4.8 Article

Efficacy of pyriproxyfen-pyrethroid long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and chlorfenapyr-pyrethroid LLINs compared with pyrethroid-only LLINs for malaria control in Benin: a cluster-randomised, superioritytrial

期刊

LANCET
卷 401, 期 10375, 页码 435-446

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)02319-4

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the efficacy of pyriproxyfen-pyrethroid LLINs and chlorfenapyr-pyrethroid LLINs compared to standard LLINs in an area with high pyrethroid resistance. The findings showed that chlorfenapyr-pyrethroid LLINs provided greater protection from malaria than pyrethroid-only LLINs in an area with pyrethroid-resistant mosquitoes. Pyriproxyfen-pyrethroid LLINs conferred protection similar to pyrethroid-only LLINs.
Background New classes of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) combining mixtures of insecticides with different modes of action could put malaria control back on track after rebounds in transmission across sub-Saharan Africa. We evaluated the relative efficacy of pyriproxyfen-pyrethroid LLINs and chlorfenapyr-pyrethroid LLINs compared with standard LLINs against malaria transmission in an area of high pyrethroid resistance in Benin. Methods We conducted a cluster-randomised, superiority trial in Zou Department, Benin. Clusters were villages or groups of villages with a minimum of 100 houses. We used restricted randomisation to randomly assign 60 clusters to one of three LLIN groups (1:1:1): to receive nets containing either pyriproxyfen and alpha-cypermethrin (pyrethroid), chlorfenapyr and alpha-cypermethrin, or alpha-cypermethrin only (reference). Households received one LLIN for every two people. The field team, laboratory staff, analyses team, and community members were masked to the group allocation. The primary outcome was malaria case incidence measured over 2 years after net distribution in a cohort of children aged 6 months-10 years, in the intention-to-treat population. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03931473.Findings Between May 23 and June 24, 2019, 53 854 households and 216 289 inhabitants were accounted for in the initial census and included in the study. Between March 19 and 22, 2020, 115 323 LLINs were distributed to 54 030 households in an updated census. A cross-sectional survey showed that study LLIN usage was highest at 9 months after distribution (5532 [76 center dot 8%] of 7206 participants), but decreased by 24 months (4032 [60 center dot 6%] of 6654). Mean malaria incidence over 2 years after LLIN distribution was 1 center dot 03 cases per child-year (95% CI 0 center dot 96-1 center dot 09) in the pyrethroid-only LLIN reference group, 0 center dot 84 cases per child-year (0 center dot 78-0 center dot 90) in the pyriproxyfen-pyrethroid LLIN group (hazard ratio [HR] 0 center dot 86, 95% CI 0 center dot 65-1 center dot 14; p=0 center dot 28), and 0 center dot 56 cases per child-year (0 center dot 51-0 center dot 61) in the chlorfenapyr-pyrethroid LLIN group (HR 0 center dot 54, 95% CI 0 center dot 42-0 center dot 70; p<0 center dot 0001). Interpretation Over 2 years, chlorfenapyr-pyrethroid LLINs provided greater protection from malaria than pyrethroid-only LLINs in an area with pyrethroid-resistant mosquitoes. Pyriproxyfen-pyrethroid LLINs conferred protection similar to pyrethroid-only LLINs. These findings provide crucial second-trial evidence to enable WHO to make policy recommendations on these new LLIN classes. This study confirms the importance of chlorfenapyr as an LLIN treatment to control malaria in areas with pyrethroid-resistant vectors. However, an arsenal of new active ingredients is required for successful long-term resistance management, and additional innovations, including pyriproxyfen, need to be further investigated for effective vector control strategies.Funding UNITAID, The Global Fund.Copyright (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据