Cargando…

Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND: Recent multi-centre trials showed that dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) was as efficacious and safe as artemether-lumefantrine (AL) for treatment of young children with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria across diverse transmission settings in Africa. Longitudinal follow-up of patien...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pfeil, Johannes, Borrmann, Steffen, Tozan, Yeşim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3991722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24748395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095681
_version_ 1782312492404310016
author Pfeil, Johannes
Borrmann, Steffen
Tozan, Yeşim
author_facet Pfeil, Johannes
Borrmann, Steffen
Tozan, Yeşim
author_sort Pfeil, Johannes
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recent multi-centre trials showed that dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) was as efficacious and safe as artemether-lumefantrine (AL) for treatment of young children with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria across diverse transmission settings in Africa. Longitudinal follow-up of patients in these trials supported previous findings that DP had a longer post-treatment prophylactic effect than AL, reducing the risk of reinfection and conferring additional health benefits to patients, particularly in areas with moderate to high malaria transmission. METHODS: We developed a Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of DP versus AL for first-line treatment of uncomplicated malaria in young children from the provider perspective, taking into consideration the post-treatment prophylactic effects of the drugs as reported by a recent multi-centre trial in Africa and using the maximum manufacturer drug prices for artemisinin-based combination therapies set by the Global Fund in 2013. We estimated the price per course of treatment threshold above which DP would cease to be a cost-saving alternative to AL as a first-line antimalarial drug. RESULTS: First-line treatment with DP compared to AL averted 0.03 DALYs (95% CI: 0.006–0.07) and 0.001 deaths (95% CI: 0.00–0.002) and saved $0.96 (95% CI: 0.33–2.46) per child over one year. The results of the threshold analysis showed that DP remained cost-saving over AL for any DP cost below $1.23 per course of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: DP is superior to AL from both the clinical and economic perspectives for treatment of uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in young children. A paediatric dispersible formulation of DP is under development and should facilitate a targeted deployment of this antimalarial drug. The use of DP as first-line antimalarial drug in paediatric malaria patients in moderate to high transmission areas of Africa merits serious consideration by health policymakers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3991722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39917222014-04-21 Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Pfeil, Johannes Borrmann, Steffen Tozan, Yeşim PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Recent multi-centre trials showed that dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) was as efficacious and safe as artemether-lumefantrine (AL) for treatment of young children with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria across diverse transmission settings in Africa. Longitudinal follow-up of patients in these trials supported previous findings that DP had a longer post-treatment prophylactic effect than AL, reducing the risk of reinfection and conferring additional health benefits to patients, particularly in areas with moderate to high malaria transmission. METHODS: We developed a Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of DP versus AL for first-line treatment of uncomplicated malaria in young children from the provider perspective, taking into consideration the post-treatment prophylactic effects of the drugs as reported by a recent multi-centre trial in Africa and using the maximum manufacturer drug prices for artemisinin-based combination therapies set by the Global Fund in 2013. We estimated the price per course of treatment threshold above which DP would cease to be a cost-saving alternative to AL as a first-line antimalarial drug. RESULTS: First-line treatment with DP compared to AL averted 0.03 DALYs (95% CI: 0.006–0.07) and 0.001 deaths (95% CI: 0.00–0.002) and saved $0.96 (95% CI: 0.33–2.46) per child over one year. The results of the threshold analysis showed that DP remained cost-saving over AL for any DP cost below $1.23 per course of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: DP is superior to AL from both the clinical and economic perspectives for treatment of uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in young children. A paediatric dispersible formulation of DP is under development and should facilitate a targeted deployment of this antimalarial drug. The use of DP as first-line antimalarial drug in paediatric malaria patients in moderate to high transmission areas of Africa merits serious consideration by health policymakers. Public Library of Science 2014-04-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3991722/ /pubmed/24748395 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095681 Text en © 2014 Pfeil et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pfeil, Johannes
Borrmann, Steffen
Tozan, Yeşim
Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_full Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_fullStr Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_short Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine vs. Artemether-Lumefantrine for First-Line Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in African Children: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_sort dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine vs. artemether-lumefantrine for first-line treatment of uncomplicated malaria in african children: a cost-effectiveness analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3991722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24748395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095681
work_keys_str_mv AT pfeiljohannes dihydroartemisininpiperaquinevsartemetherlumefantrineforfirstlinetreatmentofuncomplicatedmalariainafricanchildrenacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT borrmannsteffen dihydroartemisininpiperaquinevsartemetherlumefantrineforfirstlinetreatmentofuncomplicatedmalariainafricanchildrenacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT tozanyesim dihydroartemisininpiperaquinevsartemetherlumefantrineforfirstlinetreatmentofuncomplicatedmalariainafricanchildrenacosteffectivenessanalysis