C L Moyes1, R S Lees2, C Yunta2, K J Walker2, K Hemmings2,3, F Oladepo2, P A Hancock4, D Weetman2, M J I Paine2, H M Ismail5. 1. Big Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK. catherinemoyes@gmail.com. 2. Vector Biology Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK. 3. Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L7 8TX, UK. 4. Big Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK. 5. Vector Biology Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK. Hanafy.Ismail@lstmed.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is important to understand whether the potential impact of pyrethroid resistance on malaria control can be mitigated by switching between different pyrethroids or whether cross-resistance within this insecticide class precludes this approach. METHODS: Here we assess the relationships among pyrethroids in terms of their binding affinity to, and depletion by, key cytochrome P450 enzymes (hereafter P450s) that are known to confer metabolic pyrethroid resistance in Anopheles gambiae (s.l.) and An. funestus, in order to identify which pyrethroids may diverge from the others in their vulnerability to resistance. We then investigate whether these same pyrethroids also diverge from the others in terms of resistance in vector populations. RESULTS: We found that the type I and II pyrethroids permethrin and deltamethrin, respectively, are closely related in terms of binding affinity to key P450s, depletion by P450s and resistance within vector populations. Bifenthrin, which lacks the common structural moiety of most pyrethroids, diverged from the other pyrethroids tested in terms of both binding affinity to key P450s and depletion by P450s, but resistance to bifenthrin has rarely been tested in vector populations and was not analysed here. Etofenprox, which also lacks the common structural moiety of most pyrethroids, diverged from the more commonly deployed pyrethroids in terms of binding affinity to key P450s and resistance in vector populations, but did not diverge from these pyrethroids in terms of depletion by the P450s. The analysis of depletion by the P450s indicated that etofenprox may be more vulnerable to metabolic resistance mechanisms in vector populations. In addition, greater resistance to etofenprox was found across Aedes aegypti populations, but greater resistance to this compound was not found in any of the malaria vector species analysed. The results for pyrethroid depletion by anopheline P450s in the laboratory were largely not repeated in the findings for resistance in malaria vector populations. CONCLUSION: Importantly, the prevalence of resistance to the pyrethroids α-cypermethrin, cyfluthrin, deltamethrin, λ-cyhalothrin and permethrin was correlated across malaria vector populations, and switching between these compounds as a tool to mitigate against pyrethroid resistance is not advised without strong evidence supporting a true difference in resistance.
BACKGROUND: It is important to understand whether the potential impact of pyrethroid resistance on malaria control can be mitigated by switching between different pyrethroids or whether cross-resistance within this insecticide class precludes this approach. METHODS: Here we assess the relationships among pyrethroids in terms of their binding affinity to, and depletion by, key cytochrome P450 enzymes (hereafter P450s) that are known to confer metabolic pyrethroid resistance in Anopheles gambiae (s.l.) and An. funestus, in order to identify which pyrethroids may diverge from the others in their vulnerability to resistance. We then investigate whether these same pyrethroids also diverge from the others in terms of resistance in vector populations. RESULTS: We found that the type I and II pyrethroids permethrin and deltamethrin, respectively, are closely related in terms of binding affinity to key P450s, depletion by P450s and resistance within vector populations. Bifenthrin, which lacks the common structural moiety of most pyrethroids, diverged from the other pyrethroids tested in terms of both binding affinity to key P450s and depletion by P450s, but resistance to bifenthrin has rarely been tested in vector populations and was not analysed here. Etofenprox, which also lacks the common structural moiety of most pyrethroids, diverged from the more commonly deployed pyrethroids in terms of binding affinity to key P450s and resistance in vector populations, but did not diverge from these pyrethroids in terms of depletion by the P450s. The analysis of depletion by the P450s indicated that etofenprox may be more vulnerable to metabolic resistance mechanisms in vector populations. In addition, greater resistance to etofenprox was found across Aedes aegypti populations, but greater resistance to this compound was not found in any of the malaria vector species analysed. The results for pyrethroid depletion by anopheline P450s in the laboratory were largely not repeated in the findings for resistance in malaria vector populations. CONCLUSION: Importantly, the prevalence of resistance to the pyrethroids α-cypermethrin, cyfluthrin, deltamethrin, λ-cyhalothrin and permethrin was correlated across malaria vector populations, and switching between these compounds as a tool to mitigate against pyrethroid resistance is not advised without strong evidence supporting a true difference in resistance.
Authors: Michael R Reddy; Adrian Godoy; Kirstin Dion; Abrahan Matias; Kevin Callender; Anthony E Kiszewski; Immo Kleinschmidt; Frances C Ridl; Jeffrey R Powell; Adalgisa Caccone; Michel A Slotman Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: D A Amenya; R Naguran; T-C M Lo; H Ranson; B L Spillings; O R Wood; B D Brooke; M Coetzee; L L Koekemoer Journal: Insect Mol Biol Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.585
Authors: Catherine L Moyes; Antoinette Wiebe; Katherine Gleave; Anna Trett; Penelope A Hancock; Germain Gil Padonou; Mouhamadou S Chouaïbou; Arthur Sovi; Sara A Abuelmaali; Eric Ochomo; Christophe Antonio-Nkondjio; Dereje Dengela; Hitoshi Kawada; Roch K Dabire; Martin J Donnelly; Charles Mbogo; Christen Fornadel; Michael Coleman Journal: Sci Data Date: 2019-07-15 Impact factor: 6.444
Authors: Janet Hemingway; John Vontas; Rodolphe Poupardin; Jaishree Raman; Jo Lines; Chris Schwabe; Abrahan Matias; Immo Kleinschmidt Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Catherine L Moyes; Duncan K Athinya; Tara Seethaler; Katherine E Battle; Marianne Sinka; Melinda P Hadi; Janet Hemingway; Michael Coleman; Penelope A Hancock Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-08-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Penelope A Hancock; Amy Lynd; Antoinette Wiebe; Maria Devine; John Essandoh; Francis Wat'senga; Emile Z Manzambi; Fiacre Agossa; Martin J Donnelly; David Weetman; Catherine L Moyes Journal: BMC Biol Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 7.431
Authors: Natalie Lissenden; Mara D Kont; John Essandoh; Hanafy M Ismail; Thomas S Churcher; Ben Lambert; Audrey Lenhart; Philip J McCall; Catherine L Moyes; Mark J I Paine; Giorgio Praulins; David Weetman; Rosemary S Lees Journal: Insects Date: 2021-09-14 Impact factor: 2.769