| Literature DB >> 25948081 |
Angel Rosas-Aguirre1,2,3, Annette Erhart4, Alejandro Llanos-Cuentas5, Oralee Branch6, Dirk Berkvens7, Emmanuel Abatih8, Philippe Lambert9,10, Gianluca Frasso11, Hugo Rodriguez12, Dionicia Gamboa13, Moisés Sihuincha14, Anna Rosanas-Urgell15, Umberto D'Alessandro16,17, Niko Speybroeck18.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Focal screening and treatment (FSAT) of malaria infections has recently been introduced in Peru to overcome the inherent limitations of passive case detection (PCD) and further decrease the malaria burden. Here, we used a relatively straightforward mathematical model to assess the potential of FSAT as elimination strategy for Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the Peruvian Amazon Region.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25948081 PMCID: PMC4429469 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-0868-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the human and vector model states. The human population (N) is divided into 4 compartments: susceptible (S), infected latent (E), infectious treated (T) and infectious untreated (Ι) individuals. The latent period has 2 sub-states: latent which have not yet developed asexual blood-stage parasites (E1) and latent with asexual blood-stage parasites (E2). Before becoming recovered, individuals in I compartment need to pass through 2 sub-states: those who have not yet (Ι1) and those who have spontaneously cleared the asexual blood stage parasites (Ι2). The mosquito population (M) is divided into 3 compartments: uninfected (U), infected latent (L) and infectious (V) mosquitoes. The addition of FSAT to PCD allows for the detection and treatment of individuals in E2, I1 and I2 compartments.
Model parameters
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Mosquito density (ratio female mosquitoes/humans) |
| 75 | Assumed value within published range | |
| Human feeding rate, bites per mosquito per day |
| 0.035 - 0.32 | Monthly estimations from fitting cohort data; values within published range | |
| Mean: 0.088 | ||||
| Susceptibility of an individual to infection after being bitten by an infectious mosquito |
| 0.05 | Estimation using cohort and published data | |
| Mosquito susceptibility to infection after biting an infectious individual |
| 0.41 | Published data | |
| Duration of human latent period for |
| 21 | Published data | |
| Duration from sporozoite inoculation to development of blood asexual parasites in days |
| 11 | Published data | |
| Duration from asexual blood stage infection to development of gametocytes in days |
| 10 | Published data | |
| Duration of mosquito latent period in days |
| 11 | Published data | |
| Daily human mortality rate |
| 0.00005 | Published data | |
| Daily mosquito mortality rate |
| 0.16 | Published data | |
| Fraction of symptomatic infections |
| 0.65 | Cohort data | |
| Treatment effectiveness |
| 0.98 | Published data | |
| Duration of infectious period in treated humans with ACT (in days) |
| 14 | Published data | |
| Duration of infectious period in untreated humans in days |
| 200 | Published data | |
| Duration of presence of blood asexual parasites in untreated humans in days |
| 80 | Published data | |
| Duration of infectious period in untreated humans after clearance of blood asexual parasites in days |
| 120 | Published data | |
|
| ||||
| Coverage of FSAT | Δ | 1 | Assumption | |
| Duration of FSAT in days |
| 1 | Assumption | |
| Sensitivity of microscopy for detecting |
| 0.5 | Published data | |
| Sensitivity of microscopy for detecting |
| 0.1 | Published data | |
| Sensitivity of highly sensitive diagnostic tests for detecting asexual stages |
| 0.95 | Assumption | |
| Sensitivity of highly sensitive diagnostic tests for detecting gametocytes |
| 0.8 | Assumption | |
*Pf = P. falciparum.
Figure 2Comparison between observed and baseline model-predicted P. falciparum malariometric measures in Ninarumi village. Curves with data from Ninarumi in 2004 were repeated for three consecutive years: A) observed and predicted P. falciparum monthly new P. falciparum infections (monthly incidence); B) observed and predicted P. falciparum prevalence.
Figure 3Sensitivity analysis for the baseline model. Changes in: A) annual overall incidence (baseline model prediction: 152 infections); B) annual asymptomatic incidence (baseline: 53 infections); C) maximum prevalence during the year (baseline: 12.3%); D) minimum prevalence during the year (baseline: 3.5%). Results are expressed in percentage of change (%) in comparison with baseline model predictions.
Figure 4Model-predicted P. falciparum prevalence curves after the addition of different FSAT interventions to the baseline PCD. A) one FSAT at beginning of LTS only in year 0 (Y0) and in HTS only in year 1 (Y1), using microscopy or PCR; B) one to three successive FSAT starting at beginning of LTS only in Y0, with microscopy or PCR; C) one to three successive FSAT starting at beginning of LTS for consecutive ten years (from Y0 to Y10), with microscopy or PCR.
Figure 5Long-term impact of changes in the fraction of symptomatic infections and the treatment effectiveness on the maximum predicted P. falciparum prevalence after the onset of annual FSAT interventions (three successive FSAT at beginning of LTS): A) FSAT interventions using microscopy for malaria screening; B) FSAT interventions using PCR for malaria screening.