Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many key neglected tropical disease (NTD) activities have been postponed. This hindrance comes at a time when the NTDs are progressing towards their ambitious goals for 2030. Mathematical modelling on several NTDs, namely gambiense sleeping sickness, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, schistosomiasis, soil-transmitted helminthiases (STH), trachoma, and visceral leishmaniasis, shows that the impact of this disruption will vary across the diseases. Programs face a risk of resurgence, which will be fastest in high-transmission areas. Furthermore, of the mass drug administration diseases, schistosomiasis, STH, and trachoma are likely to encounter faster resurgence. The case-finding diseases (gambiense sleeping sickness and visceral leishmaniasis) are likely to have fewer cases being detected but may face an increasing underlying rate of new infections. However, once programs are able to resume, there are ways to mitigate the impact and accelerate progress towards the 2030 goals.

BackgroundWith the 2020 target year for elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF) approaching, there is an urgent need to assess how long mass drug administration (MDA) programs with annual ivermectin + albendazole (IA) or diethylcarbamazine + albendazole (DA) would still have to be continued, and how elimination can be accelerated. We addressed this using mathematical modeling.MethodsWe used 3 structurally different mathematical models for LF transmission (EPIFIL, LYMFASIM, TRANSFIL) to simulate trends in microfilariae (mf) prevalence for a range of endemic settings, both for the current annual MDA strategy and alternative strategies, assessing the required duration to bring mf prevalence below the critical threshold of 1%.ResultsThree annual MDA rounds with IA or DA and good coverage (≥65%) are sufficient to reach the threshold in settings that are currently at mf prevalence <4%, but the required duration increases with increasing mf prevalence. Switching to biannual MDA or employing triple-drug therapy (ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine, and albendazole [IDA]) could reduce program duration by about one-third. Optimization of coverage reduces the time to elimination and is particularly important for settings with a history of poorly implemented MDA (low coverage, high systematic noncompliance).ConclusionsModeling suggests that, in several settings, current annual MDA strategies will be insufficient to achieve the 2020 LF elimination targets, and programs could consider policy adjustment to accelerate, guided by recent monitoring and evaluation data. Biannual treatment and IDA hold promise in reducing program duration, provided that coverage is good, but their efficacy remains to be confirmed by more extensive field studies.

No abstract

The low prevalence levels associated with lymphatic filariasis elimination pose a challenge for effective disease surveillance. As more countries achieve the World Health Organization criteria for halting mass treatment and move on to surveillance, there is increasing reliance on the utility of transmission assessment surveys (TAS) to measure success. However, the long-term disease outcomes after passing TAS are largely untested. Using 3 well-established mathematical models, we show that low-level prevalence can be maintained for a long period after halting mass treatment and that true elimination (0% prevalence) is usually slow to achieve. The risk of resurgence after achieving current targets is low and is hard to predict using just current prevalence. Although resurgence is often quick (&lt;5 years), it can still occur outside of the currently recommended postintervention surveillance period of 4–6 years. Our results highlight the need for ongoing and enhanced postintervention monitoring, beyond the scope of TAS, to ensure sustained success.

Bayesian inference for coupled hidden Markov models frequently relies on data augmentation techniques for imputation of the hidden state processes. Considerable progress has been made on developing such techniques, mainly using Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. However, as the dimensionality and complexity of the hidden processes increase some of these methods become inefficient, either because they produce MCMC chains with high autocorrelation or because they become computationally intractable. Motivated by this fact we developed a novel MCMC algorithm, which is a modification of the forward filtering backward sampling algorithm, that achieves a good balance between computation and mixing properties, and thus can be used to analyze models with large numbers of hidden chains. Even though our approach is developed under the assumption of a Markovian model, we show how this assumption can be relaxed leading to minor modifications in the algorithm. Our approach is particularly well suited to epidemic models, where the hidden Markov chains represent the infection status of an individual through time. The performance of our method is assessed on simulated data on epidemic models for the spread of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in cattle. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

BackgroundSchistosomiasis is a major socio-economic and public health problem in many sub-Saharan African countries. After large mass drug administration (MDA) campaigns, prevalence of infection rapidly returns to pre-treatment levels. The traditional egg-based diagnostic for schistosome infections, Kato-Katz, is being substituted in many settings by circulating antigen recognition-based diagnostics, usually the point-of-care circulating cathodic antigen test (CCA). The relationship between these diagnostics is poorly understood, particularly after treatment in both drug-efficacy studies and routine monitoring.ResultsWe created a model of schistosome infections to better understand and quantify the relationship between these two egg- and adult worm antigen-based diagnostics. We focused particularly on the interpretation of “trace” results after CCA testing. Our analyses suggest that CCA is generally a better predictor of prevalence, particularly after treatment, and that trace CCA results are typically associated with truly infected individuals.ConclusionsEven though prevalence rises to pre-treatment levels only six months after MDAs, our model suggests that the average intensity of infection is much lower, and is probably in part due to a small burden of surviving juveniles from when the treatment occurred. This work helps to better understand CCA diagnostics and the interpretation of post-treatment prevalence estimations.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13071-017-2580-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP URL' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

Background In view of the current global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, mass drug administration interventions for neglected tropical diseases, including lymphatic filariasis (LF), have been halted. We used mathematical modelling to estimate the impact of delaying or cancelling treatment rounds and explore possible mitigation strategies. Methods We used three established LF transmission models to simulate infection trends in settings with annual treatment rounds and programme delays in 2020 of 6, 12, 18 or 24 months. We then evaluated the impact of various mitigation strategies upon resuming activities. Results The delay in achieving the elimination goals is on average similar to the number of years the treatment rounds are missed. Enhanced interventions implemented for as little as 1 y can allow catch-up on the progress lost and, if maintained throughout the programme, can lead to acceleration of up to 3 y. Conclusions In general, a short delay in the programme does not cause a major delay in achieving the goals. Impact is strongest in high-endemicity areas. Mitigation strategies such as biannual treatment or increased coverage are key to minimizing the impact of the disruption once the programme resumes and lead to potential acceleration should these enhanced strategies be maintained.