Background: According to the World Health Organization, there were more than 228 million cases of malaria globally in 2018, with 93% of cases occurring in Africa; in Mali, a 13% increase in the number of cases was observed between 2015 and 2018; this study aimed to evaluate the impact of meteorological and environmental factors on the geo-epidemiology of malaria in the health district of Dire, Mali. Methods: Meteorological and environmental variables were synthesized using principal component analysis and multiple correspondence analysis, the relationship between malaria incidence and synthetic indicators was determined using a multivariate general additive model; hotspots were detected by SaTScan. Results: Malaria incidence showed high inter and intra-annual variability; the period of high transmission lasted from September to February; health areas characterized by proximity to the river, propensity for flooding and high agricultural yield were the most at risk, with an incidence rate ratio of 2.21 with confidence intervals (95% CI: 1.85–2.58); malaria incidence in Dire declined from 120 to 20 cases per 10,000 person-weeks between 2013 and 2017. Conclusion: The identification of areas and periods of high transmission can help improve malaria control strategies.

BackgroundNeglected tropical diseases are co-endemic in many areas of the world, including sub Saharan Africa. Currently lymphatic filariasis (albendazole/ivermectin) and trachoma (azithromycin) are treated separately. Consequently, financial and logistical benefit can be gained from integration of preventive chemotherapy programs in such areas.Methodology/Findings4 villages in two co-endemic districts (Kolondièba and Bougouni) of Sikasso, Mali, were randomly assigned to coadministered treatment (ivermectin/albendazole/azithromycin) or standard therapy (ivermectin/albendazole with azithromycin 1 week later). These villages had previously undergone 4 annual MDA campaigns with ivermectin/albendazole and 2 with azithromycin. One village was randomly assigned to each treatment arm in each district. There were 7515 eligible individuals in the 4 villages, 3011(40.1%) of whom participated in the study. No serious adverse events occurred, and the majority of adverse events were mild in intensity (mainly headache, abdominal pain, diarrhoea and “other signs/symptoms”). The median time to the onset of the first event, of any type, was later (8 days) in the two standard treatment villages than in the co-administration villages. Overall the number of subjects reporting any event was similar in the co-administration group compared to the standard treatment group [18.7% (281/1501) vs. 15.8% (239/1510)]. However, the event frequency was higher in the coadministration group (30.4%) than in the standard treatment group (11.0%) in Kolondièba, while the opposite was observed in Bougouni (7.1% and 20.9% respectively). Additionally, the overall frequency of adverse events in the co-administration group (18.7%) was comparable to or lower than published frequencies for ivermectin+albendazole alone.ConclusionsThese data suggest that co-administration of ivermectin+albendazole and azithromycin is safe; however the small number of villages studied and the large differences between them resulted in an inability to calculate a meaningful overall estimate of the difference in adverse event rates between the regimens. Further work is therefore needed before co-administration can be definitively recommended.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01586169