Data from clinical studies show that artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is effective and well tolerated in adults and children with uncomplicated
A 5-year surveillance plan included all AL-treated adult and paediatric patients with confirmed or suspected
The majority of patients were male (58.6 %), Black (62.6 %), non-Hispanic (92.6 %), and likely malaria non-immune (80.8 %). The median age was 32 (range 1–88) years and the median body mass index was 25.5 (range 13.8–42.4) kg/m2. All patients with effectiveness data had confirmed (n = 116) or suspected (n = 1) malaria. The overall cure rate for patients treated with AL was 91.5 % (95 % CI 84.8–95.8 %) at day 7 and 96.9 % (95 % CI 91.3–99.4 %) at day 28. Adverse events were reported in four (3.7 %) patients, and there were no new or unexpected safety signals.
AL was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of likely non-immune patients with
Malaria is the most common febrile disease resulting in post-travel hospitalization, and artemisinin-based therapy is considered to be the fastest and most potent current anti-malarial treatment [
In 2006, the World Health Organization initially recommended that artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) be used as first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria [
In the context of the USA’s approval of Coartem®, the FDA required that Novartis conduct a descriptive surveillance project on the use of AL tablets in non-immune travellers as a post-marketing requirement. This project was conducted through collaboration between Novartis and CDC by which AL-treated malaria cases in the USA were captured in the National Malaria Surveillance System (NMSS). This report aims to describe the demographics, baseline characteristics, clinical effectiveness, and safety outcomes for patients treated with AL in both US and foreign residents.
Malaria is a mandatory reportable disease in the USA. Cases are reported by healthcare providers or laboratory staff to local and state health departments, and reports are in turn transmitted to CDC through the NMSS [
Any patient with malaria reported to CDC who had received AL treatment was included in this analysis. Patients who were diagnosed by microscopy or by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were considered as confirmed cases, while those diagnosed by a rapid diagnostic test (RDT) or clinically with no (or missing) microscopy were considered as suspected cases. Both confirmed and suspected cases were included in all analyses. However, patients with a positive RDT result followed by negative microscopy or a clinical diagnosis only were considered as non-malaria cases (i.e., neither confirmed nor suspected) and were only included in the descriptive analyses of demographics, baseline characteristics and safety.
Patients treated with AL for confirmed or clinically suspected malaria were reported to CDC as a routine public health surveillance activity. Data collection was planned for a total of 5 years. Information was captured using the CDC Malaria Case Surveillance Report form [
Patient demographic and baseline characteristics included age, gender, race, ethnicity, height, weight, and likely malaria immune status. Persons were considered to be likely semi-immune if they were recent immigrants from or residents of malaria-endemic countries who were visiting the USA when they were diagnosed with malaria. Residents of non-endemic countries and US travellers were considered likely non-immune. Clinical effectiveness was assessed in cases with available follow-up information on the Malaria Case Surveillance Report form. Resolution of clinical signs and symptoms after start of AL treatment was assessed with the following question: “Did all signs or symptoms of malaria resolve without any additional malaria treatment within 7 days after treatment start?” For patients with an answer ‘yes’ to this question, effectiveness at day 28 was assessed using the follow-up question: “Did the patient experience recurrence of signs or symptoms of malaria during the 4 weeks after starting malaria treatment?”
Data analysis was not based on a specific a priori statistical hypothesis and was simply descriptive. Summary statistics were presented for quantitative variables, and counts and percentages were calculated for categorical data. For the day 7 and day 28 cure rates, the proportions of cured patients and two-sided 95 % confidence intervals were calculated using exact Pearson-Clopper limits [
A total of 203 AL-treated cases were reported from May 2010 to April 2015. Figure Percentage of confirmed malaria cases treated with artemether-lumefantrine in the USA by year (2010–2013) Demographic and baseline characteristics BMI, body mass index, calculated in kg/m2 as weight (in pounds) × 703/(height)2 (in inches); SD, standard deviation
aN = 203 unless indicated otherwiseCharacteristic N = 203a
Age (years) Mean ± SD 34.2 ± 18.5 Median 32 Range 1–88 Age (years) category, n (%) ≤16 32 (15.8) 17–64 157 (77.3) ≥65 14 (6.9) Gender, n (%) Male 119 (58.6) Female 84 (41.4) Race, n (%) Black or African American 127 (62.6) Caucasian 55 (27.1) Asian 9 (4.4) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 2 (1.0) American Indian or Alaska Native 1 (0.5) Missing 9 (4.4) Ethnicity, n (%) Hispanic or Latino 2 (1.0) Not Hispanic or Latino 188 (92.6) Missing 13 (6.4) Height (cm), N = 109 Mean ± SD 165.7 ± 21.8 Median 172.7 Range 80.0–198.1 Weight (kg), N = 132 Mean ± SD 71.1 ± 23.8 Median 72.7 Range 9.0–144.1 BMI (kg/m2), N = 107 Mean ± SD 25.6 ± 5.9 Median 25.5 Range 13.8–42.4 BMI (kg/m2) category, n (%) <25 50 (24.6) ≥25 57 (28.1) Missing 96 (47.3) Immune status, n (%) Likely non-immune 164 (80.8) Likely semi-immune 39 (19.2) Malaria species, n (%) 160 (78.8) Other 26 (12.8) Undetermined 17 (8.4) Malaria diagnosis, n (%) Confirmed by microscopy 195 (96.1) Confirmed by PCR 6 (3.0) Suspected 1 (0.5) RDT positive (microscopy negative) 1 (0.5)
Table Day 7 and day 28 cure rates CI, confidence interval, calculated according to the exact Pearson-Clopper methodDay 7 cure rate (N = 117) Day 28 cure rate (N = 98) n (%) 95 % CI n (%) 95 % CI Overall 107 (91.5) 84.8–95.8 95 (96.9) 91.3–99.4 By age (years) ≤16 14/15 (93.3) 68.1–99.8 11/12 (91.7) 61.5-99.8 17–64 88/96 (91.7) 84.4–96.3 78/80 (97.5) 91.3–99.7 ≥65 5/6 (83.3) 35.9–99.6 6/6 (100.0) 54.1–100.0 By BMI (kg/m2) <25 35/39 (89.7) 75.8–97.1 28/30 (93.3) 77.9–99.2 ≥25 39/40 (97.5) 86.8–99.9 38/39 (97.4) 86.5–99.9 Unknown/not reported 33/38 (86.8) 71.9–95.6 29/29 (100.0) 88.1–100.0 By immune status Likely non-immune 89/99 (89.9) 82.2–95.1 78/81 (96.3) 89.6–99.2 Likely semi-immune 18/18 (100.0) 81.5–100.0 17/17 (100.0) 80.5–100.0 By malaria species 81/90 (90.0) 81.9–95.3 73/75 (97.3) 90.7–99.7 Other 18/18 (100.0) 81.5–100.0 16/17 (94.1) 71.3–99.9 Undetermined 8/9 (88.9) 51.8–99.7 6/6 (100.0) 54.1–100.0 By status of malaria diagnosis Confirmed 106/116 (91.4) 84.7–95.8 95/98 (96.9) 91.3–99.4 Suspected 1/1 (100.0) 2.5–100.0 0/0 (0.0) –
At day 7, the overall cure rate was 91.5 % (107/117). Out of the ten patients who did not resolve their malaria by day 7, seven had severe malaria at baseline and should not have received AL to begin with, one had an adverse event of nausea that was considered by the treating physician to be related to AL and was switched to atovaquone-proguanil, one was rehospitalized because of haemolytic anaemia thought to be due to persistent malaria and was discharged on quinine and doxycycline, and one did not complete the treatment course due to a supply shortage at the treating hospital. At day 28, clinical effectiveness data were available for 98 patients and the overall cure rate was 96.9 % (95/98). Three patients experienced a recurrence of signs or symptoms of malaria within 28 days. Of the 19 patients who were assessed at day 7 but not at day 28, data were missing for nine and were not collected for the ten patients who did not resolve at day 7 and were mainly switched to other anti-malarials. The day 7 (91.5 %) cure rate is not a true representation of the effectiveness of AL as at least seven patients should not have received AL for treatment of their malaria. Notably, although 22 other patients with severe malaria resolved upon receiving AL without further treatment, AL is indicated only for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria.
Adverse events (AEs) were reported in four (3.7 %) patients (Table Adverse events and serious adverse events up to day 28Adverse events (N = 108) Serious adverse events (N = 108) n (%) Anaemia 2 (1.9) 2 (1.9)
1 (0.9) – Nausea 1 (0.9) –
Cases are often reported to CDC long after they occurred or were originally notified (due to delays from the applicable state or treatment facility), and the lag time between occurrence of a case and its reporting to CDC can vary from a few days to 1 year or longer. Data available from 150 cases showed that they were reported to CDC on average 84 (range 1–733) days after the onset of signs and symptoms. As a result, there are possibly additional cases that may have been applicable to the timeframe of this project but were excluded due to a delay in reporting.
The delay in case reporting and retrospective data collection, small sample size, and incomplete data mainly because of loss to follow-up are all inherent limitations of this surveillance project. Other limitations include the non-comparative and non-randomized methods of data collection, unsupervised treatment, and clinical effectiveness and safety outcomes that were solely determined by the healthcare provider. Therefore, effectiveness data from this surveillance could hardly be considered as robust as those from some effectiveness studies conducted in endemic countries [
AL was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of likely non-immune patients in the USA with falciparum malaria.
adverse event
artemisinin-based combination therapy
artemether-lumefantrine
body mass index
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Food and Drug Administration
National Malaria Surveillance System
polymerase chain reaction
rapid diagnostic test
severe adverse event
All authors contributed to the design of the surveillance study. AMG and PA were involved in data collection. All authors provided input to data analysis and interpretation, and participated in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
The sponsors of the project were involved in study design, data analysis, data interpretation, and writing of the report. Sonja Mali and Karen Cullen at CDC were involved in tracking all AL-treated cases that were reported in the NMSS. This surveillance effort was a five-year project made possible by a public–private partnership supported by a grant to the CDC Foundation from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. The findings and conclusions in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of CDC.