Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vivax malaria is a neglected disease. There is an irrefutable need for better treatments with higher acceptability and efficacy. The treatment efficacy is influenced by many factors, including bioavailability. Hence, a straightforward strategy to improve vivax malaria treatment efficacy is the deployment of good quality formulations of primaquine and chloroquine. As these treatments were developed more than 70 years ago, many of the available data on blood levels of both drugs are based on obsolete analytical methodologies or pharmaceutical formulations, which are not available anymore. Herein, the results of three bioequivalence studies are presented, providing individual pharmacokinetic data on chloroquine and primaquine of more than a hundred healthy volunteers and using up-to-date analytical methods. METHODS: Three trials were designed as a single centre, randomized, single dose, open label, fasting, crossover bioequivalence studies comparing a new coated chloroquine tablet to the uncoated tablet, and 5 and 15 mg primaquine formulations to either an international reference product or the currently distributed tablets. Plasma concentrations of chloroquine and primaquine were measured using a validated HPLC-MS/MS method in accordance with current international regulatory requirements for bio-analytical methods. RESULTS: In total, a hundred eleven healthy volunteers of both genders were included in the three studies (n = 32; 30 and 56 respectively). No serious adverse events occurred. Drugs levels were measured in 5,520 blood samples. The estimated ratio of the geometric means of Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf of test and reference drugs and their 90% CI for chloroquine 150 mg, primaquine 15 mg and primaquine 5 mg were: 95.33% (89.18; 101.90), 86. 85% (82.61; 91.31), and 84.45% (76.95; 92.67); 93.28% (81.76; 106.41), 94.52% (86.13; 103.73) and 93.93% (85.83; 102.79); 97.44% (90.60; 104.78), 93.70% (87.04; 100.87) and 91.36% (85.27; 97.89), respectively. As Cmax and AUC0-t 90% CI were within the acceptance interval of 80-125% in all cases, the formulations tested were bioequivalent. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the three studies provided detailed chloroquine and primaquine pharmacokinetic data in accordance with current regulatory standards. Together with other open data initiatives, this individual data may increase the accuracy of pharmacokinetic models guiding best dose, new combinations, regimens and formulations to optimize the current chloroquine and primaquine treatments for vivax malaria. The data presented here may support the deployment of high-quality drugs and evidence-based public health policies.