PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Julianne Meisner AU - Agapitus Kato AU - Marshall Lemerani AU - Erick Mwamba Miaka AU - Acaga Ismail Taban AU - Jonathan Wakefield AU - Ali Rowhani-Rahbar AU - David Pigott AU - Jonathan Mayer AU - Peter Rabinowitz TI - The effect of livestock density on <em>Trypanosoma brucei gambiense</em> and <em>T. b. rhodesiense</em>: a causal inference-based approach AID - 10.1101/2022.01.13.22268995 DP - 2022 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2022.01.13.22268995 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/14/2022.01.13.22268995.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/14/2022.01.13.22268995.full AB - Domestic and wild animals are important reservoirs of the rhodesiense form of human African trypanosomiasis (rHAT), however quantification of this effect offers utility for deploying non-medical control activities, and anticipating their success when wildlife are excluded. Further, the uncertain role of animal reservoirs—particularly pigs—threatens elimination of transmission (EOT) targets set for the gambiense form (gHAT). Using a new time series of high-resolution cattle and pig density maps, HAT surveillance data collated by the WHO Atlas of HAT, and methods drawn from causal inference and spatial epidemiology, we conducted a retrospective ecological cohort study in Uganda, Malawi, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and South Sudan to estimate the effect of cattle and pig density on HAT risk.For rHAT, we found a positive effect for cattle (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.90, 2.99) and pigs (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.15, 2.75) in Uganda, and a negative effect for cattle (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.71, 1.10) and pigs (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23, 0.67) in Malawi. For gHAT we found a negative effect for cattle in Uganda (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.50, 1.77) and South Sudan (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.54, 0.77) but a positive effect in DRC (1.17, 95% CI 1.04, 1.32). For pigs, we found a positive gHAT effect in both Uganda (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.87, 3.94) and DRC (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10, 1.37), and a negative association in South Sudan (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50, 0.98).While ecological bias may drive the findings in South Sudan, estimated E-values and simulation studies suggest unmeasured confounding and underreporting are unlikely to explain our findings in Malawi, Uganda, and DRC. Our results indicate cattle and pigs are important reservoirs of rHAT in Uganda but not Malawi, and that pigs—and possibly cattle–may be gHAT reservoirs.Author summary Domestic animals, including cattle and pigs, are known to be important for the transmission of the rhodesiense form of human African trypanosomiasis (rHAT), however the relative importance of these reservoirs compared to wild animals is uncertain and likely focus-specific. For the gambiense form (gHAT) transmission is predominantly human-to-human, however pigs are thought to be a possible reservoir. In this study we used pre-existing data on livestock density and HAT risk to estimate the strength of the effect of cattle and pig density on rHAT risk in Uganda and Malawi, and gHAT risk in Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and South Sudan. We found evidence that cattle and pigs increase the risk of rHAT in Uganda but not Malawi, that pigs increase the risk of gHAT in Uganda and DRC, and that cattle increase the risk of gHAT in DRC alone. These results indicate that control of both forms of HAT should include domestic animals in a One Health framework, however control of rHAT in Malawi is unlikely to be achieved if measures exclude wild animals.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementJM T32 ES015459-09 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH/NIEHS) https://www.niehs.nih.gov 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.YesI 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.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.YesAll relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.