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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Footnotes<br />

1 Please note that due to its longer half-life, PCR adjusted treatment failure with DHA-P may be underestimated at this time point.<br />

2 One trial (Hasugian 2005 IDN) also reported outcomes at day 42 but losses to follow up were very high (> 20%) at this time point.<br />

3 Hasugian 2005 IDN and Karema 2004 RWA.<br />

4 No serious limitations: Allocation concealment was assessed as ’low risk of bias’ in one trial and ’unclear’ in one trial. Laboratory staff<br />

were blinded in both trials.<br />

5 No serious inconsistency: Heterogeneity was low.<br />

6 One trial was conducted in Africa (Rwanda, transmission intensity not reported) and one in Asia (Indonesia, unstable transmission).<br />

Children aged < one year and pregnant or lactating women were excluded.<br />

7 Serious indirectness: Due to variable resistance rates to amodiaquine extrapolation to other areas is likely to be unreliable.<br />

8 No serious imprecision: <strong>The</strong> 95% CI of the pooled estimate includes appreciable and non-appreciable benefit with DHA-P over<br />

AS+AQ but does not cross the line of no effect.<br />

9 No serious limitations: Allocation concealment was assessed as ’low risk of bias’ in this trial (Hasugian 2005 IDN).<br />

10 Serious indirectness: Only one trial (Hasugian 2005 IDN) assessed this outcome.<br />

11 No serious imprecision: Both limits of the 95% CI imply appreciable benefit with DHA-P over AS+AQ.<br />

12 Both trials report no differences in gametocyte carriage but figures were not given.<br />

13 Very serious imprecision: <strong>The</strong> 95% CI includes appreciable benefit or harm with each drugs over the other.<br />

14 Serious limitations: This trial was open label.<br />

Is Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine superior to Artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine <strong>for</strong> treating uncomplicated<br />

malaria?<br />

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

Settings: Endemic areas excluding Southeast Asia<br />

Intervention: Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine<br />

Comparison: Artesunate plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine<br />

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

(95% CI)<br />

Efficacy: Total Failure<br />

Day 42 PCR<br />

adjusted<br />

Assumed risk Corresponding<br />

risk<br />

Artesunate plus<br />

sulfadoxinepyrimethamine<br />

Dihydroartemisinin<br />

-<br />

piperaquine<br />

202 per 1000 156 per 1000<br />

(79 to 305)<br />

RR 0.77<br />

(0.39 to 1.51)<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 />

161<br />

(1)<br />

Quality of the evidence<br />

(GRADE)<br />

⊕<br />

very low 1,2,3,4<br />

246

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!