BackgroundAnti-malarial drug resistance in Plasmodium falciparum in India has historically travelled from northeast India along the Myanmar border. The treatment policy for P. falciparum in the region was, therefore, changed from chloroquine to artesunate (AS) plus sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) in selected areas in 2005 and in 2008 it became the first-line treatment. Recognizing that resistance to the partner drug can limit the useful life of this combination therapy, routine in vivo and molecular monitoring of anti-malarial drug efficacy through sentinel sites was initiated in 2009.MethodsBetween May and October 2012, 190 subjects with acute uncomplicated falciparum malaria were enrolled in therapeutic efficacy studies in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura, and Mizoram. Clinical and parasitological assessments were conducted over 42 days of follow-up. Multivariate analysis was used to determine risk factors associated with treatment failure. Genotyping was done to distinguish re-infection from recrudescence as well as to determine the prevalence of molecular markers of antifolate resistance among isolates.ResultsA total of 169 patients completed 42 days of follow-up at three sites. The crude and PCR-corrected Kaplan-Meier survival estimates of AS + SP were 60.8% (95% CI: 48.0-71.4) and 76.6% (95% CI: 64.1-85.2) in Gomati, Tripura; 74.6% (95% CI: 62.0-83.6) and 81.7% (95% CI: 69.4-89.5) in Lunglei, Mizoram; and, 59.5% (95% CI: 42.0-73.2) and 82.3% (95% CI: 64.6-91.6) in Changlang, Arunachal Pradesh. Most patients with P. falciparum cleared parasitaemia within 24 hours of treatment, but eight, including three patients who failed treatment, remained parasitaemic on day 3. Risk factors associated with treatment failure included age < five years, fever at the time of enrolment and AS under dosing. No adverse events were reported. Presence of dhfr plus dhps quintuple mutation was observed predominantly in treatment failure samples.ConclusionAS + SP treatment failure was widespread in northeast India and exceeded the threshold for changing drug policy. Based on these results, in January 2013 the expert committee of the National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme formulated the first subnational drug policy for India and selected artemether plus lumefantrine as the new first-line treatment in the northeast. Continued monitoring of anti-malarial drug efficacy is essential for effective malaria control.
Historically, malaria in India was predominantly caused by Plasmodium vivax, accounting for 53% of the estimated cases. After the spread of drug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum in the 1990s, the prevalence of the two species remained equivalent at the national level for a decade. By 2014, the proportion of P. vivax has decreased to 34% nationally, but with high regional variation. In 2014, P. vivax accounted for around 380,000 malaria cases in India; almost a sixth of all P. vivax cases reported globally. Plasmodium vivax has remained resistant to control measures, particularly in urban areas. Urban malaria is predominantly caused by P. vivax and is subject to outbreaks, often associated with increased mortality, and triggered by bursts of migration and construction. The epidemiology of P. vivax varies substantially within India, including multiple relapse phenotypes with varying latencies between primary infection and relapse. Moreover, the hypnozoite reservoir maintains transmission potential and enables reestablishment of the parasite in areas in which it was thought eradicated. The burden of malaria in India is complex because of the highly variable malaria eco-epidemiological profiles, transmission factors, and the presence of multiple Plasmodium species and Anopheles vectors. This review of P. vivax malaria in India describes epidemiological trends with particular attention to four states: Gujarat, Karnataka, Haryana, and Odisha.
Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.
Establishing and expanding government led networks to strengthen infection prevention and control and healthcare associated infection surveillance are essential to effectively tackle antimicrobial resistance. Soumya Swaminathan and colleagues discuss the progress in India
Covid-19 has once again brought into focus our limited preparedness to deal with epidemics. Most nations, across the globe, have responded with a resolve to come stronger out of this crisis and leaderships across the world have shown great commitment to protecting its people from Covid-19. Covid-19 has also taught us a few things for the future. One such learning has been that a strong shift in focus towards non-communicable diseases driving health infrastructure across the globe for the last few decades has come at neglect of communicable diseases. In that sense, therefore, the current pandemic has been a wake-up call. Organised Medicine Academic Guild (OMAG), an umbrella organization of professional associations gathered a group of health experts to develop a policy document on epidemic preparedness to limit the influence of epidemics like Covid-19.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.