↓ Skip to main content

Safety and Effectiveness of Sodium Stibogluconate and Paromomycin Combination for the Treatment of Visceral Leishmaniasis in Eastern Africa: Results from a Pharmacovigilance Programme

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Drug Investigation, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
186 Mendeley
Title
Safety and Effectiveness of Sodium Stibogluconate and Paromomycin Combination for the Treatment of Visceral Leishmaniasis in Eastern Africa: Results from a Pharmacovigilance Programme
Published in
Clinical Drug Investigation, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40261-016-0481-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Kimutai, Ahmed M. Musa, Simon Njoroge, Raymond Omollo, Fabiana Alves, Asrat Hailu, Eltahir A. G. Khalil, Ermias Diro, Peninah Soipei, Brima Musa, Khalid Salman, Koert Ritmeijer, Francois Chappuis, Juma Rashid, Rezika Mohammed, Asfaw Jameneh, Eyasu Makonnen, Joseph Olobo, Lawrence Okello, Patrick Sagaki, Nathalie Strub, Sally Ellis, Jorge Alvar, Manica Balasegaram, Emilie Alirol, Monique Wasunna

Abstract

In 2010, WHO recommended a new first-line treatment for visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in Eastern Africa. The new treatment, a combination of intravenous (IV) or intramuscular (IM) sodium stibogluconate (SSG) and IM paromomycin (PM) was an improvement over SSG monotherapy, the previous first-line VL treatment in the region. To monitor the new treatment's safety and effectiveness in routine clinical practice a pharmacovigilance (PV) programme was developed. A prospective PV cohort was developed. Regulatory approval was obtained in Sudan, Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia. Twelve sentinel sites sponsored by the Ministries of Health, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative (DNDi) participated. VL patients treated using the new treatment were consented and included in a common registry that collected demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, adverse events, serious adverse events and treatment outcomes. Six-monthly periodic safety update reports (PSUR) were prepared and reviewed by a PV steering committee. Overall 3126 patients were enrolled: 1962 (62.7%) from Sudan, 652 (20.9%) from Kenya, 322 (10.3%) from Ethiopia and 190 (6.1%) from Uganda. Patients were mostly male children (68.1%, median age 11 years) with primary VL (97.8%). SSG-PM initial cure rate was 95.1%; no geographical differences were noted. HIV/VL co-infected patients and patients older than 50 years had initial cure rates of 56 and 81.4%, respectively, while 1063 (34%) patients had at least one adverse event (AE) during treatment and 1.92% (n = 60) had a serious adverse event (SAE) with a mortality of 1.0% (n = 32). There were no serious unexpected adverse drug reactions. This first regional PV programme in VL supports SSG-PM combination as first-line treatment for primary VL in Eastern Africa. SSG-PM was effective and safe except in HIV/VL co-infected or older patients. Active PV surveillance of targeted safety, effectiveness and key VL outcomes such us VL relapse, PKDL and HIV/VL co-infection should continue and PV data integrated to national and WHO PV databases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 185 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 16%
Researcher 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 6%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 55 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 64 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2017.
All research outputs
#7,508,670
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Drug Investigation
#284
of 979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,789
of 421,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Drug Investigation
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.