Abstract
Mass drug administration (MDA) of antifilarial drugs is the main strategy towards the elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF). Recent clinical trials indicated that the triple drug therapy with ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine and albendazole (IDA) is much more effective against LF than the widely used two-drug combinations (albendazole plus either ivermectin or diethylcarbamazine). For IDA-based MDA, the stop-MDA decision is taken based on microfilariae (mf) prevalence in adults. In this study, we assess how the probability of eventually reaching elimination of transmission depends on the critical threshold used in transmission assessment surveys (TAS-es) to define whether transmission was successfully suppressed and triple-drug MDA can be stopped. This analysis focuses on treatment-naive Indian settings. We do this for a range of epidemiological and programmatic contexts, using the established LYMFASIM model for transmission and control of LF. Based on our simulations, a single TAS one year after the last MDA round provides limited predictive value of having achieved suppressed transmission, while a higher MDA coverage increases elimination probability, thus leading to a higher predictive value. Every additional TAS, conditional on previous TAS-es being passed with the same threshold, further improves predictive value for low values of stop-MDA thresholds. An mf prevalence threshold of 0.5% corresponding to TAS-3 results in ≥95% predictive value even when the MDA coverage is relatively low.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by funding of the NTD Modelling Consortium by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This supplement is sponsored by research funding of Professor T. Deirdre Hollingsworth by the Li Ka Shing Foundation at the Big Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford and funding of the NTD Modelling Consortium by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-030046). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This work only includes simulation of the population-level prevalence of lymphatic filariasis under different combinations of drugs as well as treatment duration and coverage. The simulated scenarios were hypothetical, and did not require human data. Clearly, no individual patient data was used or simulated here.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data relevant for this work were quantified and described in detail in previous publications. These articles were mentioned in the Methods section of the article.
