ライフサイエンスコーパス: artemether

1 o the ART derivatives dihydroartemisinin and artemether.

2 e-stage CM from 27.5% to 51.6% compared with artemether.

3 m berghei ANKA, comparable to artesunate and artemether.

4 uine (MFQ)-artesunate and lumefantrine (LUM)-artemether.

5 more potent than the clinically used acetal artemether.

6 6)) and other C-10 ether derivatives such as artemether.

7 ues of the potent first-generation analogues artemether (4a) and arteether (4b) have been designed an

8 al potency with an ED(50) of 2.12 mg/kg (cf. artemether = 6 mg/kg) versus P. berghei.

9 temisinin derivatives such as artesunate and artemether, along with the fully synthetic endoperoxide

10 antrine (four tablets, each containing 20 mg artemether and 120 mg lumefantrine, given twice per day

11 Participants received either 80 mg of oral artemether and 480 mg of oral lumefantrine twice daily f

12 xicity than the first-generation derivatives artemether and arteether.

13 greatly from the semi-synthetic artemisinins artemether and artesunate as they rapidly reduce parasit

14 superior to the currently used derivatives, artemether and artesunate.

15 Participants received combined artemether and lumefantrine (four tablets, each containi

16 phosphate (AM-PQP) in comparison to Coartem (artemether and lumefantrine) in patients with acute unco

17 f 33, 84.8% for AQ-13 vs 31 of 33, 93.9% for artemether and lumefantrine; p=0.43) but the upper bound

18 Coadministration of artemether and nimodipine, a calcium channel blocker use

19 creased sensitivities to dihydroartemisinin, artemether and piperaquine - an ACT partner drug in this

20 eatments (artesunate, dihydroartemisinin, or artemether) and miscarriage or malformation was assessed

21 ic drugs for severe and complicated malaria (artemether, artesunate) was prompt.

22 mine the in vitro parasite susceptibility to artemether (ATH).

23 r cerebral malaria we conclude that although artemether clears parasitemia more rapidly than quinine,

24 Pharmacokinetic sampling for artemether, dihydroartemisinin, and lumefantrine exposur

25 exposure by 2.1-fold; and nevirapine reduced artemether exposure only.

26 with dihydroartemisinin derivatives such as artemether have spawned a renewed effort to develop nont

27 0.25-0.42 microM), comparable in potency to artemether (IC(50) = 0.31 microM) and >100 times more in

28 han artemisinin and about twice as active as artemether in vitro versus chloroquine-resistant parasit

29 e clinical antimalarial drugs artesunate and artemether, in which a major metabolically sensitive sit

30 ate + amodiaquine (AS + AQ), 7.42% following artemether + lumefantrine, and 6.80% following DHA + PIP

31 a recurrence of malaria after treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (28.1% vs. 54.2%; hazard ratio,

32 d either AM-PQP (714 patients) once daily or artemether-lumefantrine (A-L; 358 patients) twice daily

33 ater than for the comparator group receiving artemether-lumefantrine (adjusted difference -1.46 g/dL;

34 2:1 to AM-PQP (571 patients) once daily and artemether-lumefantrine (AL) (288 patients) twice daily

35 Two major antimalarial policy options are artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and dihydroartemisinin-pipe

36 sinin-based combination therapies, including artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and dihydroartemisinin-pipe

37 Since the introduction of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) for treatment of uncomplica

38 ndomized for treatment with AQ-SP, AS-AQ, or artemether-lumefantrine (AL) for uncomplicated malaria.

39 In treating malaria in Uganda, artemether-lumefantrine (AL) has been associated with a

40 for Plasmodium vivax in malarious areas, but artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is also commonly used.

41 Artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is the most widely-recommen

42 ay outcomes following malaria treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL) or dihydroartemisinin-piper

43 parasite carriers were randomized to receive artemether-lumefantrine (AL) plus placebo or AL plus a s

44 signed to receive either chloroquine (CQ) or artemether-lumefantrine (AL), alone or in combination wi

45 the effects of the most widely-deployed ACT, artemether-lumefantrine (AL), relative to non-ACTs on ga

46 tive were treated with a six dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine (AL).

47 icated falciparum malaria were randomized to artemether-lumefantrine (AL; n = 153) or dihydroartemisi

48 nate (n=515), or a 3-day six-dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine (n=519).

49 % CI 91.0-94.3) versus 80.4% (77.8-83.0) for artemether-lumefantrine (n=671).

50 rtesunate, and 6.7% (95% CI, 3.9%-11.2%) for artemether-lumefantrine (P<.05 for all pairwise comparis

51 us liver-stage drugs (chloroquine [CQ], 3 d; artemether-lumefantrine [AL], 3 d; and primaquine [PQ],

52 on artemisinin combination therapies (ACTs, artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate-mefloquine) where

53 First-line treatment was switched from SP to artemether-lumefantrine before the final survey, when SP

54 ndomly allocated 468 participants to receive artemether-lumefantrine combined with placebo (119 child

55 Further refinement of artemether-lumefantrine dosing to improve exposure in in

56 ence to receive home delivery of prepackaged artemether-lumefantrine for presumptive treatment of feb

57 rtemisinin-piperaquine group (20.6%) and the artemether-lumefantrine group (11.5%) (P<0.001 for compa

58 ctic effect, were significantly lower in the artemether-lumefantrine group (52.5%) than in groups tha

59 The cure rate in the artemether-lumefantrine group was significantly lower th

60 the per-protocol analysis were 94.8% in the artemether-lumefantrine group, 98.5% in the amodiaquine-

61 In facilities with artemether-lumefantrine in stock, this antimalarial was

62 The WHO-packaged six-dose regimen of artemether-lumefantrine is effective taken unsupervised,

63 We assessed the effect of home delivery of artemether-lumefantrine on the incidence of antimalarial

64 bination with mass treatment strategies with artemether-lumefantrine on transmission metrics.

65 Overall, 312 children were randomized to artemether-lumefantrine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquin

66 The substantial over-treatment suggests that artemether-lumefantrine provided in the home might not b

67 al follow-up for recurrent malaria following artemether-lumefantrine treatment, along with the study

68 the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of artemether-lumefantrine treatment.

69 Artemether-lumefantrine was associated with the fewest a

70 Artemether-lumefantrine was better tolerated than QnC (p

71 Introduction of artemether-lumefantrine was followed by an increase in d

72 Artemether-lumefantrine was the most efficacious treatme

73 ridine-artesunate efficacy was compared with artemether-lumefantrine with the adequate clinical and p

74 rimethamine, amodiaquine plus artesunate, or artemether-lumefantrine) when diagnosed with their first

75 nd regardless of symptoms) were treated with artemether-lumefantrine, amodiaquine-artesunate, mefloqu

76 We compared simultaneous distribution of artemether-lumefantrine, artesunate-amodiaquine, and dih

77 D alleles were selected after treatment with artemether-lumefantrine, but not after artesunate-amodia

78 a and normal G6PD enzyme function to receive artemether-lumefantrine, combined with either placebo or

79 the most widely used treatment for malaria, artemether-lumefantrine, has not been adequately charact

80 isons, except amodiaquine plus artesunate vs artemether-lumefantrine, P = .05).

81 Comparator interventions included placebo, artemether-lumefantrine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP),

82 Compared to artemether-lumefantrine, the use of DP to treat uncompli

83 mears on day 14, when they were treated with artemether-lumefantrine, with rapid clinical and parasit

84 opted artemisinin-based combination therapy, artemether-lumefantrine.

85 op immunity more slowly than those receiving artemether-lumefantrine.

86 isodes of Plasmodium falciparum malaria with artemether-lumefantrine.

87 t assessed the efficacy and effectiveness of artemether-lumefantrine.

88 s of uncomplicated malaria were treated with artemether-lumefantrine.

89 e recurrence of malaria after treatment with artemether-lumefantrine.

90 ing up to about 60 days after treatment with artemether-lumefantrine.

91 aquine+artesunate, and seven of 502 (1%) for artemether-lumefantrine.

92 atment failure rate following treatment with artemether/lumefantrine (AL).

93 of 33; p=0.50) and AQ-13 was not inferior to artemether plus lumefantrine (difference -6.1%, 95% CI -

94 sistant parasites, we compared AQ-13 against artemether plus lumefantrine for treatment of uncomplica

95 cipants were randomly assigned to either the artemether plus lumefantrine group or AQ-13 group by per

96 In the artemether plus lumefantrine group, two participants had

97 of the per-protocol analysis, the AQ-13 and artemether plus lumefantrine groups had similar proporti

98 on of patients who were cured was higher for artemether plus lumefantrine than for AQ-13 and the uppe

99 alysis suggested non-inferiority of AQ-13 to artemether plus lumefantrine.

100 a positive control the popular trioxane drug artemether plus mefloquine hydrochloride (average surviv

101 e conditions using the popular trioxane drug artemether plus mefloquine hydrochloride.

102 CM markedly increased survival compared with artemether plus vehicle only.

103 results offer a possible explanation for why artemether provides less advantage than might have been

104 creased risk of MFQ, MFQ-artesunate, and LUM-artemether treatment failures and pfmdr1 gene amplificat

105 the standard trioxane drugs artemisinin and artemether were not parasiticidal.

106 GABA and the antimalarial drug artemether, which acts on GABAergic pathways, can drive