Search

Background: Mass azithromycin distributions have been shown to reduce mortality in preschool children, although the factors mediating this mortality reduction are not clear. This study was performed to determine whether mass distribution of azithromycin, which has modest antimalarial activity, reduces the community burden of malaria.Methods and Findings: In a cluster-randomized trial conducted from 23 November 2014 until 31 July 2017, 30 rural communities in Niger were randomized to 2 years of biannual mass distributions of either azithromycin (20 mg/kg oral suspension) or placebo to children aged 1 to 59 months. Participants, field staff, and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary malaria outcome was the community prevalence of parasitemia on thick blood smear, assessed in a random sample of children from each community at study visits 12 and 24 months after randomization. Analyses were performed in an intention-to-treat fashion. At the baseline visit, a total of 1,695 children were enumerated in the 15 azithromycin communities, and 3,029 children were enumerated in the 15 placebo communities. No communities were lost to follow-up. The mean prevalence of malaria parasitemia at baseline was 8.9% (95% CI 5.1%-15.7%; 52 of 552 children across all communities) in the azithromycin-treated group and 6.7% (95% CI 4.0%-12.6%; 36 of 542 children across all communities) in the placebo-treated group. In the prespecified primary analysis, parasitemia was lower in the azithromycin-treated group at month 12 (mean prevalence 8.8%, 95% CI 5.1%-14.3%; 51 of 551 children across all communities) and month 24 (mean 3.5%, 95% CI 1.9%-5.5%; 21 of 567 children across all communities) than it was in the placebo-treated group at month 12 (mean 15.3%, 95% CI 10.8%-20.6%; 81 of 548 children across all communities) and month 24 (mean 4.8%, 95% CI 3.3%-6.4%; 28 of 592 children across all communities) (P = 0.02). Communities treated with azithromycin had approximately half the odds of parasitemia compared to those treated with placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0.54, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.97). Parasite density was lower in the azithromycin group than the placebo group at 12 and 24 months (square root-transformed outcome; density estimates were 7,540 parasites/μl lower [95% CI -350 to -12,550 parasites/μl; P = 0.02] at a mean parasite density of 17,000, as was observed in the placebo arm). No significant difference in hemoglobin was observed between the 2 treatment groups at 12 and 24 months (mean 0.34 g/dL higher in the azithromycin arm, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.75 g/dL; P = 0.10). No serious adverse events were reported in either group, and among children aged 1 to 5 months, the most commonly reported nonserious adverse events (i.e., diarrhea, vomiting, and rash) were less common in the azithromycin-treated communities. Limitations of the trial include the timing of the treatments and monitoring visits, both of which took place before the peak malaria season, as well as the uncertain generalizability to areas with different malaria transmission dynamics.Conclusions: Mass azithromycin distributions were associated with a reduced prevalence of malaria parasitemia in this trial, suggesting one possible mechanism for the mortality benefit observed with this intervention.Trial Registration: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02048007). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Malaria control activities can have a disproportionately greater impact on Plasmodium falciparum than on P. vivax in areas where both species are coendemic. We investigated temporal trends in malaria-related morbidity and mortality in Papua, Indonesia, before and after introduction of a universal, artemisinin-based antimalarial treatment strategy for all Plasmodium species.Methods and Findings: A prospective, district-wide malariometric surveillance system was established in April 2004 to record all cases of malaria at community clinics and the regional hospital and maintained until December 2013. In March 2006, antimalarial treatment policy was changed to artemisinin combination therapy for uncomplicated malaria and intravenous artesunate for severe malaria due to any Plasmodium species. Over the study period, a total of 418,238 patients presented to the surveillance facilities with malaria. The proportion of patients with malaria requiring admission to hospital fell from 26.9% (7,745/28,789) in the pre-policy change period (April 2004 to March 2006) to 14.0% (4,786/34,117) in the late transition period (April 2008 to December 2009), a difference of -12.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] -13.5% to -12.2%). There was a significant fall in the mortality of patients presenting to the hospital with P. falciparum malaria (0.53% [100/18,965] versus 0.32% [57/17,691]; difference = -0.21% [95% CI -0.34 to -0.07]) but not in patients with P. vivax malaria (0.28% [21/7,545] versus 0.23% [28/12,397]; difference = -0.05% [95% CI -0.20 to 0.09]). Between the same periods, the overall proportion of malaria due to P. vivax rose from 44.1% (30,444/69,098) to 53.3% (29,934/56,125) in the community clinics and from 32.4% (9,325/28,789) to 44.1% (15,035/34,117) at the hospital. After controlling for population growth and changes in treatment-seeking behaviour, the incidence of P. falciparum malaria fell from 511 to 249 per 1,000 person-years (py) (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.49 [95% CI 0.48-0.49]), whereas the incidence of P. vivax malaria fell from 331 to 239 per 1,000 py (IRR = 0.72 [95% CI 0.71-0.73]). The main limitations of our study were possible confounding from changes in healthcare provision, a growing population, and significant shifts in treatment-seeking behaviour following implementation of a new antimalarial policy.Conclusions: In this area with high levels of antimalarial drug resistance, adoption of a universal policy of efficacious artemisinin-based therapy for malaria infections due to any Plasmodium species was associated with a significant reduction in total malaria-attributable morbidity and mortality. The burden of P. falciparum malaria was reduced to a greater extent than that of P. vivax malaria. In coendemic regions, the timely elimination of malaria will require that safe and effective radical cure of both the blood and liver stages of the parasite is widely available for all patients at risk of malaria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Basic science holds enormous power for revealing the biological mechanisms of disease and, in turn, paving the way toward new, effective interventions. Recognizing this power, the 2011 Research Agenda for Malaria Eradication included key priorities in fundamental research that, if attained, could help accelerate progress toward disease elimination and eradication. The Malaria Eradication Research Agenda (malERA) Consultative Panel on Basic Science and Enabling Technologies reviewed the progress, continuing challenges, and major opportunities for future research. The recommendations come from a literature of published and unpublished materials and the deliberations of the malERA Refresh Consultative Panel. These areas span multiple aspects of the Plasmodium life cycle in both the human host and the Anopheles vector and include critical, unanswered questions about parasite transmission, human infection in the liver, asexual-stage biology, and malaria persistence. We believe an integrated approach encompassing human immunology, parasitology, and entomology, and harnessing new and emerging biomedical technologies offers the best path toward addressing these questions and, ultimately, lowering the worldwide burden of malaria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Achieving a malaria-free world presents exciting scientific challenges as well as overwhelming health, equity, and economic benefits. WHO and countries are setting ambitious goals for reducing the burden and eliminating malaria through the "Global Technical Strategy" and 21 countries are aiming to eliminate malaria by 2020. The commitment to achieve these targets should be celebrated. However, the need for innovation to achieve these goals, sustain elimination, and free the world of malaria is greater than ever. Over 180 experts across multiple disciplines are engaged in the Malaria Eradication Research Agenda (malERA) Refresh process to address problems that need to be solved. The result is a research and development agenda to accelerate malaria elimination and, in the longer term, transform the malaria community's ability to eradicate it globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resistance to first-line treatments for Plasmodium falciparum malaria and the insecticides used for Anopheles vector control are threatening malaria elimination efforts. Suboptimal responses to drugs and insecticides are both spreading geographically and emerging independently and are being seen at increasing intensities. Whilst resistance is unavoidable, its effects can be mitigated through resistance management practices, such as exposing the parasite or vector to more than one selective agent. Resistance contributed to the failure of the 20th century Global Malaria Eradication Programme, and yet the global response to this issue continues to be slow and poorly coordinated-too often, too little, too late. The Malaria Eradication Research Agenda (malERA) Refresh process convened a panel on resistance of both insecticides and antimalarial drugs. This paper outlines developments in the field over the past 5 years, highlights gaps in knowledge, and proposes a research agenda focused on managing resistance. A deeper understanding of the complex biological processes involved and how resistance is selected is needed, together with evidence of its public health impact. Resistance management will require improved use of entomological and parasitological data in decision making, and optimisation of the useful life of new and existing products through careful implementation, combination, and evaluation. A proactive, collaborative approach is needed from basic science and the development of new tools to programme and policy interventions that will ensure that the armamentarium of drugs and insecticides is sufficient to deal with the challenges of malaria control and its elimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the turn of the century, a remarkable expansion has been achieved in the range and effectiveness of products and strategies available to prevent, treat, and control malaria, including advances in diagnostics, drugs, vaccines, and vector control. These advances have once again put malaria elimination on the agenda. However, it is clear that even with the means available today, malaria control and elimination pose a formidable challenge in many settings. Thus, currently available resources must be used more effectively, and new products and approaches likely to achieve these goals must be developed. This paper considers tools (both those available and others that may be required) to achieve and maintain malaria elimination. New diagnostics are needed to direct treatment and detect transmission potential; new drugs and vaccines to overcome existing resistance and protect against clinical and severe disease, as well as block transmission and prevent relapses; and new vector control measures to overcome insecticide resistance and more powerfully interrupt transmission. It is also essential that strategies for combining new and existing approaches are developed for different settings to maximise their longevity and effectiveness in areas with continuing transmission and receptivity. For areas where local elimination has been recently achieved, understanding which measures are needed to maintain elimination is necessary to prevent rebound and the reestablishment of transmission. This becomes increasingly important as more countries move towards elimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper summarises key advances and priorities since the 2011 presentation of the Malaria Eradication Research Agenda (malERA), with a focus on the combinations of intervention tools and strategies for elimination and their evaluation using modelling approaches. With an increasing number of countries embarking on malaria elimination programmes, national and local decisions to select combinations of tools and deployment strategies directed at malaria elimination must address rapidly changing transmission patterns across diverse geographic areas. However, not all of these approaches can be systematically evaluated in the field. Thus, there is potential for modelling to investigate appropriate 'packages' of combined interventions that include various forms of vector control, case management, surveillance, and population-based approaches for different settings, particularly at lower transmission levels. Modelling can help prioritise which intervention packages should be tested in field studies, suggest which intervention package should be used at a particular level or stratum of transmission intensity, estimate the risk of resurgence when scaling down specific interventions after local transmission is interrupted, and evaluate the risk and impact of parasite drug resistance and vector insecticide resistance. However, modelling intervention package deployment against a heterogeneous transmission background is a challenge. Further validation of malaria models should be pursued through an iterative process, whereby field data collected with the deployment of intervention packages is used to refine models and make them progressively more relevant for assessing and predicting elimination outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Artemisinin resistance observed in Southeast Asia threatens the continued use of artemisinin-based combination therapy in endemic countries. Additionally, the diversity of chemical mode of action in the global portfolio of marketed antimalarials is extremely limited. Addressing the urgent need for the development of new antimalarials, a chemical class of potent antimalarial compounds with a novel mode of action was recently identified. Herein, the preclinical characterization of one of these compounds, ACT-451840, conducted in partnership with academic and industrial groups is presented.Method and Findings: The properties of ACT-451840 are described, including its spectrum of activities against multiple life cycle stages of the human malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum (asexual and sexual) and Plasmodium vivax (asexual) as well as oral in vivo efficacies in two murine malaria models that permit infection with the human and the rodent parasites P. falciparum and Plasmodium berghei, respectively. In vitro, ACT-451840 showed a 50% inhibition concentration of 0.4 nM (standard deviation [SD]: ± 0.0 nM) against the drug-sensitive P. falciparum NF54 strain. The 90% effective doses in the in vivo efficacy models were 3.7 mg/kg against P. falciparum (95% confidence interval: 3.3-4.9 mg/kg) and 13 mg/kg against P. berghei (95% confidence interval: 11-16 mg/kg). ACT-451840 potently prevented male gamete formation from the gametocyte stage with a 50% inhibition concentration of 5.89 nM (SD: ± 1.80 nM) and dose-dependently blocked oocyst development in the mosquito with a 50% inhibitory concentration of 30 nM (range: 23-39). The compound's preclinical safety profile is presented and is in line with the published results of the first-in-man study in healthy male participants, in whom ACT-451840 was well tolerated. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modeling was applied using efficacy in the murine models (defined either as antimalarial activity or as survival) in relation to area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC), maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax), and time above a threshold concentration. The determination of the dose-efficacy relationship of ACT-451840 under curative conditions in rodent malaria models allowed prediction of the human efficacious exposure.Conclusion: The dual activity of ACT-451840 against asexual and sexual stages of P. falciparum and the activity on P. vivax have the potential to meet the specific profile of a target compound that could replace the fast-acting artemisinin component and harbor additional gametocytocidal activity and, thereby, transmission-blocking properties. The fast parasite reduction ratio (PRR) and gametocytocidal effect of ACT-451840 were recently also confirmed in a clinical proof-of-concept (POC) study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Africa, most plasmodium infections during pregnancy remain asymptomatic, yet are associated with maternal anemia and low birthweight. WHO recommends intermittent preventive therapy in pregnancy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (IPTp-SP). However, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) efficacy is threatened by high-level parasite resistance. We conducted a trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of scheduled intermittent screening with malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and treatment of RDT-positive women with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) as an alternative strategy to IPTp-SP.Methods and Findings: This was an open-label, two-arm individually randomized superiority trial among HIV-seronegative women at three sites in Malawi with high SP resistance. The intervention consisted of three or four scheduled visits in the second and third trimester, 4 to 6 wk apart. Women in the IPTp-SP arm received SP at each visit. Women in the intermittent screening and treatment in pregnancy with DP (ISTp-DP) arm were screened for malaria at every visit and treated with DP if RDT-positive. The primary outcomes were adverse live birth outcome (composite of small for gestational age, low birthweight [<2,500 g], or preterm birth [<37 wk]) in paucigravidae (first or second pregnancy) and maternal or placental plasmodium infection at delivery in multigravidae (third pregnancy or higher). Analysis was by intention to treat. Between 21 July 2011 and 18 March 2013, 1,873 women were recruited (1,155 paucigravidae and 718 multigravidae). The prevalence of adverse live birth outcome was similar in the ISTp-DP (29.9%) and IPTp-SP (28.8%) arms (risk difference = 1.08% [95% CI -3.25% to 5.41%]; all women: relative risk [RR] = 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], p = 0.625; paucigravidae: RR = 1.10 [95% CI 0.92-1.31], p = 0.282; multigravidae: RR = 0.92 [95% CI 0.71-1.20], p = 0.543). The prevalence of malaria at delivery was higher in the ISTp-DP arm (48.7% versus 40.8%; risk difference = 7.85%, [95% CI 3.07%-12.63%]; all women: RR = 1.19 [95% CI 1.07-1.33], p = 0.007; paucigravidae: RR = 1.16 [95% CI 1.04-1.31], p = 0.011; multigravidae: RR = 1.29 [95% CI 1.02-1.63], p = 0.037). Fetal loss was more common with ISTp-DP (2.6% versus 1.3%; RR = 2.06 [95% CI 1.01-4.21], p = 0.046) and highest among non-DP-recipients (3.1%) in the ISTp-DP arm. Limitations included the open-label design.Conclusions: Scheduled screening for malaria parasites with the current generation of RDTs three to four times during pregnancy as part of focused antenatal care was not superior to IPTp-SP in this area with high malaria transmission and high SP resistance and was associated with higher fetal loss and more malaria at delivery.Trial Registration: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201103000280319; ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN69800930. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]