MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4385621747 · doi:10.1016/s2542-5196(23)00137-7

Effects of next-generation, dual-active-ingredient, long-lasting insecticidal net deployment on insecticide resistance in malaria vectors in Tanzania: an analysis of a 3-year, cluster-randomised controlled trial

2023· article· en· W4385621747 sur OpenAlexaff
Louisa A. Messenger, Nancy S. Matowo, Chad L. Cross, Mohamed Jumanne, Natalie M. Portwood, Jackline Martin, Eliud Lukole, Elizabeth Mallya, Jacklin F Mosha, Robert Kaaya, Oliva Moshi, Bethanie Pelloquin, Katherine Fullerton, Alphaxard Manjurano, Franklin W. Mosha, Thomas Walker, Mark Rowland, Manisha A. Kulkarni, Natacha Protopopoff

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Lancet Planetary Health · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMalaria Research and Control
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeDepartment for International DevelopmentMedical Research CouncilRoyal SocietyDepartment of Health and Social CareWellcome TrustDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Mots-clésBiologyPermethrinAnopheles gambiaeToxicologyPiperonyl butoxideMalariaBioassayPyriproxyfenVeterinary medicinePesticideMedicineEcologyImmunology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Insecticide resistance among malaria-vector species is a pervasive problem that might jeopardise global disease-control efforts. Novel vector-control tools with different modes of action, including long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) incorporating new active ingredients, are urgently needed to delay the evolution and spread of insecticide resistance. We aimed to measure phenotypic and genotypic insecticide-resistance profiles among wild Anopheles collected over 3 years to assess the longitudinal effects of dual-active-ingredient LLINs on insecticide resistance. METHODS: For this analysis, data nested in a 3-year, four parallel-arm, superiority cluster-randomised controlled trial (cRCT) in Tanzania, collected from 84 clusters (39 307 households) formed of 72 villages in the Misungwi district, were used to measure insecticide-resistance profiles among female Anopheles mosquitoes via insecticide-resistance bioassays and quantitative RT-PCR of metabolic-resistance genes. Wild, blood-fed, indoor-resting mosquitoes were collected annually during the rainy seasons from house walls in clusters from all four trial groups. Mosquitoes were morphologically identified as An gambiae sensu lato (SL) or An funestus SL before separate bioassay testing. The primary outcomes were lethal-dose values for α-cypermethrin, permethrin, and piperonyl butoxide pre-exposure plus permethrin-resistance intensity bioassays, mortality 72 h after insecticidal exposure for chlorfenapyr bioassays, fertility reduction 72 h after insecticidal exposure for pyriproxyfen bioassays, and fold change in metabolic-enzyme expression relative to an insecticide-susceptible laboratory strain. All primary outcomes were measured in An funestus SL 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after LLIN distribution. Primary outcomes were also assessed in An gambiae SL if enough mosquitoes were collected. The cRCT is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03554616). FINDINGS: Between May 24, 2019, and Oct 25, 2021, 47 224 female Anopheles were collected for resistance monitoring. In the pyrethroid (PY)-LLIN group, there were significant increases in α-cypermethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 LD50=9·52 vs year 2 76·20, p<0·0001) and permethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 13·27 vs year 2 35·83, p=0·0019) in An funestus SL. In the pyriproxyfen PY-LLIN group, there was similar increase in α-cypermethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 0·71 vs year 2 81·56, p<0·0001) and permethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 5·68 vs year 2 50·14, p<0·0001). In the piperonyl butoxide PY-LLIN group, α-cypermethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 33·26 vs year 3 70·22, p=0·0071) and permethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 47·09 vs year 3 2635·29, p<0·0001) also increased over time. In the chlorfenapyr PY-LLIN group, there were no effects on α-cypermethrin-resistance intensity (year 1 0·42 vs year 3 0·99, p=0·54) or permethrin-resistance intensity (data were not estimable due to nearly 100% mortality). There were also minimal reductions in chlorfenapyr susceptibility. However, in the chlorfenapyr PY-LLIN group, a significant decline in piperonyl-butoxide synergy was seen by year 3 (year 1 0·02 vs year 3 0·26, p=0·020). Highly over-expressed detoxification enzymes showed dynamic patterns of selection throughout the trial. INTERPRETATION: Our phenotypic data supports trial epidemiological findings; chlorfenapyr PY-LLINs provided superior protection from malaria across multiple transmission seasons, with few effects on insecticide-resistance selection. Rapid pyrethroid-resistance intensification in the piperonyl butoxide PY-LLIN group and pre-existing tolerance of pyriproxyfen in vector populations might explain the poorer performance of these two interventions regarding malaria outcomes. Further work is required to elucidate the potential mechanisms driving cross-resistance between pyrethroids and novel active ingredients to better inform the design of pre-emptive resistance-management strategies. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development; UK Medical Research Council; Wellcome Trust; UK Department of Health and Social Care; UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office; and The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation via the Innovative Vector Control Consortium.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,576
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,977

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,315
Écart entre enseignants0,269 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations26
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Lancet Planetary HealthMême sujetMalaria Research and ControlTravaux en français237 207