---
title: "Prescriber preferences for new treatments of indeterminate Chagas disease: international EPPIC sur"
id: "medrxiv-17-evaluating-prescriber-preferences-for-the-treatment-of-indeterminate-chagas"
canonical_url: "https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/medrxiv-17-evaluating-prescriber-preferences-for-the-treatment-of-indeterminate-chagas"
content_type: "clinical_feed_article"
specialty: "Infectious Disease"
source_name: "medRxiv (Clinical Preprints)"
source_url: "https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363397v1?rss=1"
published_at: "2026-09-21T12:00:00.000Z"
evidence_level: "Verified Feed"
license: "CC-BY-NC-4.0 / Informational Use"
---
# Prescriber preferences for new treatments of indeterminate Chagas disease: international EPPIC sur
## Provenance & Clinical Metadata
- **Canonical URL:** https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/medrxiv-17-evaluating-prescriber-preferences-for-the-treatment-of-indeterminate-chagas
- **Specialty:** [Infectious Disease](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/infectious-disease.md)
- **Primary Source:** medRxiv (Clinical Preprints)
- **Source URL:** [Original Journal Publication](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363397v1?rss=1)
- **Published At:** 2026-09-21T12:00:00.000Z
- **Evidence Rating:** Verified Feed
## Executive GIST (TL;DR)
- The EPPIC study surveyed international healthcare providers, researchers, and public health practitioners about preferences for new antiparasitic regimens for **indeterminate Chagas disease**. - Current approved drugs—**benznidazole (BNZ)** and **nifurtimox (NFX)**—have frequent adverse drug reactions (**ADRs**), long treatment durations, and limited availability, which reduce adherence and cause premature discontinuation. - The cross-sectional web survey ran June–August 2024 and targeted clinicians with experience in Chagas disease from endemic and non-endemic settings; 30 of 50 invited participants completed it (60% response rate). - Most respondents were physicians or nurses (57%), and 76% had more than six years managing Chagas disease. - Prescriber willingness rose sharply at an efficacy threshold of **70%**: 46.7% were likely/very likely to prescribe regimens with 70–79% efficacy versus 20.0% for 60–69% and 6.7% for 50–59% efficacy. - Willingness to use moderately efficacious regimens (60–69%) increased when additional attributes were present: **prevention of mother-to-child transmission**, reduced ADR frequency/severity, or availability as a second-line option. - Improved accessibility was an important determinant supporting adoption of regimens with the lowest reported efficacy ranges. - Respondents ranked ADRs, long treatment duration, and limited drug availability as the main disadvantages of current therapies. - The authors conclude that provider acceptance depends on the overall benefit–risk and implementation profile, not efficacy alone, and that a 70% efficacy inflection point plus improved tolerability, prevention of vertical transmission, and access could support uptake of new regimens. - These findings are preliminary, provider-level evidence from a preprint survey and may inform trial design and treatment strategy development aligned with real-world prescribing priorities.
## Clinical Analysis & Structured Key Points
Evaluating prescriber preferences for the treatment of indeterminate Chagas disease (EPPIC study): an international survey | medRxiv Skip to main content Evaluating prescriber preferences for the treatment of indeterminate Chagas disease (EPPIC study): an international survey Rodrigo Ville-Benavides , Colin Forsyth , View ORCID Profile Marina Certo , Sara Helena Gaspar , View ORCID Profile María-Jesus Pinazo doi: https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363397 Rodrigo Ville-Benavides 1 Medica Sur; Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Colin Forsyth 2 DNDi: Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site Marina Certo 2 DNDi: Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site ORCID record for Marina Certo Sara Helena Gaspar 2 DNDi: Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site María-Jesus Pinazo 2 DNDi: Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site ORCID record for María-Jesus Pinazo For correspondence: mpinazo{at}dndi.org Abstract Info/History Metrics Data/Code Preview PDF Abstract Background: Benznidazole (BNZ) and nifurtimox (NFX) remain the only approved treatments for Trypanosoma cruzi infection, but both are associated with frequent adverse drug reactions (ADRs), long treatment duration, and limited accessibility, resulting in poor treatment adherence and premature discontinuation. Recent clinical trials have evaluated shorter and lower-dose regimens; however, the minimum level of efficacy considered acceptable by healthcare providers – in the context of improved safety and greater accessibility – has not been systematically investigated. This study aimed to identify prescriber-defined efficacy thresholds and the factors influencing prescribing preferences for new antiparasitic regimens for Chagas disease. Methods: We conducted an international, cross-sectional, web-based survey between June and August 2024 among healthcare providers, researchers, and public health practitioners with experience in Chagas disease from endemic and non-endemic countries. The survey assessed satisfaction with current antiparasitic drugs, perceived treatment disadvantages, and the willingness of practitioners to prescribe hypothetical new regimens with varying efficacy levels and additional clinical attributes. Results: Thirty of 50 invited participants completed the survey (60% response rate); most were physicians or nurses (57%), and 76% had more than six years of experience managing Chagas disease. An efficacy threshold of 70% or above was associated with substantially higher prescribing willingness: 46.7% of respondents reported being likely or very likely to prescribe a regimen with 70-79% efficacy, compared with 20.0% for 60-69% and 6.7% for 50-59%. Willingness to prescribe regimens with moderate efficacy (60-69%) was increased when regimens offered prevention of mother-to-child transmission, reduced ADR frequency and severity, or the possibility of second-line use. Improved accessibility was an additional determinant for regimen in the lowest efficacy range. Respondents identified ADRs, long treatment duration, and limited drug availability as the main disadvantages of current therapies. Conclusions: This study provides preliminary, provider-level evidence that prescriber acceptance of new antiparasitic regimens for T. cruzi infection is shaped by the overall benefit-risk profile, not efficacy alone. A 70% efficacy threshold emerged as a critical inflection point for prescribing willingness, while prevention of mother-to-child transmission, improved tolerability, and greater accessibility were identified as key factors that could support the adoption of regimens with moderate efficacy. These findings may inform the design of future clinical trials and the development of treatment strategies aligned with real-world prescribing priorities. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The survey and the methodological approach were sent to the Hospital Clínic Barcelona Ethical Committee (CEim) on 16th August 2022 and, given the study characteristics, the response received on 13th September 2022 was that, due to the study characteristics, a review and approval by an ethical committee was not necessary. In any case, and in accordance with the above-mentioned regulation, access to study data was restricted to the principal investigator and designated collaborators. All participants provided electronic informed consent prior to completing the survey. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data Availability All relevant data are within the manuscript, given that it is a survey and all the data obtained in the responses are all included in manuscript results Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license . Back to top Previous Next Posted September 21, 2026. Download PDF Data/Code Email Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv. NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article. Your Email * Your Name * Send To * Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas. You are going to email the following Evaluating prescriber preferences for the treatment of indeterminate Chagas disease (EPPIC study): an international survey Message Subject (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv Message Body (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website. Your Personal Message CAPTCHA This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Share Evaluating prescriber preferences for the treatment of indeterminate Chagas disease (EPPIC study): an international survey Rodrigo Ville-Benavides , Colin Forsyth , Marina Certo , Sara Helena Gaspar , María-Jesus Pinazo medRxiv 2026.09.18.26363397; doi: https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363397 Share This Article: Copy Citation Tools Evaluating prescriber preferences for the treatment of indeterminate Chagas disease (EPPIC study): an international survey Rodrigo Ville-Benavides , Colin Forsyth , Marina Certo , Sara Helena Gaspar , María-Jesus Pinazo medRxiv 2026.09.18.26363397; doi: https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363397 Citation Manager Formats BibTeX Bookends EasyBib EndNote (tagged) EndNote 8 (xml) Medlars Mendeley Papers RefWorks Tagged Ref Manager RIS Zotero Tweet Widget Facebook Like Google Plus One Subject Area Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) Subject Areas All Articles Addiction Medicine (619) Allergy and Immunology (903) Anesthesia (335) Cardiovascular Medicine (4832) Dentistry and Oral Medicine (479) Dermatology (419) Emergency Medicine (651) Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1633) Epidemiology (15979) Forensic Medicine (33) Gastroenterology (1206) Genetic and Genomic Medicine (7067) Geriatric Medicine (734) Health Economics (1067) Health Informatics (5060) Health Policy (1438) Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1775) Hematology (587) HIV/AIDS (1347) Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (16309) Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (1175) Medical Education (671) Medical Ethics (155) Nephrology (727) Neurology (7294) Nursing (368) Nutrition (1084) Obstetrics and Gynecology (1244) Occupational and Environmental Health (1006) Oncology (3616) Ophthalmology (1055) Orthopedics (398) Otolaryngology (458) Pain Medicine (474) Palliative Medicine (139) Pathology (709) Pediatrics (1805) Pharmacology and Therapeutics (739) Primary Care Research (768) Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (5921) Public and Global Health (9772) Radiology and Imaging (2433) Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1456) Respiratory Medicine (1250) Rheumatology (643) Sexual and Reproductive Health (773) Sports Medicine (581) Surgery (782) Toxicology (107) Transplantation (305) Urology (293)
## Related Clinical Research

- [Genomic analysis of MRSA from Swiss wastewater and clinical samples](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/medrxiv-16-genomic-insights-into-methicillin-resistant-staphylococcus-aureus-from-swiss.md)
- [Compound climate extremes, socioeconomic factors and mobility shape dengue risk across Vietnam](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/medrxiv-14-compound-climate-extremes-socioeconomic-conditions-and-human-mobility-influence.md)
- [Obesity-associated inflammation and cancer: mechanisms linking adipose immune changes to tumor risk](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/frontiers-in-immunology-6-obesity-associated-inflammation-and-cancer-molecular-mechanisms-evidence-gaps.md)
- [Understanding Parasitic Identification in Delusional Parasitosis](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/plos-one-21-bridging-perception-and-reality-parasitic-identification-in-delusional.md)
- [Kennedy renews attacks on vaccines at Children’s Health Defense conference](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/stat-news-1-kennedy-renews-attacks-on-vaccines-at-children-s-health-defense-conference.md)

## Navigation
- [← Back to Infectious Disease Feed](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed/infectious-disease.md)
- [← All Clinical Specialties](https://medichelpline.com/clinical-feed.md)
## Medical & Regulatory Disclaimer

> [!CAUTION]
> MedicHelpline content is structured for research, educational, and professional discovery purposes. It does not constitute individual medical advice, clinical diagnosis, or treatment recommendations.
> Always verify dosing, contraindications, and regulatory alerts against official product labeling and primary regulatory sources before clinical decision-making.