| Literature DB >> 26652272 |
T Déirdre Hollingsworth1, Emily R Adams2, Roy M Anderson3, Katherine Atkins4, Sarah Bartsch5, María-Gloria Basáñez3, Matthew Behrend6, David J Blok7, Lloyd A C Chapman8, Luc Coffeng7, Orin Courtenay8, Ron E Crump8, Sake J de Vlas7, Andy Dobson9, Louise Dyson8, Hajnal Farkas8, Alison P Galvani10, Manoj Gambhir11, David Gurarie12, Michael A Irvine8, Sarah Jervis8, Matt J Keeling8, Louise Kelly-Hope2, Charles King12, Bruce Y Lee5, Epke A Le Rutte7, Thomas M Lietman13, Martial Ndeffo-Mbah10, Graham F Medley4, Edwin Michael14, Abhishek Pandey10, Jennifer K Peterson9, Amy Pinsent11, Travis C Porco13, Jan Hendrik Richardus7, Lisa Reimer2, Kat S Rock8, Brajendra K Singh14, Wilma Stolk7, Subramanian Swaminathan15, Steve J Torr2, Jeffrey Townsend10, James Truscott3, Martin Walker3, Alexandra Zoueva16.
Abstract
Quantitative analysis and mathematical models are useful tools in informing strategies to control or eliminate disease. Currently, there is an urgent need to develop these tools to inform policy to achieve the 2020 goals for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). In this paper we give an overview of a collection of novel model-based analyses which aim to address key questions on the dynamics of transmission and control of nine NTDs: Chagas disease, visceral leishmaniasis, human African trypanosomiasis, leprosy, soil-transmitted helminths, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis and trachoma. Several common themes resonate throughout these analyses, including: the importance of epidemiological setting on the success of interventions; targeting groups who are at highest risk of infection or re-infection; and reaching populations who are not accessing interventions and may act as a reservoir for infection,. The results also highlight the challenge of maintaining elimination 'as a public health problem' when true elimination is not reached. The models elucidate the factors that may be contributing most to persistence of disease and discuss the requirements for eventually achieving true elimination, if that is possible. Overall this collection presents new analyses to inform current control initiatives. These papers form a base from which further development of the models and more rigorous validation against a variety of datasets can help to give more detailed advice. At the moment, the models' predictions are being considered as the world prepares for a final push towards control or elimination of neglected tropical diseases by 2020.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26652272 PMCID: PMC4674954 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-1235-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Summary of the nine neglected tropical diseases studied in these papers, where elimination refers to elimination as a public health problem. Data sources: WHO
| Name | Transmission | Global picture | Interventions | WHO target for 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preventive chemotherapy (PCT) diseases, controlled by mass drug administration (MDA) programmes | ||||
| Lymphatic filariasis (elephantiasis) | Worm transmitted by mosquito | Tropical and subtropical countries in Africa, Asia, the Western Pacific, the Caribbean and South America | Annual/biannual MDA (ivermectin, albendazole and DEC), vector control through insecticide-treated bed nets or spraying | Global elimination |
| Onchocerciasis (river blindness) | Worm transmitted by black fly | Primarily occurs in tropical sub-Saharan Africa (99 % of cases) | MDA (ivermectin) and vector control | Country elimination |
| Schistosomiasis (bilharzia) | Intestinal worm, water-borne transmission with snail intermediate host | Affect at least 240 million people worldwide. Most commonly found in Africa, as well as Asia and South-America | MDA (praziquantel) to school-agechildren and high-risk adults, along with WASH and possible snail control | Regional and country elimination |
| Soil-transmitted helminthiasis (roundworm, whipworm, hookworm) | Intestinal worms transmitted via soil contaminated with fecal matter | Over 1 billion people affected, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, India and Southeast Asian countries | MDA (albendazole, mebendazole) treatment of school-aged children. Treatment of pre-school aged children and women of childbearing age is also recommended. | 75 % coverage with (bi)annual PCT |
| Blinding trachoma | Bacterial infection transmitted by flies, fingers and fomites. | 84 million active cases globally. | MDA (azithromycin) and surgery, along with improved hygiene | Global elimination |
| Intensified disease management (IDM) diseases, controlled by increased diagnosis and management of cases | ||||
| Chagas disease | Protozoan transmitted by triatomines (kissing bugs) | 8 million infected in the Americas, 10,000 deaths per year. | Spraying with indoor residual insecticides, housing improvements. | Regional elimination |
| HAT (sleeping sickness), Gambian form | Protozoan transmitted by tsetse fly | <4000 new cases in 2014 | Treatment, active/mass screening and vector control with tsetse targets. | Global elimination |
| Leprosy | Bacterium with unclear mode of transmission: contact or droplet likely | 200,000 new diagnoses per year, >80 % from India, Brazil and Indonesia | Early diagnosis and treatment | Global elimination |
| Visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar) in the Indian sub-continent | Protozoan transmitted by sand fly | 200,000–400,000 cases annually, 80 % in Indian sub-continent. | Indoor residual spraying of insecticides, insecticide-treated bed nets, active case detection, rapid diagnosis and treatment | Regional elimination |
Fig. 1Schematic of LF results. The results include: a) highlighting that heterogeneity in human exposure and intervention greatly alters time to elimination by Irvine et al. [11]; b) a description of the association between antigenaemia and the presence of adult worms by Jambulinga et al. [13]; and c) a Bayesian fitting methodology of a deterministic model including information on model inputs and outputs by Singh et al. [12]
Fig. 2Schematic of onchocerciasis results. The results include a comparison of a stochastic individual-based model (ONCHOSIM) and a deterministic population-based model (EPIONCHO) and an investigation into the impact of systematic non-adherence in different endemicity settings by Stolk et al. [71]
Fig. 3Schematic of schistosomiasis results. The results include: a) an assessment of the potential success of MDA in different scenarios using a deterministic modelling framework by Gurarie et al. [36]; and b) an investigation into the feasibility of elimination using an age-structured deterministic model by Anderson et al. [35]
Fig. 4Schematic of STH results. The schematic includes results from: a) a deterministic transmission model by Truscott et al. applied to Ascaris, Trichuris and hookworm [41]; and b) a stochastic, individual based model of hookworm transmission by Coffeng et al. [40]
Fig. 5Schematic of trachoma results. The schematic includes results from: a) a transmission model including consideration of immunity by Gambhir et al. [45]; and b) a statistical analysis of the most informative data for forecasting trends in prevalence by Liu et al. [44]
Fig. 6Schematic of Chagas results. The schematic describes a new transmission model for Chagas disease used to analyse the consequences of varying standard assumptions about the transmission cycle by Peterson et al. [52]
Fig. 7Schematic of HAT results. The results include a) quantitative estimates of the level of heterogeneity in human exposure and screening participation by Rock et al. [56]; and b) an assessment of strategies combining both human screening and tsetse control by Pandey et al. [55]
Fig. 8Schematic of leprosy results. The results include: a) a transmission model fitted to national and regional data from India, Brazil and Indonesia to predict future trends in leprosy incidence by Blok et al. [59]; b) statistical modelling of regional case detection data from India by Brook et al. [60]; and c) a back-calculation method to investigate underlying infection dynamics and predict future incidence by Crump and Medley [61]
Fig. 9Schematic of VL results. The results include: a) new estimates of epidemiological parameters by Chapman et al. [64]; and b). a qualitative investigation of the impact of different life history assumptions on transmission dynamics and intervention efficacy by Le Rutte et al. [65]
Summary of modelling techniques used, PCT diseases
| Paper | Model | Fitted to data from: | Predictions tested? | Technical advances | Model accounts for | Next steps | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vector/environment dynamics | Heterogeneity in risk | Access to interventions | |||||||
| Lymphatic filariasis | |||||||||
| Irvine et al. | Stochastic individual | Kenya and Sri Lanka | Yes | Heterogeneity in transmission and extinction dynamics greatly affects time to elimination | Deterministic vector dynamics. Single pool of vectors | Gamma distributed risk in exposure | Spectrum of access to repeat rounds of MDA and vector control, with cross-correlations with risk | Fit the model to intervention data and understand transmission dynamics at low densities | |
| Jambulingam et al. | Stochastic individual | 35 villages in India. | Yes | Association between antigenaemia and presence of adult worms. | Deterministic vector dynamics. single pool of vectors | Age dependent, gamma distributed exposure | Individual’s treatment compliance is semi-systematic | Estimating vector infection thresholds. Estimating probability of elimination | |
| Singh et al. | Deterministic | Data from 22 villages from Africa, South East Asia, and Papua New Guine | No | Bayesian fitting including information about model inputs and outputs | Deterministic vector dynamics. single pool of vectors | Negative binomial distribution of worms | Random | Estimating thresholds for true elimination. Further understanding of parameter uncertainty | |
| Onchocerciasis | |||||||||
| Stolk et al. | ONCHOSIM | Stochastic | Cameroon | Yes | Bringing the two models together and understanding differences in predictions | Deterministic vector dynamics. Single pool of vectors | Age dependent, gamma distributed risk | Age-dependent probability of receiving treatment. Lifelong compliance factor | The two models give different Mf intensities and prevalences after MDA, which needs to be investigated further |
| EPIONCHO | Deterministic | Cameroon | Yes | Single vector compartment | Age- and sex-specific exposure to blackfly | Compliant and non-compliant groups | |||
| Schistosomiasis | |||||||||
| Anderson et al. | Deterministic | Kenya | Yes | Using an age-structured model to assess the feasibility of elimination, and comparing model predictions to reinfection data | Environmental reservoir, constant decay rate. No explicit consideration of snail dynamics | Variability in exposure as a function of age. Negative binomial distribution of worms | Treatment reduced worms by a given fraction in a given proportion of individuals, equivalent to random treatment | Better modelling of transmission by age, immunity, worm mating. Stochastic model | |
| Gurarie et al. | Deterministic | Kenya | Yes | Investigating MDA success in different scenarios using a modelling framework | Snail transmission compartments | None | A fraction of adult worms are killed by each treatment | Consideration of snail dynamics. | |
| Soil-transmitted helminthiasis | |||||||||
| Coffeng et al. (hookworm only) | Stochastic,, individual | Vietnam | Yes | Developed WORMSIM, a new generalised framework for modelling transmission and control of helminths | Environmental reservoir | Gamma distributed total egg output, two scenarios: high or low variation in host susceptibility | Participation is either random, fully systematic or a mix. | Lifespan of eggs in the environment, MDA coverage over different age groups | |
| Truscott et al. | Deterministic | India ( | Yes ( | Fitting against multiple treatment rounds data | Pool of environmental infective material, exponential decay | Negative binomial distribution of worms in individuals | All individuals have a probability of receiving treatment | Understanding spatial and age heterogeneity, systematic non-compliance | |
| Trachoma | |||||||||
| Gambhir et al. | Deterministic | Tanzania and Gambia | No | Including MDA interventions into the modelling framework | None | None | A subset of the infected group are moved to the susceptible compartment | Validating against multiple datasets, better modelling of immunity | |
| Liu et al. | Stochastic compartmental | Niger | No | Constructing a stochastic transmission model including different ways of modelling each observation by fitting to TF only or to TF, TI and PCR | None | None | All individuals have a probability of receiving treatment | Further fitting to intervention data. | |
Summary of modelling techniques used, IDM diseases
| Paper | Model | Fitted to data from: | Predictions tested? | Technical advances | Model accounts for | Next steps | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vector/environment dynamics | Heterogeneity in risk | Access to interventions | ||||||
| Chagas disease | ||||||||
| Peterson et al. | Deterministic | Parameter values were set according to the literature | No | Formulating a transmission model and analysing the consequences of varying standard assumptions on the transmission cycle | Deterministic vector dynamics with animal hosts in some modelling scenarios | None | Not applicable - vector control only | Develop two independent transmission models. Estimation of changes in transmission rates |
| Human African trypanosomiasis, Gambian form | ||||||||
| Pandey et al. | Deterministic | Boffa, Guinea | Yes | Data cannot identify whether there is an animal reservoir. But in the presence of animal reservoir, there is high risk of re-emergence of HAT as public health problem. | Includes tsetse and animal compartments | None | All individuals have a probability of receiving treatment | Evaluating 2020 goal in other foci and impact of heterogeneity in human exposure to tsetse. |
| Rock et al. | Deterministic | Bandundu, DRC | No | Data supports the existence of an unscreened, high-risk population, but cannot identify whether there is an animal reservoir | Includes tsetse and animal compartments | High risk and low risk human compartments | Randomly participating and non-participating human compartments | Projecting impact of vector control in DRC |
| Leprosy | ||||||||
| Blok et al. | Stochastic individual | India, Brazil and Indonesia | Yes | Applied SIMCOLEP to predict future leprosy incidence in India, Brazil and Indonesia | Not applicable | Susceptibility: 20 % of population is susceptible; Type of leprosy: MB vs PB; Contact structure: general population vs within households | All individuals that have been diagnosed with leprosy receive MDT treatment. Probability of being diagnosed is determined by passive case detection delays and possible active case finding activities. | Assess which additional interventions are needed to meet the goals |
| Brook et al. | Statistical | 604 analytic districts in India | No | Enhanced active case finding was associated with a higher case detection rate | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Develop independent stochastic compartmental transmission model |
| Crump & Medley | Statistical | Thailand | Yes | Back-calculation can estimate the number of undiagnosed cases from diagnosed incidence rates | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Consideration of gender and age. Analysis of other countries. |
| Visceral leishmaniasis in the Indian sub-continent | ||||||||
| Chapman et al. | Statistical | Bangladesh | No | Estimating durations of asymptomatic and symptomatic infection | Not applicable | Proportional hazards model for different risk factors including age, sex and bed net use | Not applicable | Developing a transmission model. |
| Le Rutte et al. | Deterministic | India and Nepal (KalaNet) | Yes | Developed three model structures, each with a different reservoir of infection, all fitting the data. | Vector population, deterministic. | Age-dependent sandfly exposure. | All individuals have a probability of receiving diagnosis, treatment, and vector control (IRS). | Implement best model structure in stochastic individual based model. Explore effect of additional interventions. |
| Added heterogeneity in sandfly exposure. | ||||||||
| Applied models to predict future VL incidence with current interventions. | ||||||||