Contribution of clinical pharmacy to the rational and safe use of medicines in the neonatology unit of the pediatric university hospital Charles de Gaulle of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Background: Newborns are exposed to drug therapeutic risks due to off-label prescribing and immaturity. The purpose of this study is to identify drug-related problems through the prescription and administration of drugs in the neonatology Unit and identify the need for pharmaceutical interventions. Methods: To assess drug-related problems, a cross-sectional observational study was conducted over five days at the neonatology Unit of the Pediatric University Hospital Charles de Gaulle in Burkina Faso. The study population consisted of newborns receiving drug prescriptions and treatment for five days. Results: Prematurity (50%) and early neonatal infection (53.3%) were the most common reasons for admission. A total of 380 prescription lines were recorded. Injectable and oral forms represented 72.1% and 26.3% respectively. Prescription lines in 16.8% were off-label medicines. An accuracy of drug dosages at 6.1% and an accuracy of prescribed doses at 52.7%, characterized therapeutic regimens. The prescribed drug administrations were performed in 80.0% with compliant doses and administration scheduled time 1 hour in 53.4 % and 54.6 %, respectively. Prescribers and nurses accepted 92.6% and 93.9% of proposed pharmaceutical interventions to solve drug-related problems. Conclusion. Our study emphasizes the importance of a clinical pharmacist within the health care team for the safe and efficient prescription and administration of newborn medication

The anti-circumsporozoite antibody response to repeated, seasonal booster doses of the malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS01 E

The recently deployed RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine induces a strong antibody response to the circumsporozoite protein (CSP) on the surface of the Plasmodium falciparum sporozoite which is associated with protection. The anti-CSP antibody titre falls rapidly after primary vaccination, associated with a decline in efficacy, but the antibody titre and the protective response can be partially restored by a booster dose of vaccine, but this response is also transitory. In many malaria- endemic areas of Africa, children are at risk of malaria, including severe malaria, until they are five years of age or older and to sustain protection from malaria for this period by vaccination with RTS,S/AS01E, repeated booster doses of vaccine may be required. However, there is little information about the immune response to repeated booster doses of RTS,S/AS01E. In many malaria-endemic areas of Africa, the burden of malaria is largely restricted to the rainy season and, therefore, a recent trial conducted in Burkina Faso and Mali explored the impact of repeated annual booster doses of RTS,S/AS01E given immediately prior to the malaria transmission season until children reached the age of five years. Anti-CSP antibody titres were measured in sera obtained from a randomly selected subset of children enrolled in this trial collected before and one month after three priming and four annual booster doses of vaccine using the GSK ELISA developed at the University of Ghent and, in a subset of these samples, by a multiplex assay developed at the University of Oxford. Three priming doses of RTS,S/AS01E induced a strong anti-CSP antibody response (GMT 368.9 IU/mL). Subsequent annual, seasonal booster doses induced a strong, but lower, antibody response; the GMT after the fourth booster was 128.5 IU/mL. Children whose antibody response was in the upper and middle terciles post vaccination had a lower incidence of malaria during the following year than children in the lowest tercile. Results obtained with GSK ELISA and the Oxford Multiplex assay were strongly correlated (Pearson’s correlation coefficient, r = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93–0.95). Although anti-CSP antibody titres declined after repeated booster doses of RTS,S/AS01E a high, although declining, level of efficacy was sustained suggesting that there may have been changes in the characteristics of the anti-CSP antibody following repeated booster doses. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03143218

The duration of protection against clinical malaria provided by the combination of seasonal RTS,S/AS01E vaccination and seasonal malaria chemoprevention versus either intervention given alone

BACKGROUND: A recent trial of 5920 children in Burkina Faso and Mali showed that the combination of seasonal vaccination with the RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine (primary series and two seasonal boosters) and seasonal malaria chemoprevention (four monthly cycles per year) was markedly more effective than either intervention given alone in preventing clinical malaria, severe malaria, and deaths from malaria. METHODS: In order to help optimise the timing of these two interventions, trial data were reanalysed to estimate the duration of protection against clinical malaria provided by RTS,S/AS01E when deployed seasonally, by comparing the group who received the combination of SMC and RTS,S/AS01E with the group who received SMC alone. The duration of protection from SMC was also estimated comparing the combined intervention group with the group who received RTS,S/AS01E alone. Three methods were used: Piecewise Cox regression, Flexible parametric survival models and Smoothed Schoenfeld residuals from Cox models, stratifying on the study area and using robust standard errors to control for within-child clustering of multiple episodes. RESULTS: The overall protective efficacy from RTS,S/AS01E over 6 months was at least 60% following the primary series and the two seasonal booster doses and remained at a high level over the full malaria transmission season. Beyond 6 months, protective efficacy appeared to wane more rapidly, but the uncertainty around the estimates increases due to the lower number of cases during this period (coinciding with the onset of the dry season). Protection from SMC exceeded 90% in the first 2-3 weeks post-administration after several cycles, but was not 100%, even immediately post-administration. Efficacy begins to decline from approximately day 21 and then declines more sharply after day 28, indicating the importance of preserving the delivery interval for SMC cycles at a maximum of four weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of both interventions was highest immediately post-administration. Understanding differences between these interventions in their peak efficacy and how rapidly efficacy declines over time will help to optimise the scheduling of SMC, malaria vaccination and the combination in areas of seasonal transmission with differing epidemiology, and using different vaccine delivery systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The RTS,S-SMC trial in which these data were collected was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03143218

Impact of seasonal RTS,S/AS01E vaccination plus seasonal malaria chemoprevention on the nutritional status of children in Burkina Faso and Mali.

BACKGROUND: A recent trial in Burkina Faso and Mali showed that combining seasonal RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccination with seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) substantially reduced the incidence of uncomplicated and severe malaria in young children compared to either intervention alone. Given the possible negative effect of malaria on nutrition, the study investigated whether these children also experienced lower prevalence of acute and chronic malnutrition. METHODS: In Burkina Faso and Mali 5920 children were randomized to receive either SMC alone, RTS,S/AS01E alone, or SMC combined with RTS,S/AS01E for three malaria transmission seasons (2017-2019). After each transmission season, anthropometric measurements were collected from all study children at a cross-sectional survey and used to derive nutritional status indicators, including the binary variables wasted and stunted (weight-for-height and height-for-age z-scores below - 2, respectively). Binary and continuous outcomes between treatment groups were compared by Poisson and linear regression. RESULTS: In 2017, compared to SMC alone, the combined intervention reduced the prevalence of wasting by approximately 12% [prevalence ratio (PR) = 0.88 (95% CI 0.75, 1.03)], and approximately 21% in 2018 [PR = 0.79 (95% CI 0.62, 1.01)]. Point estimates were similar for comparisons with RTS,S/AS01E, but there was stronger evidence of a difference. There was at least a 30% reduction in the point estimates for the prevalence of severe wasting in the combined group compared to the other two groups in 2017 and 2018. There was no difference in the prevalence of moderate or severe wasting between the groups in 2019. The prevalence of stunting, low-MUAC-for-age or being underweight did not differ between groups for any of the three years. The prevalence of severe stunting was higher in the combined group compared to both other groups in 2018, and compared to RTS,S/AS01E alone in 2017; this observation does not have an obvious explanation and may be a chance finding. Overall, malnutrition was very common in this cohort, but declined over the study as the children became older. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high burden of malnutrition and malaria in the study populations, and a major reduction in the incidence of malaria in children receiving both interventions, this had only a modest impact on nutritional status. Therefore, other interventions are needed to reduce the high burden of malnutrition in these areas. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03143218 , registered 8th May 2017

Seasonal Malaria Vaccination with or without Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention.

BACKGROUND: Malaria control remains a challenge in many parts of the Sahel and sub-Sahel regions of Africa. METHODS: We conducted an individually randomized, controlled trial to assess whether seasonal vaccination with RTS,S/AS01E was noninferior to chemoprevention in preventing uncomplicated malaria and whether the two interventions combined were superior to either one alone in preventing uncomplicated malaria and severe malaria-related outcomes. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 6861 children 5 to 17 months of age to receive sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine (2287 children [chemoprevention-alone group]), RTS,S/AS01E (2288 children [vaccine-alone group]), or chemoprevention and RTS,S/AS01E (2286 children [combination group]). Of these, 1965, 1988, and 1967 children in the three groups, respectively, received the first dose of the assigned intervention and were followed for 3 years. Febrile seizure developed in 5 children the day after receipt of the vaccine, but the children recovered and had no sequelae. There were 305 events of uncomplicated clinical malaria per 1000 person-years at risk in the chemoprevention-alone group, 278 events per 1000 person-years in the vaccine-alone group, and 113 events per 1000 person-years in the combination group. The hazard ratio for the protective efficacy of RTS,S/AS01E as compared with chemoprevention was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.01), which excluded the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.20. The protective efficacy of the combination as compared with chemoprevention alone was 62.8% (95% CI, 58.4 to 66.8) against clinical malaria, 70.5% (95% CI, 41.9 to 85.0) against hospital admission with severe malaria according to the World Health Organization definition, and 72.9% (95% CI, 2.9 to 92.4) against death from malaria. The protective efficacy of the combination as compared with the vaccine alone against these outcomes was 59.6% (95% CI, 54.7 to 64.0), 70.6% (95% CI, 42.3 to 85.0), and 75.3% (95% CI, 12.5 to 93.0), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of RTS,S/AS01E was noninferior to chemoprevention in preventing uncomplicated malaria. The combination of these interventions resulted in a substantially lower incidence of uncomplicated malaria, severe malaria, and death from malaria than either intervention alone. (Funded by the Joint Global Health Trials and PATH; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03143218.)

Seasonal vaccination with RTS,S/AS01E vaccine with or without seasonal malaria chemoprevention in children up to the age of 5 years in Burkina Faso and Mali: a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal vaccination with the RTS,S/AS01E vaccine combined with seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) prevented malaria in young children more effectively than either intervention given alone over a 3 year period. The objective of this study was to establish whether the added protection provided by the combination could be sustained for a further 2 years. METHODS: This was a double-blind, individually randomised, controlled, non-inferiority and superiority, phase 3 trial done at two sites: the Bougouni district and neighbouring areas in Mali and Houndé district, Burkina Faso. Children who had been enrolled in the initial 3-year trial when aged 5-17 months were initially randomly assigned individually to receive SMC with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine plus control vaccines, RTS,S/AS01E plus placebo SMC, or SMC plus RTS,S/AS01E. They continued to receive the same interventions until the age of 5 years. The primary trial endpoint was the incidence of clinical malaria over the 5-year trial period in both the modified intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. Over the 5-year period, non-inferiority was defined as a 20% increase in clinical malaria in the RTS,S/AS01E-alone group compared with the SMC alone group. Superiority was defined as a 12% difference in the incidence of clinical malaria between the combined and single intervention groups. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04319380, and is complete. FINDINGS: In April, 2020, of 6861 children originally recruited, 5098 (94%) of the 5433 children who completed the initial 3-year follow-up were re-enrolled in the extension study. Over 5 years, the incidence of clinical malaria per 1000 person-years at risk was 313 in the SMC alone group, 320 in the RTS,S/AS01E-alone group, and 133 in the combined group. The combination of RTS,S/AS01E and SMC was superior to SMC (protective efficacy 57·7%, 95% CI 53·3 to 61·7) and to RTS,S/AS01E (protective efficacy 59·0%, 54·7 to 62·8) in preventing clinical malaria. RTS,S/AS01E was non-inferior to SMC (hazard ratio 1·03 [95% CI 0·95 to 1·12]). The protective efficacy of the combination versus SMC over the 5-year period of the study was very similar to that seen in the first 3 years with the protective efficacy of the combination versus SMC being 57·7% (53·3 to 61·7) and versus RTS/AS01E-alone being 59·0% (54·7 to 62·8). The comparable figures for the first 3 years of the study were 62·8% (58·4 to 66·8) and 59·6% (54·7 to 64·0%), respectively. Hospital admissions for WHO-defined severe malaria were reduced by 66·8% (95% CI 40·3 to 81·5), for malarial anaemia by 65·9% (34·1 to 82·4), for blood transfusion by 68·1% (32·6 to 84·9), for all-cause deaths by 44·5% (2·8 to 68·3), for deaths excluding external causes or surgery by 41·1% (-9·2 to 68·3), and for deaths from malaria by 66·8% (-2·7 to 89·3) in the combined group compared with the SMC alone group. No safety signals were detected. INTERPRETATION: Substantial protection against malaria was sustained over 5 years by combining seasonal malaria vaccination with seasonal chemoprevention, offering a potential new approach to malaria control in areas with seasonal malaria transmission. FUNDING: UK Joint Global Health Trials and PATH's Malaria Vaccine Initiative (through a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section

The anti-circumsporozoite antibody response to repeated, seasonal booster doses of the malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS01E.

The recently deployed RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine induces a strong antibody response to the circumsporozoite protein (CSP) on the surface of the Plasmodium falciparum sporozoite which is associated with protection. The anti-CSP antibody titre falls rapidly after primary vaccination, associated with a decline in efficacy, but the antibody titre and the protective response can be partially restored by a booster dose of vaccine, but this response is also transitory. In many malaria- endemic areas of Africa, children are at risk of malaria, including severe malaria, until they are five years of age or older and to sustain protection from malaria for this period by vaccination with RTS,S/AS01E, repeated booster doses of vaccine may be required. However, there is little information about the immune response to repeated booster doses of RTS,S/AS01E. In many malaria-endemic areas of Africa, the burden of malaria is largely restricted to the rainy season and, therefore, a recent trial conducted in Burkina Faso and Mali explored the impact of repeated annual booster doses of RTS,S/AS01E given immediately prior to the malaria transmission season until children reached the age of five years. Anti-CSP antibody titres were measured in sera obtained from a randomly selected subset of children enrolled in this trial collected before and one month after three priming and four annual booster doses of vaccine using the GSK ELISA developed at the University of Ghent and, in a subset of these samples, by a multiplex assay developed at the University of Oxford. Three priming doses of RTS,S/AS01E induced a strong anti-CSP antibody response (GMT 368.9 IU/mL). Subsequent annual, seasonal booster doses induced a strong, but lower, antibody response; the GMT after the fourth booster was 128.5 IU/mL. Children whose antibody response was in the upper and middle terciles post vaccination had a lower incidence of malaria during the following year than children in the lowest tercile. Results obtained with GSK ELISA and the Oxford Multiplex assay were strongly correlated (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.95). Although anti-CSP antibody titres declined after repeated booster doses of RTS,S/AS01E a high, although declining, level of efficacy was sustained suggesting that there may have been changes in the characteristics of the anti-CSP antibody following repeated booster doses.Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03143218

Élimination de la matière organique des eaux de surface douces à potabiliser : effets de la reminéralisation

État des connaissances sur la matière organique des eaux naturelles -- La matière organique dans les eaux de surface -- Les substances humiques -- La matière organique biodégradable -- La demande en chlore des eaux naturelles -- La formation des sous-produits de désinfection au chlore -- Élimination de la matière organique par coagulation-floculation -- Élimination de la matière organique par traitement biologique

Réduction de la demande en chlore et des précurseurs de sous-produits de désinfection par une ozonation suivie d'une biodégradation : effets de la reminéralisation

Abstract Des essais ont été faits afin de montrer les effets d'une reminéralisation sur les performances d'un traitement biologique. La demande en chlore ainsi que les potentiels de formation des trihalométhanes, des acides haloacétiques, des haloacétonitriles, des haloacétones et de la chloropicrine ont été suivis. Une augmentation de l'alcalinité des eaux permet un meilleur enlèvement des paramètres étudiés tant par l'ozonation que par la biodégradation. Par exemple, l'abattement des précurseurs de trihalométhanes, des haloacétonitriles et des acides acétiques est respectivement de 21, 50 et 28% dans les eaux non reminéralisées (alcalinité de 25 mg/L CaCO3). Dans les eaux reminéralisées à 250 mg/L CaCO3 ces abattements sont plus importants soit : 30, 68 et 50%. Un effet similaire est observé pour la biodégradation. Ainsi dans les eaux non reminéralisées les enlèvements sont de 54, 77 et 69%, alors qu’ils sont de 67, 86 et 80% dans les eaux reminéralisées.</jats:p