Both Aedes aegytpi and Ae. albopictus are major vectors of 5 important arboviruses (namely chikungunya virus, dengue virus, Rift Valley fever virus, yellow fever virus, and Zika virus), making these mosquitoes an important factor in the worldwide burden of infectious disease. Vector control using insecticides coupled with larval source reduction is critical to control the transmission of these viruses to humans but is threatened by the emergence of insecticide resistance. Here, we review the available evidence for the geographical distribution of insecticide resistance in these 2 major vectors worldwide and map the data collated for the 4 main classes of neurotoxic insecticide (carbamates, organochlorines, organophosphates, and pyrethroids). Emerging resistance to all 4 of these insecticide classes has been detected in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Target-site mutations and increased insecticide detoxification have both been linked to resistance in Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus but more work is required to further elucidate metabolic mechanisms and develop robust diagnostic assays. Geographical distributions are provided for the mechanisms that have been shown to be important to date. Estimating insecticide resistance in unsampled locations is hampered by a lack of standardisation in the diagnostic tools used and by a lack of data in a number of regions for both resistance phenotypes and genotypes. The need for increased sampling using standard methods is critical to tackle the issue of emerging insecticide resistance threatening human health. Specifically, diagnostic doses and well-characterised susceptible strains are needed for the full range of insecticides used to control Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus to standardise measurement of the resistant phenotype, and calibrated diagnostic assays are needed for the major mechanisms of resistance.

SummaryBackgroundScale-up of insecticide-based interventions has averted more than 500 million malaria cases since 2000. Increasing insecticide resistance could herald a rebound in disease and mortality. We aimed to investigate whether insecticide resistance was associated with loss of effectiveness of long-lasting insecticidal nets and increased malaria disease burden.MethodsThis WHO-coordinated, prospective, observational cohort study was done at 279 clusters (villages or groups of villages in which phenotypic resistance was measurable) in Benin, Cameroon, India, Kenya, and Sudan. Pyrethroid long-lasting insecticidal nets were the principal form of malaria vector control in all study areas; in Sudan this approach was supplemented by indoor residual spraying. Cohorts of children from randomly selected households in each cluster were recruited and followed up by community health workers to measure incidence of clinical malaria and prevalence of infection. Mosquitoes were assessed for susceptibility to pyrethroids using the standard WHO bioassay test. Country-specific results were combined using meta-analysis.FindingsBetween June 2, 2012, and Nov 4, 2016, 40 000 children were enrolled and assessed for clinical incidence during 1·4 million follow-up visits. 80 000 mosquitoes were assessed for insecticide resistance. Long-lasting insecticidal net users had lower infection prevalence (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·63, 95% CI 0·51–0·78) and disease incidence (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0·62, 0·41–0·94) than did non-users across a range of resistance levels. We found no evidence of an association between insecticide resistance and infection prevalence (adjusted OR 0·86, 0·70–1·06) or incidence (adjusted RR 0·89, 0·72–1·10). Users of nets, although significantly better protected than non-users, were nevertheless subject to high malaria infection risk (ranging from an average incidence in net users of 0·023, [95% CI 0·016–0·033] per person-year in India, to 0·80 [0·65–0·97] per person year in Kenya; and an average infection prevalence in net users of 0·8% [0·5–1·3] in India to an average infection prevalence of 50·8% [43·4–58·2] in Benin).InterpretationIrrespective of resistance, populations in malaria endemic areas should continue to use long-lasting insecticidal nets to reduce their risk of infection. As nets provide only partial protection, the development of additional vector control tools should be prioritised to reduce the unacceptably high malaria burden.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and UK Department for International Development.

BackgroundThe landscape of mosquito-borne disease risk has changed dramatically in recent decades, due to the emergence and reemergence of urban transmission cycles driven by invasive Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopictus. Insecticide resistance is already widespread in the yellow fever mosquito, Ae. Aegypti; is emerging in the Asian tiger mosquito Ae. Albopictus; and is now threatening the global fight against human arboviral diseases such as dengue, yellow fever, chikungunya, and Zika. Because the panel of insecticides available for public health is limited, it is of primary importance to preserve the efficacy of existing and upcoming active ingredients. Timely implementation of insecticide resistance management (IRM) is crucial to maintain the arsenal of effective public health insecticides and sustain arbovirus vector control.Methodology and principal findingsThis Review is one of a series being generated by the Worldwide Insecticide resistance Network (WIN) and aims at defining the principles and concepts underlying IRM, identifying the main factors affecting the evolution of resistance, and evaluating the value of existing tools for resistance monitoring. Based on the lessons taken from resistance strategies used for other vector species and agricultural pests, we propose a framework for the implementation of IRM strategies for Aedes mosquito vectors.Conclusions and significanceAlthough IRM should be a fixture of all vector control programs, it is currently often absent from the strategic plans to control mosquito-borne diseases, especially arboviruses. Experiences from other public health disease vectors and agricultural pests underscore the need for urgent action in implementing IRM for invasive Aedes mosquitoes. Based on a plan developed for malaria vectors, here we propose some key activities to establish a global plan for IRM in Aedes spp.

Malaria is one of the most common vector-borne diseases widespread in the tropical and subtropical regions. Despite considerable success of malaria control programs in the past, malaria still continues as a major public health problem in several countries. Vector control is an essential part for reducing malaria transmission and became less effective in recent years, due to many technical and administrative reasons, including poor or no adoption of alternative tools. Of the different strategies available for vector control, the most successful are indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs), including long-lasting ITNs and materials. Earlier DDT spray has shown spectacular success in decimating disease vectors but resulted in development of insecticide resistance, and to control the resistant mosquitoes, organophosphates, carbamates, and synthetic pyrethroids were introduced in indoor residual spraying with needed success but subsequently resulted in the development of widespread multiple insecticide resistance in vectors. Vector control in many countries still use insecticides in the absence of viable alternatives. Few developments for vector control, using ovitraps, space spray, biological control agents, etc., were encouraging when used in limited scale. Likewise, recent introduction of safer vector control agents, such as insect growth regulators, biocontrol agents, and natural plant products have yet to gain the needed scale of utility for vector control. Bacterial pesticides are promising and are effective in many countries. Environmental management has shown sufficient promise for vector control and disease management but still needs advocacy for inter-sectoral coordination and sometimes are very work-intensive. The more recent genetic manipulation and sterile insect techniques are under development and consideration for use in routine vector control and for these, standardized procedures and methods are available but need thorough understanding of biology, ethical considerations, and sufficiently trained manpower for implementation being technically intensive methods. All the methods mentioned in the review that are being implemented or proposed for implementation needs effective inter-sectoral coordination and community participation. The latest strategy is evolution-proof insecticides that include fungal biopesticides, Wolbachia, and Denso virus that essentially manipulate the life cycle of the mosquitoes were found effective but needs more research. However, for effective vector control, integrated vector management methods, involving use of combination of effective tools, is needed and is also suggested by Global Malaria Control Strategy. This review article raises issues associated with the present-day vector control strategies and state opportunities with a focus on ongoing research and recent advances to enable to sustain the gains achieved so far.