| Literature DB >> 29282126 |
Anna R Last1, Sarah E Burr2,3, Emma Harding-Esch2, Eunice Cassama4, Meno Nabicassa4, Chrissy H Roberts2, David C W Mabey2, Martin J Holland2, Robin L Bailey2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trachoma, a neglected tropical disease, is caused by ocular infection with Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct). The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends three annual rounds of community mass drug treatment with azithromycin (MDA) if the prevalence of follicular trachoma in 1-9 year olds (TF1-9) exceeds 10% at district level to achieve an elimination target of district-level TF1-9 below 5% after. To evaluate this strategy in treatment-naïve trachoma-endemic island communities in Guinea Bissau, we conducted a cross-sectional population-based trachoma survey on four islands. The upper tarsal conjunctivae of each participant were clinically assessed for trachoma and conjunctival swabs were obtained (n = 1507). We used a droplet digital PCR assay to detect Ct infection and estimate bacterial load. We visited the same households during a second cross-sectional survey and repeated the ocular examination and obtained conjunctival swabs from these households one year after MDA (n = 1029).Entities:
Keywords: Bacterial load; Chlamydia trachomatis; Community mass treatment; Disease severity; Spatial clustering; Trachoma
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29282126 PMCID: PMC5745817 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-017-2566-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Enrolment of participants at baseline and follow-up one year after community mass treatment for trachoma control. Community mass treatment was distributed in accordance with WHO and national trachoma control policies. Zithromax® was donated by Pfizer Inc. through the International Trachoma Initiative
Study population characteristics at baseline and follow-up at one year
| Baseline |
| Follow-up |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median age (years) (IQRa) | 13 (5–32) | 1507 | 12 (5–35) | 1033 |
| Female | 58% | 869 | 63% | 648 |
| Age group | ||||
| 0–5 years | 28% | 416 | 28% | 288 |
| 6–10 years | 16% | 250 | 17% | 180 |
| 11–15 years | 11% | 157 | 10% | 113 |
| > 15 years | 45% | 684 | 45% | 452 |
| Conjunctival scarring (TSc) | ||||
| Prevalence overall (95% CI) | 23.8 (21.6–25.9) | 357/1502 | 30.5 (27.7–33.3) | 313/1026 |
| Prevalence by age group (95% CI) | ||||
| 0–5 years | 2.7 (1.1–4.2) | 11/414 | 2.1 (0.4–3.7) | 6/288 |
| 6–10 years | 2.8 (0.8–4.8) | 7/250 | 5.6 (2.2–9.1) | 10/177 |
| 11–15 years | 11.5 (6.5–16.4) | 18/157 | 18.9 (11.6–26.2) | 21/111 |
| > 15 years | 47.2 (43.5–51.0) | 321/680 | 61.3 (56.8–65.8) | 276/450 |
| Trachomatous trichiasis (TT>15 d) (95% CI) | 3.5 (2.1–4.9) | 24/680 | 5.1 (3.1–7.1) | 23/450 |
aIQR, interquartile range
bDenominator where indicated
cWHO Simplified Trachoma Grading System (28); TT>15 reflects TT in those over the age of 15 years
dCI, confidence interval
The effect of community mass treatment with azithromycin on the prevalence of active trachoma and ocular C. trachomatis infection
| Clinical category | Prevalence (%) (95% CIa) | Prevalence (%) (95% CIa) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline |
| Follow-up |
| |
| TF1–9 b | 22.0 (18.9–25.5) | 136/618 | 7.4 (4.8–9.9)* | 29/394 |
| TI1–9 | 2.9 (1.4–4.1) | 18/618 | 1.5 (0.3–2.7) | 6/394 |
|
| 18.6 (16.7–28.8) | 280/1502 | 3.3 (2.2–4.4)** | 34/1029 |
|
| 25.4 (22.0–28.8) | 157/618 | 6.6 (4.1–9.0)*** | 26/395 |
aCI, confidence interval
bTF1–9, TF (Trachoma-Follicular) in 1–9 year olds; TI1–9 = TI (Trachoma-Intense Inflammatory) in 1–9 year olds
c Ct, C. trachomatis infection in the population overall and in 1–9 year olds 293 households were included at baseline and 254 at follow-up. Of the households lost to follow-up, 18 had C. trachomatis detected in children aged 1–9 years within the household at baseline. C. trachomatis infection status of the household at baseline was adjusted for in the follow-up analysis
*P < 0.0001; Chi-square test, χ 2 = 37.5, df = 1, difference 14.6% (95% CI: 10.2–18.8%)
**P < 0.0001; Chi-square test, χ 2 = 131.7, df = 1, difference 15.3% (95% CI: 13.0–17.6%)
***P < 0.0001; Chi-square test, χ 2 = 57.5, df = 1, difference 18.8% (95% CI: 14.3–23.1%))
Fig. 2Prevalence of C. trachomatis infection in 1–9 year olds by household at baseline and follow-up. The grey bars show the prevalence of C. trachomatis infection (detected by ddPCR) in individual households at baseline. The black squares denote the prevalence of C. trachomatis infection in the same households at follow-up. The y-axis refers to the prevalence of C. trachomatis infection in 1–9 year olds. 13% (n = 37) households were not included at follow-up. Of those, almost half (n = 18) were households where C. trachomatis infection was detected in children aged 1–9 years at baseline
Clustering of active trachoma and C. trachomatis infection
| Active trachoma |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster level | CEBaseline a (95% CI SE) | CEFollow-up 95% CI SE) | CEBaseline a (95% CI SE) | CEFollow-up (95% CI SE) |
| Household | 1.08 (0.79–1.48) | 0.89 (0.85–0.95) | 1.35 (1.08–1.68) | 1.52 (0.85–2.74) |
| Village | 0.76 (0.50–1.14) | 1.05 (0.56–1.96) | 0.89 (0.65–1.21) | 1.04 (0.56–1.96) |
| Island | 0.47 (0.15–1.49) | 0.34 (0.08–1.37) | 0.42 (0.17–1.00) | 0.19 (0.01–5.76) |
aCE, cluster estimates obtained from age-adjusted mixed effects regression models for active trachoma and Ct (C. trachomatis) infection at baseline and follow-up. 95% CI (confidence intervals) of the SE (standard error) are quoted. Mixed effects models including all three cluster levels showed household to have the strongest effect. All cluster estimates were significant at the 1% level (Wald Chi2)
Fig. 3Reduction in median C. trachomatis load in ocular C. trachomatis infection following community mass treatment with azithromycin. Box-and-whisker plots showing the median C. trachomatis load (omcB copies/swab) from individuals with conjunctival infection at baseline and follow-up
Fig. 4The effect of community mass treatment with azithromycin on ocular C. trachomatis load by age and clinical phenotype before treatment (a) and at one year following treatment with oral azithromycin (b). Clinical phenotype is defined using the WHO simplified grading system [27]
Fig. 5The effect of community mass treatment with azithromycin on conjunctival inflammation in individuals with ocular C. trachomatis infection. Proportion of individuals with conjunctival inflammation (P score 0–3 according to the modified FPC grading system at baseline (a) and follow-up (b)
The effect of community mass treatment with azithromycin on associations between disease severity and C. trachomatis bacterial load in individuals with ocular C. trachomatis infection
| Baseline ( | Follow-up ( | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical phenotype |
| ORadj (95% CI) |
|
| ORadj (95% CI) |
| |
| F | |||||||
| F0 | 89 | – | 11 | – | |||
| F1 | 22 | 1.67 (0.48–5.78) | 0.417 | 5 | 2.15 (0.29–15.72) | 0.450 | |
| F2 | 27 | 1.84 (0.60–5.68) | 0.287 | 6 | 3.56 (0.24–52.19) | 0.354 | |
| F3 | 42 | 6.16 (1.97–19.26) | 0.002 | 9 | 17.71 (2.65–118.47) | 0.003 | |
| P | |||||||
| P0 | 48 | – | 10 | – | |||
| P1 | 68 | 6.15 (2.47–15.31) | < 0.001 | 13 | 1.25 (0.31–4.97) | 0.753 | |
| P2 | 45 | 21.74 (6.82–69.32) | < 0.001 | 3 | 1.16 (0.18–7.62) | 0.875 | |
| P3 | 24 | 27.61 (6.81–111.80) | < 0.001 | 5 | 11.65 (1.89–71.76) | 0.008 | |
Note: Age-adjusted multivariable mixed effects linear regression analysis of loge-transformed C. trachomatis load (omcB copies/swab) accounting for household clustering and C. trachomatis infection status at baseline (OR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.25–3.86, P = 0.975). F- and P-scores were assigned using the modified FPC grading system [5]. Individuals may appear in multiple clinical grading categories. P-value is for the Wald Chi2
Fig. 6Cluster-Outlier maps showing the effect of community mass treatment on clusters of high load ocular C. trachomatis infections. C. trachomatis load was log transformed (ln(ln + 1)) due to significant negative skew. Statistically significant positive values for the Local Moran’s I statistic indicate clustering with similarly high (HH) or low (LL) values. Statistically significant negative values indicate that adjacent observations have dissimilar values and that this observation is an outlier (HL (a high load outlier) or LH (a low load outlier)). Maps are presented at baseline (a) and follow-up after MDA (b). HH clusters are observed at both time points. HL outliers are observed at baseline only. There are no LL clusters. Observation values represent C. trachomatis load