Safety, Tolerability, and Compliance with Long-Term Antimalarial Chemoprophylaxis in American Soldiers in Afghanistan

A Smartphone App for Real-Time Assessment of Malaria Prophylaxis Adverse Events

Background: Growth of international travel to malarial areas over the last decades has contributed to more travelers taking malaria prophylaxis. Travel-related symptoms may be wrongly attributed to malaria prophylaxis and hinder compliance. Here, we aimed to assess the frequency of real-time reporting of symptoms by travelers following malaria prophylaxis using a smartphone app. Method: Adult international travelers included in this single-center study (Barcelona, Spain) used the smartphone Trip Doctor® app developed by our group for real-time tracking of symptoms and adherence to prophylaxis. Results: Six hundred four (n = 604) international travelers were included in the study; 74.3% (449) used the app daily, and for one-quarter of travelers, malaria prophylaxis was prescribed. Participants from the prophylaxis group traveled more to Africa (86.7% vs. 4.3%; p < 0.01) and to high travel medical risk countries (60.8% vs. 18%; p < 0.01) and reported more immunosuppression (30.8% vs. 23.1% p < 0.01). Regarding symptoms, no significant intergroup differences were observed, and no relationship was found between the total number of malarial pills taken and reported symptoms. Conclusions: In our cohort, the number of symptoms due to malaria prophylaxis was not significantly higher than in participants for whom prophylaxis was not prescribed, and the overall proportion of symptoms is higher compared with other studies.

Exposomic Signatures of Tinnitus and/or Hearing Loss

INTRODUCTION

We evaluated the risk factors associated with tinnitus and/or hearing loss (THL) among active duty (AD) members of the U.S. Army and Marine Aviation Community (AMAC) using an exposomic approach. Specifically, we aimed to determine the factors associated with the reported THL in the Military Health System.

METHODS

Longitudinal data were obtained from the Medical Assessment and Readiness System housed at Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg, NC, for a retrospective cohort study that included 78,546 AD AMAC members from October 2015 to December 2019. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between THL and numerous variables to include rank, service time, deployment, tobacco use, alcohol use, age, gender, race, ethnicity, and body mass index.

RESULTS

Our analysis included a total of 220,044 person-years of observations. The THL incidence rate was 6.7 per 100 person-years, with an 8.1% period prevalence. THL was associated with age, gender, body mass index, race, deployment, service time, marital status, and tobacco use (all P < .05). Service time greater than 16 years had the greatest odds ratio of THL (4.46, 95% CI: 3.58-5.55, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our assessment shows the utility of using an exposomic approach to create member-specific personalized clinical algorithms for health outcomes. We examined individuals with THL diagnoses and identified a combination of risk factors from biomedical, lifestyle, environmental, and stochastic sources. Taken together, the risk factors identified across the four exposomic domains could help understand the etiology of THL. Our exposomic methodology could be the foundation for generating predictive models. Finally, a specific evaluation of occupational risk factors may provide insight into aspects not readily available from civilian literature. In upcoming years, as the Medical Assessment and Readiness System matures, we will expand our analyses to include prospective, untargeted metabolites and biomarker data.

Macrophage infectivity potentiator protein, a peptidyl prolyl cis-trans isomerase, essential for Coxiella burnetii growth and pathogenesis

Coxiella burnetii is a Gram-negative intracellular pathogen that causes the debilitating disease Q fever, which affects both animals and humans. The only available human vaccine, Q-Vax, is effective but has a high risk of severe adverse reactions, limiting its use as a countermeasure to contain outbreaks. Therefore, it is essential to identify new drug targets to treat this infection. Macrophage infectivity potentiator (Mip) proteins catalyse the folding of proline-containing proteins through their peptidyl prolyl cis-trans isomerase (PPIase) activity and have been shown to play an important role in the virulence of several pathogenic bacteria. To date the role of the Mip protein in C. burnetii pathogenesis has not been investigated. This study demonstrates that CbMip is likely to be an essential protein in C. burnetii. The pipecolic acid derived compounds, SF235 and AN296, which have shown utility in targeting other Mip proteins from pathogenic bacteria, demonstrate inhibitory activities against CbMip. These compounds were found to significantly inhibit intracellular replication of C. burnetii in both HeLa and THP-1 cells. Furthermore, SF235 and AN296 were also found to exhibit antibiotic properties against both the virulent (Phase I) and avirulent (Phase II) forms of C. burnetii Nine Mile Strain in axenic culture. Comparative proteomics, in the presence of AN296, revealed alterations in stress responses with H2O2 sensitivity assays validating that Mip inhibition increases the sensitivity of C. burnetii to oxidative stress. In addition, SF235 and AN296 were effective in vivo and significantly improved the survival of Galleria mellonella infected with C. burnetii. These results suggest that unlike in other bacteria, Mip in C. burnetii is required for replication and that the development of more potent inhibitors against CbMip is warranted and offer potential as novel therapeutics against this pathogen.

Monoclonal antibodies for malaria prevention

Monoclonal antibodies are highly specific proteins that are cloned from a single B cell and bind to a single epitope on a pathogen. These laboratory-made molecules can serve as prophylactics or therapeutics for infectious diseases and have an impressive capacity to modulate the progression of disease, as demonstrated for the first time on a large scale during the COVID-19 pandemic. The high specificity and natural starting point of monoclonal antibodies afford an encouraging safety profile, yet the high cost of production remains a major limitation to their widespread use. While a monoclonal antibody approach to abrogating malaria infection is not yet available, the unique life cycle of the malaria parasite affords many opportunities for such proteins to act, and preliminary research into the efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in preventing malaria infection, disease, and transmission is encouraging. This review examines the current status and future outlook for monoclonal antibodies against malaria in the context of the complex life cycle and varied antigenic targets expressed in the human and mosquito hosts, and provides insight into the strengths and limitations of this approach to curtailing one of humanity’s oldest and deadliest diseases.

A Hierarchy of Medical Countermeasures Against Biological Threats

INTRODUCTION

Emerging biological threats represent a serious challenge for force health protection (FHP). Against a novel biological threat, medical countermeasures are the first line of defense. However, as exposed by global pandemic conditions, there are significant complications when administering medical countermeasures against novel threats. One such limitation involved the lack of any guiding structure to discuss and deliberate upon the relative value of employing different countermeasures either alone or in tandem. For example, both personal protective equipment and prophylactic medication can provide some protection, but how are individual protections weighed against operational capabilities and FHP initiatives? The goal of this review is to provide a hierarchical organizing structure to the different medical countermeasures available in response to emerging biological threats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review used no explicit inclusion or exclusion criteria for its literature review. References are provided for illustrative purposes to represent different components of the medical hierarchy.

DISCUSSION

The hierarchy presented here is organized around a resource-durability structure that functions as a push-pull mechanism. Specifically, lower levels of the hierarchy require more resources to sustain FHP conditions while also providing less durable protection. These countermeasures require continual reapplication, and so resources become conceived as much in time and effort to apply as in exhaustible supplies. Higher-order countermeasures require less resources investment as a single application can provide weeks, months, or years of protection. Moreover, higher-order protections are less likely to interfere with military operational capabilities, which further support their classification as superior countermeasures to sustain FHP. The five levels of the hierarchy are presented here as follows, organized from lowest to highest value as a medical countermeasure: (1) Sanitization, (2) personal protective equipment, (3) prophylaxis, (4) vaccines, and (5) optimized immune system. Rationale and descriptions identify how each higher-order countermeasure is superior to its lower-order counterparts while noting that optimizing FHP will likely require employing multiple countermeasures at different levels. The discussion concludes with an overview as to how different countermeasures were employed to various degrees during a novel global pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE USES

Identifying medical countermeasures is important to optimizing FHP. Different countermeasures have different advantages, and the hierarchy distinguishes between inferior and superior countermeasures through the push-pull style mechanism of resource-durability assessment. Future deployment and development should focus on superior countermeasures to maximize medical protections and operational readiness while understanding the relative value and complications inherent with different countermeasures.

Finafloxacin, a Novel Fluoroquinolone, Reduces the Clinical Signs of Infection and Pathology in a Mouse Model of Q Fever

Finafloxacin is a novel fluoroquinolone with optimal antibacterial activity in low pH environments, therefore offering a therapeutic advantage over some traditional antibiotics, in treating bacterial infections associated with acidic foci. Coxiella burnetii, the causative agent of Q fever, is a bacterium which resides and replicates in acidic intracellular parasitic vacuoles. The efficacy of finafloxacin was evaluated in vivo using the A/J mouse model of inhalational Q fever and was compared to doxycycline, the standard treatment for this infection and ciprofloxacin, a comparator fluoroquinolone. Finafloxacin reduced the severity of the clinical signs of infection and weight loss associated with Q fever, but did not reduce the level of bacterial colonization in tissues compared to doxycycline or ciprofloxacin. However, histopathological analysis suggested that treatment with finafloxacin reduced tissue damage associated with C. burnetii infection. In addition, we report for the first time, the use of viable counts on axenic media to evaluate antibiotic efficacy in vivo.

Efficacy of a 3-day pretravel schedule of tafenoquine for malaria chemoprophylaxis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chemoprophylaxis with weekly doses of tafenoquine (200 mg/day for 3 days before departure [loading dose], 200 mg/week during travel and 1-week post-travel [maintenance doses]) is effective in preventing malaria. Effectiveness of malaria chemoprophylaxis drugs in travellers is often compromised by poor compliance. Shorter schedules that can be completed before travel, allowing 'drug-free holidays', could increase compliance and thus reduce travel-related malaria. In this meta-analysis, we examined if a loading dose of tafenoquine alone is effective in preventing malaria in short-term travellers.

METHODS

Four databases were searched in November 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed efficacy and/or safety of tafenoquine for chemoprophylaxis. Network meta-analysis using the generalized pair-wise modelling framework was utilized to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of malaria infection in long-term (>28 days) and short-term (≤28 days) travellers, as well as adverse events (AEs) associated with receiving loading dose of tafenoquine alone, loading dose of tafenoquine followed by maintenance doses, loading dose of mefloquine followed by maintenance doses, or placebo.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs (1714 participants) were included. In long-term travellers, compared to mefloquine, tafenoquine with maintenance doses (OR = 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44-2.46) was equally effective in preventing malaria, while there was an increased risk of infection with the loading dose of tafenoquine alone (OR = 2.89; 95% CI: 0.78-10.68) and placebo (OR = 62.91; 95% CI: 8.53-463.88). In short-term travellers, loading dose of tafenoquine alone (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.04-22.42) and tafenoquine with maintenance doses (OR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.06-16.10) were as effective as mefloquine. The risk of AEs with tafenoquine with maintenance doses (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.67-1.60) was similar to mefloquine, while loading dose of tafenoquine alone (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.20-1.66) was associated with lower risk of AEs, although the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

For short-term travellers, loading dose of tafenoquine alone was equally effective, had possibly lower rate of AEs, and likely better compliance than standard tafenoquine or mefloquine chemoprophylaxis schedules with maintenance doses. Studies are needed to confirm if short-term travellers remain free of infection after long-term follow-up.

REGISTRATION

The meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021223756).

HIGHLIGHT

Tafenoquine is the latest approved drug for malaria chemoprophylaxis. A loading dose of tafenoquine (200 mg/day for 3 days before departure) is as effective in preventing malaria in short-term (≤28 days) travellers as chemoprophylaxis schedules of tafenoquine or mefloquine with maintenance doses, allowing travellers to have a 'drug-free holiday'.

A Validated Volumetric Absorptive Microsampling-Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method to Quantify Doxycycline Levels in Urine: An Application to Monitor the Malaria Chemoprophylaxis Compliance

Because of logistics and cost constraints, monitoring of the compliance to antimalarial chemoprophylaxis by the quantitation of drugs in biological samples is not a simple operation on the field. Indeed, analytical devices are fragile to transport and must be used in a perfectly controlled environment. This is also the case for reagents and supplies, and the waste management is constraining. Thus, samples should be repatriated. They should be frozen after collection and transported with no rupture in the cold chain. This is crucial to generate available and interpretable data but often without any difficulties. Hence, to propose an alternative solution easier to implement, a quantitation method of determining doxycycline in urine has been validated using a volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS^®) device. As blotting paper, the device is dried after collection and transferred at room temperature, but contrarily to dried spot, the collection volume is perfectly repeatable. Analysis of VAMS^® was performed with a high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to a mass spectrometer. The chromatographic separation was achieved on a core-shell C18 column. The mean extraction recovery was 109% (mean RSD, 5.4%, n = 6) for doxycycline and 102% (mean RSD, 7.0%) for the internal standard. No matrix effect has been shown. Within-run as within-day precision and accuracy were, respectively, below 14% and ranged from 96 to 106%. The signal/concentration ratio was studied in the 0.25-50 µg/mL range, and recoveries from back-calculated concentrations were in the 96-105% range (RSD < 11.0%). The RSD on slope was 10%. To achieve the validation, this new quantitation method was applied to real samples. In parallel, samples were analyzed directly after a simple dilution. No statistical difference was observed, confirming that the use of VAMS^® is an excellent alternative device to monitor the doxycycline compliance.

Army Antimalarial Drug Development: An Advanced Development Case Study for Tafenoquine

Malaria is classified as a top-tier infectious disease threat associated with a high risk for mortality among U.S. service members deployed overseas. As malarial drug resistance degrades the efficacy of current gold standard drugs for malarial prophylaxis and treatment, it is vitally important to maintain a robust drug pipeline to discover and develop improved, next-generation antimalarial prevention and treatment tools. The U.S. Army Medical Materiel Development Activity (USAMMDA) manages the medical product development of the malarial drug tafenoquine for malarial prophylaxis to address the threat to U.S. service members. Tafenoquine is an effective prophylactic drug against all parasite life cycle stages and all malaria species that infect humans. Thus, it provides broad capabilities in a single drug for malarial prophylaxis and treatment. Partnerships with industry are a crucial part of USAMMDA's medical product development strategy, by leveraging their drug development experience and manufacturing capabilities to achieve licensure and commercial availability. Additionally, these partnerships capitalize on expertise in the commercial market and help ensure that USAMMDA successfully translates a Department of Defense capability gap into a commercially available product. This article will highlight the strategies used to move this critical antimalarial drug through the development pipeline.

An open label study of the safety and efficacy of a single dose of weekly chloroquine and azithromycin administered for malaria prophylaxis in healthy adults challenged with 7G8 chloroquine-resistant Plasmodium falciparum in a controlled human malaria infection model

Background

Malaria remains the top infectious disease threat facing the U.S. military in many forward operating environments. Compliance with malaria chemoprophylaxis remains a critical component in preventing malaria in the deployed Service Member. Studies of previous military operations show that compliance is consistently higher with weekly versus daily dosing regimens. Current FDA approved weekly chemoprophylaxis options have contraindications that can limit prescribing. The combination of chloroquine (CQ) with azithromycin (AZ) has previously been shown to be an efficacious treatment option for malaria, has pharmacokinetics compatible with weekly dosing, and has shown synergy when combined in vitro.

Methods

In this open label study, 18 healthy volunteers, aged 18–50 years (inclusive), were randomly assigned to receive either 300 mg CQ or 300 mg CQ and 2 gm azithromycin (CQAZ) of directly observed therapy, weekly for 3 weeks prior to undergoing mosquito bite challenge with chloroquine-resistant Plasmodium falciparum. Volunteers that remained asymptomatic and had no evidence of parasitaemia continued to receive weekly post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for 3 weeks following malaria challenge. The primary endpoint was the number of volunteers that remained asymptomatic and had no evidence of parasitaemia 28 days after the malaria challenge.

Results

All 6 (100%) volunteers randomized to the CQ control group became symptomatic with parasitaemia during the 28-day post-challenge period. Only 1/12 (8.3%) of volunteers in the CQAZ group developed symptoms and parasitaemia during the 28-day post-challenge period. However, after chemoprophylaxis was discontinued an additional 6 volunteers developed parasitaemia between days 28–41 after challenge, with 4 of 6 experiencing symptoms. 80% of subjects in the CQAZ group experienced treatment related gastrointestinal adverse events (including 13% that experienced severe nausea) compared to 38% in the CQ group. A comparison of the pharmacokinetics in the CQAZ group demonstrated higher azithromycin Cmax (p = 0.03) and AUC (p = 0.044) levels in those volunteers who never became parasitaemic compared to those who did.

Conclusion

Given the high rate of side effects and poor efficacy when administered for 3 weeks before and after challenge, the combination of weekly chloroquine and azithromycin is a suboptimal regimen combination for weekly malaria chemoprophylaxis.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03278808

Deployment and Travel Medicine Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices, and Outcomes Study (KAPOS): Malaria Chemoprophylaxis Prescription Patterns in the Military Health System

The Deployment and Travel Medicine Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices, and Outcomes Study (KAPOS) examines the integrated relationship between provider and patient inputs and health outcomes associated with travel and deployments. This study describes malaria chemoprophylaxis prescribing patterns by medical providers within the U.S. Department of Defense’s Military Health System and its network of civilian healthcare providers during a 5-year period. Chemoprophylaxis varied by practice setting, beneficiary status, and providers’ travel medicine expertise. Whereas both civilian and military facilities prescribe an increasing proportion of atovaquone–proguanil, doxycycline remains the most prevalent antimalarial at military facility based practices. Civilian providers dispense higher rates of mefloquine than their military counterparts. Within military treatment facilities, travel medicine specialists vary their prescribing pattern based on service member versus beneficiary status of the patient, both in regards to primary prophylaxis, and use of presumptive anti-relapse therapy (PQ-PART). By contrast, nonspecialists appear to carry over practice patterns developed under force health protection (FHP) policy for service members, into the care of beneficiaries, particularly in high rates of prescribing doxycycline and PQ-PART compared with both military travel medicine specialists and civilian comparators. Force health protection policy plays an important role in standardizing and improving the quality of care for deployed service members, but this may not be the perfect solution outside of the deployment context. Solutions that broaden both utilization of decision support tools and travel medicine specialty care are necessary.

Approval of Tafenoquine for Malaria Chemoprophylaxis

Malaria chemoprophylaxis has become increasingly prominent now that it is used for vulnerable populations in endemic regions in addition to nonimmune travelers to those regions. The objective would be a drug with > 95% efficacy and that is easily tolerated, including in children and pregnant women. For individuals who prefer weekly rather than daily drug administration, a further objective is a product that is administered weekly. The deficiencies of present agents are parasite resistance to chloroquine, neuropsychiatric liability of mefloquine, the need for daily dosing for atovaquone-proguanil, and daily dosing plus adverse reactions for doxycycline. A primaquine analogue, tafenoquine, has a 17-day half-life and was approved for weekly prophylaxis in the United States and in Australia in 2018. Weekly tafenoquine was equal to mefloquine in efficacy in nonimmunes. The tafenoquine label contains a contraindication for preexisting psychosis, but not for the broad number of other neuropsychiatric disorders which are listed as contraindications in the mefloquine label. As an 8-aminoquinoline, tafenoquine is contraindicated for glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD)-deficient persons or in pregnancy if the fetus might be G6PD deficient. Other possible significant adverse reactions for tafenoquine are declines in hemoglobin levels reported in some G6PD-normal patients, asymptomatic elevations in methemoglobin, and minor psychiatric events. The lack of broad neuropsychiatric adverse reactions suggests that tafenoquine may have a role as the weekly prophylactic of choice for G6PD-normal persons.

Compliance with Primary Malaria Chemoprophylaxis: Is Weekly Prophylaxis Better Than Daily Prophylaxis?

BACKGROUND

Chemoprophylaxis is an effective tool for individuals to minimize their risk of contracting malaria and serves an important public health role in preventing imported malaria. Yet, it is only effective if the traveller is fully compliant with the prescribed regimen. For many destinations, a choice of prophylactic agents is available, so historical compliance data can be helpful for both physicians and travellers to make an informed decision.

METHODS

We analyzed the historical self-reported compliance data for six chemoprophylactic agents currently recommended by CDC for primary malaria chemoprophylaxis by searching PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus for observational studies reporting on travelers within the last 25 years. The quality of data was graded as "good" or "poor" using the NIH quality assessment tool for cohort and cross-sectional studies. Cumulative compliance data were compiled for all studies (gross compliance) and the subgroup of studies with "good" quality evidence (refined compliance). Subgroup analyses were performed for weekly vs daily administered regimens, between military and civilian travelers, and across each prophylactic agent.

RESULTS

Twenty-four eligible studies assessed compliance for mefloquine (n=20), atovaquone-proguanil (n=11), doxycycline (n=13), and chloroquine (n=3). No studies were found for primaquine or tafenoquine. Both gross and refined compliance were significantly better for weekly regimens than daily regimens (P<0.0001). Stopping chemoprophylaxis due to adverse events was significantly more for doxycycline (P<0.0001) compared to other drugs. Compliance was significantly worse in military travelers, but they were also more likely to be prescribed doxycycline.

CONCLUSION

Malaria chemoprophylaxis for a traveler should depend on prevailing resistance patterns at destination, current national guidelines, and patient preferences. However, when there is a choice, historical compliance data are useful to select a regimen that the traveler is more likely to comply with.

Factors Affecting Pre-Travel Health Seeking Behaviour and Adherence to Pre-Travel Health Advice: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Recent years have seen unprecedented growth in international travel. Travellers are at high risk for acquiring infections while abroad and potentially bringing these infections back to their home country. There are many ways to mitigate this risk by seeking pre-travel advice (PTA), including receiving recommended vaccinations and chemoprophylaxis, however many travellers do not seek or adhere to PTA. We conducted a systematic review to further understand PTA-seeking behaviour with an ultimate aim to implement interventions that improve adherence to PTA and reduce morbidity and mortality in travellers.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of published medical literature selecting studies that examined reasons for not seeking PTA and non-adherence to PTA over the last ten years. 4484 articles were screened of which 56 studies met our search criteria after full text review.

RESULTS

The major reason for not seeking or non-adherence to PTA was perceived low risk of infection while travelling. Side effects played a significant role for lack of adherence specific to malaria prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

These data may help clinicians and public health providers to better understand reasons for non-adherence to PTA and target interventions to improve travellers understanding of potential and modifiable risks. Additionally, we discuss specific recommendations to increase public health education that may enable travellers to seek PTA.

Associations between Use of Antimalarial Medications and Health among U.S. Veterans of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

Mefloquine (Lariam^®; Roche Holding AG, Basel, Switzerland) has been linked to acute neuropsychiatric side effects. This is a concern for U.S. veterans who may have used mefloquine during recent Southwest Asia deployments. Using data from the National Health Study for a New Generation of U.S. Veterans, a population-based study of U.S. veterans who served between 2001 and 2008, we investigated associations between self-reported use of antimalarial medications and overall physical and mental health (MH) using the twelve-item short form, and with other MH outcomes using the post-traumatic stress disorder Checklist-17 and the Patient Health Questionnaire (anxiety, major depression, and self-harm). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine associations between health measures and seven antimalarial drug categories: any antimalarial, mefloquine, chloroquine, doxycycline, primaquine, mefloquine plus any other antimalarial, and any other antimalarial or antimalarial combination while adjusting for the effects of deployment and combat exposure. Data from 19,487 veterans showed that although antimalarial use was generally associated with higher odds of negative health outcomes, once deployment and combat exposure were added to the multivariable models, the associations with each of the MH outcomes became attenuated. A positive trend was observed between combat exposure intensity and prevalence of the five MH outcomes. No significant associations were found between mefloquine and MH measures. These data suggest that the poor physical and MH outcomes reported in this study population are largely because of combat deployment exposure.

Mefloquine for preventing malaria during travel to endemic areas

BACKGROUND

Mefloquine is one of four antimalarial agents commonly recommended for preventing malaria in travellers to malaria-endemic areas. Despite its high efficacy, there is controversy about its psychological side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the efficacy and safety of mefloquine used as prophylaxis for malaria in travellers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published on the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase (OVID); TOXLINE (https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/newtoxnet/toxline.htm); and LILACS. We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) and ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home) for trials in progress, using 'mefloquine', 'Lariam', and 'malaria' as search terms. The search date was 22 June 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (for efficacy and safety) and non-randomized cohort studies (for safety). We compared prophylactic mefloquine with placebo, no treatment, or an alternative recommended antimalarial agent. Our study populations included all adults and children, including pregnant women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials, extracted and analysed data. We compared dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Prespecified adverse outcomes are included in 'Summary of findings' tables, with the best available estimate of the absolute frequency of each outcome in short-term international travellers. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs (11,470 participants); 35 cohort studies (198,493 participants); and four large retrospective analyses of health records (800,652 participants). Nine RCTs explicitly excluded participants with a psychiatric history, and 25 cohort studies stated that the choice of antimalarial agent was based on medical history and personal preference. Most RCTs and cohort studies collected data on self-reported or clinician-assessed symptoms, rather than formal medical diagnoses. Mefloquine efficacyOf 12 trials comparing mefloquine and placebo, none were performed in short-term international travellers, and most populations had a degree of immunity to malaria. The percentage of people developing a malaria episode in the control arm varied from 1% to 82% (median 22%) and 0% to 13% in the mefloquine group (median 1%).In four RCTs that directly compared mefloquine, atovaquone-proguanil and doxycycline in non-immune, short-term international travellers, only one clinical case of malaria occurred (4 trials, 1822 participants). Mefloquine safety versus atovaquone-proguanil Participants receiving mefloquine were more likely to discontinue their medication due to adverse effects than atovaquone-proguanil users (RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.31; 3 RCTs, 1438 participants; high-certainty evidence). There were few serious adverse effects reported with mefloquine (15/2651 travellers) and none with atovaquone-proguanil (940 travellers).One RCT and six cohort studies reported on our prespecified adverse effects. In the RCT with short-term travellers, mefloquine users were more likely to report abnormal dreams (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.37 to 3.04, moderate-certainty evidence), insomnia (RR 4.42, 95% CI 2.56 to 7.64, moderate-certainty evidence), anxiety (RR 6.12, 95% CI 1.82 to 20.66, moderate-certainty evidence), and depressed mood during travel (RR 5.78, 95% CI 1.71 to 19.61, moderate-certainty evidence). The cohort studies in longer-term travellers were consistent with this finding but most had larger effect sizes. Mefloquine users were also more likely to report nausea (high-certainty evidence) and dizziness (high-certainty evidence).Based on the available evidence, our best estimates of absolute effect sizes for mefloquine versus atovaquone-proguanil are 6% versus 2% for discontinuation of the drug, 13% versus 3% for insomnia, 14% versus 7% for abnormal dreams, 6% versus 1% for anxiety, and 6% versus 1% for depressed mood. Mefloquine safety versus doxycyclineNo difference was found in numbers of serious adverse effects with mefloquine and doxycycline (low-certainty evidence) or numbers of discontinuations due to adverse effects (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.87; 4 RCTs, 763 participants; low-certainty evidence).Six cohort studies in longer-term occupational travellers reported our prespecified adverse effects; one RCT in military personnel and one cohort study in short-term travellers reported adverse events. Mefloquine users were more likely to report abnormal dreams (RR 10.49, 95% CI 3.79 to 29.10; 4 cohort studies, 2588 participants, very low-certainty evidence), insomnia (RR 4.14, 95% CI 1.19 to 14.44; 4 cohort studies, 3212 participants, very low-certainty evidence), anxiety (RR 18.04, 95% CI 9.32 to 34.93; 3 cohort studies, 2559 participants, very low-certainty evidence), and depressed mood (RR 11.43, 95% CI 5.21 to 25.07; 2 cohort studies, 2445 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The findings of the single cohort study reporting adverse events in short-term international travellers were consistent with this finding but the single RCT in military personnel did not demonstrate a difference between groups in frequencies of abnormal dreams or insomnia.Mefloquine users were less likely to report dyspepsia (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74; 5 cohort studies, 5104 participants, low certainty-evidence), photosensitivity (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11; 2 cohort studies, 1875 participants, very low-certainty evidence), vomiting (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.27; 4 cohort studies, 5071 participants, very low-certainty evidence), and vaginal thrush (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.16; 1 cohort study, 1761 participants, very low-certainty evidence).Based on the available evidence, our best estimates of absolute effect for mefloquine versus doxycyline were: 2% versus 2% for discontinuation, 12% versus 3% for insomnia, 31% versus 3% for abnormal dreams, 18% versus 1% for anxiety, 11% versus 1% for depressed mood, 4% versus 14% for dyspepsia, 2% versus 19% for photosensitivity, 1% versus 5% for vomiting, and 2% versus 16% for vaginal thrush.Additional analyses, including comparisons of mefloquine with chloroquine, added no new information. Subgroup analysis by study design, duration of travel, and military versus non-military participants, provided no conclusive findings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The absolute risk of malaria during short-term travel appears low with all three established antimalarial agents (mefloquine, doxycycline, and atovaquone-proguanil).The choice of antimalarial agent depends on how individual travellers assess the importance of specific adverse effects, pill burden, and cost. Some travellers will prefer mefloquine for its once-weekly regimen, but this should be balanced against the increased frequency of abnormal dreams, anxiety, insomnia, and depressed mood.

Safety of antimalarial medications for use while scuba diving in malaria Endemic Regions

Background

Recreational diving occurs annually in areas of the world where malaria is endemic. The safety and efficacy of antimalarials for travelers in a hyperbaric environment is unknown. Of particular concern would be medications with adverse effects that could either mimic diving related illnesses such as barotrauma, decompression sickness (DCS) and gas toxicities, or increase the risk for such illnesses.

Methods

We conducted a review of PubMed and Cochrane databases to determine rates of neurologic adverse effects or other effects from antimalarials that may be a problem in the diving environment.

Results

One case report was found on diving and mefloquine. Multiple case reports and clinical trials were found describing neurologic adverse effects of the major chemoprophylactic medications atovaquone/proguanil, chloroquine, doxycycline, mefloquine, and primaquine.

Conclusions

Of the available literature, atovaquone/proguanil and doxycycline are most likely the safest agents and should be preferred; atovaquone/proguanil is superior due to reduced rates of sunburn in the marine environment. Primaquine also appears to be safe, but has reduced efficacy against P. falciparum; mefloquine possesses the highest rate of neurologic side effects and therefore these agents should be limited to extreme cases of patients intolerant to other agents. Chloroquine appears unsafe in the hyperbaric environment and should be avoided. More studies are required to include database reviews of returned divers traveling to malaria endemic areas and randomized controlled trials in the hyperbaric environments.

Long term health outcomes among Returned Peace Corps Volunteers after malaria prophylaxis, 1995-2014

BACKGROUND

A primary reason for non-adherence to malaria chemoprophylaxis is fear of latent side effects. We examined latent effects of malaria chemoprophylaxis among Returned Peace Corps Volunteers (RPCVs).

METHODS

During July 18-September 16, 2016, RPCVs who served during 1995-2014 with an e-mail address in Peace Corps' RPCV database were invited to take an internet-based survey on malaria prophylaxis and medical diagnoses. "Good adherence" meant taking prophylaxis "as prescribed" or "most of the time." Prevalence of diseases diagnosed after Peace Corps service was compared between users and nonusers of each antimalarial using log-binomial regression.

RESULTS

Of 8931 participants (11% response rate), 5055 (57%) took chemoprophylaxis. Initial chemoprophylaxis was mefloquine 59%, chloroquine 13%, doxycycline 16%, atovaquone-proguanil 4%, and "other" 8%. Sixty percent reported good adherence. Mefloquine users had the best adherence (67% good adherence). Prevalences of most diseases were similar between exposed and unexposed groups. Certain psychiatric diagnoses were slightly more likely among mefloquine users (PR 1.14, 95% CI [1.04-1.25], P = 0.0048). When excluding those with prior psychiatric illness, there were no differences in psychiatric diagnosis rates.

CONCLUSION

Malaria chemoprophylaxis use by Peace Corps Volunteers is safe. Avoiding mefloquine use in those with prior psychiatric illness can reduce psychiatric side effects.

Neuropsychiatric Outcomes After Mefloquine Exposure Among U.S. Military Service Members

Mefloquine was widely prescribed to U.S. military service members until 2009 when use was limited to personnel with contraindications to doxycycline and no contraindications to mefloquine. The need to estimate the occurrence of neuropsychiatric outcomes (NPOs) in service members prescribed mefloquine warranted a comprehensive evaluation of this issue. Active component service members filling a prescription for mefloquine, doxycycline, or atovaquone/proguanil (A/P) between January 1, 2008 and June 30, 2013, were included in the analysis. The risk of developing incident NPOs and the risk of subsequent NPOs among subjects with a history of the condition were assessed. A total of 367,840 individuals were evaluated (36,538 received mefloquine, 318,421 received doxycycline, and 12,881 received A/P). Among deployed individuals prescribed mefloquine, an increased risk of incident anxiety was seen when compared with doxycycline recipients (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.12 [1.01-1.24]). Among nondeployed mefloquine recipients, an increased risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was seen when compared with A/P recipients (IRR = 1.83 [1.07-3.14]). An increased risk of tinnitus was seen for both deployed and nondeployed mefloquine recipients compared with A/P recipients (IRR = 1.81 [1.18-2.79]), 1.51 (1.13-2.03), respectively). Six percent of the mefloquine cohort had an NPO in the year before receiving mefloquine. When comparing individuals with a prior neuropsychiatric history to those without, the ratio of relative risks for adjustment disorder, anxiety, insomnia, and PTSD were higher (not statistically significant) for mefloquine compared with doxycycline. These findings emphasize the continued need for physicians prescribing mefloquine to conduct contraindication screening.

The risk of imported malaria in security forces personnel returning from overseas missions in the context of prevention of re-introduction of malaria to Sri Lanka

Background

Sri Lanka is a malaria-free country. However it remains surrounded by countries with endemic malaria transmission. Since the last indigenous case of malaria was reported in October 2012, only imported malaria cases have been diagnosed with 36 cases detected in 2015, which includes 17 cases each of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum and two cases of Plasmodium ovale.

Methods

This study investigated the knowledge and practices regarding malaria chemoprophylaxis among all the Sri Lankan security forces personnel returning from peacekeeping missions in malaria endemic countries over a 7 month period. Adherence to other malaria prevention measures, occurrence of adverse events and incident cases of malaria were also recorded maintaining the anonymity of the respondents. Potential associations for non-compliance were studied.

Results

Interviews were carried out with 559 security forces personnel returning home from foreign deployments in malaria-endemic regions (males: 550, 98.4 %). The majority (553, 98.9 %) was well aware of the need for chemoprophylaxis during the overseas stay and its regular use as prescribed. The overall adherence to chemoprophylaxis was good with 78.7 % (440/559) reporting regular, as prescribed, use. Having better educational qualifications, being female, being prescribed mefloquine, having fever during deployment and belonging to a security force other than the army were significantly associated with poor compliance (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The study reveals that knowledge regarding malaria chemoprophylaxis among Sri Lankan security forces personnel serving abroad was good, a fact that may have contributed to absence/extremely low incidence of malaria during deployment.

Antibody profiles to plasmodium merozoite surface protein-1 in Cambodian adults during an active surveillance cohort with nested treatment study

BACKGROUND

In addition to evidence for a protective role of antibodies to the malaria blood stage antigen merozoite surface protein 1 (MSP1), MSP1 antibodies are also considered as a marker of past malaria exposure in sero-epidemiological studies.

METHODS

In order to better assess the potential use of MSP1 serology in malaria chemoprophylaxis trials in endemic areas, an analysis for the prevalence of antibodies to both Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax MSP142 in healthy Cambodian adults was conducted at two sites as part of an active, observational cohort evaluating the efficacy of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) for uncomplicated malaria (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01280162).

RESULTS

Rates of baseline sero-positivity were high (59 and 73% for PfMSP142 and PvMSP142, respectively), and titers higher in those who lived in a higher transmission area, although there was little correlation in titers between the two species. Those volunteers who subsequently went on to develop malaria had higher baseline MSP142 titers than those who did not for both species. Titers to both antigens remained largely stable over the course of the 4-6 month study, except in those infected with P. falciparum who had multiple recurrences.

CONCLUSION

These findings illuminate the difficulties in using MSP142 serology as either a screening criterion and/or biomarker of exposure in chemoprophylaxis studies. Further work remains to identify useful markers of malarial infection and/or immunity.