In recent minireviews (21,32), we examined mechanisms of antimalarial action and resistance. Here we examine regimens which are recommended or are being studied for the prevention (chemoprophylaxis) of malaria. We begin with an examination of in vitro and in vivo correlates as a bridge between the laboratory and clinical aspects of malaria.
IN VITRO AND IN VIVO CORRELATESIn vitro susceptibility testing and clinical outcome. The correlations between in vitro susceptibility testing and clinical outcome are imprecise. They are more qualitative than quantitative. Thus, there are no ranges of 50% effective doses or inhibitory concentrations for chloroquine, mefloquine, or other antimalarial agents which are clearly associated with the failure or success of treatment in vivo. Nevertheless, for isolates which are susceptible in vivo to chloroquine, 50% effective doses or MICs are generally lower than those for isolates which are resistant (2 to 32 versus 40 to 300 nM) (9, 12-14, 18, 20).Partitioning of chloroquine in vivo. The precise in vivo partitioning of chloroquine is unknown. However, studies by several investigators indicate that chloroquine is concentrated primarily within the acid intravesicular compartment of mammalian cells (26,30). Pharmacokinetic studies in persons without malaria indicate that chloroquine levels in serum are 50 to 100 nM in persons taking routine chemoprophylaxis (2, 11, 15) and peak at <1 to 2 ,uM in persons receiving a treatment course of chloroquine (29,38). Based on the chloroquine concentrations necessary to inhibit parasite growth in vitro, the levels of chloroquine achieved in serum should be more than sufficient to inhibit and kill susceptible parasites during chemoprophylaxis and treatment. In contrast, they should not inhibit resistant parasites during chemoprophylaxis and should inhibit them only transiently during treatment.Impact of chloroquine efflux in vivo. Chloroquine efflux from the resistant parasite has been demonstrated only recently (21), and it is not yet clear how it functions (e.g., whether it saturates) in vivo. However, recent in vitro studies indicate that the rate of chloroquine efflux (the initial release half-life of chloroquine from the resistant parasite) does not change over a 10,000-fold range of extracellular chloroquine concentrations (D. J. Krogstad, I. Y. Gluzman, and P. H. Schlesinger, unpublished observations). These observations suggest that the extracellular chloroquine concentrations achieved in serum are unlikely to overwhelm this mechanism in vivo.