Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2006 Jan 25;2006(1):CD004966.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004966.pub2.

Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus artesunate versus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine for treating uncomplicated malaria

H Bukirwa  1 , J Critchley
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus artesunate versus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine for treating uncomplicated malaria

H Bukirwa et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Artemisinin-based combination treatments are strongly advocated, but supplies are limited. Sulfadoxine combined with amodiaquine is an alternative non-artemisinin combination.

Objectives: To compare sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine (SP plus AQ) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus artesunate (SP plus AS) for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria.

Search strategy: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (October 2005), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2005), EMBASE (1988 to October 2005), LILACS (October 2005), and reference lists. We also contacted researchers and organizations working in this field.

Selection criteria: Randomized controlled trials comparing SP plus AS with SP plus AQ for treating uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria.

Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. The primary outcome measure was treatment failure (parasitological or clinical evidence of treatment failure between start of treatment and day 28). We calculated the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data.

Main results: Four trials (775 participants) met the inclusion criteria. All were from areas of high and seasonal malaria transmission in Africa. Fewer participants using SP plus AQ failed treatment by day 28 (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83; 652 participants, 3 trials). Even excluding new infections, SP plus AQ performed better (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.96; 649 participants, 3 trials). There was no statistically significant difference between the two treatments for treatment failure at day 14 (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.78; 775 participants, 4 trials). SP plus AS was more effective at reducing gametocyte carriage at day seven (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.92; 220 participants, 1 trial). One trial reported that one person - in the SP plus AQ group - developed severe malaria. Adverse events were poorly reported, but did not seem to differ in type and number between the two treatment combinations.

Authors' conclusions: SP plus AQ performed better at controlling treatment failure at day 28, but was not as good as SP plus AS at reducing gametocyte carriage at day seven. Careful consideration of local resistance patterns is required because resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine are high in many areas. In order to delay development of resistance to artesunate, the combination with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine should only be considered where both drugs are known to be effective. Data on adverse events are still lacking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) plus artesunate (AS) versus SP plus amodiaquine (AQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure by day 28.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) plus artesunate (AS) versus SP plus amodiaquine (AQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure by day 28 (excludes new infections).
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) plus artesunate (AS) versus SP plus amodiaquine (AQ), Outcome 3 Treatment failure by day 14.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) plus artesunate (AS) versus SP plus amodiaquine (AQ), Outcome 4 Treatment failure: progress to severe malaria.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) plus artesunate (AS) versus SP plus amodiaquine (AQ), Outcome 5 Gametocyte carriage at day 7.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) plus artesunate (AS) versus SP plus amodiaquine (AQ), Outcome 6 Gametocyte carriage at day 14.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004966

References

References to studies included in this review

Abacassamo 2004 {published data only}
    1. Abacassamo F, Enosse S, Aponte JJ, Gomez‐Olive FX, Quinto L, Mabunda S, et al. Efficacy of chloroquine, amodiaquine, sulphadoxine‐pyrimethamine and combination therapy with artesunate in Mozambican children with non‐complicated malaria. Tropical Medicine and International Health 2004;9(2):200‐8. - PubMed
Dorsey 2002 {published data only}
    1. Dorsey G, Njama D, Kamya MR, Cattamanchi A, Kyabayinze D, Staedke SG, et al. Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine alone or with amodiaquine or artesunate for treatment of uncomplicated malaria: a longitudinal randomised trial. Lancet 2002;360(9350):2031‐8. - PubMed
Mockenhaupt 2005 {published data only}
    1. Mockenhaupt FP, Ehrhardt S, Dzisi SY, Teun Bousema J, Wassilew N, Schreiber J, et al. A randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind trial on sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine alone or combined with artesunate or amodiaquine in uncomplicated malaria. Tropical Medicine and International Health 2005;10(6):512‐20. - PubMed
Rwagacondo 2003 {published data only}
    1. Rwagacondo CE, Niyitegeka F, Sarushi J, Karema C, Mugisha V, Dujardin JC, et al. Efficacy of amodiaquine alone and combined with sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine and sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine combined with artesunate. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2003;68(6):743‐7. - PubMed

Additional references

Adjuik 2004
    1. Adjuik M, Babiker A, Garner P, Olliaro P, Taylor W, White N, International Artemisinin Study Group. Artesunate combinations for treatment of malaria: meta‐analysis. Lancet 2004;363(9402):9‐17. - PubMed
Bloland 2003
    1. Bloland PB. A contrarian view of malaria therapy policy in Africa. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2003; Vol. 68, issue 2:125‐6. - PubMed
Brewer 1994
    1. Brewer GT, Peggins OJ, Grate JS, Petras JM, Levine BS, Weina PJ, et al. Neurotoxicity in animals due to arteether and artemether. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1994;88 Suppl 1:33‐6. - PubMed
Higgins 2005
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Highly sensitive search strategies for identifying reports of randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.5 [updated May 2005]; Appendix 5b. www.cochrane.org/resources/handbook/hbook.htm (accessed 1 October 2005).
Jüni 2001
    1. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in healthcare: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001;323(7303):42‐6. - PMC - PubMed
Kain 1995
    1. Kain KC. Chemotherapy and prevention of drug‐resistant malaria. Wilderness & Environmental Medicine 1995;6(3):307‐24. - PubMed
MacLehose 2003
    1. MacLehose HG, Klaes D, Garner P. Amodiaquine: A systematic review of adverse events [Draft]. www.who.int/medicines/organization/par/edl/expcom13/expcom03add.shtml 2003.
Olliaro 2004
    1. Olliaro P, Mussano P. Amodiaquine for treating malaria. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858] - DOI - PubMed
RBM 2003a
    1. Roll Back Malaria. Position of WHO's Roll Back Malaria Department on malarai treatment policy. www.emro.who.int/rbm/WHOPositionStatement.pdf (accessed 28 July 2004).
RBM 2003b
    1. Global Partnership to Roll Back Malaria. Assessment and monitoring of antimalarial drug efficacy for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003.
Review Manager 4.2 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 4.2 for Windows. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2003.
Stepniewska 2004
    1. Stepniewska K, Taylor WR, Mayxay M, Price R, Smithuis F, Guthmann JP, et al. In vivo assessment of drug efficacy against Plasmodium falciparum malaria: duration of follow‐up. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 2004;48(11):4271‐80. - PMC - PubMed
Sturchler 1993
    1. Sturchler D, Mittelholzer ML, Kerr L. How frequent are notified severe cutaneous adverse reactions to Fansidar?. Drug Safety 1993;8(2):160‐8. - PubMed
Talisuna 2004
    1. Talisuna AO, Nalunkuma‐Kazibwe A, Bakyaita N, Langi P, Mutabingwa TK, Watkins WW, et al. Efficacy of sulphadoxine‐pyrimethamine alone or combined with amodiaquine or chloroquine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Ugandan children. Tropical Medicine and International Health 2004;9(2):222‐9. - PubMed
Warsame 2002
    1. Warsame M, Abdillahi A, Nur Duale A, Nur Ismail A, Hassan AM, Mohamed A, et al. Therapeutic efficacy of chloroquine and sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine agaisnt Plasmodium falciparum infection in Somalia. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2002;80(9):704‐8. - PMC - PubMed
White 1998
    1. White NJ. Drug resistance in malaria. British Medical Bulletin 1998;54(3):703‐15. - PubMed
White 1999
    1. White NJ, Nosten F, Looareesuwan S, Watkins WM, Marsh K, Snow RW, et al. Averting a malaria disaster. Lancet 1999;353(9168):1965‐7. - PubMed
WHO 1988
    1. World Health Organization. Development of recommendations for the protection of short‐stay travellers to malaria endemic areas: Memorandum from two WHO Meetings. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 1988;66(2):177‐96. - PMC - PubMed
WHO 2000a
    1. WHO Expert Committee on Malaria (1998: Geneva, Switzerland), World Health Organization. WHO Expert Committee on Malaria: twentieth report. Vol. WHO Technical Report Series; 892, Geneva: World Health Organization, 2000. - PubMed
WHO 2000b
    1. World Health Organization. Management of severe malaria: a practical handbook. 2nd Edition. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2000.
WHO 2001
    1. World Health Organization. Severe malaria in the African region: results of a multicentre study. Malaria Liason Bulletin of the Malaria Programme WHO/AFRO 2001; Vol. 4, issue 2:1‐3.

MeSH terms