Larvivorous fish for preventing malaria transmission

Abstract

Background Adult anopheline mosquitoes transmit Plasmodium parasites that cause malaria. Some fish species eat mosquito larvae and pupae. In disease control policy documents, the World Health Organization includes biological control of malaria vectors by stocking ponds, rivers, and water collections near where people live with larvivorous fish to reduce Plasmodium parasite transmission. The Global Fund finances larvivorous fish programmes in some countries, and, with increasing efforts in eradication of malaria, policy makers may return to this option. We therefore assessed the evidence base for larvivorous fish programmes in malaria control. Objectives Our main objective was to evaluate whether introducing larvivorous fish to anopheline breeding sites impacts Plasmodium parasite transmission. Our secondary objective was to summarize studies evaluating whether introducing larvivorous fish influences the density and presence of Anopheles larvae and pupae in water sources, to understand whether fish can possibly have an effect. Search methods We attempted to identify all relevant studies regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press, or ongoing). We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in The Cochrane Library ; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CABS Abstracts; LILACS; and the meta Register of Controlled Trials ( m RCT) until 18 June 2013. We checked the reference lists of all studies identified by the above methods. We also examined references listed in review articles and previously compiled bibliographies to look for eligible studies. Selection criteria Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials, including controlled before-and-after studies, controlled time series and controlled interrupted time series studies from malaria-endemic regions that introduced fish as a larvicide and reported on malaria in the community or the density of the adult anopheline population. In the absence of direct evidence of an effect on transmission, we carried out a secondary analysis on studies that evaluated the effect of introducing larvivorous fish on the density or presence of immature anopheline mosquitoes (larvae and pupae forms) in community water sources to determine whether this intervention has any potential in further research on control of malaria vectors. Data collection and analysis Three review authors screened abstracts and examined potentially relevant studies by using an eligibility form. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. If relevant data were unclear or were not reported, w...

Evidence-based vector control? Improving the quality of vector control trials

“…In a step-wedge study, the intervention is rolled out randomly to clusters in a staged fashion so that by the end of the study all clusters will have received the intervention. Adapted from [32].…”

“…To date, however, many Phase III studies often focus exclusively on entomological outcomes, which are generally useful only for demonstrating proof of concept or as a secondary outcome in support of an epidemiological primary outcome. For example, a Cochrane systematic review on larvivorous fish for malaria control did not identify any studies with epidemiological outcomes [32]. The best epidemiological measure is the incidence of clinical disease or disease-specific mortality, but for some diseases, such as dengue, seroincidence (seroconversion in sequential blood draws) and the prevalence of infection in .…”

Expanding the Vector Control Toolbox for Malaria Elimination: A Systematic Review of the Evidence

“…Trends in malaria transmission and performance of VCTs are also confounded by longer-term changes in environmental and infrastructural landscapes and climate (Snow et al, 2017). Although Cochrane reviews remain the gold standard in evidence-based policy, it is often inappropriate to combine findings from studies across different eco-epidemiological settings when VCT efficacy is tied to local transmission ecology (Walshe et al, 2013;Tusting et al, 2013). Second, some emerging VCTs remain years away from accumulating a full dossier of epidemiological evidence, and although further Phase III studies are planned (Thomas M et al, 2015), nearing completion (Mtove et al, 2016), or recently concluded (Homan et al, 2017), we identified fourteen VCTs for which no Phase III epidemiological data were available within the search dates.…”

“…Larval source management (LSM): A Cochrane review compared biological control with larvivorous fish to biological control without larvivorous fish (Walshe et al, 2013). No eligible studies included in this review measured malaria incidence, entomological inoculation rate (EIR), or adult vector density (Table 3).…”

Risk and Control of Mosquito-Borne Diseases in Southeast Asian Rubber Plantations

“…and Poecilia reticulate could potentially be released in the large water-storage jars close to tappers' houses. Although a recent systematic review found that there was a lack of evidence that fish were effective control agents [84], additional well-conducted studies are needed before a recommendation can be made. Other examples of natural predators include the entomophilic mermithid nematode Romanomermis iyengari and the naturally occurring predatory mosquito Toxorhynchites splendens, which have been effective at reducing Ae.…”