deltatrials
Unknown OBSERVATIONAL NCT01555255

Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) in Pregnancy: Detection of Placental Malaria

Sponsor: Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Switzerland

Updated 11 times since 2017 Last updated: Apr 22, 2015 Started: Nov 30, 2010 Primary completion: Mar 31, 2012 Completion: Dec 31, 2012
This information is for research purposes only and is not medical advice. Consult a healthcare provider before making any medical decision.

A observational or N/A phase clinical study on Malaria and Malaria in Pregnancy, this trial is ongoing. The trial is conducted by Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Switzerland and has accumulated 11 data snapshots since 2010. Infectious disease trials contribute critical data for public health response and treatment development.

Study Description(click to expand)

Malaria prevention measures for pregnant women are critical and available, but the effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, a cornerstone in this prevention effort, is declining with increasing parasite resistance. New drugs for IPTp are being considered, but there are disadvantages to presumptive use of the few remaining efficacious antimalarials. An alternative approach may involve screening with diagnostic tests to better target efficacious antimalarial treatment to asymptomatic women with laboratory evidence of malaria infection. Light microscopy of peripheral maternal blood misses a large proportion of cases, and PCR is unavailable in routine health care settings. Preliminary evidence suggests that detection of parasite antigen in peripheral blood may provide an accurate indicator of clinically significant infections and predict pregnancy outcomes. Therefore, screening with RDTs may offer an accurate and practical way to identify pregnant women who will benefit from targeted therapy for placental malaria infection. Antigen detection thresholds vary widely among RDTs, and the distribution of target antigens in peripheral blood circulation is expected to differ; therefore, the potential value of RDTs in this population can best be established by evaluating the detection of placental parasitemia for highly-characterized RDTs, enabling results to be extrapolated to other products and programs....

Malaria prevention measures for pregnant women are critical and available, but the effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, a cornerstone in this prevention effort, is declining with increasing parasite resistance. New drugs for IPTp are being considered, but there are disadvantages to presumptive use of the few remaining efficacious antimalarials. An alternative approach may involve screening with diagnostic tests to better target efficacious antimalarial treatment to asymptomatic women with laboratory evidence of malaria infection. Light microscopy of peripheral maternal blood misses a large proportion of cases, and PCR is unavailable in routine health care settings. Preliminary evidence suggests that detection of parasite antigen in peripheral blood may provide an accurate indicator of clinically significant infections and predict pregnancy outcomes. Therefore, screening with RDTs may offer an accurate and practical way to identify pregnant women who will benefit from targeted therapy for placental malaria infection. Antigen detection thresholds vary widely among RDTs, and the distribution of target antigens in peripheral blood circulation is expected to differ; therefore, the potential value of RDTs in this population can best be established by evaluating the detection of placental parasitemia for highly-characterized RDTs, enabling results to be extrapolated to other products and programs. The study described here is proposed to address this question.

Status Flow

~Jan 2017 – ~Aug 2017 · 7 months · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Aug 2017 – ~Apr 2018 · 8 months · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Apr 2018 – ~May 2018 · 30 days · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~May 2018 – ~Jun 2018 · 31 days · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Jun 2018 – ~Nov 2020 · 29 months · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Nov 2020 – ~Jan 2021 · 2 months · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Jan 2021 – ~Dec 2021 · 11 months · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Dec 2021 – ~Jul 2024 · 31 months · monthly snapshotUnknown Status~Jul 2024 – ~Sep 2024 · 2 months · monthly snapshotUnknown~Sep 2024 – present · 19 months · monthly snapshotUnknown~Jan 2026 – present · 3 months · monthly snapshotUnknown

Change History

11 versions recorded
  1. Jan 2026 — Present [monthly]

    Unknown

  2. Sep 2024 — Present [monthly]

    Unknown

  3. Jul 2024 — Sep 2024 [monthly]

    Unknown

    Status: Unknown StatusUnknown

  4. Dec 2021 — Jul 2024 [monthly]

    Unknown Status

  5. Jan 2021 — Dec 2021 [monthly]

    Unknown Status

Show 6 earlier versions
  1. Nov 2020 — Jan 2021 [monthly]

    Unknown Status

  2. Jun 2018 — Nov 2020 [monthly]

    Unknown Status

  3. May 2018 — Jun 2018 [monthly]

    Unknown Status

  4. Apr 2018 — May 2018 [monthly]

    Unknown Status

    Phase: NANone

  5. Aug 2017 — Apr 2018 [monthly]

    Unknown Status NA

  6. Jan 2017 — Aug 2017 [monthly]

    Unknown Status NA

    First recorded

Nov 2010

Trial started

Per CT.gov start date — pre-dates our first snapshot

Eligibility Summary

No eligibility information available.

Contact Information

Sponsor contact:
  • Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Switzerland
  • UNICEF
  • United Nations Development Programme
  • World Bank
  • World Health Organization
Data source: Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, Switzerland

For direct contact, visit the study record on ClinicalTrials.gov .