RESUMEN
In regions where malaria transmission persists, the implementation of approaches aimed at eliminating parasites from the population can effectively decrease both burden of disease and transmission of infection. Thus, mass strategies that target symptomatic and asymptomatic infections at the same time may help countries to reduce transmission. This systematic review assessed the potential benefits and harms of mass testing and treatment (MTaT) to reduce malaria transmission. Searches were conducted in March 2021 and updated in April 2022 and included cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) as well as nonrandomized studies (NRSs) using malaria infection incidence, clinical malaria incidence, or prevalence as outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane's risk of bias (RoB2) tool and Risk of Bias Tool in Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I), and the certainty of evidence (CoE) was graded for each outcome. Of 4,462 citations identified, seven studies (four cRCTs and three NRSs) contributed outcome data. The analysis revealed that MTaT did not reduce the incidence (risk ratio [RR]: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.87-1.04; 1,181 participants; moderate CoE) or prevalence (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67-1.01; 7,522 participants; moderate CoE) of malaria infection but resulted in a small reduction in clinical malaria (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70-0.95; 334,944 participants; moderate CoE). Three studies contributing data on contextual factors concluded that MTaT is an acceptable, feasible, and cost-effective intervention. Mathematical modeling analyses (n = 10) suggested that MTaT effectiveness depends on the baseline transmission level, diagnostic test performance, number of rounds, and other co-interventions. Based on the limited evidence available, MTaT has little to no impact on reducing malaria transmission.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Humanos , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Malaria/diagnóstico , Malaria/transmisión , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Erradicación de la Enfermedad/métodos , Incidencia , Prevalencia , Tamizaje Masivo/métodosRESUMEN
As countries approach elimination of malaria, groups with increased exposure to malaria vectors or poor access to health services may serve as important human reservoirs of infection that help maintain transmission in the community. Parasitological testing and treatment targeted to these groups may reduce malaria transmission overall. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of targeted testing and treatment (TTaT) to reduce malaria transmission, the contextual factors, and the results of modeling studies that estimated the intervention's potential impact. Bibliographic searches were conducted in March 2021 and updated in April 2022, and a total of 1,210 articles were identified. Three studies were included for outcome data: one factorial cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) in Kenya (5,233 participants), one cRCT in Ghana (3,046 participants), and one controlled before-and-after cohort study in schoolchildren in Malawi (786 participants). Nine reports were included for contextual factors, and two were included for mathematical modeling. Data on outcomes from the three studies suggested that at the community level, TTaT would result in little to no difference in the incidence of malaria infection (measured via active surveillance), adverse events, and severe AEs. In contrast, the effects of TTaT on prevalence (malaria parasitemia) among those targeted by the intervention were found to include a short-term impact on reducing transmission but little to no impact on transmission for extended periods. Future iterations of this review should ensure consideration for populations proven to host the vast majority of the reservoir of infection in lower-transmission settings to determine the effectiveness of the intervention.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Humanos , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/transmisión , Malaria/epidemiología , Ghana/epidemiología , Kenia/epidemiología , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Malaui/epidemiología , PrevalenciaRESUMEN
In low- to very low-malaria transmission areas, most infections may be accrued within specific groups whose behaviors or occupations put them at increased risk of infection. If these infections comprise a large proportion of the reservoir of infection, targeting interventions to these groups could reduce transmission at the population level. We conducted a systematic review to assess the impact of providing antimalarials to groups of individuals at increased risk of malaria whose infections were considered to comprise a large proportion of the local reservoir of infections (targeted drug administration [TDA]). A literature search was conducted in March 2021 and updated in April 2022. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-text records. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the certainty of the evidence (CoE) for each outcome. Out of 2,563 records, we identified five studies for inclusion: two cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) in Uganda and Kenya; one controlled before-after study in Ghana; and two uncontrolled before-after studies in Sri Lanka and Greece. Compared with no intervention, TDA resulted in little to no difference in the prevalence of infection at the population level (risk ratio [RR]: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73-1.00; one cRCT, high CoE), although TDA likely resulted in a large reduction in prevalence among those targeted by the intervention (RR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.06-0.38; two cRCTs, moderate CoE). Although TDA may reduce the burden of malaria among those receiving antimalarials, we found no evidence that it reduces transmission at the population level.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria , Humanos , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/transmisión , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , PrevalenciaRESUMEN
In designing mass drug administration (MDA) campaigns, it is imperative to consider contextual factors that affect uptake of the intervention, including acceptability, cost, feasibility, and health system considerations, to ensure optimal coverage. We reviewed the literature on contextual factors influencing MDA delivery to provide programs with information to design a successful campaign. From 1,044 articles screened, 37 included contextual factors relevant to participants' values and preferences, drivers of MDA acceptability, health equity concerns, financial and economic aspects, and feasibility barriers; 13 included relevant modeling data. Key findings were abstracted by two reviewers and summarized. No studies directly assessed values or direct health equity concerns with respect to MDA, which represents an evidence gap as unequal distributions of effects and factors that impact participant acceptability and program feasibility must be considered to ensure equitable access. Participant acceptability was the most widely surveyed factor, appearing in 28 of 37 studies; perceived adverse events were a frequently noted cause of nonparticipation, mentioned in 15 studies. Feasibility considerations included when, where, and how drugs will be delivered and how to address pregnant women, as these can all have substantial implications for participation. Mass drug administration costs (â¼$1.04 to $19.40 per person per round) are driven primarily by drug prices, but the delivery mechanism can have varying costs as well, and integration with other interventions may provide cost savings. Both programmatic goals and sociopolitical and economic contexts must be carefully considered before embarking on an MDA program to ensure programmatic success.
Asunto(s)
Equidad en Salud , Administración Masiva de Medicamentos , Humanos , Femenino , Embarazo , Mujeres Embarazadas , Ahorro de Costo , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Malaria remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, even in low-transmission settings. With the advent of longer acting, more effective, and well-tolerated antimalarials, there is renewed interest in the efficacy of mass drug administration (MDA) to accelerate to elimination. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of MDA to reduce the incidence and prevalence of Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) and Plasmodium vivax (Pv) infection. From 1,044 articles screened, 14 articles, including 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), were identified. Five included data on Pf only; five included Pf and Pv. Two of the Pf studies were conducted in areas of high-moderate transmission, the remainder were in areas of low-very low transmission. In higher transmission areas, MDA reduced incidence of Pf parasitemia (rate ratio = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.40-0.92; moderate certainty) 1 to 3 months after drug administration; no significant effect of MDA on Pf parasitemia prevalence was detected 1 to 3 months post-MDA (risk ratio [RR] = 1.76, 95% CI: 0.58-5.36; low certainty). In lower transmission settings, both incidence and prevalence of Pf parasitemia were reduced 1 to 3 months post-MDA (rate ratio = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.66; RR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15-0.41, respectively). Pv prevalence was reduced 1 to 3 months post-MDA (RR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.10-0.24); there were no RCTs providing data on incidence of Pv. There was no significant effect of MDA at later time points. MDA may have short-term benefits; however, there was no evidence for longer term impact, although none of the trials assessed prolonged interventions.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria Falciparum , Malaria Vivax , Administración Masiva de Medicamentos , Humanos , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Antimaláricos/administración & dosificación , Malaria Falciparum/prevención & control , Malaria Falciparum/transmisión , Malaria Falciparum/epidemiología , Malaria Falciparum/tratamiento farmacológico , Malaria Vivax/prevención & control , Malaria Vivax/transmisión , Malaria Vivax/epidemiología , Malaria Vivax/tratamiento farmacológico , Incidencia , Plasmodium falciparum/efectos de los fármacos , Prevalencia , Plasmodium vivax/efectos de los fármacos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Parasitemia/epidemiología , Parasitemia/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Many countries pursuing malaria elimination implement "reactive" strategies targeting household members and neighbors of index cases to reduce transmission. These strategies include reactive case detection and treatment (RACDT; testing and treating those positive) and reactive drug administration (RDA; providing antimalarials without testing). We conducted systematic reviews of RACDT and RDA to assess their effect on reducing malaria transmission and gathered evidence about key contextual factors important to their implementation. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full-text records using defined criteria (Patient = those in malaria-endemic/receptive areas; Intervention = RACDT or RDA; Comparison = standard of care; Outcome = malaria incidence/prevalence) and abstracted data for meta-analyses. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach was used to rate certainty of evidence (CoE) for each outcome. Of 1,460 records screened, reviewers identified five RACDT studies (three cluster-randomized controlled trials [cRCTs] and two nonrandomized studies [NRS]) and seven RDA studies (six cRCTs and one NRS); three cRCTs comparing RDA to RACDT were included in both reviews. Compared with RDA, RACDT was associated with nonsignificantly higher parasite prevalence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85; 95% CI: 0.96-3.57; one study) and malaria incidence (rate ratio [RR] = 1.30; 95% CI: 0.94-1.79; three studies), both very low CoE. Compared with control or RACDT, RDA was associated with non-significantly lower parasite incidence (RR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.36-1.47; 2 studies, moderate CoE), prevalence (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.52-1.17; 4 studies, low CoE), and malaria incidence (RR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.82-1.05; six studies, moderate CoE). Evidence for reactive strategies' impact on malaria transmission is limited, especially for RACDT, but suggests RDA might be more effective.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria , Humanos , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Antimaláricos/administración & dosificación , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/transmisión , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Incidencia , PrevalenciaRESUMEN
As countries approach malaria elimination, imported cases of malaria make up a larger proportion of all cases and may drive malaria transmission. Targeted test and treat (TTaT) at points of entry (POEs) is a strategy that aims to reduce the number of imported infections in countries approaching elimination by testing and treating individuals at border crossings. No evidence has been systematically collected and evaluated to assess the impact and operational feasibility of this strategy. This systematic review gathered empirical evidence on the effectiveness of the intervention, contextual factors, and results of modeling studies that estimate its potential impact. Bibliographic searches were conducted in March 2021 and updated in April 2022, and a total of 1,569 articles were identified. All study designs were included, but none of them were intervention studies set up to measure the impact of TTaT at POEs. Seven nonrandomized observational studies were eligible for assessment of outcome data in terms of describing the extent of positive cases among people crossing borders. Also included in the review were three studies for assessment of acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and three for assessment of mathematical modeling. The positivity rates reported in the seven studies ranged between 0.0% and 70.0%, which may be attributable to the different settings and operational feasibility. Overall, there is limited evidence of the effect of TTaT at POEs on the prevalence of infection, and the certainty of the evidence was very low owing to critical risk of bias, serious inconsistency, and serious indirectness.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Humanos , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Transmisibles Importadas/prevención & control , Enfermedades Transmisibles Importadas/epidemiología , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , ViajeRESUMEN
In the final stages of malaria elimination, interventions to reduce malaria transmission are often centered around a confirmed case of malaria, as cases tend to cluster together at very low levels of transmission. The WHO commissioned a systematic review of the literature and synthesis of evidence for reactive indoor residual spraying (IRS) to develop official recommendations for countries. Several electronic databases were searched in November 2020. A total of 455 records were identified and screened; 20 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Two cluster-randomized trials met the inclusion criteria for epidemiological outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using standard criteria. Because one study was a superiority trial in which the comparator included reactive case detection or mass drug administration and the other was a noninferiority trial in which the comparator was proactive, focal IRS, results could not be pooled. In the superiority trial, reactive IRS reduced malaria prevalence by 68% (risk ratio [RR]: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.13-0.80; certainty of evidence: HIGH) compared with no reactive IRS. No difference was observed for clinical malaria (RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.38-1.11; certainty of evidence: MODERATE). In the noninferiority study, the mean difference in incidence between reactive IRS and proactive IRS was 0.10 additional case per 1,000 person-years, which was within the prespecified noninferiority bound (95% CI: -0.38 to 0.58; certainty of evidence: MODERATE). The evidence indicates that reactive IRS may be a cost-effective tool for the prevention of malaria in elimination settings. As only two cluster-randomized controlled trials from sub-Saharan Africa were found, additional high-quality studies should be encouraged.
Asunto(s)
Insecticidas , Malaria , Control de Mosquitos , Humanos , Control de Mosquitos/métodos , Insecticidas/administración & dosificación , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/transmisión , Malaria/epidemiología , Animales , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
Several temperate countries have used mass chemoprevention interventions with medicines of the 8-aminoquinoline class that prevent relapses from Plasmodium vivax before peak transmission to reduce transmission of malaria. The WHO commissioned a systematic review of the literature and evidence synthesis to inform development of recommendations regarding this intervention referred to as "mass relapse prevention" (MRP). Electronic databases were searched, 866 articles screened, and 25 assessed for eligibility after a full-text review. Two nonrandomized studies were included, one from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (391,357 participants) and the second from the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic (â¼30,000 participants). The two studies administered a single round of primaquine over 14 days (0.25 mg/kg per day). From 1 to 3 months after the treatment round, the incidence of P. vivax infections was significantly lower in areas that received MRP than those that did not (pooled rate ratio [RR] 0.08, 95% CI 0.07-0.08). At 4 to 12 months after the treatment round, the prevalence of P. vivax infection was significantly lower in MRP villages than non-MRP villages (odds ratio 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.52). No severe adverse events were found. The certainty of evidence for all outcomes was very low and no conclusions as to the effectiveness or safety of MRP could be drawn. However, it is not likely that this intervention will be needed in the future as most temperate countries where P. vivax is transmitted are nearing or have already eliminated malaria.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria Vivax , Plasmodium vivax , Humanos , Malaria Vivax/prevención & control , Malaria Vivax/transmisión , Malaria Vivax/epidemiología , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Prevención Secundaria/métodos , Primaquina/uso terapéutico , RecurrenciaRESUMEN
The basis for an evidence-based recommendation is a well-conducted systematic review that synthesizes the primary literature relevant to the policy or program question of interest. In 2020, the WHO commissioned 10 systematic reviews of potential interventions in elimination or post-elimination settings to summarize their impact on malaria transmission. This paper describes the general methods used to conduct this series of systematic reviews and notes where individual reviews diverged from the common methodology. The paper also presents lessons learned from conducting the systematic reviews to make similar future efforts more efficient, standardized, and streamlined.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Malaria/prevención & control , Malaria/transmisión , Malaria/epidemiología , Humanos , Erradicación de la Enfermedad/métodosRESUMEN
The WHO recommends that all affected countries work toward the elimination of malaria, even those still experiencing a high burden of disease. However, malaria programs in the final phase of elimination or those working to prevent re-establishment of transmission after elimination could benefit from specific evidence-based recommendations for these settings as part of comprehensive and quality-controlled malaria guidelines. The WHO convened an external guideline development group to formulate recommendations for interventions to reduce or prevent malaria transmission in areas with very low- to low-transmission levels and those that have eliminated malaria. In addition, several interventions that could be deployed in higher burden areas to accelerate elimination, such as mass drug administration, were reviewed. Systematic reviews were conducted that synthesized and evaluated evidence for the benefits and harms of public health interventions and summarized critical contextual factors from a health systems perspective. A total of 12 recommendations were developed, with five related to mass interventions that could be deployed at higher transmission levels and seven that would be most appropriate for programs in areas close to elimination or those working to prevent re-establishment of transmission. Four chemoprevention, two active case detection, and one vector control interventions were positively recommended, whereas two chemoprevention and three active case detection interventions were not recommended by the WHO. None of the recommendations were classified as strong given the limited and low-quality evidence base. Approaches to conducting higher quality research in very low- to low-transmission settings to improve the strength of WHO recommendations are discussed.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria , Humanos , Antimaláricos/uso terapéutico , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración Masiva de Medicamentos , Quimioprevención , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
Reported incidence of the zoonotic malaria Plasmodium knowlesi has markedly increased across Southeast Asia and threatens malaria elimination. Nonzoonotic transmission of P. knowlesi has been experimentally demonstrated, but it remains unknown whether nonzoonotic transmission is contributing to increases in P. knowlesi cases. Here, we adapt model-based inference methods to estimate RC, individual case reproductive numbers, for P. knowlesi, P. falciparum and P. vivax human cases in Malaysia from 2012-2020 (n = 32,635). Best fitting models for P. knowlesi showed subcritical transmission (RC < 1) consistent with a large reservoir of unobserved infection sources, indicating P. knowlesi remains a primarily zoonotic infection. In contrast, sustained transmission (RC > 1) was estimated historically for P. falciparum and P. vivax, with declines in RC estimates observed over time consistent with local elimination. Together, this suggests sustained nonzoonotic P. knowlesi transmission is highly unlikely and that new approaches are urgently needed to control spillover risks.
Asunto(s)
Malaria Falciparum , Malaria Vivax , Malaria , Plasmodium knowlesi , Humanos , Malasia/epidemiología , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria Falciparum/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Detection of malaria parasitaemia in samples that are negative by rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) requires resource-intensive molecular tools. While pooled testing using a two-step strategy provides a cost-saving alternative to the gold standard of individual sample testing, statistical adjustments are needed to improve accuracy of prevalence estimates for a single step pooled testing strategy. METHODS: A random sample of 4670 malaria RDT negative dried blood spot samples were selected from a mass testing and treatment trial in Asembo, Gem, and Karemo, western Kenya. Samples were tested for malaria individually and in pools of five, 934 pools, by one-step quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Maximum likelihood approaches were used to estimate subpatent parasitaemia (RDT-negative, qPCR-positive) prevalence by pooling, assuming poolwise sensitivity and specificity was either 100% (strategy A) or imperfect (strategy B). To improve and illustrate the practicality of this estimation approach, a validation study was constructed from pools allocated at random into main (734 pools) and validation (200 pools) subsets. Prevalence was estimated using strategies A and B and an inverse-variance weighted estimator and estimates were weighted to account for differential sampling rates by area. RESULTS: The prevalence of subpatent parasitaemia was 14.5% (95% CI 13.6-15.3%) by individual qPCR, 9.5% (95% CI (8.5-10.5%) by strategy A, and 13.9% (95% CI 12.6-15.2%) by strategy B. In the validation study, the prevalence by individual qPCR was 13.5% (95% CI 12.4-14.7%) in the main subset, 8.9% (95% CI 7.9-9.9%) by strategy A, 11.4% (95% CI 9.9-12.9%) by strategy B, and 12.8% (95% CI 11.2-14.3%) using inverse-variance weighted estimator from poolwise validation. Pooling, including a 20% validation subset, reduced costs by 52% compared to individual testing. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to individual testing, a one-step pooled testing strategy with an internal validation subset can provide accurate prevalence estimates of PCR-positivity among RDT-negatives at a lower cost.
Asunto(s)
Malaria Falciparum , Malaria , Humanos , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina , Kenia/epidemiología , Funciones de Verosimilitud , Malaria/diagnóstico , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria Falciparum/epidemiología , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular , Parasitemia/diagnóstico , Parasitemia/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Ensayos Clínicos como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The zoonotic malaria parasite Plasmodium knowlesi has emerged across Southeast Asia and is now the main cause of malaria in humans in Malaysia. A critical priority for P. knowlesi surveillance and control is understanding whether transmission is entirely zoonotic or is also occurring through human-mosquito-human transmission. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate existing evidence which refutes or supports the occurrence of sustained human-mosquito-human transmission of P. knowlesi. Possible evidence categories and study types which would support or refute non-zoonotic transmission were identified and ranked. A literature search was conducted on Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science using a broad search strategy to identify any possible published literature. Results were synthesized using the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) framework, using vote counting to combine the evidence within specific categories. RESULTS: Of an initial 7,299 studies screened, 131 studies were included within this review: 87 studies of P. knowlesi prevalence in humans, 14 studies in non-human primates, 13 studies in mosquitoes, and 29 studies with direct evidence refuting or supporting non-zoonotic transmission. Overall, the evidence showed that human-mosquito-human transmission is biologically possible, but there is limited evidence of widespread occurrence in endemic areas. Specific areas of research were identified that require further attention, notably quantitative analyses of potential transmission dynamics, epidemiological and entomological surveys, and ecological studies into the sylvatic cycle of the disease. CONCLUSION: There are key questions about P. knowlesi that remain within the areas of research that require more attention. These questions have significant implications for malaria elimination and eradication programs. This paper considers limited but varied research and provides a methodological framework for assessing the likelihood of different transmission patterns for emerging zoonotic diseases.
Asunto(s)
Culicidae , Malaria , Plasmodium knowlesi , Animales , Asia Sudoriental/epidemiología , Humanos , Malaria/epidemiología , Zoonosis/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Malaria causes more than 200 million cases of illness and 400,000 deaths each year across 90 countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) set a goal for 35 countries to eliminate malaria by 2030, with an intermediate milestone of 10 countries by 2020. In 2017, the WHO established the Elimination-2020 (E-2020) initiative to help countries achieve their malaria elimination goals and included 21 countries with the potential to eliminate malaria by 2020. METHODS: Across its three levels of activity (country, region and global), the WHO developed normative and implementation guidance on strategies and activities to eliminate malaria; provided technical support and subnational operational assistance; convened national malaria programme managers at three global meetings to share innovations and best practices; advised countries on strengthening their strategy to prevent re-establishment and preparing for WHO malaria certification; and contributed to maintaining momentum towards elimination through periodic evaluations, monitoring and oversight of progress in the E-2020 countries. Changes in the number of indigenous cases in E-2020 countries between 2016 and 2020 are reported, along with the number of countries that eliminated malaria and received WHO certification. RESULTS: The median number of indigenous cases in the E-2020 countries declined from 165.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 14.25-563.75) in 2016 to 78 (IQR 0-356) in 2020; 12 (57%) countries reported reductions in indigenous cases over that period, of which 7 (33%) interrupted malaria transmission and maintained a malaria-free status through 2020 and 4 (19%) were certified malaria-free by the WHO. Two countries experienced outbreaks of malaria in 2020 and 2021 attributed, in part, to the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Although the E-2020 countries contributed to the achievement of the 2020 global elimination milestone, the initiative highlights the difficulties countries face to interrupt malaria transmission, even when numbers of cases are very low. The 2025 global elimination milestone is now approaching, and the lessons learned, experience gained, and updated guidance developed during the E-2020 initiative will help serve the countries seeking to eliminate malaria by 2025.
Asunto(s)
Erradicación de la Enfermedad , Salud Global , Malaria/epidemiología , Malaria/prevención & control , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Enfermedades Endémicas/prevención & control , Guías como Asunto , Humanos , Malaria/transmisión , Vigilancia de la PoblaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating mass drug administration (MDA) in malarious areas have shown reductions in malaria immediately following the intervention. However, these effects vary by endemicity and are not sustained. Since the 2013 version of this Cochrane Review on this topic, additional studies have been published. OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives To assess the sustained effect of MDA with antimalarial drugs on: - the reduction in malaria transmission in moderate- to high-transmission settings; - the interruption of transmission in very low- to low-transmission settings. Secondary objective To summarize the risk of drug-associated adverse effects following MDA. SEARCH METHODS: We searched several trial registries, citation databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists for relevant articles up to 11 February 2021. We also communicated with researchers to identify additional published and unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies comparing MDA to no MDA with balanced co-interventions across study arms and at least two geographically distinct sites per study arm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and extracted data. We calculated relative risk (RR) and rate ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare prevalence and incidence, respectively, in MDA compared to no-MDA groups. We stratified analyses by malaria transmission and by malaria species. For cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), we adjusted standard errors using the intracluster correlation coefficient. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. For non-randomized controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies, we summarized the data using difference-in-differences (DiD) analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies met our criteria for inclusion. Ten were cRCTs and three were CBAs. Cluster-randomized controlled trials Moderate- to high-endemicity areas (prevalence ≥ 10%) We included data from two studies conducted in The Gambia and Zambia. At one to three months after MDA, the Plasmodium falciparum (hereafter, P falciparum) parasitaemia prevalence estimates may be higher compared to control but the CIs included no effect (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.58 to 5.36; Zambia study; low-certainty evidence); parasitaemia incidence was probably lower (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.92; The Gambia study; moderate-certainty evidence); and confirmed malaria illness incidence may be substantially lower, but the CIs included no effect (rate ratio 0.41, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.42; Zambia study; low-certainty evidence). At four to six months after MDA, MDA showed little or no effect on P falciparum parasitaemia prevalence (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.56; The Gambia study; moderate-certainty evidence) and, no persisting effect was demonstrated with parasitaemia incidence (rate ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.50; The Gambia study). Very low- to low-endemicity areas (prevalence < 10%) Seven studies from Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar (two studies), Vietnam, Zambia, and Zanzibar evaluated the effects of multiple rounds of MDA on P falciparum. Immediately following MDA (less than one month after MDA), parasitaemia prevalence was reduced (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.52; one study; low-certainty evidence). At one to three months after MDA, there was a reduction in both parasitaemia incidence (rate ratio 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.55; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence) and prevalence (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). For confirmed malaria incidence, absolute rates were low, and it is uncertain whether MDA had an effect on this outcome (rate ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.73; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). For P falciparum prevalence, the relative differences declined over time, from RR 0.63 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.12; 4 studies) at four to six months after MDA, to RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.36; 5 studies) at 7 to 12 months after MDA. Longer-term prevalence estimates showed overall low absolute risks, and relative effect estimates of the effect of MDA on prevalence varied from RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.20 to 3.34) at 13 to 18 months after MDA, to RR 1.25 (95% CI 0.25 to 6.31) at 31 to 36 months after MDA in one study. Five studies from Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar (2 studies), and Vietnam evaluated the effect of MDA on Plasmodium vivax (hereafter, P vivax). One month following MDA, P vivax prevalence was lower (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). At one to three months after MDA, there was a reduction in P vivax prevalence (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.24; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence). The immediate reduction on P vivax prevalence was not sustained over time, from RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.95; 4 studies) at four to six months after MDA, to RR 1.12 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.32; 5 studies) at 7 to 12 months after MDA. One of the studies in Myanmar provided estimates of longer-term effects, where overall absolute risks were low, ranging from RR 0.81 (95% CI 0.44 to 1.48) at 13 to 18 months after MDA, to RR 1.20 (95% CI 0.44 to 3.29) at 31 to 36 months after MDA. Non-randomized studies Three CBA studies were conducted in moderate- to high-transmission areas in Burkina Faso, Kenya, and Nigeria. There was a reduction in P falciparum parasitaemia prevalence in MDA groups compared to control groups during MDA (DiD range: -15.8 to -61.4 percentage points), but the effect varied at one to three months after MDA (DiD range: 14.9 to -41.1 percentage points). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In moderate- to high-transmission settings, no studies reported important effects on P falciparum parasitaemia prevalence within six months after MDA. In very low- to low-transmission settings, parasitaemia prevalence and incidence were reduced initially for up to three months for both P falciparum and P vivax; longer-term data did not demonstrate an effect after four months, but absolute risks in both intervention and control groups were low. No studies provided evidence of interruption of malaria transmission.
Asunto(s)
Antimaláricos , Malaria Falciparum , Malaria , Antimaláricos/efectos adversos , Humanos , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Malaria/epidemiología , Administración Masiva de Medicamentos , Parasitemia/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Global gains toward malaria elimination have been heterogeneous and have recently stalled. Interventions targeting afebrile malaria infections may be needed to address residual transmission. We studied the efficacy of repeated rounds of community-based mass testing and treatment (MTaT) on malaria infection prevalence in western Kenya. METHODS: Twenty clusters were randomly assigned to 3 rounds of MTaT per year for 2 years or control (standard of care for testing and treatment at public health facilities along with government-sponsored mass long-lasting insecticidal net [LLIN] distributions). During rounds, community health volunteers visited all households in intervention clusters and tested all consenting individuals with a rapid diagnostic test. Those positive were treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. Cross-sectional community infection prevalence surveys were performed in both study arms at baseline and each year after 3 rounds of MTaT. The primary outcome was the effect size of MTaT on parasite prevalence by microscopy between arms by year, adjusted for age, reported LLIN use, enhanced vegetative index, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: Demographic and behavioral characteristics, including LLIN usage, were similar between arms at each survey. MTaT coverage across the 3 annual rounds ranged between 75.0% and 77.5% in year 1, and between 81.9% and 94.3% in year 2. The adjusted effect size of MTaT on the prevalence of parasitemia between arms was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], .79-1.08) and 0.92 (95% CI, .76-1.10) after year 1 and year 2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MTaT performed 3 times per year over 2 years did not reduce malaria parasite prevalence in this high-transmission area. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02987270.
Asunto(s)
Malaria , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Kenia/epidemiología , Malaria/diagnóstico , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Malaria/epidemiología , Parasitemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Parasitemia/epidemiología , PrevalenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We compared cord blood antibody titers in unvaccinated pregnant women to those vaccinated with seasonal influenza vaccine during the 2nd and the 3rd trimesters. METHODS: Pregnant women had cord blood collected at delivery for hemagglutination inhibition assay against vaccine reference viruses: A/California/07/2009 (H1N1)pdm09, A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 (H3N2), and B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage). Geometric mean titer (GMT) ratios were calculated comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated pregnant women, and women vaccinated in the 2nd and the 3rd trimesters. Proportions of women achieving defined titers were compared using the χ2 test. RESULTS: Of 307 women, 190 (62%) were unvaccinated. Fifty and 67 were vaccinated during the 2nd and the 3rd trimesters, respectively. Median enrollment age was 29 years (interquartile range 24-34). Sixteen (5%) women had pre-existing conditions, but none were immunocompromised. GMT ratios comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated women were 5.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.06-6.96) for influenza A/California, 5.39 (95% CI 4.18-6.08) for influenza A/Switzerland, and 5.05 (95% CI 4.43-5.85) for influenza B/Phuket. Similarly, the GMT ratios comparing the 3rd and the 2nd trimester vaccinated women were 2.90 (95% CI 2.54-3.39), 2.82 (95% CI 2.56-3.13), and 2.83 (95% CI 2.56-3.14), respectively. The proportions of women with defined titers for the three vaccine reference viruses did not differ between 2nd and 3rd trimester vaccinated women (titers ≥40: 68-92% versus 70-93%; ≥110: 32% versus 33-63%; and ≥330: 4-10% versus 3-21%). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women vaccinated against influenza had more placental transfer of influenza antibodies to their infants than unvaccinated women. Placental transfer of antibodies was higher among those vaccinated in the 3rd trimester than in the 2nd trimester. There was no difference in the proportions of women achieving antibody titers corresponding to protection against influenza in children. Findings support the current World Health Organization's recommendation that pregnant women may be vaccinated in either 2nd or 3rd trimester of pregnancy.