Safety and efficacy of pyronaridine–artesunate paediatric granules in the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in children: insights from randomized clinical trials and a real-world study

Abstract Background Children are particularly at risk of malaria. This analysis consolidates the clinical data for pyronaridine–artesunate (PA) paediatric granules in children from three randomized clinical trials and a real-world study (CANTAM). Methods An integrated safety analysis of individual p...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Malaria Journal
Main Authors: Michael Ramharter, Abdoulaye A. Djimde, Isabelle Borghini-Fuhrer, Robert Miller, Jangsik Shin, Adam Aspinall, Naomi Richardson, Martina Wibberg, Lawrence Fleckenstein, Sarah Arbe-Barnes, Stephan Duparc
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024
Subjects:
Malaria
Plasmodium falciparum
Pyronaridine–artesunate
Paediatric
Anti-malarial
Granule formulation
Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine
RC955-962
Infectious and parasitic diseases
RC109-216
Arctic
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-024-04885-3
https://doaj.org/article/c0a0c67d6b674912b88c1f867080b596
Description
Summary:Abstract Background Children are particularly at risk of malaria. This analysis consolidates the clinical data for pyronaridine–artesunate (PA) paediatric granules in children from three randomized clinical trials and a real-world study (CANTAM). Methods An integrated safety analysis of individual patient data from three randomized clinical trials included patients with microscopically-confirmed Plasmodium falciparum, body weight ≥ 5 kg to < 20 kg, who received at least one dose of study drug (paediatric safety population). PA was administered once daily for 3 days; two trials included the comparator artemether–lumefantrine (AL). PCR-adjusted day 28 adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) was evaluated. Real-world PA granules safety and effectiveness was also considered. Results In the integrated safety analysis, 63.9% (95% CI 60.2, 67.4; 426/667) of patients had adverse events following PA and 62.0% (95% CI 56.9, 66.9; 222/358) with AL. Vomiting was more common with PA (7.8% [95% CI 6.0, 10.1; 52/667]) than AL (3.4% [95% CI 1.9, 5.8; 12/358]), relative risk 2.3 (95% CI 1.3, 4.3; P = 0.004), occurring mainly following the first PA dose (6.7%, 45/667), without affecting re-dosing or adherence. Prolonged QT interval occurred less frequently with PA (3.1% [95% CI 2.1, 4.8; 21/667]) than AL (8.1% [95% CI 5.7, 11.4; 29/358]), relative risk 0.39 (95% CI 0.22, 0.67; P = 0.0007). In CANTAM, adverse events were reported for 17.7% (95% CI 16.3, 19.2; 460/2599) of patients, most commonly vomiting (5.4% [95% CI 4.6, 6.4; 141/2599]), mainly following the first dose, (4.5% [117/2599]), with all patients successfully re-dosed, and pyrexia (5.4% [95% CI 4.6, 6.3; 140/2599]). In the two comparative clinical trials, Day 28 ACPR in the per-protocol population for PA was 97.1% (95% CI 94.6, 98.6; 329/339) and 100% (95% CI 99.3, 100; 514/514) versus 98.8% (95% CI 95.7, 99.9; 165/167) and 98.4% (95% CI 95.5, 99.7; 188/191) for AL, respectively. In CANTAM, PA clinical effectiveness was 98.0% (95% CI 97.3, 98.5; ...

Similar Items