A randomized, open-label study of the tolerability and efficacy of one or three daily doses of ivermectin plus diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) versus one dose of ivermectin plus albendazole (IA) for treatment of onchocerciasis.

Michael E Gyasi, Gary J Weil, Mahmood A Seidu, Daphne Lew, Ruth Laryea, Christopher L King, Eric Kanza, Augustine R Hong, Achim Hoerauf, Nicholas O Opoku, Charles W Goss, Shelter Gordor, Peter U Fischer, Kerstin Fischer, Nicole Fetcho, Bettina Dubben, Felix Doe

Journal: PLoS neglected tropical diseases 2023;17(5):e0011365

PMID: 37205721

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Onchocerciasis ("river blindness") has been targeted for elimination. New treatments that kill or permanently sterilize female worms could accelerate this process. Prior studies have shown that triple drug treatment with ivermectin plus diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) leads to prolonged clearance of microfilaremia in persons with lymphatic filariasis. We now report results from a randomized clinical trial that compared the tolerability and efficacy of IDA vs. a comparator treatment (ivermectin plus albendazole, IA) in persons with onchocerciasis.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The study was performed in the Volta region of Ghana. Persons with microfiladermia and palpable subcutaneous nodules were pre-treated with two oral doses of ivermectin (150 μg/kg) separated by at least 6 months prior to treatment with either a single oral dose of ivermectin 150 μg/kg plus albendazole 400 mg (IA), a single oral dose of IDA (IDA1, IA plus diethylcarbamazine (DEC. 6 mg/kg) or three consecutive daily doses of IDA (IDA3). These treatments were tolerated equally well. While adverse events were common (approximately 30% overall), no severe or serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed. Skin microfilariae were absent or present with very low densities after all three treatments through 18 months, at which time nodules were excised for histological assessment. Nodule histology was evaluated by two independent assessors who were masked regarding participant infection status or treatment assignment. Significantly lower percentages of female worms were alive and fertile in nodules recovered from study participants after IDA1 (40/261, 15.3%) and IDA3 (34/281, 12.1%) than after IA (41/180, 22.8%). This corresponds to a 40% reduction in the percentage of female worms that were alive and fertile after IDA treatments relative to results observed after the IA comparator treatment (P = 0.004). Percentages of female worms that were alive (a secondary outcome of the study) were also lower after IDA treatments (301/574, 52.4%) than after IA (127/198, 64.1%) (P = 0.004). Importantly, some comparisons (including the reduced % of fertile female worms after IDA1 vs IA treatment, which was the primary endpoint for the study) were not statistically significant when results were adjusted for intraclass correlation of worm fertility and viability for worms recovered from individual study participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this pilot study suggest that IDA was well tolerated after ivermectin pretreatment. They also suggest that IDA was more effective than the comparator treatment IA for killing or sterilizing female O. volvulus worms. No other short-course oral treatment for onchocerciasis has been demonstrated to have macrofilaricidal activity. However, this first study was too small to provide conclusive results. Therefore, additional studies will be needed to confirm these promising findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at Cinicaltrials.gov under the number NCT04188301.

Copyright: © 2023 Opoku et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Address: Fred Newton Binka School of Public Health, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana.; Hohoe Municipal Hospital, Hohoe, Ghana.; Institute of Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology (IMMIP), University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.; Infectious Diseases Division, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.; Division of Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.; St. Thomas Eye Hospital, Accra, Ghana.; Department of Ophthalmology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.; Centre de Recherche Clinique de Butembo, Université Catholique du Graben, Site Horizon, Butembo, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).; Center for Global Health and Diseases, Case-Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.; Department of Medical Laboratory Science, School of Biomedical and Allied Sciences, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.