| Literature DB >> 31064369 |
Ronit Dalmat1,2, Brienna Naughton3,2, Tao Sheng Kwan-Gett4,2, Jennifer Slyker1,3,2, Erin M Stuckey5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While traditional epidemiological approaches have supported significant reductions in malaria incidence across many countries, higher resolution information about local and regional malaria epidemiology will be needed to efficiently target interventions for elimination. The application of genetic epidemiological methods for the analysis of parasite genetics has, thus far, primarily been confined to research settings. To illustrate how these technical methods can be used to advance programmatic and operational needs of National Malaria Control Programmes (NMCPs), and accelerate global progress to eradication, this manuscript presents seven use cases for which genetic epidemiology approaches to parasite genetic data are informative to the decision-making of NMCPs.Entities:
Keywords: Drug resistance; Eradication; Gene flow; Genetic epidemiology; Malaria; NMCP; Policy development; Surveillance; Transmission; Use case
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31064369 PMCID: PMC6503548 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-019-2784-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1A roadmap for realizing the potential of genetic epidemiology for malaria elimination. The development of use cases is just one step in the broader pathway necessary for the effective global use of novel approaches to achieve the vision of a malaria-free world. This pathway illustrates the steps through which technical and programme stakeholders and funders can be collectively engaged to ensure the application and implementation of genetic epidemiology approaches to address programme needs and elimination priorities. Use cases represent the link between information sought by programme decision-makers and information provided by the interpretation of parasite genetics. Each use case may demand similar or different technological capabilities, which are detailed in a Target Product Profile (TPP) developed for each use case. A TPP serves as a benchmark by which to compare technological platforms and analysis methods against each other. The TPP and methods comparison steps indicate which platforms should be used for pilot testing in real-world programmatic settings. Program test cases ultimately inform the establishment of normative policy guidance for global implementation
Use cases for genetic epidemiology in malaria elimination
| Description | Pre-conditions | Post-conditions | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | Current method or indicator | Population unit for implementation of analysis | Case detection | Prevalencea | Focus type | Sampling frame | Informatics; priors needed | Potential action informed | Presentation of output | Time to information (ideal) | |
| 1. Detect resistance | Assess the prevalence/frequency of molecular markers associated with antimalarial drug resistance | PCR-based testing (currently research focused) | Individuals | Passive or active | High to very low | Active | Representative | Database of resistance alleles in local population; ability to identify possible new parkers | Intervention selection, treatment guidelines, surveillance | Quantitative, geospatial maps | Rapid (< 1 week)b |
| 2. Assess drug resistance gene flow | Monitor and predict the spread of genes conferring drug resistance within and among regions and parasite populations | Treatment efficacy surveys at variable frequencies | Multiple foci (e.g. Areas where administration of drugs is a major component of control effort) | Active | High to very low | Active | Representative | Reference distribution of resistance alleles; model for gene flow with genetic data input | Intervention selection, treatment guidelines, surveillance | Quantitative, geospatial maps, phylogenies | Monthlyb |
| 3. Assess transmission intensity | Stratify regions according to transmission intensity in the area population; monitor interventions and epidemics | Surveillance | Focus | Passive or active | Low to very low | Active | Representativec | Reference distribution of parasite diversity; intensity model using a genetic data input | Intervention selection and evaluation, deployment of resources | Quantitative, qualitative, geospatial maps | Monthly |
| 4. Identify foci | Identify focal areas of high diversity and clusters of infections | Surveillance, case investigation | Geographic area of interest (e.g. Area with unknown distribution of foci or hotspots) | Passive, active, reactive | Moderate to very low | Active to residual non-active | Representative | Algorithm to integrate case detection with geographic and population characteristics | Intervention selection, surveillance, deployment of resources | Phylogenies, geospatial maps | Fast (< 1 month) |
| 5. Determine connectivity of parasite populations | Assess degree to which transmission is linked among regions due to parasite population linkages | Migration data (often produced via modeling) | Multiple foci across a region, country, or continent (e.g. Areas where parasite populations may be linked due to human or parasite migration) | Active | High to very low | Active to residual non-active | Representative | Reference distribution of parasite diversity and human migration patterns; model for parasite flow with genetic data input | Intervention selection and evaluation, deployment of resources | Geospatial network maps | Annual |
| 6. Identify imported cases | Discriminate between indigenous vs. imported cases (sources and sinks) | Travel surveys | Individuals | Passive or reactive | Very low to zero | Active to residual non-active | Dense | Reference distribution of local parasite diversity; high coverage case surveillance | Intervention selection and evaluation, deployment of resources, surveillance, case investigation; certify elimination | Quantitative, phylogenies, network maps | Rapid (< 3 days)d |
| 7. Characterize local transmission chains | Distinguish contributions factors (e.g. seasonality, migrants, asymptomatics, and highly infectious individuals) to ongoing transmission patterns; certify elimination | Case investigations | Focus with limited transmission | Passive or reactive | Low to very low | Active to residual non-active | Dense | Reference distribution of parasite diversity; models engaging geospatial and/or network analysis to distinguish chain length | Intervention selection and evaluation, deployment of resources, surveillance, case investigation; certify elimination | Quantitative, phylogenies, network maps | Fast (< 1 month) |
aWhile this information may be applicable at higher levels of prevalence, current methods suggest that genetic information is most useful in areas of low transmission that are progressing to zero
bTreatment regimen may not be adaptable in this timeframe, depending on drug availability
cHigher coverage is required for populations with more complex substructure or high parasite relatedness
dThis period is an estimate of how quickly a decision needs to be made about whether a full case investigation should be conducted