In a randomised trial conducted at four sites in Uganda, the researchers, led by Grant Dorsey from UCSF, showed that patients treated with a cheaper combination of drugs --amodiaquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine--had at least as good a chance of preventing recurrent malarial infection (defined as either new infections or the previous infection returning) compared with patients treated with artemisinin-based combination therapy. In the sites that had the highest transmission rates the cheaper combination worked better. The authors conclude that although artemisinin combinations offer great hope for Africa, the ideal combination regimen remains uncertain and cost is a problem. To compare the efficacy of the different therapies, bigger and longer controlled trials are needed in many different conditions.
Citation: Yeka A, Banek K, Bakyaita N, Staedke SG, Kamya MR, et al. (2005) Artemisinin versus nonartemisinin combination therapy for uncomplicated malaria: Randomized clinical trials from four sites in Uganda. PLoS Med 2(7): e190.
CONTACT:
Grant Dorsey
University of California, San Francisco
1001 Potrero Avenue
Building 30 Room 421
San Francisco, CA USA 94110
1-415-206-4680
grantd@itsa.ucsf.edu
PLEASE MENTION PLoS Medicine (www.plosmedicine.org) AS THE SOURCE FOR THESE ARTICLES. THANK YOU.
All works published in PLoS Medicine are open access. Everything is immediately available without cost to anyone, anywhere--to read, download, redistribute, include in databases, and otherwise use--subject only to the condition that the original authorship is properly attributed. Copyright is retained by the authors. The Public Library of Science uses the Creative Commons Attribution License.
PLOS Medicine