Case Report: Case Series of Human Plasmodium knowlesi Infection on the Southern Border of Thailand

Ngernna, Sutharinee; Rachaphaew, Nattawan; Thammapalo, Suwich; Prikchoo, Pathomporn; Kaewnah, Opart; Manopwisedjaroen, Khajohnpong; Phumchuea, Kanit; Suansomjit, Chayanut; Roobsoong, Wanlapa; Sattabongkot, Jetsumon; Nguitragool, Wang

doi:10.4269/ajtmh.19-0063

Cited by 24 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Human malarial infection with this parasite was first reported in 1965 [ 4 ], and a second case presented in 1971 in Malaysia [ 5 ]. Plasmodium knowlesi infections have also shown distribution across the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS), and previous P. knowlesi infections in the GMS have been recorded in Malaysia [ 6 – 9 ], Thailand [ 10 – 12 ], Myanmar [ 13 , 14 ], Laos [ 15 , 16 ], Vietnam [ 17 , 18 ], and Cambodia [ 19 ]. The distribution of P. knowlesi may obstruct the malaria elimination agendas of countries of the GMS of Southeast Asia, especially due to asymptomatic cases, which have been previously reported [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic population of Plasmodium knowlesi during pre-malaria elimination in Thailand

Sugaram

Boondej

Srisutham

et al. 2021

Malar J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Thailand is committed to eliminating malaria by 2024. From 2013 to 2020, the total number of malaria cases have decreased, from 37,741 to 4474 (an 88.1% reduction). However, infections with Plasmodium knowlesi, a monkey malarial pathogen that can also infect humans, have been increasingly observed. This study focused on the molecular analysis of P. knowlesi parasites causing malaria in Thailand. Methods Under Thailand’s integrated Drug Efficacy Surveillance (iDES), which includes drug-resistance monitoring as part of routine case-based surveillance and responses, specimens were collected from malaria patients (n = 966) between 2018 and 2020. Thirty-one mono P. knowlesi infections (3.1%), most of which were from eastern and southern Thailand, were observed and confirmed by nested PCR assay and DNA sequencing. To evaluate whether these pathogens were from different lineages, cluster analysis based on seven microsatellite genotyping markers and the merozoite surface protein 1 (pkmsp1) gene was carried out. The P. knowlesi pyrimethamine resistance gene dihydrofolate reductase (pkdhfr) was sequenced and homology modelling was constructed. Results The results of analysing the seven microsatellite markers and pkmsp1 sequence demonstrated that P. knowlesi parasites from eastern Thailand were of the same lineage as those isolated in Cambodia, while the parasites causing malaria in southern Thailand were the same lineage as those isolated from Malaysia. The sequencing results for the pkdhfr genes indicated the presence of two mutations, Arg34Leu and a deletion at position 105. On analysis with homology modelling, the two mutations were not associated with anti-malarial drug resistance. Conclusions This report compared the genetic populations of P. knowlesi parasites in Thailand from 2018 to 2020 and have shown similar lineages as those isolated in Cambodia and Malaysia of P. knowlesi infection in Thailand and demonstrated that the P. knowlesi parasites were of the same lineages as those isolated in Cambodia and Malaysia. The parasites were also shown to be sensitive to pyrimethamine.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic population of Plasmodium knowlesi during pre-malaria elimination in Thailand

Sugaram

Boondej

Srisutham

et al. 2021

Malar J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The selected studies had been conducted at the community level in several countries in the Western Pacific region: five in Malaysia [ 11 , 14 , 16 , 37 , 38 ], three in Indonesia [ 6 , 39 , 40 ], two in Thailand [ 41 , 42 ], and one in Malaysia and the Philippines [ 43 ]. The study by Fornace et al [ 43 ] was undertaken in the northern part of Sabah, Malaysia, as well as the southern part of the Philippines, which have relatively homogenous populations with minimal variation in environment, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and access to healthcare.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Human Behavior in Plasmodium knowlesi Malaria Infection: A Systematic Review

Naserrudin

Hod

Jeffree

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Plasmodium knowlesi is a non-human parasite that causes zoonotic disease in humans. This systematic review aims to highlight and summarize studies describing human behaviors and activities that expose humans to mosquito bites. Design: English entries in PubMed, Web of Science, and Science Direct from 2010 to 2020 were systematically perused, and the results were synthesized. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal checklists. Setting: Studies that described malaria preventive measures were included. Laboratory, in vivo, in vitro, and animal studies were excluded. Primary and secondary outcome measures: The main outcome of the review was findings from studies describing the behavior that exposed a person or a group to P. knowlesi infection. Results: Twelve eligible studies were of good or medium quality. Attitude, disease misconceptions, perceived threat of disease, lack of motivation, and supernatural or traditional beliefs causing individuals to seek treatment from traditional healers influenced the exposure of individuals or communities to P. knowlesi malaria. Other factors were forestry activities (2.48, 1.45–4.23,95% CI, p = 0.0010) and sleeping outdoors (3.611, 1.48–8.85, 95% CI, p = 0.0049). Conclusions: Future studies must consider the importance of human behavior and community perspective on the infection to provide novel information to improve the current zoonotic malaria programs. Policymakers should concentrate on understanding human behavior and activities that expose individuals or communities to mosquito bites, in order to better design socially feasible interventions.

show abstract

“…Primates, our closest evolutionary relatives, have been implicated in a number of zoonotic disease outbreaks in humans (Morse et al, 2012). Primate-to-human zoonotic transmission is implicated in the origins of HIV/AIDS (Peeters et al, 2002), as well as sporadic human infection with several diseases, including simian malaria (Plasmodium knowlesi), Simian Foamy Virus, monkeypox, Herpes B, Kyasanur Forest Disease virus, and other pathogens (Essbauer, Pfeiffer, & Meyer, 2010;Feeroz et al, 2013;Gillespie, Nunn, & Leendertz, 2008;Holbrook, 2012;Ngernna et al, 2019;Sato et al, 2019;Switzer et al, 2004;Tischer & Osterrieder, 2010;Yadav et al, 2020). Primate-to-human zoonosis is also suspected in some outbreaks of filoviral hemorrhagic fevers such as Marburg and Ebola (Changula, Kajihara, Mweene, & Takada, 2014;Gillespie et al, 2008).…”

Section: The Zoonotic Origins Of Sars-cov-and Human-primate Zoonosesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The human–primate interface in the New Normal: Challenges and opportunities for primatologists in the COVID‐19 era and beyond

Lappan

Malaivijitnond

Radhakrishna

et al. 2020

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of SARS‐CoV‐2 in late 2019 and human responses to the resulting COVID‐19 pandemic in early 2020 have rapidly changed many aspects of human behavior, including our interactions with wildlife. In this commentary, we identify challenges and opportunities at human–primate interfaces in light of COVID‐19, focusing on examples from Asia, and make recommendations for researchers working with wild primates to reduce zoonosis risk and leverage research opportunities. First, we briefly review the evidence for zoonotic origins of SARS‐CoV‐2 and discuss risks of zoonosis at the human–primate interface. We then identify challenges that the pandemic has caused for primates, including reduced nutrition, increased intraspecific competition, and increased poaching risk, as well as challenges facing primatologists, including lost research opportunities. Subsequently, we highlight opportunities arising from pandemic‐related lockdowns and public health messaging, including opportunities to reduce the intensity of problematic human–primate interfaces, opportunities to reduce the risk of zoonosis between humans and primates, opportunities to reduce legal and illegal trade in primates, new opportunities for research on human–primate interfaces, and opportunities for community education. Finally, we recommend specific actions that primatologists should take to reduce contact and aggression between humans and primates, to reduce demand for primates as pets, to reduce risks of zoonosis in the context of field research, and to improve understanding of human–primate interfaces. Reducing the risk of zoonosis and promoting the well‐being of humans and primates at our interfaces will require substantial changes from “business as usual.” We encourage primatologists to help lead the way.

show abstract

Case Report: Case Series of Human Plasmodium knowlesi Infection on the Southern Border of Thailand

Cited by 24 publications

References 22 publications

Genetic population of Plasmodium knowlesi during pre-malaria elimination in Thailand

Genetic population of Plasmodium knowlesi during pre-malaria elimination in Thailand

The Role of Human Behavior in Plasmodium knowlesi Malaria Infection: A Systematic Review

The human–primate interface in the New Normal: Challenges and opportunities for primatologists in the COVID‐19 era and beyond

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About