ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Population pharmacokinetics of lumefantrine in pregnant and non-pregnant women with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Western Kenya.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Population pharmacokinetics of lumefantrine in pregnant and non-pregnant Nigerian women receiving efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of lumefantrine in pregnant and non-pregnant women with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Western Kenya.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis study intends to assess the pharmacokinetic properties and treatment response of lumefantrine in pregnant and non-pregnant women with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection in Western Kenya.
methodsSeventy-five women with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria were enrolled, including 25 non-pregnant, 30 pregnant women in the second trimester and 20 pregnant women in their third trimester. The participants received a standard dose of artemether-lumefantrine (80/480 mg) twice daily for 3 days. Densely venous plasma samples were collected. Nonlinear mixed-effects modelling was used to characterize the pharmacokinetic properties of lumefantrine, and the effects of pregnancy was assessed on all pharmacokinetic parameters by a full covariate modelling approach.
resultsThe concentration-time data of lumefantrine were described adequately by a two-compartment disposition model, with a flexible transit absorption and first-order elimination. Covariate modelling results demonstrated that pregnancy status or gestational age had a significant impact on both elimination clearance (CL) and the central volume of distribution (Vc) of lumefantrine. The estimated pregnancy effects on CL and Vc were 23% (95%CI: 10.8-34.8%) and 28% (95%CI: 7.3-51.8%), respectively. Pregnant women exhibited lower drug exposure compared to non-pregnant women, with the geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.57-1.01), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.63-0.99) and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.51-0.94) for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), maxinum concentration (C
conclusionsThe exposure to lumefantrine was lower in pregnant women, compared to non-pregnant women, with uncomplicated P. falciparum infection. This lower drug exposure might increase the risk of treatment failure with artemether-lumefantrine in pregnant women, especially if susceptibility to either drug is reduced. Continuous assessment and monitoring of the efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine in pregnant women are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.