Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Achieving adequate antimalarial drug exposure is essential for curing malaria. Day 7 blood or plasma lumefantrine concentrations provide a simple measure of drug exposure that correlates well with artemether-lumefantrine efficacy. However, the ‘therapeutic’ day 7 lumefantrine concentration threshold needs to be defined better, particularly for important patient and parasite sub-populations. Methods The WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network (WWARN) conducted a large pooled analysis of individual pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic data from patients treated with artemether-lumefantrine for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria, to define therapeutic day 7 lumefantrine concentrations and identify patient factors that substantially alter these concentrations. A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and conference proceedings identified all relevant studies. Risk of bias in individual studies was evaluated based on study design, methodology and missing data. Results Of 31 studies identified through a systematic review, 26 studies were shared with WWARN and 21 studies with 2,787 patients were included. Recrudescence was associated with low day 7 lumefantrine concentrations (HR 1.59 (95 % CI 1.36 to 1.85) per halving of day 7 concentrations) and high baseline parasitemia (HR 1.87 (95 % CI 1.22 to 2.87) per 10-fold increase). Adjusted for mg/kg dose, day 7 concentrations were lowest in very young children (<3 years), among whom underweight-for-age children had 23 % (95 % CI −1 to 41 %) lower concentrations than adequately nourished children of the same age and 53 % (95 % CI 37 to 65 %) lower concentrations than adults. Day 7 lumefantrine concentrations were 44 % (95 % CI 38 to 49 %) lower following unsupervised treatment. The highest risk of recrudescence was observed in areas of emerging artemisinin resistance and very low transmission intensity. For all other populations studied, day 7 concentrations ≥200 ng/ml were associated with >98 % cure rates (if parasitemia <135,000/μL). Conclusions Current artemether-lumefantrine dosing recommendations achieve day 7 lumefantrine concentrations ≥200 ng/ml and high cure rates in most uncomplicated malaria patients. Three groups are at increased risk of treatment failure: very young children (particularly those underweight-for-age); patients with high parasitemias; and patients in very low transmission intensity areas with emerging parasite resistance. In these groups, adherence and treatment response should be monitored closely. Higher, more frequent, or prolonged dosage regimens should now be evaluated in very young children, particularly if malnourished, and in patients with hyperparasitemia.

Infectious diseases elimination and eradication have become important areas of focus for global health and countries. Due to the substantial up-front investments required to eliminate and eradicate, and the overall shortage of resources for health, economic analysis can inform decision making on whether elimination/eradication makes economic sense and on the costs and benefits of alternative strategies. In order to draw lessons for current and future initiatives, we review the economic literature that has addressed questions related to the elimination and eradication of infectious diseases focusing on: why, how and for whom? A systematic review was performed by searching economic literature (cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and economic impact analyses) on elimination/eradication of infectious diseases published from 1980 to 2013 from three large bibliographic databases: one general (SCOPUS), one bio-medical (MEDLINE/PUBMED) and one economic (IDEAS/REPEC). A total of 690 non-duplicate papers were identified from which only 43 met the inclusion criteria. In addition, only one paper focusing on equity issues, the \"for whom?\" question, was found. The literature relating to \"why?\" is the largest, much of it focusing on how much it would cost. A more limited literature estimates the benefits in terms of impact on economic growth with mixed results. The question of how to eradicate or eliminate was informed by an economic literature highlighting that there will be opportunities for individuals and countries to free-ride and that forms of incentives and/or disincentives will be needed. This requires government involvement at country level and global coordination. While there is little doubt that eliminating infectious diseases will eventually improve equity, it will only happen if active steps to promote equity are followed on the path to elimination and eradication. The largest part of the literature has focused on costs and economic benefits of elimination/eradication. To a lesser extent, challenges associated with achieving elimination/eradication and ensuring equity have also been explored. Although elimination and eradication are, for some diseases, good investments compared with control, countries' incentives to eliminate do not always align with the global good and the most efficient elimination strategies may not prioritize the poorest populations. For any infectious disease, policy-makers will need to consider realigning contrasting incentives between the individual countries and the global community and to assure that the process towards elimination/eradication considers equity.

Background Policy makers and health practitioners are in need of guidance to respond to the growing geographic mobility of Hispano-American migrants in Europe. Drawing from contributions from epidemiology, social sciences, demography, psychology, psychiatry and economy, this scoping review provides an up-to-date and comprehensive synthesis of studies addressing the health status and determinants of this population. We describe major research gaps and suggest specific avenues of further inquiry. Methods We identified systematically papers that addressed the concepts “health” and “Hispano Americans” indexed in five data bases from Jan 1990 to May 2014 with no language restrictions. We screened the 4,464 citations retrieved against exclusion criteria and classified 193 selected references in 12 thematic folders with the aid of the reference management software ENDNOTE X6. After reviewing the full text of all papers we extracted relevant data systematically into a table template to facilitate the synthesising process. Results Most studies focused on a particular disease, leaving unexplored the interlinkages between different health conditions and how these relate to legislative, health services, environmental, occupational, and other health determinants. We elucidated some consistent results but there were many heterogeneous findings and several popular beliefs were not fully supported by empirical evidence. Few studies adopted a trans-national perspective and many consisted of cross-sectional descriptions that considered “Hispano-Americans” as a homogeneous category, limiting our analysis. Our results are also constrained by the availability and varying quality of studies reviewed. Conclusions Burgeoning research has produced some consistent findings but there are huge gaps in knowledge. To prevent unhelpful generalisations we need a more holistic and nuanced understanding of how mobility, ethnicity, income, gender, legislative status, employment status, working conditions, neighbourhood characteristics and social status intersect with demographic variables and policy contexts to influence the health of the diverse Hispano-American populations present in Europe.