Evidence Hub

Realizing Effectiveness Across Continents with Hydroxyurea: Enrollment and Baseline Characteristics of the Multicenter REACH Study in sub-Saharan Africa

Patrick T. McGann, T. Williams, P. Olupot‐Olupot, G. Tomlinson, A. Lane, José Luís Reis da Fonseca, R. Kitenge, G. Mochamah et al.

American journal of hematology/oncology, 2018

635 participants · 41 citations

Abstract

Despite its well‐described safety and efficacy in the treatment of sickle cell anemia (SCA) in high‐income settings, hydroxyurea remains largely unavailable in sub‐Saharan Africa, where more than 75% of annual SCA births occur and many comorbidities exist. Realizing Effectiveness Across Continents with Hydroxyurea (REACH, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01966731) is a prospective, Phase I/II open‐label trial of hydroxyurea designed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and benefits of hydroxyurea treatment for children with SCA in four sub‐Saharan African countries. Following comprehensive training of local research teams, REACH was approved by local Ethics Committees and achieved full enrollment ahead of projections with 635 participants enrolled over a 30‐month period, despite half of families living >12 km from their clinical site. At enrollment, study participants (age 5.4 ± 2.4 years) had substantial morbidity, including a history of vaso‐occlusive pain (98%), transfusion (68%), malaria (85%), and stroke (6%). Significant differences in laboratory characteristics were noted across sites, with lower hemoglobin concentrations (P < .01) in Angola (7.2 ± 1.0 g/dL) and the DRC (7.0 ± 0.9 g/dL) compared to Kenya (7.4 ± 1.1 g/dL) and Uganda (7.5 ± 1.1 g/dL). Analysis of known genetic modifiers of SCA demonstrated a high frequency of α‐thalassemia (58.4% with at least a single α‐globin gene deletion) and G6PD deficiency (19.7% of males and 2.4% of females) across sites. The CAR β‐globin…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 635 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free