) versus 86/96 (90%) in Gabon (8.3%[1.5-15.1], p=0.02). The corresponding rates for day 28 were: 123/180 (68%) versus 75/183 (41%) in Kenya (27.3%[17.5-37.2], p<0.0001), 130/159 (82%) versus 123/156 (79%) in Sénégal (2.9%[-5.9 to 11.7], p=0.5), and 80/94 (85%) versus 70/98 (71%) in Gabon (13.7%[2.2-25.2], p=0.02). Similar rates were obtained by evaluability analysis. INTERPRETATION: The combination of artesunate and amodiaquine improved treatment efficacy in Gabon and Kenya, and was equivalent in Sénégal. Amodiaquine-artesunate is a potential combination for use in Africa. Further investigations to assess the potential effect on the evolution of drug resistance, disease transmission, and safety of amodiaquine-artesunate are warranted.

6 out of 7 patients with severe neutropenia associated with the use of amodiaquine for malaria prophylaxis amodiaquine (400 mg weekly) plus proguanil (200 mg daily); 1 of these patients had also taken cotrimoxazole and another had taken sulphaguanidine. The 7th patient had taken amodiaquine alone, but at a higher dose. A retrospective analysis suggests that the frequency of severe neutropenia complicating amodiaquine taken prophylactically may be as high as 1 in 2000.

BACKGROUND New antimalarial treatments are urgently needed in sub-Saharan Africa. Improved therapies should decrease failure rates in the short term, but their effect on incidence of subsequent episodes of malaria is little studied. We aimed to compare the short-term and long-term effectiveness of three antimalarial regimens in children from Kampala, Uganda. METHODS We randomly allocated healthy children aged 6 months to 5 years to receive 25 mg/kg sulfadoxine and 1.25 mg/kg pyrimethamine plus either placebo, 25 mg/kg amodiaquine, or 12 mg/kg artesunate. Participants were followed up for 1 year and received the same preassigned treatment for every new episode of uncomplicated malaria diagnosed during follow-up. Recrudescent and new infections were distinguished by comparison of polymorphisms in merozoite surface protein 2 (MSP2). Our primary endpoint was the total number of treatments for malaria per time at risk. Analyses were done per protocol. FINDINGS 183 (61%) of 316 participants were diagnosed with at least one episode of uncomplicated malaria. A total of 577 episodes of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria were treated with study drugs; all regimens were safe and well tolerated. Clinical treatment failure after 14 days was significantly more frequent in the sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine group (38 of 215, 18%) compared with either the sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine group (two of 164, 1%; p<0.0001) or sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine plus artesunate group (one of 198, 1%; p<0.0001). After 28 and 42 days, patients in the sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine group were significantly less likely to develop malaria than were those in the other groups. Overall, sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine reduced the rate of subsequent treatments for malaria by 54%(95% CI 36-66, p<0.0001) compared with sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine alone and by 37%(12-54, p=0.007) compared with sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine plus artesunate. INTERPRETATION Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine could be used as an inexpensive regimen to decrease the rate of subsequent episodes of malaria.

BACKGROUND: The increasing spread of multidrug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria emphasises the urgent need for alternative treatment regimens. The objective of the study was to establish the efficacy of a novel drug combination. We compared a combination of atovaquone and proguanil with amodiaquine in the treatment of acute uncomplicated P falciparum malaria in Lambaréné, Gabon. METHODS: 142 adults were randomly allocated either a combination treatment of atovaquone 1000 mg daily and proguanil 400 mg daily for 3 days or treatment with amodiaquine 600 mg on admission, 600 mg 24 h later, and 300 mg after a further 24 h. Symptoms and clinical signs were recorded and giemsa-stained thick blood smears were done every 12 h until patients had been symptom-free and aparasitaemic for 24 h. 126 patients were followed up for 28 days or until recrudescence. FINDINGS: In the atovaquone plus proguanil group 62 (87%) of 71 patients were cured and only one had recrudescent infection. By contrast, the cure rate was significantly lower (p=0.022) with amodiaquine (51 [72%] of 71; there were 12 recrudescences in the amodiaquine group). Eight patients in each group were lost to follow-up. Patients treated with atovaquone plus proguanil complained of nausea (33%) and vomiting (29%), and the most commonly reported adverse effects of amodiaquine were pruritus (43%) and insomnia (27%). INTERPRETATION: Atovaquone and proguanil was a highly effective and safe drug combination in patients with acute uncomplicated P falciparum malaria in Gabon.

BACKGROUND: Malaria is a major cause of infant morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa, and is often complicated by severe anaemia. Resistance of Plasmodium falciparum to most affordable antimalarial drugs is an impediment to intermittent chemotherapy. We investigated the effect of presumptive intermittent treatment with amodiaquine and daily iron supplementation in infants on malarial fevers and anaemia, in a holoendemic area of Tanzania where malaria is largely resistant to chloroquine and sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine. METHODS: 291 infants aged 12-16 weeks who attended three clinics were randomised to receive amodiaquine, iron supplementation, amodiaquine plus iron supplementation, or placebo. Over 6 months, we gave amodiaquine three times with intervals of 60 days; oral iron supplementation was given daily. Malarial fevers and anaemia were monitored at bimonthly treatment visits and by self-reporting to health centres. FINDINGS: The protective efficacy of intermittent amodiaquine treatment in prevention of malarial fevers and anaemia was 64.7%(95% CI, 42.4-77.2) and 67.0%(95% CI, 34.5-83.4), respectively. Protective efficacy was similar in the group receiving amodiaquine plus iron supplementation. Infants receiving iron supplementation only were partly protected against anaemia (protective efficacy 59.8%; 95% CI, 23.4-78.9), but not against malarial fevers. 4 months' follow-up did not show rebound morbidity. We noted no haematological or clinical adverse effects. INTERPRETATION: Presumptive intermittent treatment for malaria with amodiaquine reduced malarial fevers and anaemia in infants, in an area with high resistance to other antimalarials. Intermittent treatment strategies for malaria in highly endemic areas could be of great benefit to public health.

BACKGROUND Increasing Plasmodium falciparum resistance to chloroquine in sub-Saharan Africa necessitates use of alternative antimalarial agents. Affordable alternative treatments include sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine and amodiaquine. Combination of antimalarial agents can increase therapeutic efficacy and delay emergence of drug resistance. We compared the efficacy of sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine, amodiaquine, and an amodiaquine/sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine combination for treatment of uncomplicated malaria in a region of high chloroquine resistance. METHODS Patients with symptoms of uncomplicated falciparum malaria and confirmed disease in Kampala, Uganda, were randomly assigned to receive sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine (25 mg/kg sulfadoxine, and 1.25 mg/kg pyrimethamine) plus placebo; amodiaquine (25 mg/kg) plus placebo; or amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine. Patients were followed up for 14 days, and clinical and parasitological outcomes were assessed. FINDINGS 90%(400/445) of patients enrolled in the study successfully completed 14 days of follow-up. Treatment failure based on clinical criteria occurred in 13 of 131 (10%) patients on sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine, nine of 131 (7%) on amodiaquine, and four of 138 (3%) on amodiaquine/sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine. Based on parasitological criteria, treatment failed in 26%, 16%, and 10% of these patients, respectively. Amodiaquine/sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine was significantly more effective than sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine alone in children aged younger than 5 years (clinical failure in 3.5% vs 13.9%, respectively, risk difference 10.4%[95% CI, 1.6-19.3] p=0.021; parasitological failure in 12.8% vs 26.4%, risk difference 13.6%[1.2-26.0] p=0.041). INTERPRETATION Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine, amodiaquine, and amodiaquine/sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine were all effective for treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Uganda. The amodiaquine/sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine combination was the most effective, and could be the optimum low-cost alternative to chloroquine in Africa.

BACKGROUND Drug resistance in Plasmodium falciparum poses a major threat to malaria control. Combination antimalarial therapy including artemisinins has been advocated recently to improve efficacy and limit the spread of resistance, but artemisinins are expensive and relatively untested in highly endemic areas. We compared artemisinin-based and other combination therapies in four districts in Uganda with varying transmission intensity. METHODS AND FINDINGS We enrolled 2,160 patients aged 6 mo or greater with uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Patients were randomized to receive chloroquine (CQ)+ sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP); amodiaquine (AQ)+ SP; or AQ + artesunate (AS). Primary endpoints were the 28-d risks of parasitological failure either unadjusted or adjusted by genotyping to distinguish recrudescence from new infections. A total of 2,081 patients completed follow-up, of which 1,749 (84%) were under the age of 5 y. The risk of recrudescence after treatment with CQ + SP was high, ranging from 22% to 46% at the four sites. This risk was significantly lower (p < 0.01) after AQ + SP or AQ + AS (7%-18% and 4%-12%, respectively). Compared to AQ + SP, AQ + AS was associated with a lower risk of recrudescence but a higher risk of new infection. The overall risk of repeat therapy due to any recurrent infection (recrudescence or new infection) was similar at two sites and significantly higher for AQ + AS at the two highest transmission sites (risk differences = 15% and 16%, p < 0.003). CONCLUSION AQ + AS was the most efficacious regimen for preventing recrudescence, but this benefit was outweighed by an increased risk of new infection. Considering all recurrent infections, the efficacy of AQ + SP was at least as efficacious at all sites and superior to AQ + AS at the highest transmission sites. The high endemicity of malaria in Africa may impact on the efficacy of artemisinin-based combination therapy. The registration number for this trial is ISRCTN67520427 (http://www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn/trial/|/0/67520427.html).

BACKGROUND Plasmodium falciparum resistance has rendered chloroquine monotherapy ineffective in much of Africa, but data on alternative regimens are limited. We compared chloroquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, amodiaquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, and amodiaquine+artesunate for treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Kampala, Uganda. METHODS Of 1017 consecutive patients aged 6 months to 10 years with uncomplicated malaria who were screened, 418 were randomised to receive: chloroquine (25 mg/kg over 3 days) and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (25 mg/kg sulfadoxine, 1.25 mg/kg pyrimethamine, single dose); amodiaquine (25 mg/kg over 3 days) and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine; or amodiaquine and artesunate (4 mg/kg daily for 3 days). Primary efficacy outcomes were 28-day clinical failure risks, adjusted and unadjusted by genotyping to distinguish new infection and recrudescence. The primary safety endpoint was incidence of serious adverse events during follow-up. Analysis was intention to treat and per protocol. FINDINGS 18 patients were excluded before enrollment. Of those enrolled, 384 of 400 (96%) were assigned an efficacy outcome and 396 (99%) were assessed for safety. Risk of 28-day clinical treatment failure was significantly higher with chloroquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (44/125 [35%]) than with amodiaquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (12/129 [9%]; risk difference 26%[95% CI 16-36]; p<0.0001) or amodiaquine+artesunate (3/130 [2%]; 33%[24-42]; p<0.0001). The greater risk of clinical treatment failure with amodiaquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was balanced by a lower risk of new infection, resulting in a similar need for retreatment over 28 days for amodiaquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (17/129 [13%]) and amodiaquine+artesunate (16/130 [12%]; p=0.854). Serious adverse events were uncommon with all regimens. INTERPRETATION Risk of treatment failure with chloroquine+sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was unacceptably high. Combinations of amodiaquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine or artesunate were significantly more efficacious, and each regimen could be an appropriate alternative for treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Africa.

The safety and efficacy of amodiaquine (AQ), sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), and coadministered AQ+SP was assessed in 351 Tanzanian children (age range, 6-59 months) with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. This open, randomized study followed the 28-day World Health Organization (WHO) protocol and evaluated safety using clinical and laboratory parameters. Children receiving SP were more likely to vomit during follow-up (32% vs. 17%: P = 0.03), and SP alone resulted in prolonged fever clearance times. Although Day 7 and Day 14 clinical and parasitological cure rates were similar, by Day 28 45% of children treated with AQ demonstrated R1 resistance and 27.5% were clinical failures compared with 25% and 6.3%, respectively, for SP alone. Coadministered AQ+SP was safe, combined the greater clinical (96.2%) and parasitological (64.2%) efficacy of SP with the more rapid symptom resolution of AQ, and reduced the incidence of gametocytemia during follow-up (AQ+SP 12.6% vs. SP 29.9%; P = 0.001). The level of R1 resistance to SP may herald a rapid decline in its efficacy as SP drug pressure increases. Coadministration of AQ+SP may delay this.