Background In Phase II/III randomized controlled clinical trials for the treatment of acute uncomplicated malaria, pyronaridine–artesunate demonstrated high efficacy and a safety profile consistent with that of comparators, except that asymptomatic, mainly mild-to-moderate transient increases in liver aminotransferases were reported for some patients. Hepatic safety, tolerability, and effectiveness have not been previously assessed under real-world conditions in Africa. Methods and findings This single-arm, open-label, cohort event monitoring study was conducted at 6 health centers in Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon, Ivory Coast, and Republic of Congo between June 2017 and April 2019. The trial protocol as closely as possible resembled real-world clinical practice for the treatment of malaria at the centers. Eligible patients were adults or children of either sex, weighing at least 5 kg, with acute uncomplicated malaria who did not have contraindications for pyronaridine–artesunate treatment as per the summary of product characteristics. Patients received fixed-dose pyronaridine–artesunate once daily for 3 days, dosed by body weight, without regard to food intake. A tablet formulation was used in adults and adolescents and a pediatric granule formulation in children and infants under 20 kg body weight. The primary outcome was the hepatic event incidence, defined as the appearance of the clinical signs and symptoms of hepatotoxicity confirmed by a >2× rise in alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (ALT/AST) versus baseline in patients with baseline ALT/AST >2× the upper limit of normal (ULN). As a secondary outcome, this was assessed in patients with ALT/AST >2× ULN prior to treatment versus a matched cohort of patients with normal baseline ALT/AST. The safety population comprised 7,154 patients, of mean age 13.9 years (standard deviation (SD) 14.6), around half of whom were male (3,569 [49.9%]). Patients experienced 8,560 malaria episodes; 158 occurred in patients with baseline ALT/AST elevations >2×ULN. No protocol-defined hepatic events occurred following pyronaridine–artesunate treatment of malaria patients with or without baseline hepatic dysfunction. Thus, no cohort comparison could be undertaken. Also, as postbaseline clinical chemistry was only performed where clinically indicated, postbaseline ALT/AST levels were not systematically assessed for all patients. Adverse events of any cause occurred in 20.8% (1,490/7,154) of patients, most frequently pyrexia (5.1% [366/7,154]) and vomiting (4.2% [303/7,154]). Adjusting for Plasmodium falciparum reinfection, clinical effectiveness at day 28 was 98.6% ([7,369/7,746] 95% confidence interval (CI) 98.3 to 98.9) in the per-protocol population. There was no indication that comorbidities or malnutrition adversely affected outcomes. The key study limitation was that postbaseline clinical biochemistry was only evaluated when clinically indicated. Conclusions Pyronaridine–artesunate had good tolerability and effectiveness in a representative African population under conditions similar to everyday clinical practice. These findings support pyronaridine–artesunate as an operationally useful addition to the management of acute uncomplicated malaria. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03201770.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundMalaria the first causes of death from parasitic infection worldwide. Interventions to reduce the burden of malaria have produced a tremendous drop in malaria morbidity and mortality. However, progress is slower in DRC, which shares with Nigeria 39% of deaths related to malaria globally. Inappropriate use of drugs may be one of the factors of this below-average performance. The aim of this study was to describe the use of drugs in the management of uncomplicated malaria in public health facilities in DRC.MethodsA drug use study was carried out in DRC from January to March 2014. In each of the former 11 provinces of DRC, one Rural Health Centre, one Urban Health Centre and one General Hospital were selected. In each of them, 100 patient’s files containing prescription of anti-malarials from January to December 2013 were randomly selected. Among them, all of the files with diagnosis of uncomplicated malaria were included in this study. Prescribed anti-malarials, co-prescribed drugs and their indications were collected. Descriptive analyses were performed.ResultsA total of 2300 files out of 3300 (69.7%) concerned uncomplicated malaria and were included in analysis. Malaria treatment was initiated after a positive RDT or microscopy in 51.5% of cases, upon suspicion without requesting biological confirmation in 37% and despite negative results in 11%. Twenty-nine (29) different treatment regimens were used. The drugs recommended by the National Malaria Control Programme were used in 54.3% of cases (artesunate–amodiaquine 37.4% or artemether–lumefantrine 16.9%). The second most used anti-malarial was quinine (32.4%). Apart from anti-malarials, an average of 3.1 drugs per patient were prescribed, among which antibiotics (67.9%), analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDs) (all abbreviations to be explicated on first use) (70.6%), vitamins (29.1%), anaemia drugs, including blood transfusion (9.1%) and corticosteroids (5.7%), In 51.4% of cases there was no indication for the concomitant medication.ConclusionManagement of uncomplicated malaria in DRC is characterized by a low adherence to treatment policy, numerous treatment regimens, and abundant concomitant medication potentially harmful to the patient. This may contribute to the low performance of DRC in malaria control. Determinant of this irrational use of drugs need to be assessed in order to formulate and implement efficient corrective measures.

Implementation of pharmacovigilance (PV) systems in resource-limited countries is a real endeavor. Despite country- and continent-specific challenges, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has been able to develop one of the most active PV systems in the sub-Saharan Africa. The World Health Organization (WHO) regional Office identified the DRC experience to set up a PV system for antimalarial drugs safety monitoring as a ‘best practice’ that needed to be documented in order to help DRC improve its PV system and to be scaled up in other African countries. In response to the WHO request, a best practices and bottlenecks analysis was conducted in 2015. This analysis was updated in 2018 in the light of the minimum requirements of the WHO to set up a PV system taking into account other guidance for PV systems. The following themes were retained for analysis: (1) creation of the national PV center; (2) implementation of PV in the health system; (3) data collection and analysis; (4) collaboration with public health programs; (5) collaboration with the National Regulatory Authority. Lessons learnt from the DRC experience show that it is possible to implement PV systems in order to promote patients’ safety in resource limited sub-Saharan African countries with no guaranteed funding. The ability of national PV centers to collaborate with Public health stakeholders, including public health authorities at all levels as well as public health programs, and to use existing health information systems are considered the main key to success and may substantially reduce the cost of PV activities.