https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6389-0897
Figures
Abstract
Background
Declining in susceptibility of Plasmodium falciparum to mefloquine is reported in South-East Asia. A revisiting on mefloquine pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) could assist in finding new appropriate dosage regimens in combination with artesunate as a three-day course treatment.
Objective
This study aimed to investigate promising alternative artesunate-mefloquine combination regimens that are effective for the treatment of patients with mefloquine-sensitive and resistant P. falciparum malaria.
Methods
Data collected during 2008–2009 from 124 patients with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria were included in the analysis, 90 and 34 patients with sensitive and recrudescence response, respectively. All patients were treated with a three-day combination of artesunate-mefloquine. Population PK-PD models were developed. The developed models were validated with clinically observed data. Simulations of clinical efficacy of alternative mefloquine regimens were performed based on mefloquine sensitivity, patients’ adherence and parasite biomass.
Results
The developed PK/PD models well described with clinically observed data. For mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum, a three-day standard regimen of artesunate-mefloquine is suitable (>50% efficacy) only when the level of parasite sensitivity was < 1.5-fold of the cut-off level (IC50 < 36 nM). For mefloquine-sensitive parasite with IC50 < 23.19 nM (0.96-fold), all regimens provided satisfactory efficacy. In the isolates with IC50 of 24 nM, regimen-I is recommended. Curative treatment criteria for mefloquine and artesunate were C336h (>408 ng.mL-1) or Cmax/IC50 (>130.1 g.m/M), and Cmax/IC50 (>381.2 g.m/M), respectively.
Conclusions
Clinical use of a three-day standard artesunate-mefloquine is suitable only when the IC50 of P. falciparum isolates is lower than 36 nM. Otherwise, other ACT regimens should be replaced. For mefloquine-sensitive parasite, a dose reduction is recommended with the IC50 is lower than 23.19 nM.
Citation: Saeheng T, Na-Bangchang K (2023) Prediction of improved antimalarial chemotherapy of artesunate-mefloquine in combination with mefloquine sensitive and resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria. PLoS ONE 18(2): e0282099. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282099
Editor: Benedikt Ley, Menzies School of Health Research, AUSTRALIA
Received: November 22, 2022; Accepted: February 7, 2023; Published: February 23, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Saeheng, Na-Bangchang. 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 credited.
Data Availability: The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are restricted due to the data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information. Contact information: ec.medtu@tu.ac.th.
Funding: This study was supported by Thammasat Postdoctoral Fellowship. Also, it was received funding from Thammasat University under the project Center of Excellence in Pharmacology and Molecular Biology of Malaria and Cholangiocarcinoma (No. 1/2556, dated 12 October 2013), and National Research Council of Thailand (No. 45/2561, dated 10 September 2018). K.N. is supported by the National Research Council of Thailand under the Research Team Promotion grant (grant number NRCT 820/2563, dated 12 November 2020). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Introduction
Malaria-related mortality has tremendously reduced during the last two decades since the introduction of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) [1]. Artesunate-mefloquine is one of the commonly used ACT for the first-line treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum in Southeast Asia and Africa [2–18]. In South-East Asia, its clinical efficacy has been continuously declined, with failure rates of 10–30% [1]. The highest failure rate was reported in the Thai-Myanmar border areas (42-day cure rate of 72.58%) in 2010 [18]. This high failure rate was attributed to pharmacokinetic factors (inadequate drug concentrations) and reduced susceptibility or resistance of P. falciparum to either mefloquine or artesunate, or both. Inadequate blood concentrations of mefloquine was shown to significantly influence treatment response compared with artesunate. Notably, the current three-day course regimen may not provide adequate drug concentrations in the resistant parasites. Revisiting the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationship of drug concentration-time profile and clinico-parasitological response following this combination therapy may offer effective alternative dosage regimens for both mefloquine-sensitive and resistant P. falciparum. The pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) modelling has been successfully applied to predict the appropriate dosage regimens of various antimalarial drugs for a clinical use [19–23], exemplified by the SJ733 (an oral ATP4 inhibitor) [23]. The current study aimed to investigate promising alternative regimens of artesunate-mefloquine with improved efficacy to cope with multidrug resistant P. falciparum using PK/PD model approach.
Materials and methods
The flow-chart of study framework is shown in Fig 1.
Data source and study population
Data from the previously published article on the clinical efficacy of the three-day artesunate-mefloquine combination in the Thai-Myanmar borders during 2008–2009 were used for pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) analysis [18]. All patients were diagnosed with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria. In brief, 124 patients (aged 16–50 years) were included in the study, 90 and 34 patients with sensitive and recrudescence response, respectively. All received 200 mg of artesunate and 750 mg of mefloquine on day 1, followed by 200 mg of artesunate, and 500 mg of mefloquine on day 2, followed by 30 mg of primaquine on day 3.
Population PK/PD modeling
The PK/PD models for mefloquine and artesunate/dihydroartemisinin (active metabolite of artesunate) were constructed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling (MonolixSuite software, version 2021R1, Antony, France; Lixoft SAS, 2021). Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using the build-in stochastic approximation expectation-maximization algorithm. Various compartment model with different order absorption and elimination were performed to fit with drug concentration-time data. Pharmacokinetic parameters were normally distributed when transformed to log-scale. The pharmacodynamic model was evaluated using Emax model (turn-over rate) with production inhibition. The model was corrected with the fraction of unbound drug (fu) in plasma and tissue and was tested for sigmoidicity characteristics. Pharmacodynamic parameters were tested following non-transformed and log-normal transformation. The pharmacodynamic equation is shown below;
(1)
Where parasite is number of parasite; C is drug plasma-concentration profiles; IC50 is the half maximal inhibitory concentration that inhibit parasite growth by 50%; Kin is indirect turnover model with full inhibition of production; Kout is the degradation rate of parasite. The residual variability and the types of error models were evaluated using proportional, constant, and combined error models with power law. Predefined criteria for a model selection were: (i) the decrease in minimum objective function value (OFV), Akaike Information Criteria (AIC), Bayesian Information Criteria (BIC), and Corrected Bayesian Information Criteria (BICc), and (ii) the percentage of root mean square errors (RSE%), Graphical Goodness of Fit (GOF) including the observed versus predicted concentrations, scatter plot of residual, and the virtual predictive check (VPC). A significant level for the inclusion of the covariates (age, sex, bodyweight, and mefloquine level before treatment) in the model was set at α = 0.05.
The plotting of model-based individual prediction (IPRED) and population prediction (PRED) versus observed concentrations (GOF) was used for model evaluation. VPC included the observational data versus simulated data (1,000 patients) with the 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles.
PK/PD model validation
The IC50 (concentration that inhibits parasite growth by 50%) reflecting parasite’s susceptibility to mefloquine from the clinical study in the same areas areas [24] were used for model validation (IC50 12.9, 19.1 and 30.4 nM for isolates from Ranong, Kanchanaburi and Ratchaburi, and Tak provinces, respectively). These IC50 values were used to report the drug’s efficacy in those area (Ranong, Kanchanaburi and Ratchaburi, and Tak province). The evaluation of drug’s efficacy were described in the next section. The pharmacodynamic endpoint were the 42 days curative rate.
Monte Carlo simulations
The final PK/PD (1,000 virtual patients with 10 simulations) models were used to simulate optimal dosages of mefloquine in the combination regimens that provided high clinical efficacy using Monte Carlo simulations (Simulix version 2021R1, Antony, France; Lixoft SAS, 2021). The simulated dose regimens (oral administration) for mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum included: (i) 750 mg on day 1 (day 0), followed by 500 mg on day 2, (ii) 500 mg once daily for 42 days, (iii) 500 mg every 72 hours for 42 days, (iv) 500 mg every 96 hours for 42 days, and (v) 250 mg every 12 hours for 42 days. The simulated regimens for mefloquine-sensitive strains were: (i) 750 mg on day 1 and 500 mg on day 2, (ii) 500 mg on day 1 and 250 mg on day 2, (iii) 750 mg on day 1, (iv) 500 mg on day 1, and (v) 250 mg on day 1, 2, and 3. The simulated regimens are based on trials and erros until it provides the curative rate close to 100%.
Effect of P. falciparum susceptibility to mefloquine
The cut-off level for mefloquine sensitivity used was 24 nM [20,21]. Simulations were performed using five simulated levels of mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum based on the current IC50 (23.19 nM) of sensitive strains, i.e., IC50: 24 nM (1-fold of the cut-off level), 30.4 (1.25-fold), 36 (1.5-fold), 48 (2-fold), 72 (3-fold), and 120 (5-fold) nM. The IC50 used for the sensitive strains were: 6 (0.25-fold), 12 (0.5-fold), 12.9 (0.54-fold), 19.1 (0.8-fold), and 23.19 (0.96-fold) nM. In addition, the IC50 reported in 2010 in the current study [18] of 23.19 (mefloquine-sensitive) and 63.84 (mefloquine-reistant) nM were also used in the simuluation. Mefloquine-sensitive and recrudescence P. falciparum responses refer to adequate clinical and parasitological response at day 42 (ACPR42) as a primary endpoint based on the previous study [18].
Effect of patients’ adherence
Due to long course treatment of the proposed reimen (42 days), the effect of patients’ adherence to medication (i.e., 100%, 70%, 50%, and 30%) on treatment efficacy were evaluated.
Effect of admission parasite biomass
The effect of parasite biomass (30,000, 20,000, 15,000 and 5000/μL) on the efficacy of mefloquine in the standard regimen (regimen-I) was evaluated using the cut-off level for curative treatment of < 10/μL on day 42) [25]. Treatment outcome was classified as low (<50% cure), moderate (50–70% cure), and high (>70% cure) efficacy [23]. Statistical analysis (relative risk, odds ratio, Fisher’s exact and chi-square tests) were performed at a significance level (α) of 0.05.
Toxicity approach
Due to the permanent neurological deficits following standard treatment, the relative risk of plasma/blood concentration over the threshond, resulting in the disruption of calcium homeostasis and ER function following five regimens, were calculated.
Establishment of the criteria for curative treatment
Receiving Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the accuracy of the following cut-off parameters for curative outcome: area under the curve during the first 7 days (AUC0-7days), trough plasma/whole-blood concentration at 336 h (Ctrough,336h), and peak concentration and IC50 ratio (Cmax /IC50). It is noted that the mechanism of action of a mefloquine is on the blood stage (blood schizontocide), curative parameter “Ctrough, 336h (14 days)” covers the blood stage. A binomial proportion (Wilson/Brown) method was performed at a statistically significant level of 0.05 (GraphPad Prism version 9.20 for Windows, GraphPad Software, La Jolla California USA). Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), positive likelihood ratios (LR+), negative likelihood ratios (LR-), and diagnostic odd ratios were calculated for an internal validity.
Results
PK/PD models
A one-compartmental model with zero-order kinetic absorption and linear elimination showed the best characterized (best fit) the population pharmacokinetic properties for mefloquine. A transit-compartment model with one compartment and linear elimination best characterized (best fit) the pharmacokinetic properties of artesunate and dihydroartemisinin. The pharmacokinetic model of artesunate/dihydroartemisinin was in accordance with that previously reported [a transit-compartment model followed by one-compartment disposition] [26]. Since both artesunate and dihydroartemisinin are almost immediately eliminated from the systemic circulation, their contribution to parasite elimination is only during the first two days of treatment. Therefore, the neither artesunate nor artesunate could be fit with parasite clearance throughout 42 days. With a short-half-life, primaquine unlikely plays important role for parasite elimination due to fast elimination, particulary of blood stage. Only mefloquine was therefore used for PK/PD modeling and simulation as it play role in parasite elimination for the whole 42-day follow up. The final PK/PD model of mefloquine was well characterized by Emax model (turn-over rate) without sigmoidicity when corrected with fu. The inclusion of body weight and sex did not improve model quality. All parameters in all models showed low to moderate variation (%RSE). The analysis of OFV, AIC, BIC, BICc and GOF were summarized in the S1 File. Final population parameters estimated for mefloquine (resistance and sensitive), artesunate and dihydroartemisinin are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
Model validation
The developed PK/PD models using the IC50 of 12.9, 19.1 and 30.4 nM adequately predicted the reported clinical efficacy of mefloquine [19]. The efficacy predicted based on the IC50 of 23.19 (sensitive) and 63.84 nM (resistance) reported for the current study was 74 and 13.8%, respectively [18].
PK/PD simulations for prediction of the clinical efficacy of mefloquine
Mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum.
Without the effect of patients’ adherence (100%), the efficacy of mefloquine for regimen-I (standard regimen) ranged from 1 to 57.3% (Fig 2), with IC50 ranging from 1 to 5-fold (24–110 nM). All other regimens provided better treatment efficacy than regimen-I (p ≤ 0.001). Regimen-V was the most effective (70.6–98.4% cure) (Fig 2). Number-needed-to-treat (NNT) and relative risk (RR) for regimen-V were 1.44–2.43 and 0.04–0.58, respectively. With a 1 to 2-fold increase in IC50 (24–72 nM), all proposed regimens provided moderate efficacy (>50%). With a 3 to 5-fold increase in IC50, the efficacy of regimen-III and IV dramatically dropped to around 30 and 15%, respectively. The efficacy of regimen-II and V were high (>70%). The simulated Cmax ratios between regimen-II, III, IV and V compared with regimen-I were 5.65, 1.82, 1.44, and 5.55-fold, respectively. Since regimen-II and V provided Cmax over 5-fold of the standard regimen, patients may be at risk of toxicities. Regimen-II and V were inappropriate for clinical use, and therefore, the effect of patients’ adherence was evaluated only for regimen-III, and IV. Treatment efficacy, RR, and NNT for all regimens when the adherence was 100% are presented in Figs 2–4 (2, 3, and 4 for efficacy, RR, and NNT, respectively). With 70% adherence, regimen-III and IV provided improved efficacy compared with regimen-I for isolates with different levels of sensitivity to mefloquine (p<0.001) for mefloquine resistance (S1 File).The NNT and RR were 3.21–43.68 and 0.12–0.81, respectively. When the IC50 was 1 to 1.5-fold of the cut-off value, the efficacy of regimen-III and IV were moderate (50–70%) and high (>70%), respectively. When the IC50 was increased by 2-fold, regimen-IV provided low efficacy (43.9%) efficacy. When the IC50 was increased by 5-fold, the efficacy for regimen-III and IV were 13.3 and 7.2%, respectively (S1 File).
With 50% adherence, both regimen-III and IV still provided superior efficacy than regimen-I (α = 0.001). Only a 1-fold increase of IC50 resulted in moderate efficacy (>50%) for both regimen-III and IV. When the IC50 was increased by 1.5-fold, treatment efficacy of regimen-III was still over 50% (NNT = 5.05, p<0.001). With a 2 to 3-fold increase in IC50, the efficacy was 15–50% for both regimens. With a 5-fold increase in IC50, the efficacy of both regimens were lower than 10%.
With 30% adherence, the efficacy of regimen-III appeared to be slightly higher than regimen-I (S1 File). However, no significant difference was found for 1-fold (p = 0.2), 1.5-fold (p = 0.09), and 2-fold (p = 0.02) increase in IC50. The efficacy of regimen-IV for all sensitivity levels except 5-fold was lower than regimen-I. No significant difference was found between regimen-I and IV when the IC50 was increased by 3-fold (p = 0.08) and 5-fold (p = 0.24). The efficacy and RR of each regimen at 100 and 30% adherence are shown in Figs 5 and 6. The predicted mefloquine plasma/blood concentration profiles for each regimen are shown in S1 File.
In addition to toxicity approach, the RR of mefloquine concentration over the threshold of inducing the disruption of calcium homeostasis and ER function for regimen-II, III, IV, and V with 100% of adherence were 3.72 (3.30–4.16), 2.67 (2.37–3.00), 2.29 (2.02–2.59), and 3.67 (3.28–4.11), respectively.
Five different levels of parasite biomass [i.e., 30,000 (group-I), 20,000 (group-II), 15,000 (group-III), 10,000 (group-IV), and 5,000 (group-V)] with three different levels of parasite sensitivity to mefloquine were simulated. Overall, treatment efficacy seemed to be an inverse relationship with parasites biomass. All scenarios in all groups except for the IC50 of 63.83 nM in group-II (p = 0.1) showed a significant difference in efficacy compared with group-I (p<0.001) (Fig 7), with odds ratios of 0.02–0.58 (Fig 8). For all parasite sensitivity levels, the group-V with IC50 of 30.89 nM was the most effective regimen (75.30% cure). In contrast, the group-I with IC50 of 63.84 nM was the least effective (1.3% cure).
Mefloquine sensitive P. falciparum
Three levels of mefloquine sensitivity based on clinical IC50 and two varied IC50 values were simulated assuming 100% patients’ adherence. Overall, the efficacy of all regimens was inferior to regimen-I for all scenarios (p = 0.001). However, the efficacy of all regimens except regimen-IV with IC50 of 23.19 nM (49.7%) were still higher than 50% (moderate efficacy). With the most sensitive strains (IC50 6 nM or 0.25-fold), all regimens provided efficacy over 80% (92.7, 86.3, 86.1, 81.9 and 87.8% for regimen-I, II, III, IV and V, respectively). When the IC50 was increased to 12 nM, the efficacy was slightly decreased, but still over 70% (84.5, 75.4, 73.3, 65.8 and 76.5%). With a slight increase in IC50 (13.10 nM), the efficacy was still maintained (83.5, 73.4, 71.5, 63.0 and 75.1%. With moderate level of mefloquine sensitivity (IC50 19.39 nM), the efficacy was slightly dropped by 10% (77.1, 65.0, 61.6, 53.7 and 64.6%). Notably, treatment efficacy was dramatically decreased to around 60% when the IC50 was increased to 23.19 nM (73.9, 60.2, 56.7, 49.7 and 60.6%). Comparison of clinical efficacy of regimen-I and other regimens for all IC50 are provided in S1 File. Comparison of treatment efficacy between the 0.25-fold and 0.96-fold IC50 with different regimens are shown in Fig 9. The predicted mefloquine plasma/blood concentration profiles for each regimen are shown in S1 File.
The effect of parasite biomass on the treatment efficacy of the current standard regimen was simulated using the IC50 reported in the study [18]. An inverse relationship was observed between parasites biomass and treatment efficacy. With the IC50 of 13.10 nM, the efficacy of mefloquine for group-I, II, III, IV and V were 41.9, 54.3, 58.6, 71.9 and 84.9%, respectively. When the IC50 was increased to 19.39 nM, the corresponding efficacy was 31.1, 43.2, 49.4, 61.4 and 78.5%, respectively (S1 File)
Curative treatment criteria
ROC curves for mefloquine based on Ctrough,336h (>408 ng/mL) and Cmax/IC50 (>130.1 g/mM) were 0.756 (95%CI: 0.60–0.91, p = 0.006), and 0.75 (95%CI: 0.60–0.91, p = 0.006), respectively. ROC curve for artesunate based on Cmax/IC50 (>381.2 g/mM) was 0.75 (95%CI: 0.57–0.93, p = 0.019). Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, NPV, PPV, LR+, LR-, diagnostic odd ratios are summarized in Table 3.
Discussion
The emergence and spread of mefloquine resistance have led to a decrease in clinical efficacy of artesunate-mefloquine combination. For mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum, a three-day artesunate-mefloquine regimen (regimen-I) should be replaced by other regimens when the IC50 of mefloquine was higher than 36 nM (1.5-fold of the cut-off level) (<50% efficacy). It was clear that regimen-II/V provided the best efficacy for P. falciparum with different sensitivity. These regimens were the best option for mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum. Nonetheless, these proposed regimens resulted in a 5-fold increase in Cmax compared with regimen-I. Clinical use of regimen-II or V may result in an increased risk of mefloquine toxicity. In such case, regimen-III or IV would be a preferable choice for mefloquine-resistant parasite with IC50 lower than 48 nM, particularly when supervised medication or directly observed therapy (DOT) is applicable. Notably, it is clear that patients’ adherence significantly affected the treatment efficacy of the long-course treatment regimens (42 days). Treatment efficacy for parasite strains with IC50 below 48 nM dramatically dropped to lower than 50% when the adherence was only 30%. Interestingly, initial parasite biomass significantly affected the clinical efficacy of mefloquine in the standard regimen (I), the higher initial parasite biomass, the higher treatment failure rate. The current standard regimen is thus, only suitable when the initial parasite biomass was lower than 5,000/μL (IC50: 30.89–32.71 nM). For mefloquine-sensitive parasite, although the clinical efficacy of all proposed regimens was relatively low compared with regimen-I (moderate efficacy).
Ideally, regimen-IV with the lowest mefloquine total dose (500 mg) would be a preferable choice considering the amount of dosage administration. This regimen, however, provided the lowest efficacy compared with others. Its efficacy was also decreased to 50% for the parasite strains with IC50 of 23.19 nM (Fig 5). Regimen-II, III and V had a comparable amount of mefloquine dose as well as clinical efficacy. In cases when patients’ adherence to medication is of great concern, a single dose regimen-III (on day 1) is a preferable choice. Due to Mefloquine-induced neurotoxicity, low dose regimens, i.e., regimen-II and V are preferable choices. Remarkably, the efficacy of all proposed regimens for the parasite strains with IC50 of 23.19 nM was decreased to 60%. In such case, Regimen-I is more appropriate. Similarly to the resistant strains, initial parasite biomass significantly influenced the efficacy of mefloquine in the sensitive isolates. When the IC50 of mefloquine was between 13.10 and 19.39 nM, regimen-I was still effective with an initial parasite biomass of lower than 10,000/μL. In cases when the initial parasite density was over 10,000/μL, clinical use of this regimen may not be effective (<50% efficacy).
Besides the problem with mefloquine-resistant P. falciparum in the Great Mekong Subregion (GMS), the emergence and spread of resistance to artemisinin-based therapy is the great concern in all malaria-endemic areas. The combination of two partner drugs with different mechanisms of action (triple artemisinin-based combination therapy or TACT) is an optional choice for malaria treatment [27,28]. It is noted that this approach has been successfully applied in HIV as well as tuberculosis [27]. The first clinical trial of TACT showed that TACT could tackle artemisinin-based resistance problems with high efficacy, safety and tolerability [28]. TACT is, therefore, a promising approach for malaria therapy.
Few clinical information have been corrected based on previous study [18], therefore, the effects of covariate parameters on models are limited. Since the highest mefloquine resistance level is reported in Thailand [1], the proposed curative criteria based on clinical data in Thailand could be applied for the treatment of uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in other endemic areas. The efficacy reported in this study [18] was 78.5%, while the efficacy in other Southeast Asia countries (Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos) [4–12], and African countries (Mali, and Senegal) [13–17] ranged 96 to 100%. However, clinical application based on the results of the current study may be limited as the PK/PD models did not include the effect of artesunate and dihydroartemisinin on parasite clearance. Furthermore, the impact of initial parasite biomass on the clinical efficacy of regimen-I artesunate-mefloquine combination seemed to be underestimated (low efficacy). An increase in initial parasite biomass has been reported to result in delayed parasite clearance [29]. Therefore, simulation of efficacy for the 42-day follow up may not be long enough to capture such effect. Moreover, external validation for curative treatment criteria using separate data sets was not performed. Further large clinical trials of the three-day artesunate-mefloquine combination with different levels of initial parasite biomass is required. Also, only nausea and vomiting have been reported in patients and no other neurological deficits have been reported [18]. The accumulation of this drug exceeding 50 μM following standard treatment in some patients, however, would disrupt the function of neuronal calcium homeostasis and ER functions [30]. Results based on this simulation showed that there were not significantly different of predicted brain-concentration profiles between patients with and without adverse events following a standard treatment (p = 0.2734). Nevertheless, the RR of mefloquine concentrations over threshold of the disruption of neuronal calcium homeostasis for each regimen compared with standard treatment were reported for a risk-benefit assessment (All regimens are at risk of the disruption of neuronal calcium homeostasis).
Conclusions
In conclusion, clinical use of a three-day artesunate-mefloquine (regimen-I) is suitable only when the IC50 of P. falciparum isolates is lower than 36 nM. With the resistant strains (IC50 up to 48 nM), two proposed regimens (III and IV) are preferable under DOT therapy or supervised medication. Otherwise, other ACT regimens should be replaced as the clinical efficacy would be dramatically decreased if patients’ adherence to medication is poor. For mefloquine-sensitive parasite, all regimens should provide satisfactory efficacy if the IC50 is lower than 23.19 nM. With decreased parasite sensitivity (IC50 close to 24 nM), a three-day artesunate-mefloquine is recommended since the efficacy of all proposed regimens would be extremely reduced to lower than 60%.
Supporting information
S1 File. Contains all the supporting tables and figures.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282099.s001
(DOCX)
References
- 1.
World Health Organization. World malaria report 2020: 20 years of global progress and challenges. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2021.
- 2. Peixoto HM., Marchesini PB., de Oliveira MRF. Efficacy and safety of artesunate-mefloquine therapy for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria: systematic review and meta-analysis. Trans R SoC Trop Med Hyg. 2016; 110 (11): 626–636. pmid:28039388
- 3. Hutagalung R, Paiphun L, Ashley EA et al. A randomized trial of artemeter-lumefantrine versus mefloquine-artesunate for the treatment of uncomplicated multi-drug resistant Plasmodium falciparum on the western border of Thailand. Mar J 2005;4:46.
- 4. Lefevre G, Looareesuwan S, Treeprasertsuk S et al. A clinical and pharmacokinetic trial of six doses of artemether-lumefantrine for multidrug -resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Thailand. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2001; 64:246–56. pmid:11463111
- 5. Mayxay M, Khanthvong M, Lindegardh N et al. Randomized comparison of chloroquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine versus artesunate plus mefloquine versus artemether-lumefantrine in the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39:1139–47.
- 6. Smithuis F, Kyaw MK, Phe O et al. Effectiveness of five artemisinin combination regimens with or without primaquine in uncomplicated malaria: An open-label randomized trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2010; 10:673–81.
- 7. Stohrer JM, Dittrich S, Thongpaseuth V et al. Therapeutic efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate-mefloquine for treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Luang Namtha Province, Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Trop Med Int Health 2004;9:1175–83. pmid:15548313
- 8. Ashley EA, McGready R, Hutagalung R et al. A randomized, controlled study of a simple, one-daily regimen of dihydriartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated, multidrug-resistant falciparum malaria. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:425–32.
- 9. Janssens B, Van Herp M, Goubert L et al. A randomized open study to assess the efficacy and tolerability of dihydriartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Cambodia. Trop Med Int Health 2007;12:251–9.
- 10. Mayxay M, Thongpraseuth V, Khanthavon M et al. An open, randomized comparison of artesunate plus mefloquine vs. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos). Trop Med Int Health 2006; 11:1157–65.
- 11. Smithuis F, Kyaw MK, Phe O et al. Efficacy and effectiveness of Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus artesunate-mefloquine in falciparum malaria: an open-label randomized comparison. Lancet 2006;367:2075–85.
- 12. Tangpukdee N, Krudsood S, Thanachartwet W et al. An open randomized clinical trial of Artekin vs artesunate-mefloquine in the treatment of acute uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2005;36:1085–91. pmid:16438129
- 13. Faye B, Ndiaye JL, Ndiaye D et al. Efficacy and tolerability to four antimalarial combinations in the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Senegal. Malar J 2007;6:80.
- 14. Faye B, Ndiaye JL, Tine R et al. A randomized trial of artesunate mefloquine versus artemether lumefantrine for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Senegalese children. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2010;82:140–4. pmid:20065010
- 15. Sagara I, Diallo A, Kone M et al. A randomized trial of artesunate-mefloquine versus artemether-lumefantrine for treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Mali. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2008;79:655–61 pmid:18981499
- 16. Tine RCK, Faye B, Sylla K et al. Efficacy and tolerability of a new formulation of artesunate-mefloquine for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in adult in Senegal: open randomized trial. Mar J 2012;11:416. pmid:23234606
- 17. Toure OA, Kouame MG, Didier YJ et al. Artesunate/mefloquine paediatric formulation vs. artemether/lumefantrine for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum in Anonkoua koute Cote d’lvoire. Trop Med Int Heal 2011;16:290–7.
- 18. Na-Bangchang K., Ruengweerayut R., Mahamad P., et al. Declining in efficacy of a three-day combination regimen of mefloquine-artesunate in a multi-drug resistance area along the Thai-Myanmar border. Mala J. 2010; 8(9):273.
- 19. White NJ. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations in antimalarial dose optimization. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Dec;57(12):5792–807. pmid:24002099
- 20. Kay K, Hastings IM. Improving pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling to investigate anti-infective chemotherapy with application to the current generation of antimalarial drugs. PLoS Comput Biol. 2013;9(7):e1003151. pmid:23874190
- 21. Simpson JA, Zaloumis S, DeLivera AM, Price RN, McCaw JM. Making the most of clinical data: reviewing the role of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models of anti-malarial drugs. AAPS J. 2014 Sep;16(5):962–74. pmid:25056904
- 22. Hughes E, Wallender E, Mohamed Ali A, Jagannathan P, Savic RM. Malaria PK/PD and the Role Pharmacometrics Can Play in the Global Health Arena: Malaria Treatment Regimens for Vulnerable Populations. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2021 Oct;110(4):926–940. pmid:33763871
- 23. Gaur AH, Panetta JC, Smith AM, et al. Combining SJ733, an oral ATP4 inhibitor of Plasmodium falciparum, with the pharmacokinetic enhancer cobicistat: An innovative approach in antimalarial drug development. EBioMedicine. 2022 Jun;80:104065. pmid:35598441
- 24. Chaijaroenkul W., Na-Bangchang K., Mungthin M. et al. In vitro antimalarial drug susceptibility in Thai border areas from 1998–2003. Mala J. 2005; 4(37). pmid:16060967
- 25. Seilie AM, Chang M, Hanron AE et al. Beyond blood smears: Qualification of Plasmodium 18S rRNA as biomarker for controlled human malaria infections. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2019; 100(6):1466–76.
- 26. Das JPL, Kyaw MP, Nyunt MH, et al. Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of artesunate in patients with artemisinin sensitive and resistant infections in Southern Myanmar. Mala J. 2018; 17(1):126.
- 27. van der Pluijm RW, Amaratunga C, Dhorda M, Dondorp AM. Triple Artemisinin-Based Combination Therapies for Malaria—A New Paradigm? Trends Parasitol. 2021 Jan;37(1):15–24. pmid:33060063
- 28. van der Pluijm RW, Tripura R, Hoglund RM, et al. Triple artemisinin-based combination therapies versus artemisinin-based combination therapies for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria: a multicentre, open-label, randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2020 Apr 25;395(10233):1345–1360. pmid:32171078
- 29. White NJ. The parasite clearance curve. Malar J. 2011;10:278. pmid:21939506
- 30. Dow GS, Hudson TH, Vahey M., Koenig ML. The acute neurotoxicity of mefloquine may be mediated through a disruption of calcium homeostasis and ER function in vitro. Malar J. 2003;2:14. pmid:12848898