Azithromycin and Childhood Mortality in Africa

Mass Azithromycin Distribution to Prevent Child Mortality in Burkina Faso: The CHAT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Repeated mass distribution of azithromycin has been shown to reduce childhood mortality by 14% in sub-Saharan Africa. However, the estimated effect varied by location, suggesting that the intervention may not be effective in different geographical areas, time periods, or conditions.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of twice-yearly azithromycin to reduce mortality in children in the presence of seasonal malaria chemoprevention.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cluster randomized placebo-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of single-dose azithromycin for prevention of all-cause childhood mortality included 341 communities in the Nouna district in rural northwestern Burkina Faso. Participants were children aged 1 to 59 months living in the study communities.

Interventions

Communities were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral azithromycin or placebo distribution. Children aged 1 to 59 months were offered single-dose treatment twice yearly for 3 years (6 distributions) from August 2019 to February 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was all-cause childhood mortality, measured during a twice-yearly enumerative census.

Results

A total of 34 399 children (mean [SD] age, 25.2 [18] months) in the azithromycin group and 33 847 children (mean [SD] age, 25.6 [18] months) in the placebo group were included. A mean (SD) of 90.1% (16.0%) of the censused children received the scheduled study drug in the azithromycin group and 89.8% (17.1%) received the scheduled study drug in the placebo group. In the azithromycin group, 498 deaths were recorded over 60 592 person-years (8.2 deaths/1000 person-years). In the placebo group, 588 deaths were recorded over 58 547 person-years (10.0 deaths/1000 person-years). The incidence rate ratio for mortality was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.67-1.02; P = .07) in the azithromycin group compared with the placebo group. The incidence rate ratio was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.72-1.36) in those aged 1 to 11 months, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.67-1.27) in those aged 12 to 23 months, and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.57-0.94) in those aged 24 to 59 months.

Conclusions and Relevance

Mortality in children (aged 1-59 months) was lower with biannual mass azithromycin distribution in a setting in which seasonal malaria chemoprevention was also being distributed, but the difference was not statistically significant. The study may have been underpowered to detect a clinically relevant difference.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03676764.

Mass drug administration of azithromycin: an analysis

BACKGROUND

WHO recommends mass drug administration (MDA) of the antibiotic azithromycin for children aged 1-11 months in areas with high rates of infant and child mortality. Notwithstanding the substantial potential benefits of lowering childhood mortality, MDA raises understandable concerns about exacerbating antibiotic resistance.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the use of MDA using both quantitative and ethical considerations.

SOURCES

We performed a series of literature searches between July 2019 and June 2022.

CONTENT

We first compared MDA with other uses of antibiotics using the standard metric of 'number needed to treat', and five additional criteria: (1) other widely accepted uses of anti-infectives (2) absolute use (i.e. total number), of antibiotics, (3) risk-benefit trade-off, (4) availability of short-term alternatives, and (5) the precedent for implementing similar interventions. We found that MDA falls well within a justifiable range when compared with widely accepted uses of antibiotics in terms of the number needed to treat. The other five criteria we considered provided further support for the use of MDA to prevent childhood mortality.

IMPLICATIONS

Although better data on antibiotic use and resistance are needed, efforts to reduce antibiotic use and resistance should not start with halting MDA of azithromycin in the areas with the highest rates of childhood mortality. Improving data to inform this decision is critical. However, on the basis of the best evidence available, we believe that concerns regarding resistance should not thwart MDA; instead, MDA should be accompanied by robust plans to monitor its efficacy and changes in resistance levels. Similar considerations could be included in a framework for evaluating the benefits of antibiotics against the risk of resistance in other contexts.

Ethical challenges in mass drug administration for reducing childhood mortality: a qualitative study

Background

Mass drug administration (MDA) of medications to entire at-risk communities or populations has shown promise in the control and elimination of global infectious diseases. MDA of the broad-spectrum antibiotic azithromycin has demonstrated the potential to reduce childhood mortality in children at risk of premature death in some global settings. However, MDA of antibiotics raises complex ethical challenges, including weighing near-term benefits against longer-term risks—particularly the development of antimicrobial resistance that could diminish antibiotic effectiveness for current or future generations. The aim of this study was to understand how key actors involved in MDA perceive the ethical challenges of MDA.

Methods

We conducted 35 semi-structured interviews from December 2020–February 2022 with investigators, funders, bioethicists, research ethics committee members, industry representatives, and others from both high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Interview participants were identified via one of seven MDA studies purposively chosen to represent diversity in terms of use of the antibiotic azithromycin; use of a primary mortality endpoint; and whether the study occurred in a high child mortality country. Data were analyzed using constructivist grounded theory methodology.

Results

The most frequently discussed ethical challenges related to meaningful community engagement, how to weigh risks and benefits, and the need to target MDA We developed a concept map of how participants considered ethical issues in MDA for child mortality; it emphasizes MDA’s place alongside other public health interventions, empowerment, and equity. Concerns over an ethical double standard in weighing risks and benefits emerged as a unifying theme, albeit one that participants interpreted in radically different ways. Some thought MDA for reducing child mortality was ethically obligatory; others suggested it was impermissible.

Conclusions

Ethical challenges raised by MDA of antibiotics for childhood mortality—which span socio-cultural issues, the environment, and effects on future generations—require consideration beyond traditional clinical trial review. The appropriate role of MDA also requires attention to concerns over ethical double standards and power dynamics in global health that affect how we view antibiotic use in HICs versus LMICs. Our findings suggest the need to develop additional, comprehensive guidance on managing ethical challenges in MDA.

Graphical Abstract

Longer-Term Assessment of Azithromycin for Reducing Childhood Mortality in Africa

BACKGROUND

The MORDOR I trial (Macrolides Oraux pour Réduire les Décès avec un Oeil sur la Résistance) showed that in Niger, mass administration of azithromycin twice a year for 2 years resulted in 18% lower postneonatal childhood mortality than administration of placebo. Whether this benefit could increase with each administration or wane owing to antibiotic resistance was unknown.

METHODS

In the Niger component of the MORDOR I trial, we randomly assigned 594 communities to four twice-yearly distributions of either azithromycin or placebo to children 1 to 59 months of age. In MORDOR II, all these communities received two additional open-label azithromycin distributions. All-cause mortality was assessed twice yearly by census workers who were unaware of participants' original assignments.

RESULTS

In the MORDOR II trial, the mean (±SD) azithromycin coverage was 91.3±7.2% in the communities that received twice-yearly azithromycin for the first time (i.e., had received placebo for 2 years in MORDOR I) and 92.0±6.6% in communities that received azithromycin for the third year (i.e., had received azithromycin for 2 years in MORDOR I). In MORDOR II, mortality was 24.0 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.1 to 26.3) in communities that had originally received placebo in the first year and 23.3 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 21.4 to 25.5) in those that had originally received azithromycin in the first year, with no significant difference between groups (P = 0.55). In communities that had originally received placebo, mortality decreased by 13.3% (95% CI, 5.8 to 20.2) when the communities received azithromycin (P = 0.007). In communities that had originally received azithromycin and continued receiving it for an additional year, the difference in mortality between the third year and the first 2 years was not significant (-3.6%; 95% CI, -12.3 to 4.5; P = 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that the effect of mass administration of azithromycin on childhood mortality in Niger waned in the third year of treatment. Childhood mortality decreased when communities that had originally received placebo received azithromycin. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02047981.).