Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022
Relapse of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium ovale Malaria With and Without Primaquine Treatment in a Nonendemic Area.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wångdahl Andreas, Sondén Klara, Wyss Katja, Stenström Christine, Björklund David, Zhang Jessica, Hervius Askling Helena, Carlander Christina, Hellgren Urban, Färnert Anna
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The effect of primaquine in preventing Plasmodium vivax relapses from dormant stages is well established. For Plasmodium ovale, the relapse characteristics and the use of primaquine is not as well studied. We set to evaluate the relapsing properties of these 2 species, in relation to primaquine use among imported malaria cases in a nonendemic setting.
METHODS: We performed a nationwide retrospective study of malaria diagnosed in Sweden 1995-2019, by reviewing medical records of 3254 cases. All episodes of P. vivax (n = 972) and P. ovale (n = 251) were selected for analysis.
RESULTS: First time relapses were reported in 80/857 (9.3%) P. vivax and 9/220 (4.1%) P. ovale episodes, respectively (P < .01). Without primaquine, the risk for relapse was higher in P. vivax, 20/60 (33.3%), compared to 3/30 (10.0%) in P. ovale (hazard ratio [HR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-12.0). In P. vivax, patients prescribed primaquine had a reduced risk of relapse compared to episodes without relapse preventing treatment, 7.1% vs 33.3% (HR 0.2, 95% CI .1-.3). In P. ovale, the effect of primaquine on the risk of relapse did not reach statistical significance, with relapses seen in 2.8% of the episodes compared to 10.0% in patients not receiving relapse preventing treatment (HR 0.3, 95% CI .1-1.1).
CONCLUSIONS: The risk of relapse was considerably lower in P. ovale than in P. vivax infections indicating different relapsing features between the two species. Primaquine was effective in preventing P. vivax relapse. In P. ovale, relapse episodes were few, and the supportive evidence for primaquine remains limited.
METHODS: We performed a nationwide retrospective study of malaria diagnosed in Sweden 1995-2019, by reviewing medical records of 3254 cases. All episodes of P. vivax (n = 972) and P. ovale (n = 251) were selected for analysis.
RESULTS: First time relapses were reported in 80/857 (9.3%) P. vivax and 9/220 (4.1%) P. ovale episodes, respectively (P < .01). Without primaquine, the risk for relapse was higher in P. vivax, 20/60 (33.3%), compared to 3/30 (10.0%) in P. ovale (hazard ratio [HR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-12.0). In P. vivax, patients prescribed primaquine had a reduced risk of relapse compared to episodes without relapse preventing treatment, 7.1% vs 33.3% (HR 0.2, 95% CI .1-.3). In P. ovale, the effect of primaquine on the risk of relapse did not reach statistical significance, with relapses seen in 2.8% of the episodes compared to 10.0% in patients not receiving relapse preventing treatment (HR 0.3, 95% CI .1-1.1).
CONCLUSIONS: The risk of relapse was considerably lower in P. ovale than in P. vivax infections indicating different relapsing features between the two species. Primaquine was effective in preventing P. vivax relapse. In P. ovale, relapse episodes were few, and the supportive evidence for primaquine remains limited.