Jack Guy Lafontant

Randomised placebo-controlled comparison of ivermectin and albendazole alone and in combination for Wuchereria bancrofti microfilaraemia in Haitian children.

BACKGROUND Lymphatic filariasis and intestinal helminth infections are important disorders in tropical areas. Periodic treatment with albendazole is now used in many school-based intestinal helminth-control programmes. However, few such programmes exist for lymphatic filariasis, despite evidence that single-dose treatment with ivermectin can greatly reduce the concentration of Wuchereria bancrofti microfilariae in the blood for months to years. We aimed to assess the potential for school-based control of lymphatic filariasis by investigating the efficacy and tolerability or combined ivermectin and albendazole in Haitian schoolchildren. METHODS In January, 1996, we collected 832 20 microL capillary blood samples for inclusion in a randomised controlled study from children aged 5-11 years, and examined them by microscopy for W bancrofti microfilariae. Infected children were randomly assigned treatment with placebo (n = 29), a single 200-400 micrograms/kg dose of ivermectin (mean, 273 micrograms/kg, n = 28), 400 mg albendazole (n = 29), or a combination of 200-400 micrograms/kg ivermectin and 400 mg albendazole (n = 24). Children with high concentrations of microfilariae in the blood were admitted to hospital and adverse reactions were monitored for 3-5 days, otherwise children were examined at school or during a visit to their home. 4 months after treatment, we examined blood samples again for microfilariae. FINDINGS 113 microfilaraemic children were enrolled (mean age 7.8 years). 4 months after treatment, the proportion of children who remained positive for microfilariae was significantly lower in the ivermectin plus albendazole group (four [17%]), but there were no significant changes in the other three groups (20 [69%] placebo, 22 [76%] albendazole alone, 17 [61%] ivermectin alone remained positive; p = 0.004). Geometric mean microfilarial concentration decreased from 9.3 to 5.3 per 20 microL blood among children who received placebo; from 15.5 to 1.5 per 20 microL blood among those who received ivermectin only (p = 0.032); from 14.1 to 5.1 per 20 microL blood among those who received albendazole alone; and from 13.7 to 0.3 per 20 microL blood among those who received both ivermectin and albendazole (p = 0.0001). Systemic adverse reactions did not differ significantly between children who received ivermectin alone and those who were treated with ivermectin and albendazole [corrected]. INTERPRETATION For children with W bancrofti microfilaraemia, combined treatment with ivermectin and albendazole was more effective than treatment with ivermectin only, with no measurable increase in severity of adverse reactions.

Spatial clustering of filarial transmission before and after a Mass Drug Administration in a setting of low infection prevalence

Background In the global program for the elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF) longitudinal assessment of the prevalence of microfilaremia and antigenemia is recommended to monitor the effect of mass treatment on transmission. Additional monitoring tools such as entomologic and antibody methods may be useful in identifying residual foci of infection. In this study, we characterized serologic markers of infection and exposure spatially both before and after mass treatment, in an area of initial low Wuchereria bancrofti infection prevalence. Methods Consenting persons in the sentinel community were tested for circulating microfilaria and antigen (by immunochromatographic test) before and after the 1st annual mass drug administration of diethylcarbamazine and albendazole. A cohort of 161 persons provided serum specimens both years that were tested for antifilarial IgG (1 and 4) antibody. Every house was mapped using a differential Global Positioning System; this information was linked to the serologic data. W. bancrofti infection in the mosquito vector was assessed with year-round collection. Multiple linear regression was used to investigate the influence of antigen-positive persons on the antifilarial antibody responses of antigen-negative neighbors. Results After mass treatment, decreases were observed in the sentinel site in the overall prevalence of antigen (10.4% to 6.3%) and microfilaremia (0.9 to 0.4%). Of the persons in the cohort that provided serum specimens both years, 79% received treatment. Antigen prevalence decreased from 15.0% to 8.7%. Among 126 persons who received treatment, antigen and antifilarial IgG1 prevalence decreased significantly (p = 0.002 and 0.001, respectively). Among 34 persons who did not receive treatment, antifilarial IgG1 prevalence increased significantly (p = 0.003). Average antifilarial IgG1 levels decreased in households with high treatment coverage and increased in households that refused treatment. Each 10-meter increase in distance from the residence of a person who was antigen-positive in 2000 was associated a 4.68 unit decrease in antifilarial IgG1 level in 2001, controlling for other factors (p = 0.04). Discussion Antifilarial antibody assays can be used as a measure of filarial exposure. Our results suggest that micro-scale spatial heterogeneity exists in LF exposure and infection. Treatment appeared to be associated with reduced exposure at the sub-community level, suggesting the need to achieve high and homogeneous coverage. Public health messages should note the benefits of having ones neighbors receive treatment with antifilarial drugs.

Eliminating lymphatic filariasis: a view from the field.

Among infections closely associated with poverty, lymphatic filariasis (LF) is a study in contrasts. It is both a consequence of and a contributor to poverty. Although rarely fatal, it is recognized as a leading global cause of lifelong disability as well as significant personal, social, and economic burdens coincident with disease. Infection is often considerably more prevalent in communities than the number of cases of overt pathology for which LF is best known (lymphedema, elephantiasis, and hydrocele). With an estimated 120 million to 130 million affected persons in 83 countries and 1.25 billion persons living in areas at risk, in some countries LF may be expanding its range, whereas in others, with economic development, it has disappeared with little if any targeted intervention. The transmission cycle is relatively inefficient, yet an association with pockets of deepest poverty remains tenacious. Thanks to scientific advances in diagnostic tools, and particularly in control strategies focused on large‐scale drug donation and mass drug distribution programs, scientists and policy makers now consider LF eliminable. Together with new approaches for morbidity control, a hopeful tone surrounds a disease problem that as recently as two decades ago could easily have been categorized as among the most neglected of neglected diseases. Continued progress toward global LF elimination will require solutions to potential obstacles in the most challenging—that is, the poorest—endemic settings. This chapter reviews progress toward LF elimination and some of the remaining challenges from a perspective in Haiti, the only least developed country of the Americas.

Translating Research into Reality: Elimination of Lymphatic Filariasis from Haiti

Abstract. Research provides the essential foundation of disease elimination programs, including the global program to eliminate lymphatic filariasis (GPELF). The development and validation of new diagnostic tools and intervention strategies, critical steps in the evolution of GPELF, required a global effort. Lymphatic filariasis research in Haiti involved many partners and was directly linked to the development of the national elimination program and to the success achieved to date. Ongoing research efforts involving many partners will continue to be important in resolving the challenges faced by the program today in its final efforts to achieve elimination.