AzTrials
AzTrials

MalariaNCT01043744

Non-malarial Febrile Illness in Children in Areas of Perennial Malaria Transmission

A study testing Artemether-Lumefantrine in people with Malaria and Non-malarial Febrile Illness, run by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at 2 sites in Tanzania.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

To evaluate the causes of non-malarial febrile illness in children living in an area of perennial malaria transmission and to determine if these children who test negative for malaria by rapid diagnostic test receive any benefit from antimalarial therapy. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 6 to 59 monthsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Malaria, Non-malarial Febrile Illness
What is being tested?
Artemether-Lumefantrine
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
1,000 participants
Where
2 sitesTanzania
Study dates
Jan 2010to Dec 2011
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 6 to 59 months
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child

Who may be able to join

  • Age 6 to 59 months.
  • Present to health facility with fever (oral or rectal temperature ≥38°C or axillary temperature ≥37.5°C) or history of fever in the past 48 hours.
  • Have negative rapid diagnostic test for malaria.
  • Live within the boundaries of the officially recognized catchment area of Miono Health Center (within approximately 10 km of the health facility).

Who cannot join

  • Plan to travel or leave the area within the next 3 months.
  • Have been treated for malaria in the 2 weeks prior to enrollment.
  • Have clinical evidence or history of danger signs: convulsions, lethargy, loss of consciousness, unable to eat or drink, vomiting everything.
  • Have severe, life-threatening anemia: hemoglobin ≤5g/ dL.
  • Have very low weight for age, severe pneumonia, or very severe disease as defined in the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness algorithms.
  • Have a history of sensitivity to artemisinin derivatives or Artemether-Lumefantrine.
  • Have previously been enrolled in this study or another ongoing cohort study of malaria treatment options at these health facilities
  • Chronic disease requiring ongoing medical care (i.e HIV on cotrimoxazole).

Trial locations and contacts

2 sites in 1 country.

Tanzania2 sites
  • Miono Health Center

    Miono, Bagamoyo District

  • Msata Dispensary

    Msata

Other trials in Tanzania

About this study

Official title: Treatment Outcomes for Non-malarial Febrile Illness in Children Aged 6-59 Months in Areas of Perennial Malaria Transmission

To evaluate the causes of non-malarial febrile illness in children living in an area of perennial malaria transmission and to determine if these children who test negative for malaria by rapid diagnostic test receive any benefit from antimalarial therapy.

Read the detailed description

Until recently, national and global malaria control authorities recommended clinical diagnosis-based solely on the presence or history of fever-for most malaria treatment settings in sub-Saharan Africa where malaria transmission is sustained and intense. To some extent this recommendation was based on the fact that conventional antimalarial treatments like chloroquine or sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) were relatively affordable and safe and that microscopic diagnosis was complex and difficult to maintain in remote rural settings. It was economically advantageous and logistically more feasible to treat all potential cases as malaria than to extend microscopic diagnosis to every level of the health system. This approach has resulted in extensive over-treatment, particularly among older children and adults, and may have contributed to the rapid development of antimalarial drug resistance.

Although much has been written recently on the cost-effectiveness of expanding malaria diagnosis, available information is scarce on a number of other important reasons why clinical diagnosis has been recommended for so long, especially among children living in high transmission settings. First, uncomplicated malaria can progress to severe or fatal illness within 24 to 48 hours of onset. Numerous care-seeking studies have demonstrated that caretakers seldom arrive at formal health facilities within 24 or 48 hours after the onset of uncomplicated febrile illness. If a diagnostic test imposes additional barriers-such as cost, time delay, or referral-requiring a positive parasitological diagnosis could put children whose cause of fever is malaria infection at greater risk of progressing to severe or fatal illness. Second, although the current approach based on clinical diagnosis appears to result in substantial over-treatment, it is still possible to demonstrate that children living in malaria transmission areas benefit from additional scheduled doses of antimalarial treatment, even when they are not ill. For example, a meta-analysis of six trials of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) given to children at routine immunization visits demonstrated an average decrease of 30% in episodes of clinical malaria, 15% in anemia, and 24% in all-cause hospital admissions among children receiving SP compared to children who did not receive the drug at these visits. Finally, providers and clients may be inclined to disregard a negative blood slide or RDT, especially in situations where they have not identified an additional treatable cause of illness. Withholding antimalarial treatments from such children might adversely affect provider and client satisfaction and poor client satisfaction may reduce subsequent health facility utilization. It might also encourage disappointed clients to seek treatment in the private sector where a broad range of antimalarial drugs-most of them single drug treatments that contribute to the development of resistance and which are not recommended in the national treatment policy-can be obtained without diagnostic confirmation.

We propose a longitudinal cohort study to evaluate the identifiable causes of treatable fever among 1000 malaria-negative children presenting to outpatient health clinics in Miono, Bagamoyo District, Tanzania using a variety of clinical, microbiological and serologic methods. In addition we intend to follow these 1000 malaria-negative children for up to 91 days or until their next malaria infection to assess their clinical progress and need for further malaria treatment. To compare the relative benefit of providing antimalarial treatment even to malaria-negative children, half of the participants will be randomized to receive first-line treatment for malaria as currently recommended; the other half will receive treatment only for other identified illnesses.

Alternative Hypothesis: Febrile, parasite-negative children treated for malaria have better clinical and longitudinal outcomes (as measured by prevalence of anemia at the end of the follow up period, reticulocyte count repeat visits to the health facility, hospitalization, and time to next infection with malaria parasites) than febrile, parasite-negative children not treated for malaria in areas of high transmission.

Being tested
Artemether-Lumefantrine
Keywords
malaria, presumptive treatment, Integrated Management of Childhood Illness, fever
Medical subject headings
Malaria, Fever

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Artemether-LumefantrineDrug

    Also called CoArtem, Novartis

    Artemether-lumefantrine (Coartem; Novartis) administered twice daily for three days as tablets containing 20 mg of artemether plus 120 mg of lumefantrine at a dosage of:

    • 1 tablet (for patients weighing 5-14 kg)
    • 2 tablets (for patients weighing 15-24 kg)
Study groups in NCT01043744
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Artemether-LumefantrineExperimentalReceive artemether-lumefantrine with direct observation of am dose on days 0, 1, and 2 of study
Receives: Drug: Artemether-Lumefantrine
No treatmentNo interventionNo antimalarial treatment given on day 0.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Hematological recovery (Hb return to normal)

    Measured: 28, 63, 91 days

  2. Mean time to next infection

    Measured: Weekly

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Etiologic agent of non-malarial febrile illness

    Measured: Day 0

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted7 Jan 2010 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2010
  3. Primary completionDec 2011
  4. Study completionDec 2011

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
1,000 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01043744
Sponsor's protocol ID
CDC-CCID-5597
Status last verified
Mar 2013
First submitted
6 Jan 2010
Last updated
11 Mar 2013
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Artemether-Lumefantrine in people with Malaria and Non-malarial Febrile Illness, run by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at 2 sites in Tanzania.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Mar 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 2 sites in Tanzania. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Hematological recovery (Hb return to normal) (time frame: 28, 63, 91 days). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Mar 2013.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in