Death to Onchocerciasis and Lymphatic Filariasis (DOLF) Triple Drug Therapy for Lymphatic Filariasis
- Conditions
- Lymphatic Filariasis
- Interventions
- Drug: 3 drug dose - IDADrug: 2 drug dose - DA
- Registration Number
- NCT02899936
- Lead Sponsor
- Washington University School of Medicine
- Brief Summary
The DOLF Triple Drug Therapy for Lymphatic Filariasis study will determine the frequency, type and severity of adverse events following triple-drug therapy (IVM+DEC+ALB, IDA) compared to the standard two-drug treatment (DEC+ALB, DA) in infected and uninfected individuals in a community in 5 different countries. The objective is to acquire safety, efficacy, and acceptability data to assess the safety and acceptability of the IDA drug combination.
- Detailed Description
In 2000, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF) to eliminate lymphatic filariasis as a public health problem by 2020. To interrupt transmission, WHO recommends therapy using combinations of two medicines delivered to entire at-risk populations through a strategy known as mass drug administration. Ivermectin (IVM) and albendazole (ALB) are administered in areas where onchocerciasis is co-endemic; diethylcarbamazine (DEC) and albendazole (ALB) are administered in areas where onchocerciasis is not co-endemic.
Results of a pilot study in Papua New Guinea suggest that triple drug therapy (ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine and albendazole) is superior to the currently recommended two-drug regimen (DEC+ALB, DA). A single dose of the triple therapy (IVM+DEC+ALB, IDA) rapidly achieved complete clearance of Wuchereria bancrofti microfilariae from the blood of 12 individuals for at least one year post-treatment. All six individuals tested at 24 months were still amicrofilaremic, suggesting that the triple therapy might permanently sterilizes adult filarial worms. Many people treated in these studies experienced transient systemic adverse events commonly associated with diethylcarbamazine or ivermectin treatment of filariasis. Adverse events were more frequent after the triple therapy than after the usual combination of two drugs. However, no serious adverse events were observed. The dramatic reduction and sustained decrease of microfilaria along with the safety profile seen in the Papua New Guinea studies suggest that the triple drug therapy may be a useful tool to achieve the goal of eliminating lymphatic filariasis as a public health problem by 2020.
Although the study cited above has clearly demonstrated the superiority of the triple therapy for clearing W. bancrofti microfilaria from the blood, more safety and efficacy data are needed before triple therapy can be rolled out on a large scale as a mass drug administration regimen in lymphatic filariasis endemic countries. WHO recommends a best practice called "cohort event monitoring" for demonstrating safety of new drug regimens for public health program use. Establishing safety through such methodology requires pre and post treatment assessment from at least 10,000 people treated with the triple therapy across multiple settings.
It is therefore proposed to conduct a cohort event monitoring study to acquire safety data. Efficacy and acceptability components will also be included in the study. Similar studies will be conducted simultaneously in Haiti, India, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Sri Lanka to reach the 10,000 people necessary to assess the safety of this new drug combination.
This will be an open label, two-armed study. The two arms are (1) mass drug administration (MDA) with the currently used combination of two-drug regimen (DA) and (2) MDA with triple drug therapy (IDA).
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 23789
- Age ≥ 5 years, male or female for IDA arm and age > 2 years for DA arm.
- Able to provide informed consent to participate in the trial (forms to be attached)
- No evidence of severe or systemic co-morbidities except for features of filarial disease
- Age < 5 years (ivermectin is contraindicated in children below 5 years of age) for IDA arm and age < 2 years for DA arm
- Pregnant women (DEC, ivermectin and albendazole are contraindicated in pregnancy)
- Severe chronic illness (for example, chronic renal failure, inability to care for oneself with activities of daily living)
- History of previous allergy to MDA drugs
For rest of countries:
Inclusion Criteria:
- Age ≥ 5 years, for IDA and DA arms (males and females).
- Able to provide informed consent or give parental consent for minors to participate in the trial
- No evidence of severe or systemic co-morbidities except for features of filarial disease
Exclusion Criteria:
- Age < 5 years (ivermectin is not approved for use in children less than 5 years of age)
- Unable to provide informed consent or give parental consent for minors to participate in the trial
- Pregnant women (DEC, ivermectin and albendazole are not known to be safe for use during pregnancy)
- Severe chronic illness (chronic renal insufficiency, severe chronic liver disease, or any illness that is severe enough to interfere with activities of daily living)
- History of previous allergy to MDA drugs
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description 3 drug dose - IDA 3 drug dose - IDA Triple-drug regimen Ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) 2 drug dose - DA 2 drug dose - DA Drug treatment with two-drug regimen diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (DA)
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Number of participants with treatment-related adverse events as assessed by modified CTCAE v4.0 scale within 7 days of drug administration To determine the frequency, type and severity of adverse events following triple-drug therapy Ivermectin, Diethylcarbamazine and Albendazole (IVM+DEC+ALB, IDA) compared to the standard two-drug treatment Diethylcarbamazine and Albendazole (DEC+ALB, DA) in infected and uninfected individuals in a community as assessed by modified CTCAE v4.0 scale.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Number of participants Filarial Test Strip (FTS) and/or MF positive as tested with FTS and night blood smears with treatment-related adverse events as assessed by modified CTCAE v4.0 scale baseline (pre-treatment), within 7 days of drug administration and follow up at 12 months To assess the presence and intensity of filarial infection on the frequency and severity of adverse events. One year post MDA, all participants who were positive for either microfilaremia or filarial antigenemia during the baseline visit will be tested for filarial antigen using the FTS to assess their response to treatment and to compare the efficacy of the two treatment regimens. Participants with positive FTS will also be tested for nocturnal microfilaremia by blood smear (finger prick - 60ul)
Number of participants with clearance of microfilaremia (MF) as measured with microfilaremia night blood smear testing (finger prick - 60ul) baseline (pre-treatment), within 7 days of drug administration and follow up at 12 months To compare the efficacy of IDA vs. DA administered in communities for clearance of MF and filarial antigenemia (Ag) in cohort and effectiveness (prevalence) in community settings. A minimum of 21 (70%) of MF-positive participants in each arm will be retested at 12 months post-treatment for antigenemia and microfilaremia. This sample size is adequate to demonstrate superiority of the IDA regimen (assumptions: 90% reduction in MF prevalence after IDA and 60% reduction after DA, 80% power for detecting an effect size of 30%). The primary endpoint for efficacy will be complete clearance of MF 12 months post Mass Drug Administration (MDA). Clearance of filarial antigenemia at 12 months will be a secondary endpoint for the efficacy analysis. Testing of microfilaria is by analyzing 60 microliter (ul) measured volume thick blood smear by finger prick method and results are either positive or negative for MF presence.
Prevalence of STH (hookworm, ascaris, trichuris and strongyloides) as measured by Kato-katz or PCR at baseline and 12 months after treatment Stool collected at baseline (pre-treatment), 4 weeks (individual response), and 12 months (community prevalence). Some sites will include stool sample collections to compare the efficacy of 2 and 3-drug regimens on STH. Stool samples will be analysed using Kato-katz method, as well as PCR.
Community acceptance will be measured using on a survey using likert scale questions based on perception of efficacy, intent to participate and relevance of the treatment. 6-8 months Community acceptance will be measured using a survey to community members receiving both the 2-drug and 3-drug treatments during the safety trial. To complement this survey, a series of focus group discussions in the community as well as key informant interviews are proposed with community leaders, health personnel and drug distributors in the same communities to assess perceptions about the 3-drug versus the 2-drug regimen. The community acceptability study will be carried out within one month of the completion of the safety trial. The acceptability score will use a set of likert scale questions based on perception of efficacy, intent to participate and relevance of the treatment. Some of the questions have been inspired by Reimer's Treatment Acceptability Rating form-Revised and general principles of social validity but mostly the questions are not from one particular survey instrument.
Trial Locations
- Locations (4)
Ministere de la Sante Publique et de la Population
🇭🇹Port-au-Prince, Haiti
Vector Control Research Centre
🇮🇳Puducherry, India
Universitas Indonesia
🇮🇩Jakarta, Indonesia
Papua New Guinea Institute for Medical Research
🇵🇬Madang, Papua New Guinea