Limits...
Antimalarial drugs for preventing malaria during pregnancy and the risk of low birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized trials.

Muanda FT, Chaabane S, Boukhris T, Santos F, Sheehy O, Perreault S, Blais L, Bérard A - BMC Med (2015)

Bottom Line: Compared to no use, all combined antimalarial drugs were associated with a 27% (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.97, ten studies) reduction in the risk of LBW.Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was not associated with a reduction in the risk of LBW in regions where the prevalence of the dihydropteroate synthase 540E mutation exceeds 50% (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, three studies).The risk of LBW was similar when sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was compared to mefloquine (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.29, two studies).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Montreal, 2940 Chemin de Polytechnique, Montreal, QC, H3T 1J4, Canada. flory.muanda-tsobo@umontreal.ca.

ABSTRACT

Background: It is known that antimalarial drugs reduce the risk of low birth weight (LBW) in pregnant patients. However, a previous Cochrane review did not evaluate whether the level of antimalarial drug resistance could modify the protective effect of antimalarial drugs in this regard. In addition, no systematic review exists comparing current recommendations for malaria prevention during pregnancy to alternative regimens in Africa. Therefore, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of antimalarial drugs for malaria prevention during pregnancy in reducing the risk of LBW.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for articles published up to 21 November 2014, in English or French, and identified additional studies from reference lists. We included randomized and quasi-randomized studies reporting LBW as one of the outcomes. We extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in selected studies. All pooled analyses were based on a random effect model, and we used a funnel plot and trim and fill method to test and adjust for publication bias.

Results: A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria (37,981 subjects). Compared to no use, all combined antimalarial drugs were associated with a 27% (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.97, ten studies) reduction in the risk of LBW. The level of antimalarial drug resistance modified the protective effect of the antimalarial drug used for prevention of LBW during pregnancy. Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was not associated with a reduction in the risk of LBW in regions where the prevalence of the dihydropteroate synthase 540E mutation exceeds 50% (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, three studies). The risk of LBW was similar when sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was compared to mefloquine (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.29, two studies).

Conclusion: Prophylactic antimalarial drugs and specifically sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine may no longer protect against the risk of LBW in areas of high-level resistance. In Africa, there are currently no suitable alternative drugs to replace sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for malaria prevention during pregnancy.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Three doses or more compared to two doses of the main type of antimalarial drug used for prevention of malaria during pregnancy and risk of LBW. Each study is displayed as a square and horizontal line representing the relative risk together with its confidence interval. The area of the square represents the weight that the study contributes to the meta-analysis. The combined relative risk and its confidence interval are represented by the diamond. The P value after I2 represents chi-square test for heterogeneity. DerSimonian and Laird were used to calculate the random effect model. *Relative risk has been calculated with the Mantel–Haenszel method instead of using the odds ratio (OR) provided in the paper. CI, confidence interval; LBW, low birth weight; RR, relative risk
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4537579&req=5

Fig4: Three doses or more compared to two doses of the main type of antimalarial drug used for prevention of malaria during pregnancy and risk of LBW. Each study is displayed as a square and horizontal line representing the relative risk together with its confidence interval. The area of the square represents the weight that the study contributes to the meta-analysis. The combined relative risk and its confidence interval are represented by the diamond. The P value after I2 represents chi-square test for heterogeneity. DerSimonian and Laird were used to calculate the random effect model. *Relative risk has been calculated with the Mantel–Haenszel method instead of using the odds ratio (OR) provided in the paper. CI, confidence interval; LBW, low birth weight; RR, relative risk

Mentions: When three doses or more of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine were compared to two doses of this drug, we found a significant 25 % reduction in the risk of LBW (RR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.59–0.96; I2 = 27.1 %, P = 0.241, five studies) (Fig. 4). No evidence of publication bias was detected after inspection of the funnel plot (Egger’s test, P = 0.901; Begg’s test, P = 1.000) (Additional file 5: Figure S8). In a sensitivity analysis, a significant reduction of LBW was also found when using a fixed effect model (RR 0.77, 95 % CI 0.63–0.93; I2 = 27.1 %, P = 0.241, five studies) (Additional file 5: Figure S9). There was no influence of each individual study on the overall meta-analysis summary estimate after removal of each trial one at a time from the meta-analysis (Additional file 5: Table S6).Fig. 4


Antimalarial drugs for preventing malaria during pregnancy and the risk of low birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized trials.

Muanda FT, Chaabane S, Boukhris T, Santos F, Sheehy O, Perreault S, Blais L, Bérard A - BMC Med (2015)

Three doses or more compared to two doses of the main type of antimalarial drug used for prevention of malaria during pregnancy and risk of LBW. Each study is displayed as a square and horizontal line representing the relative risk together with its confidence interval. The area of the square represents the weight that the study contributes to the meta-analysis. The combined relative risk and its confidence interval are represented by the diamond. The P value after I2 represents chi-square test for heterogeneity. DerSimonian and Laird were used to calculate the random effect model. *Relative risk has been calculated with the Mantel–Haenszel method instead of using the odds ratio (OR) provided in the paper. CI, confidence interval; LBW, low birth weight; RR, relative risk
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4537579&req=5

Fig4: Three doses or more compared to two doses of the main type of antimalarial drug used for prevention of malaria during pregnancy and risk of LBW. Each study is displayed as a square and horizontal line representing the relative risk together with its confidence interval. The area of the square represents the weight that the study contributes to the meta-analysis. The combined relative risk and its confidence interval are represented by the diamond. The P value after I2 represents chi-square test for heterogeneity. DerSimonian and Laird were used to calculate the random effect model. *Relative risk has been calculated with the Mantel–Haenszel method instead of using the odds ratio (OR) provided in the paper. CI, confidence interval; LBW, low birth weight; RR, relative risk
Mentions: When three doses or more of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine were compared to two doses of this drug, we found a significant 25 % reduction in the risk of LBW (RR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.59–0.96; I2 = 27.1 %, P = 0.241, five studies) (Fig. 4). No evidence of publication bias was detected after inspection of the funnel plot (Egger’s test, P = 0.901; Begg’s test, P = 1.000) (Additional file 5: Figure S8). In a sensitivity analysis, a significant reduction of LBW was also found when using a fixed effect model (RR 0.77, 95 % CI 0.63–0.93; I2 = 27.1 %, P = 0.241, five studies) (Additional file 5: Figure S9). There was no influence of each individual study on the overall meta-analysis summary estimate after removal of each trial one at a time from the meta-analysis (Additional file 5: Table S6).Fig. 4

Bottom Line: Compared to no use, all combined antimalarial drugs were associated with a 27% (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.97, ten studies) reduction in the risk of LBW.Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was not associated with a reduction in the risk of LBW in regions where the prevalence of the dihydropteroate synthase 540E mutation exceeds 50% (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, three studies).The risk of LBW was similar when sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was compared to mefloquine (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.29, two studies).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Montreal, 2940 Chemin de Polytechnique, Montreal, QC, H3T 1J4, Canada. flory.muanda-tsobo@umontreal.ca.

ABSTRACT

Background: It is known that antimalarial drugs reduce the risk of low birth weight (LBW) in pregnant patients. However, a previous Cochrane review did not evaluate whether the level of antimalarial drug resistance could modify the protective effect of antimalarial drugs in this regard. In addition, no systematic review exists comparing current recommendations for malaria prevention during pregnancy to alternative regimens in Africa. Therefore, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of antimalarial drugs for malaria prevention during pregnancy in reducing the risk of LBW.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for articles published up to 21 November 2014, in English or French, and identified additional studies from reference lists. We included randomized and quasi-randomized studies reporting LBW as one of the outcomes. We extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in selected studies. All pooled analyses were based on a random effect model, and we used a funnel plot and trim and fill method to test and adjust for publication bias.

Results: A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria (37,981 subjects). Compared to no use, all combined antimalarial drugs were associated with a 27% (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.97, ten studies) reduction in the risk of LBW. The level of antimalarial drug resistance modified the protective effect of the antimalarial drug used for prevention of LBW during pregnancy. Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was not associated with a reduction in the risk of LBW in regions where the prevalence of the dihydropteroate synthase 540E mutation exceeds 50% (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, three studies). The risk of LBW was similar when sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was compared to mefloquine (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.29, two studies).

Conclusion: Prophylactic antimalarial drugs and specifically sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine may no longer protect against the risk of LBW in areas of high-level resistance. In Africa, there are currently no suitable alternative drugs to replace sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for malaria prevention during pregnancy.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus