Could a mango-flavoured pill end intestinal worms?

BBC - Jan 11th, 2025

A new mango-flavored tablet combining two existing anti-parasitic drugs has shown promising results in trials, potentially helping to eradicate intestinal worms affecting approximately 1.5 billion people worldwide. Conducted by researchers from eight European and African institutions, the study, named 'ALIVE,' suggests that the pill is more effective against soil-transmitted helminths when taken as a single dose or over three consecutive days. The combination aims to combat drug resistance and enhance large-scale disease management, particularly in developing countries where poor sanitation contributes to the spread of parasitic infections like whipworm and hookworm. During clinical trials involving 1,001 children in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Mozambique, the tablet proved effective, although results on threadworm were inconclusive. The study's findings have been submitted to regulators in Europe and Africa, with decisions expected by early 2025. Further trials will involve 20,000 participants in Kenya and Ghana. Experts, including Prof. Hany Elsheikha and Dr. Stella Kepha, acknowledge the pill's potential but emphasize the need for more research to confirm its efficacy across different populations.

World Health Organization Mozambique Kenya Ethiopia Intestinal Worms Parasitic Infections Soil Transmitted Helminths Alive Study Prof Jose Muñoz Prof Hany Elsheikha Dr Stella Kepha Albendazole Ivermectin Drug Resistance Clinical Trials Kenya Medical Research Institute

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.6

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a promising overview of a new tablet that aims to combat intestinal worms, highlighting its potential benefits and the trials conducted so far. While it scores well in terms of accuracy and clarity, the article shows room for improvement in balance, source quality, and transparency. The primary strength lies in its clear communication of complex medical information, making it accessible to the average reader. However, it lacks a comprehensive range of perspectives and detailed source attribution, which could affect its credibility. Furthermore, the article could benefit from more transparent disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, which would enhance its overall reliability and trustworthiness.

Accuracy

The article is largely accurate in its depiction of the new tablet's development and its potential impact on treating intestinal worms. It references a study published in the Lancet, a reputable medical journal, which lends credibility to the claims made. The article accurately describes the mechanism of action of the drugs involved and provides statistics on the global impact of intestinal worms. However, it lacks specific data points and detailed results from the study, which would further validate the claims. The mention of inconclusive results regarding threadworm treatment suggests a level of honesty about the study's limitations. Overall, while the article is factually sound, additional data from the study would strengthen its accuracy.

Balance

The article presents a generally positive view of the new tablet but lacks a comprehensive range of perspectives. While it includes quotes from Prof. Jose Muñoz and Prof. Hany Elsheikha, offering both optimism and caution, it does not provide viewpoints from skeptics or critics of the treatment. The mention of gaps in the study by Prof. Elsheikha adds some balance, but the article could benefit from more diverse opinions, particularly from experts in regions heavily affected by intestinal worms. The focus on positive outcomes over potential drawbacks or challenges in implementation suggests a slight bias towards the treatment's success. Therefore, the article scores moderately in balance.

Clarity

The article excels in clarity, using straightforward language to convey complex medical information. It clearly explains the impact of intestinal worms, the mechanism of the new tablet, and the potential benefits of its widespread use. The structure is logical, beginning with the problem, followed by the solution, and concluding with expert opinions. The use of quotes from researchers adds depth and credibility to the narrative. However, the article could be improved by providing more context about the study's geographical scope and the specific challenges faced in different regions. Despite this, the article maintains a neutral and professional tone throughout, making it accessible to a broad audience.

Source quality

The article references a study published in the Lancet and includes comments from researchers involved in the study, which are credible sources. However, it does not provide direct citations or detailed information about the study itself, such as its methodology or the specific institutions involved. The lack of direct links or references to the Lancet study limits the ability to verify the claims independently. Additionally, while researchers from various institutions are mentioned, the article does not clarify their roles or potential conflicts of interest, which could affect the impartiality of the reporting. Improving source attribution and providing more context about the study would enhance the article's source quality.

Transparency

The article provides a basic overview of the study and mentions the involvement of multiple institutions, but it lacks transparency in certain areas. It does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest, such as funding sources or affiliations that could impact the study's outcomes. Furthermore, while it mentions a trial's submission to regulators, it does not specify the regulatory bodies or the expected timeline for approval. The article could benefit from more detailed explanations of the study's methodology and the criteria for participant selection. By including these details, the article would offer a more transparent view of the research process and its potential implications.