11.11.2012 Views

Artemisinin-based combination therapy for ... - The Cochrane Library

Artemisinin-based combination therapy for ... - The Cochrane Library

Artemisinin-based combination therapy for ... - The Cochrane Library

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

9 Serious indirectness: Only one trial conducted in Peru in a low transmission setting. Children age < 5 years and pregnant and lactating<br />

women were excluded.<br />

10 Very serious imprecision: <strong>The</strong> 95% CI of the pooled estimate is wide including appreciable benefit or harm with each drug over the<br />

other. Both drugs per<strong>for</strong>med very well and there were too few events to detect a difference between the two drugs.<br />

11 No serious imprecision: Both limits of the 95% CI suggest appreciable benefit with AS+MQ.<br />

12 Overall five trials assessed P. vivax response. No differences were shown in occurrence of vivax parasitaemia at any time point or<br />

between those with or without vivax co-infection at baseline.<br />

13 No serious indirectness: Trials conducted in Asia and South America in low and unstable transmission areas.<br />

14 No serious limitations: Allocation concealment was assessed as ’low risk of bias’ in three out of four trials.<br />

15 Serious imprecision: <strong>The</strong> 95% CI of the pooled estimate includes appreciable benefit with AS+MQ over DHA-P and crosses the line<br />

of no effect.<br />

16 No serious limitations: Allocation concealment was assessed as ’low risk of bias’ in all four trials.<br />

17 No serious limitations: Allocation concealment was judged to be at ’low risk of bias’ in five out of eight trials.<br />

18 Serious limitations: All trials were open label and judged to be at ’high risk of bias’ <strong>for</strong> blinding.<br />

19 Serious imprecision: <strong>The</strong> 95% CI of the pooled estimate includes appreciable benefit with DHA-P and crosses the line of no effect.<br />

Is Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine as effective as Artemether-lumefantrine <strong>for</strong> treating uncomplicated malaria?<br />

Patient or population: Patients with uncomplicated malaria<br />

Settings: Endemic areas worldwide<br />

Intervention: Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine<br />

Comparison: Artemether-lumefantrine<br />

Outcomes Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) Relative effect<br />

(95% CI)<br />

Efficacy: Total Failure<br />

(P. falciparum)<br />

Day 42 PCR adjusted<br />

- Africa<br />

Efficacy: Total Failure<br />

(P. falciparum)<br />

Day 42 PCR unadjusted<br />

- Africa<br />

Assumed risk Corresponding<br />

risk<br />

Artemether- lumefantrine<br />

Dihydroartemisininpiperaquine<br />

117 per 1000 46 per 1000<br />

(28 to 75)<br />

380 per 1000 167 per 1000<br />

(76 to 361)<br />

RR 0.39<br />

(0.24 to 0.64)<br />

RR 0.44<br />

(0.20 to 0.95)<br />

<strong>Artemisinin</strong>-<strong>based</strong> <strong>combination</strong> <strong>therapy</strong> <strong>for</strong> treating uncomplicated malaria (Review)<br />

Copyright © 2009 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Cochrane</strong> Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.<br />

No of participants<br />

(studies)<br />

869<br />

(3)<br />

1136<br />

(3)<br />

Quality of the evidence<br />

(GRADE)<br />

⊕⊕⊕⊕<br />

high 1,2,3,4,5,6,7<br />

⊕⊕⊕<br />

moderate 2,3,4,6,8,9<br />

242

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!