| Literature DB >> 33836772 |
Ayleen Kosasih1,2,3, Cristian Koepfli4,5, M Sopiyudin Dahlan6, William A Hawley7, J Kevin Baird8, Ivo Mueller5, Neil F Lobo4, Inge Sutanto9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A goal of malaria epidemiological interventions is the detection and treatment of parasite reservoirs in endemic areas-an activity that is expected to reduce local transmission. Since the gametocyte is the only transmissible stage from human host to mosquito vector, this study evaluated the pre and post presence of gametocytes during a mass screening and treatment (MST) intervention conducted during 2013 in East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia.Entities:
Keywords: Gametocyte; Mass screening and treatment; Pfs25; Pvs25
Year: 2021 PMID: 33836772 PMCID: PMC8034167 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-021-03709-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Study framework
Fig. 2Correlation between gametocyte transcript numbers and parasitaemia density by light microscopy (LM) in P. falciparum (a) and P. vivax (b). In P. falciparum, no correlation was found between gametocyte transcript numbers and parasitaemia density by microscopy (r = 0.198, p = 0.202), whereas in P. vivax, positive correlation was demonstrated (r = 0.514, p < 0.001)
Fig. 3Correlation between gametocyte transcript numbers and 18S copies by qPCR in P. falciparum (a) and P. vivax (b). A positive correlation was demonstrated between 18S gene copy numbers/µL and gametocyte transcript numbers/µL for a P. falciparum (pfs25) as well as for b P. vivax/pvs25. Linear regression analyses both demonstrated a significance correlation (p < 0.001). Microscopic infections (●) were showing higher transcripts than submicroscopic infections (○)
Prevalence and density of P. falciparum at baseline and endpoint
| Baseline | Endpoint | p value | OR/GMR (95%CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parasite prevalence | ||||
| By microscopy | 22/811 (3%)a | 34/740 (5%)b | 0.056 | 1.73 (0.97–3.13) |
| By PCR | 49/811 (6%) | 42/740 (6%) | 0.829 | 0.94 (0.60–1.46) |
| By either test | 52/811 (6%) | 50/740 (7%) | 0.838 | 1.06 (0.69–1.61) |
| Median parasitaemia/µL (IQR) (microscopy) | 440 (80–1800) | 860 (92–2690) | 0.351 | |
| Median 18S copies/µL (IQR) (qPCR) (n baseline = 33, endpoint = 29) | 59.4 (7.8–1475.0) | 713.5 (7.6–899.1) | 0.095 | |
| Gametocyte prevalence | ||||
| By microscopy | 11/811 (1.4%) | 15/740 (2.0%) | 0.328 | 1.50 (0.64–3.65) |
| By | 19/803 (2%) | 23/729 (3%) | 0.353 | 1.34 (0.69–2.63) |
| By either test | 19/803 (2%) | 23/729 (3%) | 0.353 | 1.34 (0.69–2.63) |
| Gametocyte density (per μL) | ||||
| By microscopy (median) (IQR) | 80 (48–280) | 460 (80–860) | 0.085 | |
| By | 132.5 (30.2–580.5) | 210.9 (56.8–782.7) | 0.625 | 0.6 (0.1–4.2) |
OR odds ratio, GMR geometric mean ratio
aThree and beight subjects were not confirmed by PCR during baseline and endpoint, respectively. This is presumably due to degraded DNA and possible LM false positive given 10 of 11 (90%) showed negative microscopy during cross check
Prevalence and density of P. vivax at baseline and endpoint
| Baseline | Endpoint | p value | OR/GMR (95%CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parasite prevalence | ||||
| By microscopy | 43/811 (5%)a | 35/740 (5%)b | 0.643 | 0.89 (0.54–1.44) |
| By PCR | 183/811 (23%) | 135/740 (18%) | ||
| By either test | 192/811 (24%) | 142/740 (19%) | ||
| Median parasitaemia/µL (IQR) (microscopy) | 112 (48–1000) | 80 (16–1080) | 0.832 | |
| Median 18S copies/µL (IQR) (qPCR) (n baseline = 115, endpoint = 74) | 192.2 (60.6–605.2) | 177.7 (72.7–1535.0) | 0.719 | |
| Gametocyte prevalence | ||||
| By microscopy | 9/811 (1.1%) | 14/740 (1.9%) | 0.215 | 1.72 (0.69–4.53) |
| By | 49/744 (7%) | 39/704 (5%) | 0.442 | 0.83 (0.52–1.31) |
| By either test | 49/744 (7%) | 39/704 (5%) | 0.442 | 0.83 (0.52–1.31) |
| Gametocyte density (per μL) | ||||
| By microscopy (median) (IQR) | 160 (28–200) | 64 (32–170) | 0.516 | |
| By | 56.4 (23.8–134.0) | 65.6 (26.5–162.2) | 0.810 | 0.9 (0.2–3.0) |
OR odds ratio, GMR geometric mean ratio
aNine and bseven subjects were not confirmed by PCR during baseline and endpoint, respectively. This is presumably due to degraded DNA and possible LM false positive as 11 of 16 (69%) showed negative microscopy during cross check.
*p < 0.05
Fig. 4Dynamics of parasite and gametocyte in P. falciparum at baseline and endpoint. At baseline, P. falciparum prevalence was 6% (52/811) by microscopy and/or PCR. Half of these 52 subjects were positive by microscopy thus treated (54% = 28/52, ■), and 46% (24/52) were submicroscopic and untreated (□). At the endpoint, only two of each microscopic and submicroscopic group were positive. However, 46 subjects other than the mentioned groups were detected positive by microscopy (n = 32) or PCR (n = 14) ( ). Forty of these 46 subjects had data at baseline: 73% (n = 29) were parasite negative and 27% (n = 11) were infected with other species (P. vivax). Furthermore, similar pattern was observed in gametocyte. At baseline, gametocyte prevalence was 2% (19/803). Seventy-nine percent (15/19) had microscopic parasite and treated ( ), and 21% (4/19) had submicroscopic thus untreated ( ). At the endpoint, only one submicroscopic parasite remained positive. However, 22 subjects other than the mentioned groups were positive for gametocyte ( ). Twenty of these 22 subjects were negative at baseline while two had no data
Fig. 5Dynamics of parasite and gametocyte in P. vivax at baseline and endpoint. At baseline, P. vivax prevalence was 24% (192/811) by microscopy and/or PCR. A third of these 192 subjects were microscopic positive thus treated (28% = 54/192, ■) and 72% (138/192) were submicroscopic and untreated (□). At the endpoint, six of the microscopic and 43 submicroscopic subjects were positive. In addition, 93 positive subjects (23 by microscopy and 70 by PCR) other than those groups ( ) appeared. Eighty-five of these 93 subjects had data at baseline: 80 were parasite negative and 5 were infected with other species (P. falciparum). A similar pattern was also observed in gametocyte. At baseline, gametocyte prevalence was 7% (49/744). Fifty-three percent (26/49) had microscopic parasite and treated ( ), while 47% (23/49) had submicroscopic and untreated ( ). At the endpoint, only two (one microscopic and one submicroscopic) were positive. However, 37 subjects other than the mentioned groups were positive for gametocyte ( ). Thirty of these 37 subjects were negative at baseline, while seven had no data