AzTrials
AzTrials

MalariaNCT00913146

Can Treatment of Malaria be Restricted to Parasitologically Confirmed Malaria?

An observational study of Malaria, run by Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement at 1 site in Benin.

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

The investigators performed a prospective study, in order to assess the feasibility and safety of restricting antimalarials to rapid diagnostic test (RDT)-confirmed cases in children aged 5 to 15 years-old Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 5 to 15 years
Conditions the study is for
Malaria
How many people
484 participants
Where
1 siteBenin
Study dates
Feb 2008to Mar 2009
Phase
Observational
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 5 to 15 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child

Study population: 2600 schoolchildren of 5 years-old and above

Who may be able to join

  • School children aged 5 to 15 years.
  • Tympanic temperature at 37.8°C or above, or if a history of fever in the preceding 24 hours was reported.
  • A negative malaria (Paracheck® Plasmodium falciparum) RDT.
  • Informed consent.
  • Asymptomatic children were screened for the Control Group on gender, age, week of inclusion. The first child with a negative RDT and for whom an informed consent was obtained, was included in the CG.

Who cannot join

  • Adequate malaria treatment within a month prior screening.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Benin1 site
  • Centre de Santé de Commune

    Allada

Other trials in Benin

About this study

Official title: Can Treatment of Malaria be Restricted to Parasitologically Confirmed Malaria? A School-Based Prospective, Exposed/Non Exposed to Fever, Study in Benin.

The investigators performed a prospective study, in order to assess the feasibility and safety of restricting antimalarials to rapid diagnostic test (RDT)-confirmed cases in children aged 5 to 15 years-old

Read the detailed description

This study was designed to measure the incidence of malaria attacks during a 2-week follow-up period in 2 populations of patients. First, an index group (IG, exposed to fever) constituted by schoolchildren attending the school nursery for fever and not diagnosed malaria, based on a negative HRP2-based RDT. Second, a control group (CG, not exposed to fever) constituted of apparently healthy schoolchildren paired with index cases on gender, age, week of inclusion and malaria status (ie: negative HRP2-based RDT).

In a pragmatic purpose, the subjects were selected for inclusion if no malaria diagnosis was made by the means accessible to a clinician in routine practice, i.e., RDT and body temperature assessment. During the follow-up, malaria was defined as the association of fever and parasitemia, using any malaria diagnostic method, whatever its availability on the field: (blood smear and/or PCR).

Hence, the primary objective of the study was to show that applying the algorithm of management of fevers in the school setting is safe, in the way it does not lead to an excessive number of undiagnosed (and thus untreated) malaria attacks, by comparing the number of malaria attacks between the two groups (exposed and non exposed to fever).

The secondary objective was to compare malaria incidence between children at high risk for malaria during follow-up in the IG and CG respectively. Children at high risk for malaria in these 2 groups were defined by the detection of Plasmodium falciparum infection at enrollment, using the most sensitive diagnostic tool currently available (i.e., PCR). Based on data from the literature, we estimated to about 15% the proportion of children attending for fever with a negative RDT and a positive PCR for malaria, and we assumed this proportion to be roughly the same in apparently healthy children. Twenty-eight children at high risk for malaria in each group (corresponding to187 children in each group) are needed to detect an 8% difference in proportion between the 2 groups (α = 0.05 and β = 0.8). Assuming a maximum of 5% in the dropout rate, we aimed at including a minimum of 200 children in each group.

Study site: This study was performed from February through June 2008 in 4 schools, located at Allada, Southern-Benin, where malaria transmission is intense and perennial. Altogether, the 4 study schools received about 2600 schoolchildren of 5 years-old and above.

Conduct of the study: Ethical clearance was obtained from the Faculty of Medicine ethics committee, Benin National University, Cotonou. Children attended school nurseries on their own, or led by their parents/guardians. Care was provided for any child from a school participating to the study. Children from the IG were included and actively followed only if individual informed consent was obtained (within 24 hours from the initial visit) from a parent or guardian. Asymptomatic children were screened for the CG on gender, age, week of inclusion. The first child with a negative RDT and for whom an informed consent was obtained, was included in the CG. Asymptomatic children (screened for inclusion into the CG) and with a positive RDT were advised to quickly attend at the school nursery as soon as symptoms of malaria would appear. Children treated for malaria within the prior month were not included in either group.

All children were examined by a study nurse. Children with danger signs were referred to a health centre. Children attending the school nurseries were managed for fever only if fever was stated (tympanic temperature at 37.8°C or above) or if an history of fever in the preceding 24 hours was reported. For each schoolchild managed for fever, a RDT (Paracheck®, ORCHID Diagnostics) was performed and children were given artemether-lumefantrine (AL) if the RDT result was positive, according to national guidelines in this age group. At enrolment and during follow-up, medications with antimalarial activity for the treatment of non malarial illnesses were avoided when acceptable alternatives were available.

Follow-up visits were on day 3, 7 and 14. A blood smear and a blood spot were collected at enrolment and at each scheduled visit. An additional blood spot for pharmacological data was collected for 100 children in each group on day 0 and day 14. When fever was reported and/or stated at a follow-up visit, a RDT was performed.

We estimated the number of undiagnosed P falciparum malaria at enrolment, by taking into account both baseline data (all cases with P falciparum parasitemia >1000/µL) and follow-up data with fever with concomitant occurrence of at least one test (including PCR) positive for a P falciparum infection.

Laboratory analysis: RDTs were red by the study nurse, as recommended by manufacturer 15 minutes after it was performed. Microscopy examination was done retrospectively (patients were managed according to RDT results in terms of antimalarials prescriptions and IG or CG group assignment) and blinded to the patient's identity.

DNA was prepared from blood collected at day 0 and on the last day of follow-up, as well as at occurrence of fever during follow-up.

On day 0 and day 14 in the 100 first children from each group, whole blood was sampled on filter paper spots and dried at room temperature. Using these dried blood spot (DBS), chloroquine (and monodesethylchloroquine) and quinine were detected by high pressure liquid chromatography with UV detection to 254 nm using ammonium acetate (40 mM, pH =5.5)/acetonitrile (85/15 % v/v).

Statistics: Parametric tests (Pearson's chi-square and chi-square for the comparison of crude rates) and non-parametric (Fischer) tests were used. A logistic regression on PCR positivity at enrollment was performed, taking into account variables likely to influence the malarial status: gender, age, school, clinical status, declared bednet use.

Conditions
Malaria
Keywords
Management of fever, Malaria, Malaria rapid diagnostic test, Clinical trial
Medical subject headings
Malaria

What participants receive

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

Study groups in NCT00913146
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
indexchild with fever and a negative malaria RDT
controlapparently healthy child with a negative RDT

What is being measured

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

  1. malaria incidence in the 2 groups (index and control)

    Measured: after 14 days of follow-up

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. malaria incidence in children with a positive Plasmodium falciparum PCR at baseline

    Measured: after 14 days of follow-up

Timeline

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

  1. First posted4 Jun 2009 (estimated)
  2. Study startFeb 2008
  3. Primary completionJun 2008
  4. Study completionMar 2009

Resources

More details

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

Study design
Study type
Observational
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
484 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00913146
Sponsor's protocol ID
IMEA5982FAU90
Status last verified
Jun 2009
First submitted
3 Jun 2009
Last updated
4 Jun 2009
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Njama-Meya D, Clark TD, Nzarubara B, Staedke S, Kamya MR, Dorsey G. Treatment of malaria restricted to laboratory-confirmed cases: a prospective cohort study in Ugandan children. Malar J. 2007 Jan 21;6:7. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-6-7.

    PubMed 17239256
  • Msellem MI, Martensson A, Rotllant G, Bhattarai A, Stromberg J, Kahigwa E, Garcia M, Petzold M, Olumese P, Ali A, Bjorkman A. Influence of rapid malaria diagnostic tests on treatment and health outcome in fever patients, Zanzibar: a crossover validation study. PLoS Med. 2009 Apr 28;6(4):e1000070. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000070. Epub 2009 Apr 28.

    PubMed 19399156

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Malaria, run by Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement at 1 site in Benin.

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 5 inclusion and 1 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 4 Jun 2009. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Benin. 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?

malaria incidence in the 2 groups (index and control) (time frame: after 14 days of follow-up). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00913146, which also lists 2 linked publications.

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 4 Jun 2009.

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