Browsing by Author "Barnes, K I"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Complex interactions between malaria and malnutrition: a systematic literature review
    (BioMed Central, 2018-10-29) Das, D; Grais, R F; Okiro, E A; Stepniewska, K; Mansoor, R; van der Kam, S; Terlouw, D J; Tarning, J; Barnes, K I; Guerin, P J
    Abstract Background Despite substantial improvement in the control of malaria and decreased prevalence of malnutrition over the past two decades, both conditions remain heavy burdens that cause hundreds of thousands of deaths in children in resource-poor countries every year. Better understanding of the complex interactions between malaria and malnutrition is crucial for optimally targeting interventions where both conditions co-exist. This systematic review aimed to assess the evidence of the interplay between malaria and malnutrition. Methods Database searches were conducted in PubMed, Global Health and Cochrane Libraries and articles published in English, French or Spanish between Jan 1980 and Feb 2018 were accessed and screened. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the risk of bias across studies was assessed using the GRADE approach. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline were followed. Results Of 2945 articles screened from databases, a total of 33 articles were identified looking at the association between malnutrition and risk of malaria and/or the impact of malnutrition in antimalarial treatment efficacy. Large methodological heterogeneity of studies precluded conducting meaningful aggregated data meta-analysis. Divergent results were reported on the effect of malnutrition on malaria risk. While no consistent association between risk of malaria and acute malnutrition was found, chronic malnutrition was relatively consistently associated with severity of malaria such as high-density parasitemia and anaemia. Furthermore, there is little information on the effect of malnutrition on therapeutic responses to artemisinin combination therapies (ACTs) and their pharmacokinetic properties in malnourished children in published literature. Conclusions The evidence on the effect of malnutrition on malaria risk remains inconclusive. Further analyses using individual patient data could provide an important opportunity to better understand the variability observed in publications by standardising both malaria and nutritional metrics. Our findings highlight the need to improve our understanding of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of ACTs in malnourished children. Further clarification on malaria-malnutrition interactions would also serve as a basis for designing future trials and provide an opportunity to optimise antimalarial treatment for this large, vulnerable and neglected population. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42017056934 .
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    The interaction between artemether-lumefantrine and lopinavir/ritonavir-based antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 infected patients
    (BioMed Central, 2016-01-27) Kredo, T; Mauff, K; Workman, L; Van der Walt, J S; Wiesner, L; Smith, P J; Maartens, G; Cohen, K; Barnes, K I
    Background: Artemether-lumefantrine is currently the most widely recommended treatment of uncomplicated malaria. Lopinavir–based antiretroviral therapy is the commonly recommended second-line HIV treatment. Artemether and lumefantrine are metabolised by cytochrome P450 isoenzyme CYP3A4, which lopinavir/ritonavir inhibits, potentially causing clinically important drug-drug interactions. Methods: An adaptive, parallel-design safety and pharmacokinetic study was conducted in HIV-infected (malaria-negative) patients: antiretroviral-naïve and those stable on lopinavir/ritonavir-based antiretrovirals. Both groups received the recommended six-dose artemether-lumefantrine treatment. The primary outcome was day-7 lumefantrine concentrations, as these correlate with antimalarial efficacy. Adverse events were solicited throughout the study, recording the onset, duration, severity, and relationship to artemether-lumefantrine. Results: We enrolled 34 patients. Median day-7 lumefantrine concentrations were almost 10-fold higher in the lopinavir than the antiretroviral-naïve group [3170 versus 336 ng/mL; p = 0.0001], with AUC(0-inf) and Cmaxincreased five-fold [2478 versus 445 μg.h/mL; p = 0.0001], and three-fold [28.2 versus 8.8 μg/mL; p < 0.0001], respectively. Lumefantrine Cmax, and AUC(0-inf) increased significantly with mg/kg dose in the lopinavir, but not the antiretroviral-naïve group. While artemether exposure was similar between groups, Cmax and AUC(0-8h) of its active metabolite dihydroartemisinin were initially two-fold higher in the lopinavir group [p = 0.004 and p = 0.0013, respectively]. However, this difference was no longer apparent after the last artemether-lumefantrine dose. Within 21 days of starting artemether-lumefantrine there were similar numbers of treatment emergent adverse events (42 vs. 35) and adverse reactions (12 vs. 15, p = 0.21) in the lopinavir and antiretroviral-naïve groups, respectively. There were no serious adverse events and no difference in electrocardiographic QTcF- and PR-intervals, at the predicted lumefantrine Tmax. Conclusion: Despite substantially higher lumefantrine exposure, intensive monitoring in our relatively small study raised no safety concerns in HIV-infected patients stable on lopinavir-based antiretroviral therapy given the recommended artemether-lumefantrine dosage. Increased day-7 lumefantrine concentrations have been shown previously to reduce the risk of malaria treatment failure, but further evidence in adult patients co-infected with malaria and HIV is needed to assess the artemether-lumefantrine risk : benefit profile in this vulnerable population fully. Our antiretroviral-naïve patients confirmed previous findings that lumefantrine absorption is almost saturated at currently recommended doses, but this dose-limited absorption was overcome in the lopinavir group.