Weil Gary J, Fischer Peter U, Krentel Alison
Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2022 Mar 15;106(5_Suppl):13-17. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.21-0840. Print 2022 May 11.
Early clinical trials clearly demonstrated the superior efficacy of triple drug therapy with ivermectin plus DEC and albendazole (IDA) for clearing microfilaremia (Mf) in individuals with lymphatic filariasis (LF). Although these initial pharmacokinetic and efficacy studies were necessary first steps in the clinical development of IDA, they were not sufficient to justify policy changes necessary for widespread use of this new regimen by national filariasis elimination programs. Processes and procedures that led to the World Health Organization's (WHO) endorsement of IDA as a mass drug administration (MDA) regimen for LF are reviewed elsewhere in this Supplement. However, the "guideline review process" depended heavily on preliminary results from multicenter studies that were performed to compare the safety, tolerability, and acceptability of IDA versus DA (the two-drug regimen of DEC plus albendazole that was recommended for use for filariasis elimination in countries without co-endemic onchocerciasis or loiasis). Efficacy and tolerability results from those studies have been recently published. Therefore, this paper will focus on practical aspects of the planning and conduct of the large-scale studies that were so critically important for policy change.
早期临床试验清楚地证明,伊维菌素联合乙胺嗪和阿苯达唑(IDA)的三联药物疗法在清除淋巴丝虫病(LF)患者的微丝蚴血症(Mf)方面具有卓越疗效。尽管这些初步的药代动力学和疗效研究是IDA临床开发中必要的第一步,但它们不足以证明国家丝虫病消除计划广泛使用这一新方案所需的政策变革是合理的。导致世界卫生组织(WHO)认可IDA作为LF群体服药(MDA)方案的过程和程序在本增刊的其他地方进行了回顾。然而,“指南审查过程”在很大程度上依赖于多中心研究的初步结果,这些研究旨在比较IDA与DA(乙胺嗪加阿苯达唑的两药方案,推荐用于没有盘尾丝虫病或罗阿丝虫病共同流行的国家消除丝虫病)的安全性、耐受性和可接受性。这些研究的疗效和耐受性结果最近已发表。因此,本文将重点关注对政策变革至关重要的大规模研究的规划和实施的实际方面。