BackgroundAnti-leishmanial drug regimens that include a single dose AmBisome® could be suitable for eastern African patients with symptomatic visceral leishmaniasis (VL) but the appropriate single dose is unknown.MethodologyA multi-centre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial with an adaptive design, was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of a single dose and multiple doses of AmBisome® for the treatment of VL in eastern Africa. The primary efficacy endpoint was definitive cure (DC) at 6 months. Symptomatic patients with parasitologically-confirmed, non-severe VL, received a single dose of AmBisome® 7.5 mg/kg body weight or multiple doses, 7 times 3 mg/kg on days 1–5, 14, and 21. If interim analyses, evaluated 30 days after the start of treatment following 40 or 80 patients, showed the single dose gave significantly poorer parasite clearance than multiple doses at the 5% significance level, the single dose was increased by 2·5 mg/kg. In a sub-set of patients, parasite clearance was measured by quantitative reverse transcriptase (qRT) PCR.Principal FindingsThe trial was terminated after the third interim analysis because of low efficacy of both regimens. Based on the intention-to-treat population, DC was 85% (95%CI 73–93%), 40% (95%CI 19–64%), and 58% (95%CI 41–73%) in patients treated with multiple doses (n = 63), and single doses of 7·5 (n = 21) or 10 mg/kg (n = 40), respectively. qRT-PCR suggested superior parasite clearance with multiple doses as early as day 3. Safety data accorded with the drug label.ConclusionsThe tested AmBisome® regimens would not be suitable for VL treatment across eastern Africa. An optimal single dose regimen was not identified.Trials Registration www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00832208
BackgroundA recent study has shown that treatment of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) with the standard dose of 15 mg/kg/day of paromomycin sulphate (PM) for 21 days was not efficacious in patients in Sudan. We therefore decided to test the efficacy of paramomycin for a longer treatment duration (15 mg/kg/day for 28 days) and at the higher dose of 20 mg/kg/day for 21 days.MethodsThis randomized, open-label, dose-finding, phase II study assessed the two above high-dose PM treatment regimens. Patients with clinical features and positive bone-marrow aspirates for VL were enrolled. All patients received their assigned courses of PM intramuscularly and adverse events were monitored. Parasite clearance in bone-marrow aspirates was tested by microscopy at end of treatment (EOT, primary efficacy endpoint), 3 months (in patients who were not clinically well) and 6 months after EOT (secondary efficacy endpoint). Pharmacokinetic data were obtained from a subset of patients weighing over 30 kg.Findings42 patients (21 per group) aged between 4 and 60 years were enrolled. At EOT, 85% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63.7% to 97.0%) in the 20 mg/kg/day group and 90% of patients (95% CI: 69.6% to 98.8%) in the 15 mg/kg/day group had parasite clearance. Six months after treatment, efficacy was 80.0% (95% CI: 56.3% to 94.3%) and 81.0% (95% CI: 58.1% to 94.6%) in the 20 mg/kg/day and 15 mg/kg/day groups, respectively. There were no serious adverse events. Pharmacokinetic profiles suggested a difference between the two doses, although numbers of patients recruited were too few to make it significant (n = 3 and n = 6 in the 20 mg/kg/day and 15 mg/kg/day groups, respectively).ConclusionData suggest that both high dose regimens were more efficacious than the standard 15 mg/kg/day PM for 21 days and could be further evaluated in phase III studies in East Africa.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00255567
Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a neglected parasitic disease that is fatal if left untreated and is endemic in eastern Sudan. We estimated the direct and indirect costs of treatment of VL from the perspective of the provider and the household at three public hospitals in Gedaref State. The median total cost for one VL episode was estimated to be US$450. Despite the free provision of VL drugs at public hospitals, households bore 53% of the total cost of VL with one episode of VL representing 40% of the annual household income. More than 75% of households incurred catastrophic out-of-pocket expenditures. The length of treatment of 30 days led to important costs for both health providers and households. Alternative treatment regimens that reduce the duration of treatment are urgently needed.
BackgroundTreatment options for Visceral Leishmaniasis (VL) in East Africa are far from satisfactory due to cost, toxicity, prolonged treatment duration or emergence of parasite resistance. Hence there is a need to explore alternative treatment protocols such as miltefosine alone or in combinations including miltefosine, sodium stibogluconate (SSG) or liposomal amphotericin B. The aim of this trial is to identify regimen(s) which are sufficiently promising for future trials in East Africa.Methods/DesignA phase II randomized, parallel arm, open-labelled trial is being conducted to assess the efficacy of each of the three regimens: liposomal amphotericin B with SSG, Liposomal amphotericin B with miltefosine and miltefosine alone. The primary endpoint is cure at day 28 with secondary endpoint at day 210 (6 months). Initial cure is a single composite measure based on parasitologic evaluation (bone marrow, spleen or lymph node aspirate) and clinical assessment. Repeated interim analyses have been planned after recruitment of 15 patients in each arm with a maximum sample size of 63 for each. These will follow group-sequential methods (the triangular test) to identify when a regimen is inadequate (<75% efficacy) or adequate (>90% efficacy). We describe a method to ensure consistency of the sequential analysis of day 28 cure with the non-sequential analysis of day 210 cure.DiscussionA regimen with adequate efficacy would be a candidate for treatment of VL with reasonable costs. The design allows repeated testing throughout the trial recruitment period while maintaining good statistical properties (Type I & II error rates) and reducing the expected sample sizes.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01067443
BackgroundLow efficacy of miltefosine in the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis was recently observed in Eastern Africa.ObjectivesTo describe the pharmacokinetics and establish a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship for miltefosine in Eastern African patients with visceral leishmaniasis, using a time-to-event approach to model relapse of disease.MethodsMiltefosine plasma concentrations from 95 patients (48 monotherapy versus 47 combination therapy) were included in the population pharmacokinetic model using non-linear mixed effects modelling. Subsequently a time-to-event model was developed to model the time of clinical relapse. Various summary pharmacokinetic parameters (various AUCs, Time > EC50, Time > EC90), normalized within each treatment arm to allow simultaneous analysis, were evaluated as relapse hazard-changing covariates.ResultsA two-compartment population model with first-order absorption fitted the miltefosine pharmacokinetic data adequately. Relative bioavailability was reduced (−74%, relative standard error 4.7%) during the first week of treatment of the monotherapy arm but only the first day of the shorter combination regimen. Time to the relapse of infection could be described using a constant baseline hazard (baseline 1.8 relapses/year, relative standard error 72.7%). Miltefosine Time > EC90 improved the model significantly when added in a maximum effect function on the baseline hazard (half maximal effect with Time > EC90 6.97 days for monotherapy).ConclusionsMiltefosine drug exposure was found to be decreased in Eastern African patients with visceral leishmaniasis, due to a (transient) initial lower bioavailability. Relapse hazard was inversely linked to miltefosine exposure. Significantly lower miltefosine exposure was observed in children compared with adults, further urging the need for implementation of dose adaptations for children.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.