TY - JOUR T1 - Serological evaluation of a cluster randomised trial on the use of reactive focal mass drug administration and reactive vector control to reduce malaria transmission in Zambezi Region, Namibia JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.04.12.21255334 SP - 2021.04.12.21255334 AU - Lindsey Wu AU - Michelle S. Hsiang AU - Lisa M. Prach AU - Leah Schrubbe AU - Henry Ntuku AU - Mi-Suk Kang Dufour AU - Brooke Whittemore AU - Valerie Scott AU - Joy Yala AU - Kathryn W. Roberts AU - Catriona Patterson AU - Joseph Biggs AU - Tom Hall AU - Kevin K.A. Tetteh AU - Cara Smith Gueye AU - Bryan Greenhouse AU - Adam Bennett AU - Jennifer L. Smith AU - Stark Katokele AU - Petrina Uusiku AU - Davis Mumbengegwi AU - Roly Gosling AU - Chris Drakeley AU - Immo Kleinschmidt Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/19/2021.04.12.21255334.abstract N2 - Due to challenges in measuring changes in malaria in low transmission settings, serology is increasingly being used to complement clinical and parasitological surveillance. Longitudinal cohort studies have shown serological markers, such as Etramp5.Ag1, to be particularly discriminatory of spatio-temporal differences in malaria transmission. However, these markers have yet to be used as endpoints in intervention trials. This study is an extended analysis of a 2017 cluster randomised trial conducted in Zambezi Region, Namibia, evaluating the effectiveness of reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) and reactive vector control (RAVC). A panel of eight serological markers of Plasmodium falciparum infection - Etramp5.Ag1, GEXP18, HSP40.Ag1, Rh2.2030, EBA175, PfMSP119, PfAMA1, and PfGLURP.R2 - was used on a multiplex immunoassay to measure population antibody responses as trial endpoints.Reductions in sero-prevalence to antigens Etramp.Ag1, PfMSP119, Rh2.2030, and PfAMA1 were observed in study arms combining rfMDA and RAVC, but only effects for Etramp5.Ag1 were statistically significant. Etramp5.Ag1 sero-prevalence was significantly lower in all intervention arms. Compared to the reference arms, adjusted Etramp5.Ag1 prevalence ratio (aPR) was 0.77 (95%CI 0.65 – 0.90, p<0.001) for rfMDA and 0.79 (95%CI 0.67 – 0.92, p=0.001) for RACD. For combined rfMDA plus RAVC, aPR was 0.58 (95%CI 0.45 – 0.75, p<0.001). Significant reductions were also observed based on continuous antibody responses. Sero-prevalence as an endpoint was found to achieve higher study power (99.9% power to detect a 50% reduction in prevalence) compared to quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) prevalence (72.9% power to detect a 50% reduction in prevalence).The use of serological endpoints to evaluate trial outcomes was comparable to qPCR and measured effect size with improved precision. Serology has clear application in cluster randomised trials, particularly in settings where measuring clinical incidence or infection is less reliable due to seasonal fluctuations, limitations in health care seeking, or incomplete testing and reporting.What is already known?▪ Numerous serological studies across sub-Saharan Africa have found that malaria-specific antibody responses are highly correlated with malaria transmission.▪ Serology is increasingly being used to complement traditional malaria surveillance data in settings where clinical or parasitological measures of incidence or infection may be less reliable due to fluctuations in parasite densities, limitations in health care seeking, or incomplete testing and reporting.▪ The identification of new serological markers associated with recent malaria exposure hold promise as measures of malaria incidence. In previous longitudinal cohort studies, Etramp5.Ag1 has been shown to be a discriminatory serological marker capable of detecting spatio-temporal differences in malaria transmission. However, these markers have never been formally used as endpoints in a malaria cluster randomised trial.What are the new findings?▪ This study is the first application of serological endpoints in a malaria cluster randomised trial. Using a multiplexed immunoassay, a panel of sero-incidence markers of recent malaria exposure were used to evaluate the effectiveness of reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) and reactive focal vector control (RAVC) compared to reactive case detection (standard of care) to reduce malaria transmission.▪ Cluster-level antibody responses were significantly lower in all intervention arms compared to control, and effect sizes were measured with greater study power than other trial endpoints such as quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) parasite prevalence.What do the new findings imply?▪ The findings from this study, together with ongoing innovations in assay design and multi-disease platforms, illustrate the potential application of serological markers as endpoints in cluster randomised trials. The use of serological endpoints can help achieve trial efficiencies, such as reduced sample size, particularly in low transmission settings or multi-intervention trials where measuring differences between study arms may be challenging with clinical or parasitological endpoints alone.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT02610400Funding StatementThis study was supported by Novartis Foundation (A122666), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1160129), and the Horchow Family Fund (5300375400). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The trial received ethical approval from the Namibia MoHSS (17/3/3), and the Institutional Review Boards of the University of Namibia (MRC/259/2017), University of California San Francisco (15-17422) and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (10411).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAfter publication, data collected from this study are available upon request to the corresponding author. Available data include de-identified individual participant data, cluster-level data, and a data dictionary defining each field in the set. A published manuscript of the protocol is also available online. Requests to conduct analyses outside the scope of this publication will be reviewed by the principal investigators (MSH, DM, RG, and IK) to determine whether a requester's proposed use of the data is scientifically and ethically appropriate and does not conflict with constraints or informed consent limitations identified by the institutions that granted ethical approval for the study. Requests to reanalyse the data presented in this Article will not require such review. ER -