METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT). We searched relevant studies in electronic databases up to May 2013. RCTs comparing efficacy of (DHP) with other artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), non-ACT or placebo were selected. The primary endpoint was efficacy expressed as PCR-corrected parasitological failure. Efficacy was pooled by hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI, if studies reported time-to-event outcomes by the Kaplan-Meier method or data available for calculation of HR Nine RCTs with 14 datasets were included in the quantitative analysis. Overall, most of the studies were of high quality. Only a few studies compared with the same antimalarial drugs and reported the outcomes of the same follow-up duration, which created some difficulties in pooling of outcome data. We found the superiority of DHP over chloroquine (CQ) (at day > 42-63, HR:2.33, 95% CI:1.86-2.93, I (2): 0%) or artemether-lumefentrine (AL) (at day 42, HR:2.07, 95% CI:1.38-3.09, I (2): 39%). On the basis of GRADE criteria, further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Findings document that DHP is more efficacious than CQ and AL in treating uncomplicated P. vivax malaria. The better safety profile of DHP and the once-daily dosage improves adherence, and its fixed co-formulation ensures that both drugs (dihydroartemisinin and piperaquine) are taken together. However, DHP is not active against the hypnozoite stage of P. vivax. DHP has the potential to become an alternative antimalarial drug for the treatment uncomplicated P. vivax malaria. This should be substantiated by future RCTs with other ACTs. Additional work is required to establish how best to combine this treatment with appropriate antirelapse therapy (primaquine or other drugs under development).
METHODS: Relevant randomized trials that assessed efficacy of antimalarial drugs for patients having uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Asian region were searched in health-related databases. We evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Main outcome was treatment success at day 28 as determined by the absence of parasiteamia. We performed network meta-analysis of the interventions in the trials, and assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS: Seventeen randomized trials (n = 5043) were included in this network meta-analysis study. A network geometry was formed with 14 antimalarial treatment options such as artemether-lumefantrine (AL), artemisinin-piperaquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, artesunate-mefloquine (ASMQ), artesunate-chloroquine, artesunate-mefloquine home treatment, artesunate-mefloquine 2-day course, artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, chloroquine, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DHP), dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine home treatment, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine 4-day course, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and added artesunate, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. A maximum number of trials included was DHP compared to ASMQ (n = 5). In general, DHP had better efficacy than AL at day 28 (DHP vs AL: OR 2.5, 95%CI:1.08-5.8). There is low certainty evidence due to limited number of studies and small trials.
DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest the superiority of DHP (3-day course) to AL and other comparator ACTs are with the overall low/very low quality of evidence judgements. Moreover, one drug regimen is better than another is only if current drug-resistance patterns are at play. For example, the AL might be better than DHP in areas where both artemisinin and piperaquine resistance patterns are prevalent. For substantiation, well-designed larger trials from endemic countries are needed. In the light of benefit versus harm concept, future analysis with safety information is recommended.
METHODS/FINDINGS: A total of 41 Naegleria-like isolates were isolated from water and dust samples. All these isolates were subjected to PCR using two primer sets designed from the ITS1-ITS2 regions. The N. fowleri species-specific primer set failed to produce the expected amplicon. The Naegleria genus-specific primers produced amplicons of 408 bp (35), 450 bp (2), 457 bp (2) or 381 bp (2) from all 41 isolates isolated from aquatic (33) and dust (8) samples. Analysis of the sequences from 10 representative isolates revealed that amplicons with fragments 408, 450 and 457 bp showed homology with non-pathogenic Naegleria species, and 381 bp showed homology with Vahlkampfia species. These results concurred with the morphological observation that all 39 isolates which exhibited flagella were Naegleria, while 2 isolates (AC7, JN034055 and AC8, JN034056) that did not exhibit flagella were Vahlkampfia species.
CONCLUSION: To date, pathogenic species of N. fowleri have not been isolated from Malaysia. All 39 isolates that produced amplicons (408, 450 and 457 bp) from the genus-specific primers were identified as being similar to nonpathogenic Naegleria. Amplicon 408 bp from 5 representative isolates showed 100% and 99.7% identity to Naegleria philippinensis isolate RJTM (AM167890) and is thus believed to be the most common species in our environment. Amplicons 450 bp and 457 bp were respectively believed to be from 2 new species of Naegleria, since representative isolates showed lower homology and had a longer base pair length when compared to the reference species in the Genbank, Naegleria schusteri (AJ566626) and Naegleria laresi (AJ566630), respectively.