Phenotypic Evidence of Emerging Ivermectin Resistance in Onchocerca volvulus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ivermectin (IVM) has been used in Ghana for over two decades for onchocerciasis control. In recent years there have been reports of persistent microfilaridermias despite multiple treatments. This has necessitated a reexamination of its microfilaricidal and suppressive effects on reproduction in the adult female Onchocerca volvulus. In an initial study, we demonstrated the continued potent microfilaricidal effect of IVM. However, we also found communities in which the skin microfilarial repopulation rates at days 90 and 180 were much higher than expected. In this follow up study we have investigated the reproductive response of female worms to multiple treatments with IVM. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The parasitological responses to IVM in two hundred and sixty-eight microfilaridermic subjects from nine communities that had received 10 to 19 annual doses of IVM treatment and one pre-study IVM-naïve community were followed. Skin snips were taken 364 days after the initial IVM treatment during the study to determine the microfilaria (mf) recovery rate. Nodules were excised and skin snips taken 90 days following a second study IVM treatment. Nodule and worm density and the reproductive status of female worms were determined. On the basis of skin mf repopulation and skin mf recovery rates we defined three categories of response--good, intermediate and poor--and also determined that approximately 25% of subjects in the study carried adult female worms that responded suboptimally to IVM. Stratification of the female worms by morphological age and microfilarial content showed that almost 90% of the worms were older or middle aged and that most of the mf were produced by the middle aged and older worms previously exposed to multiple treatments with little contribution from young worms derived from ongoing transmission. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm that in some communities adult female worms were non-responsive or resistant to the anti-fecundity effects of multiple treatments with IVM. A scheme of the varied responses of the adult female worm to multiple treatments is proposed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".