Search

BACKGROUND:Primaquine is an approved radical cure treatment for Plasmodium vivax malaria but treatment can result in life-threatening hemolysis if given to a glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficient (G6PDd) patient. There is a need for reliable point-of-care G6PD diagnostic tests. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the performance of the CareStart™ rapid diagnostic test (RDT) in the hands of healthcare workers (HCWs) and village malaria workers (VMWs) in field settings, and to better understand user perceptions about the risks and benefits of PQ treatment guided by RDT results. METHODS:This study enrolled 105 HCWs and VMWs, herein referred to as trainees, who tested 1,543 healthy adult male volunteers from 84 villages in Cambodia. The trainees were instructed on G6PD screening, primaquine case management, and completed pre and post-training questionnaires. Each trainee tested up to 16 volunteers in the field under observation by the study staff. RESULTS:Out of 1,542 evaluable G6PD volunteers, 251 (16.28%) had quantitative enzymatic activity less than 30% of an adjusted male median (8.30 U/g Hb). There was no significant difference in test sensitivity in detecting G6PDd between trainees (97.21%), expert study staff in the field (98.01%), and in a laboratory setting (95.62%) (p = 0.229); however, test specificity was different for trainees (96.62%), expert study staff in the field (98.14%), and experts in the laboratory (98.99%) (p < 0.001). Negative predictive values were not statistically different for trainees, expert staff, and laboratory testing: 99.44%, 99.61%, and 99.15%, respectively. Knowledge scores increased significantly post-training, with 98.7% willing to prescribe primaquine for P.vivax malaria, an improvement from 40.6% pre-training (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:This study demonstrated ability of medical staff with different background to accurately use CareStart™ RDT to identify G6PDd in male patients, which may enable safer prescribing of primaquine; however, pharmacovigilance is required to address possible G6PDd misclassifications.

Emerging antimalarial drug resistance in mobile populations remains a significant public health concern. We compared two regimens of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in military and civilians on the Thai-Cambodian border to evaluate national treatment policy.Efficacy and safety of two and three-day regimens of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine were compared as a nested open-label evaluation within a malaria cohort study in 222 otherwise healthy volunteers (18% malaria-infected at baseline). The first 80 volunteers with slide-confirmed Plasmodium falciparum or vivax malaria were randomized 1:1 to receive either regimen (total dose 360 mg dihydroartemisinin and 2880 mg piperaquine) and followed weekly for up to 6 months. The primary endpoint was malaria recurrence by day 42. Volunteers with vivax infection received primaquine at study discharge with six months follow-up.Eighty patients (60 vivax, 15 falciparum, and 5 mixed) were randomized to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. Intention-to-treat all-species efficacy at Day 42 was 85% for the two-day regimen (95% CI 69-94) and 90% for the three-day regimen (95% CI 75-97). PCR-adjusted falciparum efficacy was 75% in both groups with nearly half (45%) still parasitemic at Day 3. Plasma piperaquine levels were comparable to prior published reports, but on the day of recrudescence were below measurable in vitro piperaquine IC50 levels in all falciparum treatment failures.In the brief period since introduction of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, there is early evidence suggesting declining efficacy relative to previous reports. Parasite IC50 levels in excess of plasma piperaquine levels seen only in treatment failures raises concern for clinically significant piperaquine resistance in Cambodia. These findings warrant improved monitoring of clinical outcomes and follow-up, given few available alternative drugs.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01280162.