Abstract
Background Identifying effective malaria elimination strategies for remote forested regions in Southeast Asia is challenging given limited resources. In this study, two malaria elimination strategies were evaluated in partnership with the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces - monthly malaria prophylaxis (MMP) and focused screening and treatment (FSAT).
Methods Eight primarily military clusters (1,050 volunteers total) along the Cambodian-Thai border were randomized to 3 months of MMP or FSAT with monthly malaria testing by RDT, PCR, and microscopy for six months. Clusters were sub-randomized to permethrin treated (ITU) or sham water-treated clothing (sITU). Volunteers in MMP clusters were given three full monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) treatment courses with 12 weekly 22.5mg primaquine. Volunteers in FSAT clusters were treated with appropriate first-line antimalarials if malaria-positive by microscopy or PCR.
Results Pf positivity in MMP clusters was reduced by 90% (10% at enrollment to 1% at 6 months; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 9%) at 6 months. However, 32% of Pf cases treated with DP as MMP at baseline recrudesced, requiring rescue treatment at 1 month with artesunate-mefloquine. Pf positivity in FSAT clusters declined 66% over 6 months (7.6% to 2.7%; ARR 4.9%). MMP reduced Pv positivity from 9% to 0% at 3 months, but Pv rebounded to 6.7% at 6 months. FSAT failed to significantly reduce Pv positivity during the study. The 22.5mg weekly primaquine MMP regimen was safe, even for the 15% of volunteers with G6PD-deficiency. Those wearing ITU had additional Pv parasitemia reductions compared to sITU in the FSAT but not MMP groups. PCR was more sensitive than microscopy and RDT for detecting both species.
Conclusions MMP was safe, and superior to FSAT to reduce Pf and Pv, suggesting greater utility to achieve malaria elimination in Cambodia. Low dose (22.5mg) weekly primaquine was a safe adjunct in this setting, even for those with G6PD-deficiency. Permethrin-treated clothing further reduced Pv parasitemia for FSAT but not MMP. MMP may be more easily scaled to eliminate malaria. The military may provide substantial support for regional elimination efforts.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT02653898
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Defense Malaria Assistance Program.
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:
The IRB of the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research gave ethical approval for this work.
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
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
