Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp
Foundation of Public Utility

The efficacy of antimalarial monotherapies, sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine in East Africa: implications for sub-regional policy

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.other D'Alessandro, U. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2007-12-06T14:33:26Z
dc.date.available 2007-12-06T14:33:26Z
dc.date.issued 2003 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1360-2276 en_US
dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-3156.2003.01114.x
dc.identifier.other ITG-PLA en_US
dc.identifier.other PARAS en_US
dc.identifier.other U-MALAR en_US
dc.identifier.other JIF en_US
dc.identifier.other DOI en_US
dc.identifier.other FTB en_US
dc.identifier.other ABSTRACT en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10390/134
dc.description The definitive version is available at www3.interscience.wiley.com
dc.description.abstract Between 1998 and 2001, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Zanzibar, Rwanda and Burundi changed antimalarial drug policy, in the face of widespread chloroquine resistance. The new first-line treatment is either sulphadoxine–pyrimethamine (SP) monotherapy, or a combination of SP with either chloroquine or amodiaquine. Two national malaria control programmes, Burundi and Zanzibar, have decided upon amodiaquine-artesunate as their first-line treatment, although SP will continue to fill this role until the new policy can be implemented. Given the broad uniformity of parasite chemoresistance in the six countries, The East African Network for Monitoring Antimalarial Treatment (EANMAT) has focused attention on, and worked towards, a sub-regional antimalarial drug policy, where the evidence base would be the entire portfolio of network in vivo test results. Currently, there are several different antimalarial drug policies within the EANMAT area: the intention is to eventually replace this plethora of policies with a single, sub-regional policy based upon combination therapy. Currently, successful malaria treatment depends primarily upon the efficacy of SP, and of amodiaquine, which is either a component of first-line treatment, or the second line drug. This report addresses the results of WHO in vivo tests on these two monotherapies within the network. Results are analysed to assess the evidence for change in parasite susceptibility over time; the range of susceptibility to each drug within countries, and the implications of test results on policy. en_US
dc.language English en_US
dc.publisher Blackwell Publishing
dc.subject Protozoal diseases en_US
dc.subject Malaria en_US
dc.subject Antimalarials en_US
dc.subject Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine en_US
dc.subject Amodiaquine en_US
dc.subject Drug resistance en_US
dc.subject Drug sensitivity testing en_US
dc.subject National policies en_US
dc.subject EANMAT en_US
dc.subject Africa, East en_US
dc.title The efficacy of antimalarial monotherapies, sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine in East Africa: implications for sub-regional policy en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.citation.jtitle Tropical Medicine and International Health en_US
dc.citation.volume 8 en_US
dc.citation.pages 860-867 en_US
dc.publisher.place Oxford
dc.contributor.corpauthor East African Network for Monitoring Antimalarial Treatment (EANMAT) en_US
dc.identifier.pmid http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14516296
dc.citation.jabbreviation Trop Med Int Health en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record