| Literature DB >> 26942912 |
Abstract
Currently, schistosomiasis in China provides an excellent example of many of the challenges of moving from low transmission to the elimination of transmission for infectious diseases generally. In response to the surveillance dimension of these challenges, we here explore two strategic approaches to inform priorities for the development of improved methods addressed specifically to schistosomiasis in the low transmission environment. We utilize an individually-based model and the exposure data used earlier to explore surveillance strategies, one focused on exposure assessment and the second on our estimates of variability in individual susceptibility in the practical context of the current situation in China and the theoretical context of the behavior of transmission dynamics near the zero state. Our findings suggest that individual susceptibility is the major single determinant of infection intensity in both the low and medium risk environments. We conclude that there is considerable motivation to search for a biomarker of susceptibility to infection in humans, but that there would also be value in a method for monitoring surface waters for the free-swimming forms of the parasite in endemic or formerly endemic environments as an early warning of infection risk.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26942912 PMCID: PMC4778868 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004425
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1The bivariate distribution of the susceptibility parameter α and cumulative cercarial exposure C together with the marginal distribution of C for simulated populations HP1 (light) and HP2 (dark).
In both populations the distribution of α is log normal with a geometric standard deviation of 4.5. αC = 2 is the lower bound on the number of worms necessary to produce schistosome eggs.
Fig 2Observed distributions of the susceptibility parameter α for those infected in simulated populations HP1 and HP2.
Percentiles of the population HP1 detected as infected or the percentiles of total population egg excretion, EPG, accounted for by upper percentiles of the distributions of susceptibility, α, number of exposure episodes, n, cumulative water contact, ns, and cumulative cercarial exposure, .
| Top % of people tracked | Percentage detected (HP1) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPG | Infected (yes/no) | |||||||
| 5% | 47.6 | 20.1 | 24.8 | 33.8 | 14.2 | 10.9 | 11.8 | 13.8 |
| 10% | 62.3 | 32.6 | 38.6 | 49.4 | 25.4 | 19.8 | 21.2 | 24.8 |
| 15% | 72.1 | 43.4 | 49.2 | 60.7 | 35.8 | 28.4 | 30.0 | 34.9 |
| 20% | 78.8 | 52.1 | 57.7 | 68.8 | 44.8 | 36.0 | 37.8 | 43.7 |
| 50% | 96.0 | 85.1 | 87.7 | 93.0 | 82.4 | 73.3 | 75.0 | 81.3 |
Percentiles of the population HP2 detected as infected or the percentiles of total population egg excretion, EPG, accounted for by upper percentiles of the distributions of susceptibility, α, number of exposure episodes, n, cumulative water contact, ns, and cumulative cercarial exposure, .
| Top % of people tracked | Percentage detected (HP2) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPG | Infected (yes/no) | |||||||
| 5% | 49.9 | 24.4 | 27.3 | 31.1 | 28.5 | 18.2 | 19.4 | 21.7 |
| 10% | 65.4 | 39.1 | 41.8 | 46.4 | 46.9 | 31.1 | 32.7 | 36.1 |
| 15% | 75.5 | 50.5 | 53.1 | 57.9 | 61.1 | 42.2 | 44.0 | 48.0 |
| 20% | 82.3 | 59.4 | 62.0 | 66.6 | 71.6 | 51.6 | 53.3 | 57.7 |
| 50% | 98.4 | 90.1 | 91.0 | 93.2 | 97.5 | 86.9 | 87.7 | 90.3 |