A call to strengthen the global strategy against schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis: the time is now.

In 2001, the World Health Assembly (WHA) passed the landmark WHA 54.19 resolution for global scale-up of mass administration of anthelmintic drugs for morbidity control of schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis, which affect more than 1·5 billion of the world's poorest people. Since then, more than a decade of research and experience has yielded crucial knowledge on the control and elimination of these helminthiases. However, the global strategy has remained largely unchanged since the original 2001 WHA resolution and associated WHO guidelines on preventive chemotherapy. In this Personal View, we highlight recent advances that, taken together, support a call to revise the global strategy and guidelines for preventive chemotherapy and complementary interventions against schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis. These advances include the development of guidance that is specific to goals of morbidity control and elimination of transmission. We quantify the result of forgoing this opportunity by computing the yearly disease burden, mortality, and lost economic productivity associated with maintaining the status quo. Without change, we estimate that the population of sub-Saharan Africa will probably lose 2·3 million disability-adjusted life-years and US$3·5 billion of economic productivity every year, which is comparable to recent acute epidemics, including the 2014 Ebola and 2015 Zika epidemics. We propose that the time is now to strengthen the global strategy to address the substantial disease burden of schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis.

Assessment of global guidelines for preventive chemotherapy against schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis: a cost-effectiveness modelling study.

BACKGROUND: WHO guidelines recommend annual treatment for schistosomiasis or soil-transmitted helminthiasis when prevalence in school-aged children is at or above a threshold of 50% and 20%, respectively. Separate treatment guidelines are used for these two helminthiases, and integrated community-wide treatment is not recommended. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of changing prevalence thresholds and treatment guidelines under an integrated delivery framework. METHODS: We developed a dynamic, age-structured transmission and cost-effectiveness model that simulates integrated preventive chemotherapy programmes against schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis. We assessed a 5-year treatment programme with praziquantel (40 mg/kg per treatment) against schistosomiasis and albendazole (400 mg per treatment) against soil-transmitted helminthiasis at 75% coverage. We defined strategies as highly cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was less than the World Bank classification for a low-income country (gross domestic product of US$1045 per capita). We calculated the prevalence thresholds for cost-effective preventive chemotherapy of various strategies, and estimated treatment needs for sub-Saharan Africa. FINDINGS: Annual preventive chemotherapy against schistosomiasis was highly cost-effective in treatment of school-aged children at a prevalence threshold of 5% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 1·7-5·2; current guidelines recommend treatment at 50% prevalence) and for community-wide treatment at a prevalence of 15% (7·3-18·5; current recommendation is unclear, some community treatment recommended at 50% prevalence). Annual preventive chemotherapy against soil-transmitted helminthiasis was highly cost-effective in treatment of school-aged children at a prevalence of 20% (95% UI 5·4-30·5; current guidelines recommend treatment at 20% prevalence) and the entire community at 60% (35·3-85·1; no guidelines available). When both helminthiases were co-endemic, prevalence thresholds using integrated delivery were lower. Using this revised treatment framework, we estimated that treatment needs would be six times higher than WHO guidelines for praziquantel and two times higher for albendazole. An additional 21·3% (95% Bayesian credible interval 20·4-22·2) of the population changed from receiving non-integrated treatment under WHO guidelines to integrated treatment (both praziquantel and albendazole). Country-specific economic differences resulted in heterogeneity around these prevalence thresholds. INTERPRETATION: Annual preventive chemotherapy programmes against schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis are likely to be highly cost-effective at prevalences lower than WHO recommendations. These findings support substantial treatment scale-up, community-wide coverage, integrated treatment in co-endemic settings that yield substantial cost synergies, and country-specific treatment guidelines. FUNDING: Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, Mount Sinai Hospital-University Health Network AMO Innovation Fund, and Stanford University Medical Scholars Programme.

Comparison of community-wide, integrated mass drug administration strategies for schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis: a cost-effectiveness modelling study.

BACKGROUND: More than 1·5 billion people are affected by schistosomiasis or soil-transmitted helminthiasis. WHO's recommendations for mass drug administration (MDA) against these parasitic infections emphasise treatment of school-aged children, using separate treatment guidelines for these two helminthiases groups. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of expanding integrated MDA to the entire community in four settings in Côte d'Ivoire. METHODS: We extended previously published, dynamic, age-structured models of helminthiases transmission to simulate costs and disability averted with integrated MDA (of praziquantel and albendazole) for schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis. We calibrated the model to data for prevalence and intensity of species-specific helminth infection from surveys undertaken in four communities in Côte d'Ivoire between March, 1997, and September, 2010. We simulated a 15-year treatment programme with 75% coverage in only school-aged children; school-aged children and preschool-aged children; adults; and the entire community. Treatment costs were estimated at US$0·74 for school-aged children and $1·74 for preschool-aged children and adults. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated in 2014 US dollars per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted. FINDINGS: Expanded community-wide treatment was highly cost effective compared with treatment of only school-aged children (ICER $167 per DALY averted) and WHO guidelines (ICER $127 per DALY averted), and remained highly cost effective even if treatment costs for preschool-aged children and adults were ten times greater than those for school-aged children. Community-wide treatment remained highly cost effective even when elimination of helminth infections was not achieved. These findings were robust across the four diverse communities in Côte d'Ivoire, only one of which would have received annual MDA for both schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis under the latest WHO guidelines. Treatment every 6 months was also highly cost effective in three out of four communities. INTERPRETATION: Integrated, community-wide MDA programmes for schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis can be highly cost effective, even in communities with low disease burden in any helminth group. These results support an urgent need to re-evaluate current global guidelines for helminthiases control programmes to include community-wide treatment, increased treatment frequency, and consideration for lowered prevalence thresholds for integrated treatment. FUNDING: Stanford University Medical Scholars Programme, Mount Sinai Hospital-University Health Network AMO Innovation Fund.

The cost-effectiveness of routine tuberculosis screening with Xpert MTB/RIF prior to initiation of antiretroviral therapy: a model-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: In settings with high tuberculosis (TB) prevalence, 15-30% of HIV-infected individuals initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) have undiagnosed TB. Such patients are usually screened by symptoms and sputum smear, which have poor sensitivity. OBJECTIVE: To project the clinical and economic outcomes of using Xpert MTB/RIF(Xpert), a rapid TB/rifampicin-resistance diagnostic, to screen individuals initiating ART. DESIGN: We used a microsimulation model to evaluate the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of alternative TB screening modalities - in all patients or only symptomatic patients - for hypothetical cohorts of individuals initiating ART in South Africa (mean CD4 cell count = 171 cells/µl; TB prevalence 22%). We simulated no active screening and four diagnostic strategies, smear microscopy (sensitivity 23%); smear and culture (sensitivity, 100%); one Xpert sample (sensitivity in smear-negative TB: 43%); two Xpert samples (sensitivity in smear-negative TB: 62%). Outcomes included projected life expectancy, lifetime costs (2010 US$), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Strategies with ICERs less than $7100 (South African gross domestic product per capita) were considered very cost-effective. RESULTS: Compared with no screening, life expectancy in TB-infected patients increased by 1.6 months using smear in symptomatic patients and by 6.6 months with two Xpert samples in all patients. At 22% TB prevalence, the ICER of smear for all patients was $2800 per year of life saved (YLS), and of Xpert (two samples) for all patients was $5100/YLS. Strategies involving one Xpert sample or symptom screening were less efficient. CONCLUSION: Model-based analysis suggests that screening all individuals initiating ART in South Africa with two Xpert samples is very cost-effective.