10 research outputs found

    Cost-effectiveness of district-wide seasonal malaria chemoprevention when implemented through routine malaria control programme in Kita, Mali using fixed point distribution

    Get PDF
    Background Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) is a strategy for malaria control recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) since 2012 for Sahelian countries. The Mali National Malaria Control Programme adopted a plan for pilot implementation and nationwide scale-up by 2016. Given that SMC is a relatively new approach, there is an urgent need to assess the costs and cost effectiveness of SMC when implemented through the routine health system to inform decisions on resource allocation. Methods Cost data were collected from pilot implementation of SMC in Kita district, which targeted 77,497 children aged 3–59 months. Starting in August 2014, SMC was delivered by fixed point distribution in villages with the first dose observed each month. Treatment consisted of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine once a month for four consecutive months, or rounds. Economic and financial costs were collected from the provider perspective using an ingredients approach. Effectiveness estimates were based upon a published mathematical transmission model calibrated to local epidemiology, rainfall patterns and scale-up of interventions. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were calculated for the cost per malaria episode averted, cost per disability adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, and cost per death averted. Results The total economic cost of the intervention in the district of Kita was US 357,494.Drugcostsandpersonnelcostsaccountedfor34357,494. Drug costs and personnel costs accounted for 34% and 31%, respectively. Incentives (payment other than salary for efforts beyond routine activities) accounted for 25% of total implementation costs. Average financial and economic unit costs per child per round were US 0.73 and US 0.86,respectively;totalannualfinancialandeconomiccostsperchildreceivingSMCwereUS0.86, respectively; total annual financial and economic costs per child receiving SMC were US 2.92 and US 3.43,respectively.Accountingforcoverage,theeconomiccostperchildfullyadherent(receivingallfourrounds)wasUS3.43, respectively. Accounting for coverage, the economic cost per child fully adherent (receiving all four rounds) was US 6.38 and US 4.69,ifweightedhighlyadherent,(receiving3or4roundsofSMC).Whencostswerecombinedwithmodelledeffects,theeconomiccostpermalariaepisodeavertedinchildrenwasUS4.69, if weighted highly adherent, (receiving 3 or 4 rounds of SMC). When costs were combined with modelled effects, the economic cost per malaria episode averted in children was US 4.26 (uncertainty bound 2.83–7.17), US 144(135–153)perDALYavertedandUS144 (135–153) per DALY averted and US 14,503 (13,604–15,402) per death averted. Conclusions When implemented at fixed point distribution through the routine health system in Mali, SMC was highly cost-effective. As in previous SMC implementation studies, financial incentives were a large cost component

    Phase 1 Study of a Combination AMA1 Blood Stage Malaria Vaccine in Malian Children

    Get PDF
    Apical Membrane Antigen-1 (AMA1) is one of the leading blood stage malaria vaccine candidates. AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel consists of an equal mixture of recombinant AMA1 from FVO and 3D7 clones of P. falciparum, adsorbed onto Alhydrogel. A Phase 1 study in semi-immune adults in Mali showed that the vaccine was safe and immunogenic, with higher antibody responses in those who received the 80 microg dose. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and immunogenicity of this vaccine in young children in a malaria endemic area.This was a Phase 1 dose escalating study in 36 healthy children aged 2-3 years started in March 2006 in Donéguébougou, Mali. Eighteen children in the first cohort were randomized 2 ratio 1 to receive either 20 microg AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel or Haemophilus influenzae type b Hiberix vaccine. Two weeks later 18 children in the second cohort were randomized 2 ratio 1 to receive either 80 microg AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel or Haemophilus influenzae type b Hiberix vaccine. Vaccinations were administered on Days 0 and 28 and participants were examined on Days 1, 2, 3, 7, and 14 after vaccination and then about every two months. Results to Day 154 are reported in this manuscript.Of 36 volunteers enrolled, 33 received both vaccinations. There were 9 adverse events related to the vaccination in subjects who received AMA1-C1 vaccine and 7 in those who received Hiberix. All were mild to moderate. No vaccine-related serious or grade 3 adverse events were observed. There was no increase in adverse events with increasing dose of vaccine or number of immunizations. In subjects who received the test vaccine, antibodies to AMA1 increased on Day 14 and peaked at Day 42, with changes from baseline significantly different from subjects who received control vaccine.AMA-C1 vaccine is well tolerated and immunogenic in children in this endemic area although the antibody response was short lived.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00341250

    Impact of a Plasmodium falciparum AMA1 Vaccine on Antibody Responses in Adult Malians

    Get PDF
    Apical Membrane Antigen 1 (AMA1) of Plasmodium falciparum merozoites is a leading blood-stage malaria vaccine candidate. Protection of Aotus monkeys after vaccination with AMA1 correlates with antibody responses.A randomized, controlled, double-blind phase 1 clinical trial was conducted in 54 healthy Malian adults living in an area of intense seasonal malaria transmission to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the AMA1-C1 malaria vaccine. AMA1-C1 contains an equal mixture of yeast-expressed recombinant proteins based on sequences from the FVO and 3D7 clones of P. falciparum, adsorbed on Alhydrogel. The control vaccine was the hepatitis B vaccine (Recombivax). Participants were enrolled into 1 of 3 dose cohorts (n = 18 per cohort) and randomized 2:1 to receive either AMA1-C1 or Recombivax. Participants in the first, second, and third cohorts randomized to receive AMA1-C1 were vaccinated with 5, 20 and 80 microg of AMA1-C1, respectively. Vaccinations were administered on days 0, 28, and 360, and participants were followed until 6 months after the final vaccination. AMA1-C1 was well tolerated; no vaccine-related severe or serious adverse events were observed. AMA1 antibody responses to the 80 microg dose increased rapidly from baseline levels by days 14 and 28 after the first vaccination and continued to increase after the second vaccination. After a peak 14 days following the second vaccination, antibody levels decreased to baseline levels one year later at the time of the third vaccination that induced little or no increase in antibody levels.Although the AMA1-C1 vaccine candidate was well-tolerated and induced antibody responses to both vaccine and non-vaccine alleles, the antibody response after a third dose given at one year was lower than the response to the initial vaccinations. Additionally, post-vaccination increases in anti-AMA1 antibody levels were not associated with significant changes in in vitro growth inhibition of P. falciparum.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00343005

    Measuring the impact of seasonal malaria chemoprevention as part of routine malaria control in Kita, Mali

    No full text
    Abstract Background Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) is a new strategy recommended by WHO in areas of highly seasonal transmission in March 2012. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown SMC to be highly effective, evidence and experience from routine implementation of SMC are limited. Methods A non-randomized pragmatic trial with pre-post design was used, with one intervention district (Kita), where four rounds of SMC with sulfadoxine + amodiaquine (SP + AQ) took place in August–November 2014, and one comparison district (Bafoulabe). The primary aims were to evaluate SMC coverage and reductions in prevalence of malaria and anaemia when SMC is delivered through routine programmes using existing community health workers. Children aged 3–59 months from 15 selected localities per district, sampled with probability proportional to size, were surveyed and blood samples collected for malaria blood smears, haemoglobin (Hb) measurement, and molecular markers of drug resistance in two cross-sectional surveys, one before SMC (July 2014) and one after SMC (December 2014). Difference-in-differences regression models were used to assess and compare changes in malaria and anaemia in the intervention and comparison districts. Adherence and tolerability of SMC were assessed by cross-sectional surveys 4–7 days after each SMC round. Coverage of SMC was assessed in the post-SMC survey. Results During round 1, 84% of targeted children received at least the first SMC dose, but coverage declined to 67% by round 4. Across the four treatment rounds, 54% of children received four complete SMC courses. Prevalence of parasitaemia was similar in intervention and comparison districts prior to SMC (23.4 vs 29.5%, p = 0.34) as was the prevalence of malaria illness (2.4 vs 1.9%, p = 0.75). After SMC, parasitaemia prevalence fell to 18% in the intervention district and increased to 46% in the comparison district [difference-in-differences (DD) OR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.20–0.60]. Prevalence of malaria illness fell to a greater degree in the intervention district versus the comparison district (DD OR = 0.20; 95% CI 0.04–0.94) and the same for moderate anaemia (Hb < 8 g/dL) (DD OR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.11–0.65). The frequency of the quintuple mutation (dhfr N51I, C59R and S108N + dhps A437G and K540E) remained low (5%) before and after intervention in both districts. Conclusions Routine implementation of SMC in Mali substantially reduced malaria and anaemia, with reductions of similar magnitude to those seen in previous RCTs. Improving coverage could further strengthen SMC impact. Trial registration clinical trial registration number NCT0289429

    A randomized and controlled Phase 1 study of the safety and immunogenicity of the AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel + CPG 7909 vaccine for Plasmodium falciparum malaria in semi-immune Malian adults.

    No full text
    A double blind, randomized, controlled Phase 1 clinical trial was conducted to assess the safety and immunogenicity in malaria exposed adults of the Plasmodium falciparum blood stage vaccine candidate Apical Membrane Antigen 1- Combination 1 (AMA1-C1)/Alhydrogel(®) with and without the novel adjuvant CPG 7909. Participants were healthy adults 18–45 years old living in the village of Donéguébougou, Mali. A total of 24 participants received 2 doses one month apart of either 80 μg AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel or 80 μg AMA1-C1/Alhydrogel + 564 μg CPG 7909. The study started in October 2007 and completed follow up in May 2008. Both vaccines were well tolerated, with only mild local adverse events and no systemic adverse events judged related to vaccination. The difference in antibody responses were over 2 fold higher in the group receiving CPG 7909 for all time points after second vaccination and the differences are statistically significant (all p<0.05). This is the first use of the novel adjuvant CPG 7909 in a malaria exposed population

    Comparing the Understanding of Subjects Receiving a Candidate Malaria Vaccine in the United States and Mali

    Get PDF
    Initial responses to questionnaires used to assess participants' understanding of informed consent for malaria vaccine trials conducted in the United States and Mali were tallied. Total scores were analyzed by age, sex, literacy (if known), and location. Ninety-two percent (92%) of answers by United States participants and 85% of answers by Malian participants were correct. Questions more likely to be answered incorrectly in Mali related to risk, and to the type of vaccine. For adult participants, independent predictors of higher scores were younger age and female sex in the United States, and male sex in Mali. Scores in the United States were higher than in Mali (P = 0.005). Despite this difference participants at both sites were well informed overall. Although interpretation must be qualified because questionnaires were not intended as research tools and were not standardized among sites, these results do not support concerns about systematic low understanding among research participants in developing versus developed countries
    corecore