Background Cryptococcal meningitis is a leading cause of HIV-related mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. Based on phase-II data, we performed a phase-III randomized controlled non-inferiority trial to determine the efficacy of a single high-dose liposomal amphotericin B based treatment regimen. Methods HIV-positive adults with cryptococcal meningitis in Botswana, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe were randomized 1:1 to induction therapy of either (i) single, high-dose liposomal amphotericin B 10mg/kg given with 14 days of flucytosine 100mg/kg/day and fluconazole 1200mg/day (AmBisome group), or (ii) the current WHO recommended treatment of 7 daily doses of amphotericin B deoxycholate (1mg/kg/day) plus flucytosine (100mg/kg/day), followed by 7 days of fluconazole 1200mg/day (control group). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 10 weeks with the trial powered to show non-inferiority at a 10% margin. Results We randomized 844 participants. None were lost-to-follow-up. In intention-to-treat analysis, 10-week mortality was 24.8% (101 of 407; 95% confidence interval [CI] 20.7-29.3%) in the AmBisome group and 28.7% (117 of 407; 95% CI 24.4-33.4%) in controls. The absolute difference in mortality was -3.9%, with an upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval of 1.2%. Fungal clearance from cerebrospinal fluid was -0.40 log 10 CFU/ml/day in the AmBisome group and -0.42 log 10 CFU/ml/day in the control group. Fewer participants experienced grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the AmBisome group than the control group (50.0% vs. 62.3%). Conclusions Single dose liposomal amphotericin B (10mg/kg) on a backbone of flucytosine and fluconazole was non-inferior to the current WHO recommended standard of care for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis and associated with fewer adverse events. (Trial registration number: ISRCTN72509687.)

No abstract

Introduction An adverse event following immunisation is any untoward medical occurrence which follows vaccination. Frequency of adverse events ranges from 13% to 34% and they should be reported regardless of severity. From the beginning of 2016 to mid-2017, Guruve district in Zimbabwe did not report any AEFIs. This suggests the surveillance system may be failing to detect adverse events. We therefore evaluated the AEFI surveillance system in Guruve district. Methods We conducted a surveillance system evaluation using the updated Centers for Disease Control guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems. We interviewed health workers and caregivers of babies under 2 years in Guruve district. We also reviewed all records on AEFI surveillance for the period of January 2016 to November 2017. Results We recruited 31 health workers and 33 caregivers into the study. Between January 2016 and mid-2017, 39% of the caregivers had children who had suffered AEFIs and 45% of the health workers had encountered AEFIs but none had been notified. The main reasons for failure to report AEFIs included health workers' fear of personal consequences and caregivers thinking that an adverse event was not serious enough to report. Knowledge of the surveillance system was good amongst the majority of health workers. All the resources needed by the surveillance system were available. Conclusion We concluded that health workers in Guruve district were afraid to report adverse events following immunization and caregivers were reluctant to report mild adverse events hence the surveillance system was performing poorly and was not useful. However, the stability of the system and the good knowledge gives a good foundation for improving the surveillance system.