How can interventions that target forest-goers be tailored to accelerate malaria elimination in the Greater Mekong Subregion? A systematic review of the qualitative literature

Background Despite decreases in incidence and related mortality, malaria remains a major public health challenge in the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS). The emergence of artemisinin resistance threatens these gains and has prompted efforts to accelerate elimination in the region. In the GMS, transmission now clusters in hotspots along international borders and among high-risk populations, including forest-goers. To eliminate malaria in the region, interventions must target such hard-to-reach populations. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the qualitative research on behaviours and perceptions that influence uptake of and adherence to malaria interventions among forest-goers in the GMS. Methods A systematic search strategy was used to identify relevant sources, including database (OVID SP, PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge) and bibliographic searches. Relevant findings from qualitative research methods were extracted and thematic analysis undertaken. Results Of 268 sources retrieved in searches twenty-two were reviewed. Most reported studies were conducted in Cambodia (n = 10), and were published after 2014 (n = 16). Four major themes emerged that are particularly relevant to the design of intervention packages targeted at forest-goers: (1) understanding of malaria and perceived risk; (2) preventive measures used when visiting the forest; (3) behaviours that put forest-goers at risk of infection; and, (4) malaria-related treatment seeking. There were notable differences across the reviewed articles that suggest the need for a locally tailored approach. Conclusion A more detailed characterization of forest activities is needed but research on this topic raises methodological challenges. Current vector control measures have limitations, with use of insecticidal-treated nets, hammocks and repellents influenced by the type of forest activities and the characteristics of these measures. In contrast, anti-malarial drugs, for example, as chemoprophylaxis, hold promise but require further evaluation

Antimalarial Chemoprophylaxis for Forest Goers in Southeast Asia: An Open-Label, Individually Randomised Controlled Trial

Summary Background Malaria in the eastern Greater Mekong subregion has declined to historic lows. Countries in the Greater Mekong subregion are accelerating malaria elimination in the context of increasing antimalarial drug resistance. Infections are now increasingly concentrated in remote, forested foci. No intervention has yet shown satisfactory efficacy against forest-acquired malaria. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of malaria chemoprophylaxis among forest goers in Cambodia. Methods We conducted an open-label, individually randomized controlled trial in Cambodia, which recruited participants aged 16–65 years staying overnight in forests. Participants were randomly allocated 1:1 to antimalarial chemoprophylaxis, a 3-day course of twice-daily artemether–lumefantrine followed by the same daily dosing once a week while travelling in the forest and for a further 4 weeks after leaving the forest (four tablets per dose; 20 mg of artemether and 120 mg of lumefantrine per tablet), or a multivitamin with no antimalarial activity. Allocations were done according to a computer-generated randomization schedule, and randomization was in permuted blocks of size ten and stratified by village. Investigators and participants were not masked to drug allocation, but laboratory investigations were done without knowledge of allocation. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of either clinical malaria with any Plasmodium species within 1–28, 29–56, or 57–84 days, or subclinical infection detected by PCR on days 28, 56, or 84 using complete-case analysis of the intention-to-treat population. Adherence to study drug was assessed primarily by self-reporting during follow-up visits. Adverse events were assessed in the intention-to-treat population as a secondary endpoint from self-reporting at any time, plus a physical examination and symptom questionnaire at follow-up. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04041973) and is complete. Findings Between March 11 and November 20, 2020, 1,480 individuals were enrolled, of whom 738 were randomly assigned to artemether–lumefantrine and 742 to the multivitamin. 713 participants in the artemether–lumefantrine group and 714 in the multivitamin group had a PCR result or confirmed clinical malaria by rapid diagnostic test during follow-up. During follow-up, 19 (3%, 95% CI 2–4) of 713 participants had parasitaemia or clinical malaria in the artemether– lumefantrine group and 123 (17%, 15–20) of 714 in the multivitamin group (absolute risk difference 15%, 95% CI 12–18; p \u3c 0·0001). During follow-up, there were 166 malaria episodes caused by Plasmodium vivax, 14 by Plasmodium falciparum, and five with other or mixed species infections. The numbers of participants with P. vivax were 18 (3%, 95% CI 2–4) in the artemether–lumefantrine group versus 112 (16%, 13–19) in the multivitamin group (absolute risk difference 13%, 95% CI 10–16; p \u3c 0.0001). The numbers of participants with P. falciparum were two (0.3%, 95% CI 0.03–1.01) in the artemether–lumefantrine group versus 12 (1·7%, 0.9–2.9) in the multivitamin group (absolute risk difference 1·4%, 95% CI 0.4–2·4; p = 0.013). Overall reported adherence to the full course of medication was 97% (95% CI 96–98; 1,797 completed courses out of 1,854 courses started) in the artemether–lumefantrine group and 98% (97–98; 1,842 completed courses in 1,885 courses started) in the multivitamin group. Overall prevalence of adverse events was 1.9% (355 events in 18,806 doses) in the artemether–lumefantrine group and 1.1% (207 events in 19,132 doses) in the multivitamin group (p \u3c 0.0001). Interpretation Antimalarial chemoprophylaxis with artemether–lumefantrine was acceptable and well tolerated and substantially reduced the risk of malaria. Malaria chemoprophylaxis among high-risk groups such as forest workers could be a valuable tool for accelerating elimination in the Greater Mekong subregion

Acceptability and feasibility of malaria prophylaxis for forest goers: findings from a qualitative study in Cambodia

Background: In the Greater Mekong Subregion, adults are at highest risk for malaria, particularly those who visit forests. The absence of effective vector control strategies and limited periods of exposure during forest visits suggest that chemoprophylaxis could be an appropriate strategy to protect forest goers against malaria. Methods: Alongside a clinical trial of anti-malarial chemoprophylaxis in northern Cambodia, qualitative research was conducted, including in-depth interviews and observation, to explore the acceptability of malaria prophylaxis for forest goers, the implementation opportunities, and challenges of this strategy. Results: Prophylaxis with artemether–lumefantrine for forest goers was found to be acceptable under trial conditions. Three factors played a major role: the community’s awareness and perception of the effectiveness of prophylaxis, their trust in the provider, and malaria as a local health concern. The findings highlight how uptake and adherence to prophylaxis are influenced by the perceived balance between benefits and burden of anti-malarials which are modulated by the seasonality of forest visits and its influence on malaria risk. Conclusions: The implementation of anti-malarial prophylaxis needs to consider how the preventive medication can be incorporated into existing vector-control measures, malaria testing and treatment services. The next step in the roll out of anti-malarial prophylaxis for forest visitors will require support from local health workers

Pharmacometrics of high dose ivermectin in early COVID-19: an open label, randomized, controlled adaptive platform trial (PLATCOV)

Background: There is no generally accepted methodology for in vivo assessment of antiviral activity in SARS-CoV-2 infections. Ivermectin has been recommended widely as a treatment of COVID-19, but whether it has clinically significant antiviral activity in vivo is uncertain. Methods: In a multicentre open label, randomized, controlled adaptive platform trial, adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to one of six treatment arms including high-dose oral ivermectin (600 µg/kg daily for 7 days), the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab (600 mg/600 mg), and no study drug. The primary outcome was the comparison of viral clearance rates in the modified intention-to-treat population. This was derived from daily log10 viral densities in standardized duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates. This ongoing trial is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT05041907). Results: Randomization to the ivermectin arm was stopped after enrolling 205 patients into all arms, as the prespecified futility threshold was reached. Following ivermectin, the mean estimated rate of SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance was 9.1% slower (95% confidence interval [CI] –27.2% to +11.8%; n=45) than in the no drug arm (n=41), whereas in a preliminary analysis of the casirivimab/imdevimab arm it was 52.3% faster (95% CI +7.0% to +115.1%; n=10 (Delta variant) vs. n=41). Conclusions: High-dose ivermectin did not have measurable antiviral activity in early symptomatic COVID-19. Pharmacometric evaluation of viral clearance rate from frequent serial oropharyngeal qPCR viral density estimates is a highly efficient and well-tolerated method of assessing SARS-CoV-2 antiviral therapeutics in vitro

The feasibility of novel point-of-care diagnostics for febrile illnesses at health centres in Southeast Asia: a mixed-methods study

Background The decline of malaria in Southeast Asia means other causes of fever are increasingly relevant, but often undiagnosed. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of point-of-care tests to diagnose acute febrile illnesses in primary care settings. Methods A mixed-methods study was conducted at nine rural health centres in western Cambodia. Workshops introduced health workers to the STANDARD(TM) Q Dengue Duo, STANDARD(TM) Q Malaria/CRP Duo and a multiplex biosensor detecting antibodies and/or antigens of eight pathogens. Sixteen structured observation checklists assessed users’ performances and nine focus group discussions explored their opinions. Results All three point-of-care tests were performed well under assessment, but sample collection was difficult for the dengue test. Respondents expressed that the diagnostics were useful and could be integrated into routine clinical care, but were not as convenient to perform as standard malaria rapid tests. Health workers recommended that the most valued point-of-care tests would directly inform clinical management (e.g. a decision to refer a patient or to provide/withhold antibiotics). Conclusions Deployment of new point-of-care tests to health centres could be feasible and acceptable if they are user-friendly, selected for locally circulating pathogens and are accompanied by disease-specific education and simple management algorithms

Expanding the role of village malaria workers in Cambodia: Implementation and evaluation of four health education packages

Background: Early access to correct diagnosis and appropriate treatment is essential for malaria elimination, and in Cambodia this relies on village malaria workers (VMWs). Decreasing malaria transmission leave VMWs with diminished roles. Activities related to the control of other health conditions could keep these community health workers relevant. Methods: During 2022, 120 VMWs attended training at local health centres on four health education packages: 1. hygiene and sanitation; 2. disease surveillance; 3. management of mild illness; 4. vaccination and antenatal care. All training and evaluation sessions were documented through meeting minutes, and 19 focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted among VMWs and health centre personnel. Audio-records of FGDs were transcribed and translated in English and underwent thematic analysis. Results: VMWs reported strong interest in the training and welcomed the expansion of their roles thus assuring their continued relevance. VMWs prioritized disease surveillance and management of mild illness among the available training packages because these topics were seen as most relevant. While training was considered comprehensible and important, the low literacy among VMWs was an impediment suggesting training materials need to be delivered visually. Since VMWs have limited resources, incentives could ensure that VMWs are motivated to undertake additional roles and responsibilities. Conclusions: The transformation of VMWs into community health workers with roles beyond malaria is a promising approach for sustaining health care provision in remote areas. Training needs to consider the low scientific literacy, time constraints and limited resources of VMWs

Antimalarial chemoprophylaxis for forest goers in southeast Asia: an open-label, individually randomised controlled trial.

BackgroundMalaria in the eastern Greater Mekong subregion has declined to historic lows. Countries in the Greater Mekong subregion are accelerating malaria elimination in the context of increasing antimalarial drug resistance. Infections are now increasingly concentrated in remote, forested foci. No intervention has yet shown satisfactory efficacy against forest-acquired malaria. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of malaria chemoprophylaxis among forest goers in Cambodia. MethodsWe conducted an open-label, individually randomised controlled trial in Cambodia, which recruited participants aged 16-65 years staying overnight in forests. Participants were randomly allocated 1:1 to antimalarial chemoprophylaxis, a 3-day course of twice-daily artemether-lumefantrine followed by the same daily dosing once a week while travelling in the forest and for a further 4 weeks after leaving the forest (four tablets per dose; 20 mg of artemether and 120 mg of lumefantrine per tablet), or a multivitamin with no antimalarial activity. Allocations were done according to a computer-generated randomisation schedule, and randomisation was in permuted blocks of size ten and stratified by village. Investigators and participants were not masked to drug allocation, but laboratory investigations were done without knowledge of allocation. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of either clinical malaria with any Plasmodium species within 1-28, 29-56, or 57-84 days, or subclinical infection detected by PCR on days 28, 56, or 84 using complete-case analysis of the intention-to-treat population. Adherence to study drug was assessed primarily by self-reporting during follow-up visits. Adverse events were assessed in the intention-to-treat population as a secondary endpoint from self-reporting at any time, plus a physical examination and symptom questionnaire at follow-up. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04041973) and is complete. FindingsBetween March 11 and Nov 20, 2020, 1480 individuals were enrolled, of whom 738 were randomly assigned to artemether-lumefantrine and 742 to the multivitamin. 713 participants in the artemether-lumefantrine group and 714 in the multivitamin group had a PCR result or confirmed clinical malaria by rapid diagnostic test during follow-up. During follow-up, 19 (3%, 95% CI 2-4) of 713 participants had parasitaemia or clinical malaria in the artemether-lumefantrine group and 123 (17%, 15-20) of 714 in the multivitamin group (absolute risk difference 15%, 95% CI 12-18; p Interpretation Antimalarial chemoprophylaxis with artemether-lumefantrine was acceptable and well tolerated and substantially reduced the risk of malaria. Malaria chemoprophylaxis among high-risk groups such as forest workers could be a valuable tool for accelerating elimination in the Greater Mekong subregion

Expanding the roles of community health workers to sustain programmes during malaria elimination: a meeting report on operational research in Southeast Asia

In Southeast Asia malaria elimination is targeted by 2030. Cambodia aims to achieve this by 2025, driven in large part by the urgent need to control the spread of artemisinin-resistant falciparum malaria infections. Rapid elimination depends on sustaining early access to diagnosis and effective treatment. In much of Cambodia, rapid elimination will rely on a village malaria worker (VMW) network. Yet as malaria declines and is no longer a common cause of febrile illness, VMWs may become less popular with febrile patients, as VMWs do not diagnose or treat other conditions at present. There is a risk that VMWs become inactive and malaria rebounds before the complete interruption of transmission is achieved. During 2021–23 a large-scale operational research study was conducted in western Cambodia to explore how a VMW network could be sustained by including health activities that cover non-malarial illnesses to encourage febrile patients to continue to attend. 105 VMWs received new rapid diagnostic tests (including dengue antigen–antibody and combined malaria/C-reactive protein tests), were trained in electronic data collection, and attended health education packages on hygiene and sanitation, disease surveillance and first aid, management of mild illness, and vaccination and antenatal care. In August 2023 the National Malaria Control Programme of Cambodia convened a stakeholder meeting in Battambang, Cambodia. Findings from the study were reviewed in the context of current malaria elimination strategies. The discussions informed policy options to sustain the relevance of the VMW network in Cambodia, and the potential for its integration with other health worker networks. This expansion could ensure VMWs remain active and relevant until malaria elimination is accomplished

Triple therapy with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine versus artemether-lumefantrine alone for artemisinin-resistant, uncomplicated falciparum malaria: an open-label, randomised, multicentre trial

Background: Late treatment failures after artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) for falciparum malaria have increased in the Greater Mekong subregion in southeast Asia. Addition of amodiaquine to artemether-lumefantrine could provide an efficacious treatment for multidrug-resistant infections. Methods: We conducted an open-label, randomised trial at five hospitals or health centres in three locations (western Cambodia, eastern Cambodia, and Vietnam). Eligible participants were male and female patients aged 2-65 years with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 in blocks of eight to 12) to either artemether-lumefantrine alone (dosed according to WHO guidelines) or artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine (10 mg base per kg/day), both given orally as six doses over 3 days. All received a single dose of primaquine (0·25 mg/kg) 24 h after the start of study treatment to limit transmission of the parasite. Parasites were genotyped, identifying artemisinin resistance. The primary outcome was Kaplan-Meier 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy against recrudescence of the original parasite, assessed by intent-to-treat. Safety was a secondary outcome. This completed trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03355664). Findings: Between March 18, 2018, and Jan 30, 2020, 310 patients received randomly allocated treatment; 154 received artemether-lumefantrine alone and 156 received artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine. Parasites from 305 of these patients were genotyped. 42-day PCR-corrected treatment efficacy was noted in 151 (97%, 95% CI 92-99) of 156 patients with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine versus 146 (95%, 89-97) of 154 patients with artemether-lumefantrine alone; hazard ratio (HR) for recrudescence 0·6 (95% CI 0·2-1·9, p=0·38). Of the 13 recrudescences, 12 were in 174 (57%) of 305 infections with pfkelch13 mutations indicating artemisinin resistance, for which 42-day efficacy was noted in 89 (96%) of 93 infections with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine versus 73 (90%) of 81 infections with artemether-lumefantrine alone; HR for recrudescence 0·44 (95% CI 0·14-1·40, p=0·17). Artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine was generally well tolerated, but the number of mild (grade 1-2) adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, was greater in this group compared with artemether-lumefantrine alone (vomiting, 12 [8%] with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine vs three [2%] with artemether-lumefantrine alone, p=0·03; and nausea, 11 [7%] with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine vs three [2%] with artemether-lumefantrine alone, p=0·05). Early vomiting within 1 h of treatment, requiring retreatment, occurred in no patients of 154 with artemether-lumefantrine alone versus five (3%) of 156 with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine, p=0·06. Bradycardia (≤54 beats/min) of any grade was noted in 59 (38%) of 154 patients with artemether-lumefantrine alone and 95 (61%) of 156 with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine, p=0·0001. Interpretation: Artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine provides an alternative to artemether-lumefantrine alone as first-line treatment for multidrug-resistant P falciparum malaria in the Greater Mekong subregion, and could prolong the therapeutic lifetime of artemether-lumefantrine in malaria-endemic populations