BackgroundRecent efforts in malaria control have resulted in great gains in reducing the burden of Plasmodium falciparum, but P. vivax has been more refractory. Its ability to form dormant liver stages confounds control and elimination efforts. To compare the efficacy and safety of primaquine regimens for radical cure, we undertook a randomized controlled trial in Ethiopia.Methods and findingsPatients with normal glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase status with symptomatic P. vivax mono-infection were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either chloroquine (CQ) or artemether-lumefantrine (AL), alone or in combination with 14 d of semi-supervised primaquine (PQ) (3.5 mg/kg total). A total of 398 patients (n = 104 in the CQ arm, n = 100 in the AL arm, n = 102 in the CQ+PQ arm, and n = 92 in the AL+PQ arm) were followed for 1 y, and recurrent episodes were treated with the same treatment allocated at enrolment. The primary endpoints were the risk of P. vivax recurrence at day 28 and at day 42.The risk of recurrent P. vivax infection at day 28 was 4.0% (95% CI 1.5%–10.4%) after CQ treatment and 0% (95% CI 0%–4.0%) after CQ+PQ. The corresponding risks were 12.0% (95% CI 6.8%–20.6%) following AL alone and 2.3% (95% CI 0.6%–9.0%) following AL+PQ. On day 42, the risk was 18.7% (95% CI 12.2%–28.0%) after CQ, 1.2% (95% CI 0.2%–8.0%) after CQ+PQ, 29.9% (95% CI 21.6%–40.5%) after AL, and 5.9% (95% CI 2.4%–13.5%) after AL+PQ (overall p < 0.001). In those not prescribed PQ, the risk of recurrence by day 42 appeared greater following AL treatment than CQ treatment (HR = 1.8 [95% CI 1.0–3.2]; p = 0.059). At the end of follow-up, the incidence rate of P. vivax was 2.2 episodes/person-year for patients treated with CQ compared to 0.4 for patients treated with CQ+PQ (rate ratio: 5.1 [95% CI 2.9–9.1]; p < 0.001) and 2.3 episodes/person-year for AL compared to 0.5 for AL+PQ (rate ratio: 6.4 [95% CI 3.6–11.3]; p < 0.001). There was no difference in the occurrence of adverse events between treatment arms.The main limitations of the study were the early termination of the trial and the omission of haemoglobin measurement after day 42, resulting in an inability to estimate the cumulative risk of anaemia.ConclusionsDespite evidence of CQ-resistant P. vivax, the risk of recurrence in this study was greater following treatment with AL unless it was combined with a supervised course of PQ. PQ combined with either CQ or AL was well tolerated and reduced recurrence of vivax malaria by 5-fold at 1 y.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01680406

Background In vivo efficacy assessments of antimalarials are essential for ensuring effective case management. In Ethiopia, chloroquine (CQ) without primaquine is the first-line treatment for Plasmodium vivax in malarious areas, but artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is also commonly used.Methods and FindingsIn 2009, we conducted a 42-day efficacy study of AL or CQ for P. vivax in Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Individuals with P. vivax monoinfection were enrolled. Primary endpoint was day 28 cure rate. In patients with recurrent parasitemia, drug level and genotyping using microsatellite markers were assessed. Using survival analysis, uncorrected patient cure rates at day 28 were 75.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 66.8–82.5) for AL and 90.8% (95% CI 83.6–94.9) for CQ. During the 42 days of follow-up, 41.6% (47/113) of patients in the AL arm and 31.8% (34/107) in the CQ arm presented with recurrent P. vivax infection, with the median number of days to recurrence of 28 compared to 35 days in the AL and CQ arm, respectively. Using microsatellite markers to reclassify recurrent parasitemias with a different genotype as non-treatment failures, day 28 cure rates were genotype adjusted to 91.1% (95% CI 84.1–95.1) for AL and to 97.2% (91.6–99.1) for CQ. Three patients (2.8%) with recurrent parasitemia by day 28 in the CQ arm were noted to have drug levels above 100 ng/ml.ConclusionsIn the short term, both AL and CQ were effective and well-tolerated for P. vivax malaria, but high rates of recurrent parasitemia were noted with both drugs. CQ provided longer post-treatment prophylaxis than AL, resulting in delayed recurrence of parasitemia. Although the current policy of species-specific treatment can be maintained for Ethiopia, the co-administration of primaquine for treatment of P. vivax malaria needs to be urgently considered to prevent relapse infections.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01052584

IntroductionThe scale‐up of effective HIV viral load (VL) testing is an urgent public health priority. Implementation of testing is supported by the availability of accurate, nucleic acid based laboratory and point‐of‐care (POC) VL technologies and strong WHO guidance recommending routine testing to identify treatment failure. However, test implementation faces challenges related to the developing health systems in many low‐resource countries. The purpose of this commentary is to review the challenges and solutions from the large‐scale implementation of other diagnostic tests, namely nucleic‐acid based early infant HIV diagnosis (EID) and CD4 testing, and identify key lessons to inform the scale‐up of VL.DiscussionExperience with EID and CD4 testing provides many key lessons to inform VL implementation and may enable more effective and rapid scale‐up. The primary lessons from earlier implementation efforts are to strengthen linkage to clinical care after testing, and to improve the efficiency of testing. Opportunities to improve linkage include data systems to support the follow‐up of patients through the cascade of care and test delivery, rapid sample referral networks, and POC tests. Opportunities to increase testing efficiency include improvements to procurement and supply chain practices, well connected tiered laboratory networks with rational deployment of test capacity across different levels of health services, routine resource mapping and mobilization to ensure adequate resources for testing programs, and improved operational and quality management of testing services. If applied to VL testing programs, these approaches could help improve the impact of VL on ART failure management and patient outcomes, reduce overall costs and help ensure the sustainable access to reduced pricing for test commodities, as well as improve supportive health systems such as efficient, and more rigorous quality assurance. These lessons draw from traditional laboratory practices as well as fields such as logistics, operations management and business.ConclusionsThe lessons and innovations from large‐scale EID and CD4 programs described here can be adapted to inform more effective scale‐up approaches for VL. They demonstrate that an integrated approach to health system strengthening focusing on key levers for test access such as data systems, supply efficiencies and network management. They also highlight the challenges with implementation and the need for more innovative approaches and effective partnerships to achieve equitable and cost‐effective test access.

BackgroundIn vivo efficacy assessments of the first-line treatments for Plasmodium falciparum malaria are essential for ensuring effective case management. In Ethiopia, artemether-lumefantrine (AL) has been the first-line treatment for uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria since 2004.MethodsBetween October and November 2009, we conducted a 42-day, single arm, open label study of AL for P. falciparum in individuals >6 months of age at two sites in Oromia State, Ethiopia. Eligible patients who had documented P. falciparum mono-infection were enrolled and followed according to the standard 2009 World Health Organization in vivo drug efficacy monitoring protocol. The primary and secondary endpoints were PCR uncorrected and corrected cure rates, as measured by adequate clinical and parasitological response on days 28 and 42, respectively.ResultsOf 4426 patients tested, 120 with confirmed falciparum malaria were enrolled and treated with AL. Follow-up was completed for 112 patients at day 28 and 104 patients at day 42. There was one late parasitological failure, which was classified as undetermined after genotyping. Uncorrected cure rates at both day 28 and 42 for the per protocol analysis were 99.1% (95% CI 95.1-100.0); corrected cure rates at both day 28 and 42 were 100.0%. Uncorrected cure rates at day 28 and 42 for the intention to treat analysis were 93.3% (95% CI 87.2-97.1) and 86.6% (95% CI 79.1-92.1), respectively, while the corrected cure rates at day 28 and 42 were 94.1% (95% CI 88.2-97.6) and 87.3% (95% CI 79.9-92.7), respectively. Using survival analysis, the unadjusted cure rate was 99.1% and 100.0% adjusted by genotyping for day 28 and 42, respectively. Eight P. falciparum patients (6.7%) presented with Plasmodium vivax infection during follow-up and were excluded from the per protocol analysis. Only one patient had persistent parasitaemia at day 3. No serious adverse events were reported, with cough and nausea/vomiting being the most common adverse events.ConclusionsAL remains a highly effective and well-tolerated treatment for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in the study setting after several years of universal access to AL. A high rate of parasitaemia with P. vivax possibly from relapse or new infection was observed.Trial RegistrationNCT01052584

BackgroundAccurate early diagnosis and prompt treatment is one of the key strategies to control and prevent malaria in Ethiopia where both Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax are sympatric and require different treatment regimens. Microscopy is the standard for malaria diagnosis at the health centres and hospitals whereas rapid diagnostic tests are used at community-level health posts. The current study was designed to assess malaria microscopy capacity of health facilities in Oromia Regional State and Dire Dawa Administrative City, Ethiopia.MethodsA descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted from February to April 2011 in 122 health facilities, where health professionals were interviewed using a pre-tested, standardized assessment tool and facilities’ laboratory practices were assessed by direct observation.ResultsOf the 122 assessed facilities, 104 (85%) were health centres and 18 (15%) were hospitals. Out of 94 health facilities reportedly performing blood films, only 34 (36%) used both thin and thick smears for malaria diagnosis. The quality of stained slides was graded in 66 health facilities as excellent, good and poor quality in 11(17%), 31 (47%) and 24 (36%) respectively. Quality assurance guidelines and malaria microscopy standard operating procedures were found in only 13 (11%) facilities and 12 (10%) had involved in external quality assessment activities, and 32 (26%) had supportive supervision within six months of the survey. Only seven (6%) facilities reported at least one staff’s participation in malaria microscopy refresher training during the previous 12 months. Although most facilities, 96 (79%), had binocular microscopes, only eight (7%) had the necessary reagents and supplies to perform malaria microscopy. Treatment guidelines for malaria were available in only 38 (31%) of the surveyed facilities. Febrile patients with negative malaria laboratory test results were managed with artemether-lumefantrine or chloroquine in 51% (53/104) of assessed health facilities.ConclusionsThe current study indicated that most of the health facilities had basic infrastructure and equipment to perform malaria laboratory diagnosis but with significant gaps in continuous laboratory supplies and reagents, and lack of training and supportive supervision. Overcoming these gaps will be critical to ensure that malaria laboratory diagnosis is of high-quality for better patient management.