| Literature DB >> 31961872 |
María Soledad Castaño1,2, Martial L Ndeffo-Mbah3,4, Kat S Rock5,6, Cody Palmer7, Edward Knock5,8, Erick Mwamba Miaka9, Joseph M Ndung'u10, Steve Torr11, Paul Verlé12, Simon E F Spencer5,8, Alison Galvani3, Caitlin Bever7, Matt J Keeling5,6, Nakul Chitnis1,2.
Abstract
Since the turn of the century, the global community has made great progress towards the elimination of gambiense human African trypanosomiasis (HAT). Elimination programs, primarily relying on screening and treatment campaigns, have also created a rich database of HAT epidemiology. Mathematical models calibrated with these data can help to fill remaining gaps in our understanding of HAT transmission dynamics, including key operational research questions such as whether integrating vector control with current intervention strategies is needed to achieve HAT elimination. Here we explore, via an ensemble of models and simulation studies, how including or not disease stage data, or using more updated data sets affect model predictions of future control strategies.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31961872 PMCID: PMC6994134 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007976
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Models overview.
| Model I | Model S | Model W | Model Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transmission model structure | Partitions population into high/low risk | N | Y | Y | N |
| Asymptomatic infection | N | N | N | Y | |
| Infectious stages 1 and 2 | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
| Interventions | Population at risk | All at risk | Assumed constant (fixed at 70%) | All at some risk (high or low) | Fixed population at risk estimated during fitting |
| Pulsed AS | N | Y (1 | Y (1 | Y (1 | |
| AS in all population | Y | N (only low-risk) | N (only low-risk) | N (only at risk population) | |
| PD: stage-specific detection rate | Y | Y (one fitted) | Y (both fitted) | Y (both fitted) | |
| PD: time-dependent detection rate | N | Y (fit to staged and subset staged data) | Y (fit to staged data) | N | |
| PD: underreporting | N | N | Y (stage 2 only) | Y (stage 2 only) | |
| EPD: improvement in detection in both stages | Y | Y | Y | Y | |
| Fitting procedure | Nb. of parameters fixed and fitted | fixed:10 | fixed:24 | fixed:19 (staged fit) & 17 (other fits) | fixed:17 |
| Initial conditions | Fitted | Endemic equilibrium with ongoing PD | Endemic equilibrium with ongoing PD | Endemic equilibrium with ongoing PD | |
| Likelihood-based | Y | N | Y | N | |
| Likelihood for AS | Poisson | - | Beta-binomial | - | |
| Likelihood for PD | Poisson | - | Beta-binomial | - |
Description of key aspects of model structure, interventions and fitting procedure. Abbreviations: AS: active screening; EPD: enhanced passive detection; PD: passive detection.
Different types of future strategies considered in model projections.
| Strategy | Interventions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Passive | Active | Vector control | |
| 1 | Standard | Mean of historic data | - |
| 2 | Standard | Mean of historic data | 60% reduction |
| 3 | Enhanced | Mean of historic data | - |
Fig 1Former Bandundu province reported data and estimated reported cases.
Estimated reported cases from model calibrations to three different configurations of the data for a baseline strategy composed of annual, pulsed active screening and continuous passive detection. The median (as a point) and the corresponding 95% CI (shaded region of the same color) are shown in each case. Dashed lines indicate projections from the fit to the subset staged data.
Fig 2Proportion of stage 1 cases.
The estimates for the four models fitted to three different configurations of the data under the baseline strategy are shown. The posterior median is shown as a point and 95% CIs shaded. Dashed lines indicate projections from the fit to the subset staged data.
Probability of different strategies achieving elimination by 2030.
| Fit | Strategy | Model | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Vector control | EPD | ||
| Unstaged | 0.167 | 1 | 0.167 | |
| Staged | 0 | 0.656 | 0 | I |
| Subset staged | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Unstaged | 0 | 0.206 | 0 | |
| Staged | 0 | 0.551 | 0 | S |
| Subset staged | 0 | 0.836 | 0 | |
| Unstaged | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Staged | 0 | 1 | 0.984 | W |
| Subset staged | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Unstaged | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Staged | 0 | 1 | 0 | Y |
| Subset staged | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
EOT is defined in the models as <1 new transmission per 1,000,000 people. In each case simulations of 1000 parameter sets were used.
Summary of relevant data and its potential use in HAT modelling.
| Data type | Collected, open access | Collected, available upon request | Not routinely collected | Potential use in HAT modelling |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| -First-final date of survey (AS) | x | Inform time, number and duration of survey | ||
| Staging (province level) | x | x | Inform staging ratios | |
| Staging (village or health zone level) | x | Inform staging ratios | ||
| Geo-referenced | x | Explore spatial-related measures of HAT transmission risk | ||
| Age | x | -Identify at-risk population | ||
| Gender | x | -Identify at-risk population | ||
| Occupation | x | -Identify at-risk population | ||
| Socio-economic indicators | x | Identify at-risk population | ||
| Presence of alternative sources of blood meals (e.g. pigs) | x | Better understand feeding behaviour of tsetse flies to investigate potential roles of animal reservoirs | ||
| Family clustering | x | Spatial modeling to better identify foci |
The list is not exhaustive. Abbreviations: AS: active screening; PD: passive detection.