Safety and tolerability of adjunctive rosiglitazone treatment for children with uncomplicated malaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Despite the widespread use and availability of rapidly acting anti-malarials, the fatality rate of severe malaria in sub-Saharan Africa remains high. Adjunctive therapies that target the host response to malaria infection may further decrease mortality over that of anti-malarial agents alone. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonists (e.g. rosiglitazone) have been shown to act on several pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of severe malaria and may improve clinical outcome as an adjunctive intervention. Methods In this study, the safety and tolerability of adjunctive rosiglitazone in paediatric uncomplicated malaria infection was evaluated in Mozambique, as a prelude to its evaluation in a randomized controlled trial in paediatric severe malaria. The study was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIa trial of rosiglitazone (0.045 mg/kg/dose) twice daily for 4 days versus placebo as adjunctive treatment in addition to Mozambican standard of care (artemisinin combination therapy Coartem ® ) in children with uncomplicated malaria. The primary outcomes were tolerability and safety, including clinical, haematological, biochemical, and electrocardiographic evaluations. Results Thirty children were enrolled: 20 were assigned to rosiglitazone and 10 to placebo. Rosiglitazone treatment did not induce hypoglycaemia nor significantly alter clinical, biochemical, haematological, or electrocardiographic parameters. Conclusions Adjunctive rosiglitazone was safe and well-tolerated in children with uncomplicated malaria, permitting the extension of its evaluation as adjunctive therapy for severe malaria. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02694874
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".