Background The Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF) provides antifilarial medications to hundreds of millions of people annually to treat filarial infections and prevent elephantiasis. Recent trials have shown that a single-dose, triple-drug treatment (ivermectin with diethylcarbamazine and albendazole [IDA]) is superior to a two-drug combination (diethylcarbamazine plus albendazole [DA]) that is widely used in LF elimination programs. This study was performed to assess the safety of IDA and DA in a variety of endemic settings. Methods and findings Large community studies were conducted in five countries between October 2016 and November 2017. Two studies were performed in areas with no prior mass drug administration (MDA) for filariasis (Papua New Guinea and Indonesia), and three studies were performed in areas with persistent LF despite extensive prior MDA (India, Haiti, and Fiji). Participants were treated with a single oral dose of IDA (ivermectin, 200 μg/kg; diethylcarbamazine, 6 mg/kg; plus albendazole, a fixed dose of 400 mg) or with DA alone. Treatment assignment in each study site was randomized by locality of residence. Treatment was offered to residents who were ≥5 years of age and not pregnant. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed by medical teams with active follow-up for 2 days and passive follow-up for an additional 5 days. A total of 26,836 persons were enrolled (13,535 females and 13,300 males). A total of 12,280 participants were treated with DA, and 14,556 were treated with IDA. On day 1 or 2 after treatment, 97.4% of participants were assessed for AEs. The frequency of all AEs was similar after IDA and DA treatment (12% versus 12.1%, adjusted odds ratio for IDA versus DA 1.15, 95% CI 0.87–1.52, P = 0.316); 10.9% of participants experienced mild (grade 1) AEs, 1% experienced moderate (grade 2) AEs, and 0.1% experienced severe (grade 3) AEs. Rates of serious AEs after DA and IDA treatment were 0.04% (95% CI 0.01%–0.1%) and 0.01% (95% CI 0.00%–0.04%), respectively. Severity of AEs was not significantly different after IDA or DA. Five of six serious AEs reported occurred after DA treatment. The most common AEs reported were headache, dizziness, abdominal pain, fever, nausea, and fatigue. AE frequencies varied by country and were higher in adults and in females. AEs were more common in study participants with microfilaremia (33.4% versus 11.1%, P < 0.001) and more common in microfilaremic participants after IDA than after DA (39.4% versus 25.6%, P < 0.001). However, there was no excess of severe or serious AEs after IDA in this subgroup. The main limitation of the study was that it was open-label. Also, aggregation of AE data from multiple study sites tends to obscure variability among study sites. Conclusions In this study, we observed that IDA was well tolerated in LF-endemic populations. Posttreatment AE rates and severi...

Detection of histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) from the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum provides evidence for active or recent infection, and is utilized for both diagnostic and surveillance purposes, but current laboratory immunoassays for HRP2 are hindered by low sensitivities and high costs. Here we present a new HRP2 immunoassay based on antigen capture through a bead-based system capable of detecting HRP2 at sub-picogram levels. The assay is highly specific and cost-effective, allowing fast processing and screening of large numbers of samples. We utilized the assay to assess results of HRP2-based rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in different P. falciparum transmission settings, generating estimates for true performance in the field. Through this method of external validation, HRP2 RDTs were found to perform well in the high-endemic areas of Mozambique and Angola with 86.4% and 73.9% of persons with HRP2 in their blood testing positive by RDTs, respectively, and false-positive rates of 4.3% and 0.5%. However, in the low-endemic setting of Haiti, only 14.5% of persons found to be HRP2 positive by the bead assay were RDT positive. Additionally, 62.5% of Haitians showing a positive RDT test had no detectable HRP2 by the bead assay, likely indicating that these were false positive tests. In addition to RDT validation, HRP2 biomass was assessed for the populations in these different settings, and may provide an additional metric by which to estimate P. falciparum transmission intensity and measure the impact of interventions.

BackgroundAs a nation reduces the burden of falciparum malaria, identifying areas of transmission becomes increasingly difficult. Over the past decade, the field of utilizing malaria serological assays to measure exposure has grown rapidly, and a variety of serological methods for data acquisition and analysis of human IgG against falciparum antigens are available. Here, different immunoassays and statistical methods are utilized to analyse samples from a low transmission setting and directly compare the estimates generated.MethodsA subset of samples (n = 580) from a 2012 Haitian nationwide malaria survey was employed as sample population of low falciparum endemicity. In addition to the Haitian samples, samples from 247 US residents were used as a reference population of ‘true seronegatives’. Data acquisition was performed through standard ELISA and bead-based multiplex assays assaying for IgG antibodies to the Plasmodium falciparum antigens MSP-1p19, MSP-1p42(D), MSP-1p42(F), and AMA-1. Appropriate parametric distributions and seropositivity cutoff values were determined by statistical measures.ResultsData from both assays showed a strong positive skew, and the lognormal distribution was found to be an appropriate statistical fit to the Haitian and American populations. The American samples served as a good serological true negative population for the multiplex assay, but not for ELISA-based data. Mixture model approaches to determine seronegative and seropositive populations from the Haitian data showed a high degree of distribution overlap—likely due to the historical low falciparum transmission in this nation. Different fittings to the reversible catalytic model resulted depending upon the immunoassay utilized and seropositivity cutoff method employed. Data were also analysed through fitting to penalized B-splines, presenting another possible analytical tool for the analysis of malaria serological data.ConclusionsStandardization of serological techniques and analyses may prove difficult as some tools can prove to be more useful depending on the area and parasite in question, making clear interpretation a vital pursuit. The presented analysis in the low-endemic nation of Haiti found malaria-naive US residents to be an appropriate seronegative reference population for the multiplex assay, and this assay providing consistent estimates between MSP-1 and AMA-1 antigens of percent seropositives for this low-endemic population.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-015-0955-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, and the US-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Haiti and the Dominican Republic, which share the island of Hispaniola, are the last locations in the Caribbean where malaria still persists. Malaria is an important public health concern in Haiti with 17,094 reported cases in 2014. Further, on January 12, 2010, a record earthquake devastated densely populated areas in Haiti including many healthcare and laboratory facilities. Weakened infrastructure provided fertile reservoirs for uncontrolled transmission of infectious pathogens. This situation results in unique challenges for malaria epidemiology and elimination efforts. To help Haiti achieve its malaria elimination goals by year 2020, the Laboratoire National de Santé Publique and Henry Ford Health System, in close collaboration with the Direction d’Épidémiologie, de Laboratoire et de Recherches and the Programme National de Contrôle de la Malaria, hosted a scientific meeting on “Elimination Strategies for Malaria in Haiti” on January 29-30, 2015 at the National Laboratory in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. The meeting brought together laboratory personnel, researchers, clinicians, academics, public health professionals, and other stakeholders to discuss main stakes and perspectives on malaria elimination. Several themes and recommendations emerged during discussions at this meeting. First, more information and research on malaria transmission in Haiti are needed including information from active surveillance of cases and vectors. Second, many healthcare personnel need additional training and critical resources on how to properly identify malaria cases so as to improve accurate and timely case reporting. Third, it is necessary to continue studies genotyping strains of Plasmodium falciparum in different sites with active transmission to evaluate for drug resistance and impacts on health. Fourth, elimination strategies outlined in this report will continue to incorporate use of primaquine in addition to chloroquine and active surveillance of cases. Elimination of malaria in Haiti will require collaborative multidisciplinary approaches, sound strategic planning, and strong ownership of strategies by the Haiti Ministère de la Santé Publique et de la Population.