Approximately 170 million inhabitants of the American continent live at risk of malaria transmission. Although the continent’s contribution to the global malaria burden is small, at least 1 to 1.2 million malaria cases are reported annually. Sixty per cent of the malaria cases occur in Brazil and the other 40% are distributed in 20 other countries of Central and South America. Plasmodium vivax is the predominant species (74.2 %) followed by P. falciparum (25.7 %) and P. malariae (0.1%), and no less than 10 Anopheles species have been identified as primary or secondary malaria vectors. Rapid deforestation and agricultural practices are directly related to increases in Anopheles species diversity and abundance, as well as in the number of malaria cases. Additionally, climate changes profoundly affect malaria transmission and are responsible for malaria epidemics in some regions of South America. Parasite drug resistance is increasing, but due to bio-geographic barriers there is extraordinary genetic differentiation of parasites with limited dispersion. Although the clinical spectrum ranges from uncomplicated to severe malaria cases, due to the generally low to middle transmission intensity, features such as severe anemia, cerebral malaria and other complications appear to be less frequent than in other endemic regions and asymptomatic infections are a common feature. Although the National Malaria Control Programs (NMCP) of different countries differ in their control activities these are all directed to reduce morbidity and mortality by using strategies like health promotion, vector control and impregnate bed nets among others. Recently, international initiatives such as the Malaria Control Program in Andean-country Border Regions (PAMAFRO) (implemented by the Andean Organism for Health (ORAS) and sponsored by The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM)) and The Amazon Network for the Surveillance of Antimalarial Drug Resistance (RAVREDA) (sponsored by the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization (PAHO/WHO) and several other partners), have made great investments for malaria control in the region. We describe here the current status of malaria in a non-Amazonian region comprising several countries of South and Central America participating in the Centro Latino Americano de Investigación en Malaria (CLAIM), an International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research (ICEMR) sponsored by the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

BackgroundDespite the large burden of Plasmodium vivax, little is known about its transmission dynamics. This study explored the population structure and spatio-temporal dynamics of P. vivax recurrent infections after radical cure in a two-year cohort study carried out in a rural community of the Peruvian Amazon.MethodsA total of 37 P. vivax participants recruited in San Carlos community (Peru) between April and December 2008 were treated radically with chloroquine and primaquine and followed up monthly for two years with systematic blood sampling. All samples were screened for malaria parasites and subsequently all P. vivax infections genotyped using 15 microsatellites. Parasite population structure and dynamics were determined by computing different genetic indices and using spatio-temporal statistics.ResultsAfter radical cure, 76% of the study participants experienced one or more recurrent P. vivax infections, most of them sub-patent and asymptomatic. The parasite population displayed limited genetic diversity (He = 0.49) and clonal structure, with most infections (84%) being monoclonal. Spatio-temporal clusters of specific haplotypes were found throughout the study and persistence of highly frequent haplotypes were observed over several months within the same participants/households.ConclusionsIn San Carlos community, P. vivax recurrences were commonly observed after radical treatment, and characterized by asymptomatic, sub-patent and clustered infections (within and between individuals from a few neighbouring households). Moreover low genetic diversity as well as parasite inbreeding are likely to define a clonal parasite population which has important implications on the malaria epidemiology of the study area.

Scale-up of the main vector control interventions, residual insecticides sprayed on walls or structures and/or impregnated in bed nets, together with prompt diagnosis and effective treatment, have led to a global reduction in malaria transmission. However, resistance in vectors to almost all classes of insecticides, particularly to the synthetic pyrethroids, is posing a challenge to the recent trend of declining malaria. Ten International Centers of Excellence for Malaria Research (ICEMR) located in the most malaria-endemic regions of the world are currently addressing insecticide resistance in the main vector populations, which not only threaten hope for elimination in malaria-endemic countries but also may lead to reversal where notable reductions in malaria have been documented. This communication illustrates the current status of insecticide resistance with a focus on the countries where activities are ongoing for 9 out of the 10 ICEMRs. Most of the primary malaria vectors in the ICEMR countries exhibit insecticide resistance, albeit of varying magnitude, and spanning all mechanisms of resistance. New alternatives to the insecticides currently available are still to be fully developed for deployment. Integrated vector management principles need to be better understood and encouraged, and viable insecticide resistance management strategies need to be developed and implemented.

BackgroundThe rapid diagnostic tests for malaria (RDT) constitute a fast and opportune alternative for non-complicated malaria diagnosis in areas where microscopy is not available. The objective of this study was to validate a RDT named Parascreen™ under field conditions in Iquitos, department of Loreto, Peru. Parascreen™ is a RDT that detects the histidine-rich protein 2 (HRP2) antigen from Plasmodium falciparum and lactate deshydrogenase from all Plasmodium species.MethodsParascreen™ was compared with microscopy performed by experts (EM) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the following indicators: sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive (PV+) and negative predictive values (PV-), positive (LR+) and negative likehood ratio (LR-).Results332 patients with suspected non-complicated malaria who attended to the MOH health centres were enrolled between October and December 2006. For P. falciparum malaria, Parascreen™ in comparison with EM, had Se: 53.5%, Sp: 98.7%, PV+: 66.7%, PV-: 97.8%, LR+: 42.27 and LR-: 0.47; and for non-P. falciparum malaria, Se: 77.1%, Sp: 97.6%, PV+: 91.4%, PV-: 92.7%, LR+: 32.0 and LR-: 0.22. The comparison of Parascreen™ with PCR showed, for P. falciparum malaria, Se: 81.8%, Sp: 99.1%, PV+: 75%, PV-: 99.4, LR+: 87.27 and LR-: 0.18; and for non-P. falciparum malaria Se: 76.1%, Sp: 99.2%, PV+: 97.1%, PV-: 92.0%, LR+: 92.51 and LR-: 0.24.ConclusionsThe study results indicate that Parascreen™ is not a valid and acceptable test for malaria diagnosis under the field conditions found in the Peruvian Amazon. The relative proportion of Plasmodium species, in addition to the genetic characteristics of the parasites in the area, must be considered before applying any RDT, especially after the finding of P. falciparum malaria parasites lacking pfhrp2 gene in this region.