Insecticide-treated eave nets and window screens for malaria control in Chalinze district, Tanzania: a study protocol for a household randomised control trial

Considerations for first field trials of low-threshold gene drive for malaria vector control

Sustainable reductions in African malaria transmission require innovative tools for mosquito control. One proposal involves the use of low-threshold gene drive in Anopheles vector species, where a 'causal pathway' would be initiated by (i) the release of a gene drive system in target mosquito vector species, leading to (ii) its transmission to subsequent generations, (iii) its increase in frequency and spread in target mosquito populations, (iv) its simultaneous propagation of a linked genetic trait aimed at reducing vectorial capacity for Plasmodium, and (v) reduced vectorial capacity for parasites in target mosquito populations as the gene drive system reaches fixation in target mosquito populations, causing (vi) decreased malaria incidence and prevalence. Here the scope, objectives, trial design elements, and approaches to monitoring for initial field releases of such gene dive systems are considered, informed by the successful implementation of field trials of biological control agents, as well as other vector control tools, including insecticides, Wolbachia, larvicides, and attractive-toxic sugar bait systems. Specific research questions to be addressed in initial gene drive field trials are identified, and adaptive trial design is explored as a potentially constructive and flexible approach to facilitate testing of the causal pathway. A fundamental question for decision-makers for the first field trials will be whether there should be a selective focus on earlier points of the pathway, such as genetic efficacy via measurement of the increase in frequency and spread of the gene drive system in target populations, or on wider interrogation of the entire pathway including entomological and epidemiological efficacy. How and when epidemiological efficacy will eventually be assessed will be an essential consideration before decisions on any field trial protocols are finalized and implemented, regardless of whether initial field trials focus exclusively on the measurement of genetic efficacy, or on broader aspects of the causal pathway. Statistical and modelling tools are currently under active development and will inform such decisions on initial trial design, locations, and endpoints. Collectively, the considerations here advance the realization of developer ambitions for the first field trials of low-threshold gene drive for malaria vector control within the next 5 years.

Time of exposure and assessment influence the mortality induced by insecticides against metabolic resistant mosquitoes

BACKGROUND

Increasing metabolic resistance in malaria vector mosquitoes resulted in the development of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) with active ingredients (AI) that target them. Bioassays that accurately measure the mortality induced by these AIs on ITNs are needed. Mosquito metabolic enzyme expression follows a circadian rhythm. Thus, this study assessed (i) influence of the time of day of mosquito exposure and (ii) timing of assessment of mortality post exposure (24 and 72 h) to ITNs against vectors that are susceptible to pyrethroids and those with metabolic and knockdown resistance mechanisms.

METHODS

Two cone bioassay experiments were conducted following World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Firstly, on ITNs incorporated with 2 g AI/kg of deltamethrin (DM) alone, or combined with 8 g AI/kg piperonyl butoxide (PBO) synergist, during the day (9:00-14:00 h) and repeated in the evening (18:00-20:00 h). This was followed by a confirmatory experiment during the afternoon (12:00-14:00 h) and repeated in the night (22:00-24:00 h) using mosquitoes unexposed or pre-exposed to PBO for 1 h before exposure to DM ITNs. Each net piece was tested with a minimum of eight cones per time (N = 24). The outcome was mortality after 24 h (M24) or 72 h (M72) of holding.

RESULTS

The cone bioassays performed using metabolic resistant mosquitoes during the evening showed significantly lower M24 than those performed in the day for DM: odds ratio (OR) 0.14 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.30, p < 0.0001] and DM PBO [OR 0.29 (95% CI 0.18-0.49, p < 0.0001). M72 was higher than M24 for metabolic resistant mosquitoes exposed to DM [OR 1.44 (95% CI 1.09-1.88), p = 0.009] and DM PBO [OR 1.82 (95% CI 1.42-2.34), p < 0.0001]. An influence of hour of experiment and time of assessment was not observed for mosquitoes that had knockdown resistance or that were pyrethroid-susceptible.

CONCLUSIONS

Time of day of experiment and hour of assessment of delayed mortality after exposure of mosquitoes are important considerations in evaluating insecticides that interact with mosquito metabolism to counter metabolic resistant mosquitoes. This is important when evaluating field-aged ITNs that may have lower concentrations of AI.

House modifications for preventing malaria

BACKGROUND

Malaria remains an important public health problem. Research in 1900 suggested house modifications may reduce malaria transmission. A previous version of this review concluded that house screening may be effective in reducing malaria. This update includes data from five new studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of house modifications that aim to reduce exposure to mosquitoes on malaria disease and transmission.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (OVID); Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International (CAB) Abstracts (Web of Science); and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (LILACS) up to 25 May 2022. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry to identify ongoing trials up to 25 May 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials, including cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), cross-over studies, and stepped-wedge designs were eligible, as were quasi-experimental trials, including controlled before-and-after studies, controlled interrupted time series, and non-randomized cross-over studies. We sought studies investigating primary construction and house modifications to existing homes reporting epidemiological outcomes (malaria case incidence, malaria infection incidence or parasite prevalence). We extracted any entomological outcomes that were also reported in these studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used risk ratios (RR) to compare the effect of the intervention with the control for dichotomous data. For continuous data, we presented the mean difference; and for count and rate data, we used rate ratios. We presented all results with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

One RCT and six cRCTs met our inclusion criteria, with an additional six ongoing RCTs. We did not identify any eligible non-randomized studies. All included trials were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa since 2009; two randomized by household and four at the block or village level. All trials assessed screening of windows, doors, eaves, ceilings, or any combination of these; this was either alone, or in combination with roof modification or eave tube installation (an insecticidal "lure and kill" device that reduces mosquito entry whilst maintaining some airflow). In one trial, the screening material was treated with 2% permethrin insecticide. In five trials, the researchers implemented the interventions. A community-based approach was adopted in the other trial. Overall, the implementation of house modifications probably reduced malaria parasite prevalence (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.82; 5 trials, 5183 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), although an inconsistent effect was observed in a subpopulation of children in one study. House modifications reduced moderate to severe anaemia prevalence (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89; 3 trials, 3643 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was no consistent effect on clinical malaria incidence, with rate ratios ranging from 0.38 to 1.62 (3 trials, 3365 participants, 4126.6 person-years). House modifications may reduce indoor mosquito density (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.30; 4 trials, 9894 household-nights; low-certainty evidence), although two studies showed little effect on this parameter.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

House modifications - largely screening, sometimes combined with insecticide and lure and kill devices - were associated with a reduction in malaria parasite prevalence and a reduction in people with anaemia. Findings on malaria incidence were mixed. Modifications were also associated with lower indoor adult mosquito density, but this effect was not present in some studies.