Is the exclusion of children under 24 months from anthelmintic treatment justifiable?

Antonio Montresor, Rebecca J. Stoltzfus, Marco Albonico, James M. Tielsch, Amy L. Rice, Hababu M. Chwaya, Lorenzo Savioli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

There are no reports documenting toxicity or adverse effects after treatment of children aged <24 months with benzimidazole derivatives and there is an urgent need to clarify this point in light of the potential detrimental effect that soil-transmitted helminthiasis has on this age-group. A total of 653 treatments (317 mebendazole 500 mg; 336 placebo) were administered in 1996/97 to 212 children aged <24 months as part of a 1-year anthelmintic drug study conducted among preschool-age children in Tanzania. Data on fever, cough, diarrhoea, dysentery and acute respiratory illness were collected 1 week following the treatment. No differences between the occurrence of adverse effects in the 2 groups were observed. In light of the potential nutritional benefit achieved by regular deworming in this young age-group, the policy that excludes children aged <24 months from treatment should be re-considered.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)197-199
Number of pages3
JournalTransactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
Volume96
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2002

Fingerprint

Anthelmintics
Age Groups
Helminthiasis
Mebendazole
Dysentery
Tanzania
Preschool Children
Therapeutics
Cough
Diarrhea
Fever
Soil
Placebos
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Adverse effects
  • Age
  • Anthelmintics
  • Children
  • Children under 2 years
  • Clinical trial
  • Mebendazole
  • Safety
  • Tanzania

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Parasitology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Montresor, A., Stoltzfus, R. J., Albonico, M., Tielsch, J. M., Rice, A. L., Chwaya, H. M., & Savioli, L. (2002). Is the exclusion of children under 24 months from anthelmintic treatment justifiable? Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 96(2), 197-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0035-9203(02)90303-2

Is the exclusion of children under 24 months from anthelmintic treatment justifiable? / Montresor, Antonio; Stoltzfus, Rebecca J.; Albonico, Marco; Tielsch, James M.; Rice, Amy L.; Chwaya, Hababu M.; Savioli, Lorenzo.

In: Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, Vol. 96, No. 2, 2002, p. 197-199.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Montresor, Antonio ; Stoltzfus, Rebecca J. ; Albonico, Marco ; Tielsch, James M. ; Rice, Amy L. ; Chwaya, Hababu M. ; Savioli, Lorenzo. / Is the exclusion of children under 24 months from anthelmintic treatment justifiable?. In: Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2002 ; Vol. 96, No. 2. pp. 197-199.
@article{d250a1129a92434788a252ab27fceb60,
title = "Is the exclusion of children under 24 months from anthelmintic treatment justifiable?",
abstract = "There are no reports documenting toxicity or adverse effects after treatment of children aged <24 months with benzimidazole derivatives and there is an urgent need to clarify this point in light of the potential detrimental effect that soil-transmitted helminthiasis has on this age-group. A total of 653 treatments (317 mebendazole 500 mg; 336 placebo) were administered in 1996/97 to 212 children aged <24 months as part of a 1-year anthelmintic drug study conducted among preschool-age children in Tanzania. Data on fever, cough, diarrhoea, dysentery and acute respiratory illness were collected 1 week following the treatment. No differences between the occurrence of adverse effects in the 2 groups were observed. In light of the potential nutritional benefit achieved by regular deworming in this young age-group, the policy that excludes children aged <24 months from treatment should be re-considered.",
keywords = "Adverse effects, Age, Anthelmintics, Children, Children under 2 years, Clinical trial, Mebendazole, Safety, Tanzania",
author = "Antonio Montresor and Stoltzfus, {Rebecca J.} and Marco Albonico and Tielsch, {James M.} and Rice, {Amy L.} and Chwaya, {Hababu M.} and Lorenzo Savioli",
year = "2002",
doi = "10.1016/S0035-9203(02)90303-2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "197--199",
journal = "Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene",
issn = "0035-9203",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is the exclusion of children under 24 months from anthelmintic treatment justifiable?

AU - Montresor, Antonio

AU - Stoltzfus, Rebecca J.

AU - Albonico, Marco

AU - Tielsch, James M.

AU - Rice, Amy L.

AU - Chwaya, Hababu M.

AU - Savioli, Lorenzo

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - There are no reports documenting toxicity or adverse effects after treatment of children aged <24 months with benzimidazole derivatives and there is an urgent need to clarify this point in light of the potential detrimental effect that soil-transmitted helminthiasis has on this age-group. A total of 653 treatments (317 mebendazole 500 mg; 336 placebo) were administered in 1996/97 to 212 children aged <24 months as part of a 1-year anthelmintic drug study conducted among preschool-age children in Tanzania. Data on fever, cough, diarrhoea, dysentery and acute respiratory illness were collected 1 week following the treatment. No differences between the occurrence of adverse effects in the 2 groups were observed. In light of the potential nutritional benefit achieved by regular deworming in this young age-group, the policy that excludes children aged <24 months from treatment should be re-considered.

AB - There are no reports documenting toxicity or adverse effects after treatment of children aged <24 months with benzimidazole derivatives and there is an urgent need to clarify this point in light of the potential detrimental effect that soil-transmitted helminthiasis has on this age-group. A total of 653 treatments (317 mebendazole 500 mg; 336 placebo) were administered in 1996/97 to 212 children aged <24 months as part of a 1-year anthelmintic drug study conducted among preschool-age children in Tanzania. Data on fever, cough, diarrhoea, dysentery and acute respiratory illness were collected 1 week following the treatment. No differences between the occurrence of adverse effects in the 2 groups were observed. In light of the potential nutritional benefit achieved by regular deworming in this young age-group, the policy that excludes children aged <24 months from treatment should be re-considered.

KW - Adverse effects

KW - Age

KW - Anthelmintics

KW - Children

KW - Children under 2 years

KW - Clinical trial

KW - Mebendazole

KW - Safety

KW - Tanzania

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036323056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036323056&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0035-9203(02)90303-2

DO - 10.1016/S0035-9203(02)90303-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 12055814

AN - SCOPUS:0036323056

VL - 96

SP - 197

EP - 199

JO - Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

JF - Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

SN - 0035-9203

IS - 2

ER -