| Literature DB >> 26787302 |
Epke A Le Rutte1, Luc E Coffeng2, Daniel M Bontje3, Epco C Hasker4, José A Ruiz Postigo5, Daniel Argaw6, Marleen C Boelaert7, Sake J De Vlas8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a neglected tropical disease transmitted by sandflies. On the Indian subcontinent (ISC), VL is targeted for elimination as a public health problem by 2017. In the context of VL, the elimination target is defined as an annual VL incidence of <1 per 10,000 capita at (sub-)district level. Interventions focus on vector control, surveillance and on diagnosing and treating VL cases. Many endemic areas have not yet achieved optimal control due to logistical, biological as well as technical challenges. We used mathematical modelling to quantify VL transmission dynamics and predict the feasibility of achieving the VL elimination target with current control strategies under varying assumptions about the reservoir of infection in humans.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26787302 PMCID: PMC4717541 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-016-1292-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Schematic representation of three model structures. In model 1 (a), recovered individuals eventually lose their immunity and become susceptible again to infection through exposure to infective sandflies. In model 2 (b), recovered individuals may experience reactivation of their past infection such that they directly re-enter the stage of early asymptomatic infection without requiring exposure to infective sandflies. In model 3, which is identical in structure to model 1 (c), only cases of symptomatic infection and PKDL contribute to transmission of infection, and duration of PKDL is three times as long as in model 1
Overview of assumptions and pre-set parameters
| Parameters | Valuea | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Human birth rate (per 1000 capita, αH) | 21 (Indian crude birth rate in 2011) | [ |
| Human mortality rate (μH) | Age-dependent (Indian mortality rates in 2011) | [ |
| Average duration of late recovered stage (years, 1/ρRHC) | 2 or 5 | Pre-set |
| Average duration of symptomatic untreated stage (days, 1/ρIHS) | 30 (fitting) and 45 (predicting) | Unpublished data |
| Average duration of symptomatic treatment 1 (days, 1/ρ | 30 (fitting) and 2.5 (predicting) | [ |
| Average duration of symptomatic treatment 2 (days, 1/ρ | 30 (fitting) and 10 (predicting) | [ |
| Average duration of putatively recovered stage (months, 1/ρ | 21 | [ |
| Average duration of PKDL (years, 1/ρ | 5 (models 1 and 2) and 15 (model 3) | Expert opinion (EH and MB) |
| Infectiveness of symptomatic untreated cases ( | 1.0 | Reference value |
| Infectiveness of patients under treatment 1 and 2 ( | 0.5 | Expert opinion (EH and MB) |
| Infectiveness of PKDL cases ( | 0.5 (models 1 and 2 only; estimated for model 3) | Expert opinion (EH and MB) |
| Fraction of untreated symptomatic cases that spontaneously, putatively recover ( | 0.03 | [ |
| Excess mortality rate among untreated symptomatic cases (per day, μK) | 1/150 | Assumption |
| Excess mortality rate among treated symptomatic cases (per day, μ | 1/150 + 1/600 = 1/120 (fitting) and 1/150 (predicting) | [ |
| Fraction of failed first-line treatments ( | 0.05 | [ |
| Fraction of putatively recovered cases that develop PKDL ( | 0.05 (set such that models 1 and 2 predicted a prevalence of PKDL between 4.4 and 7.8 per 10,000 capita in India) | [ |
| Average life expectancy of the sandfly (days, 1/μ | 14 | [ |
| Average duration of incubation period in sandflies (days, 1/ρ | 5 | [ |
| Sandfly biting rate (per day, β) | 1/4 | [ |
| Transmission probability sandfly to human ( | 1.0b | Reference value |
The parameter values listed here are the same for all three models and their sub-variants, unless indicated otherwise
aParameter values marked with “fitting” only apply to the KalaNet study setting and were therefore only used when fitting the models to the KalaNet data; related to this, different parameter values were used when predicting the impact of IRS (indicated by “predicting”)
bThe probability that a susceptible person becomes infected when bitten by an infectious sandfly is assumed to be 1; potential overestimation is compensated by the estimated sandfly density per human
Quantified parameter values of the twelve model variants
The colours represent the model sub-variants that best reproduced the age-structured prevalence and incidence data. See Additional file 2 for illustrations of fitting of all model variants to all data and Fig. 2 for the predicted and observed age-patterns in VL incidence and DAT prevalence in India and Nepal with the selected model variants
Fig. 2Predicted and observed age-patterns in VL incidence and DAT prevalence in India and Nepal. Coloured lines represent model predictions from the sub-variant of each of the three models that best fit age-patterns in human infection markers; black bullets represent the data per age group; horizontal lines indicate the age range for each data point; vertical lines represent 95 %-Bayesian credible intervals, given total raw sample sizes (i.e. not accounting for clustering, see Additional file 1 for sample sizes). See Additional file 2 for illustrations of the fit of all model sub-variants to all data types
Fig. 3Predicted impact of optimal and sub-optimal IRS on VL incidence for three endemic settings. IRS is assumed to start in the year zero. Lines within plots represent different pre-IRS endemic settings (high: 20/10,000, medium: 10/10,000, low: 5/10,000); the dotted line represents the target VL incidence of <1 per 10,000 capita. Model predictions were made with the sub-variant of each of the three models that best fit age-patterns in human infection markers. See Additional file 3 for the short and long-term impact of optimal and sub-optimal IRS in low, medium, and highly endemic settings with all model sub-variants
Fig. 4Predicted prevalence of infective sandflies during IRS. Pre-IRS prevalence levels of infective sandflies represent a setting with 10 annual VL cases per 10,000 capita. IRS is assumed to start in the year zero, and to be implemented optimally (63 % reduction in sandfly density). The three colored lines represent the sub-variant of each of the three models that best fit age-patterns in human infection markers. See Additional file 4 for low, medium and highly endemic settings with optimal and sub-optimal IRS