Summary Background A test-and-not-treat (TaNT) strategy has been developed to prevent people with high concentrations of circulating Loa loa microfilariae (>20 000 microfilariae per mL) developing serious adverse events after ivermectin treatment during mass drug administration to eliminate onchocerciasis. An important question related to cost and programmatic issues is whether annual retesting is required for everyone. We therefore aimed to investigate changes in L loa microfilarial densities during TaNT campaigns run 18 months apart. Methods In this observational cohort study, we assessed the participants of two TaNT campaigns for onchocerciasis. These campaigns, which were run by a research team, together with personnel from the Ministry of Health and community health workers, were done in six health areas (in 89 communities) in Okola health district (Cameroon); the first campaign was run between Aug 10, and Oct 29, 2015, and the second was run between March 7, and May 26, 2017. All individuals aged 5 years and older were invited to be screened for Loa loa microfilaraemia before being offered ivermectin (unless contraindicated). L loa microfilarial density was measured at the point of care using the LoaScope. All those with a L loa microfilarial density of 20 000 microfilariae per mL or less were offered treatment; in the first 2 weeks of the 2015 campaign, a higher exclusion threshold of 26 000 microfilariae per mL or less was used. At both rounds of the intervention, participants were registered with a paper form, in which personal information were collected. In 2017, we also recorded whether each individual reported participation in the 2015 campaign. The primary outcome, assessed in all participants, was whether L loa microfilarial density was above or below the exclusion threshold (ie, the criteria that guided the decision to treat). Findings In the 2015 TaNT campaign, 26 415 people were censused versus 29 587 people in the 2017 TaNT campaign. All individuals aged 5 years and older without other contraindications to treatment (22 842 people in 2015 and 25 421 people in 2017) were invited to be screened for L loa microfilaraemia before being offered ivermectin. In 2015, 16 182 individuals were examined with the LoaScope, versus 18 697 individuals in the same communities in 2017. 344 (2·1%) individuals were excluded from ivermectin treatment because of a high L loa microfilarial density in 2015, versus 283 (1·5%) individuals in 2017 (p<0·0001). Records from 2017 could be matched to those from 2015 for 6983 individuals (43·2% of the 2015 participants). In this cohort, in 2017, 6981 (>99·9%) of 6983 individuals treated with ivermectin in 2015 had L loa microfilariae density below the ...

Background Severe adverse events after treatment with ivermectin in individuals with high levels of Loa loa microfilariae in the blood preclude onchocerciasis elimination through community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) in Central Africa. We measured the cost of a community-based pilot using a test-and-not-treat (TaNT) strategy in the Soa health district in Cameroon. Methods Based on actual expenditures, we empirically estimated the economic cost of the Soa TaNT campaign, including financial costs and opportunity costs that will likely be borne by control programs and stakeholders in the future. In addition to the empirical analyses, we estimated base-case, less intensive, and more intensive resource use scenarios to explore how costs might differ if TaNT were implemented programmatically. Results The total costs of US$283 938 divided by total population, people tested, and people treated with 42% coverage were US$4.0, US$9.2, and US$9.5, respectively. In programmatic implementation, these costs (base-case estimates with less and more intensive scenarios) could be US$2.2 ($1.9–$3.6), US$5.2 ($4.5–$8.3), and US$5.4 ($4.6–$8.6), respectively. Conclusions TaNT clearly provides a safe strategy for large-scale ivermectin treatment and overcomes a major obstacle to the elimination of onchocerciasis in areas coendemic for Loa loa. Although it is more expensive than standard CDTI, costs vary depending on the setting, the implementation choices made by the institutions involved, and the community participation rate. Research on the required duration of TaNT is needed to improve the affordability assessment, and more experience is needed to understand how to implement TaNT optimally.

Background Soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infections remain a public health concern in sub-Saharan Africa. School-based mass drug administration (MDA) using the anthelminthic drug Mebendazole/Albendazole have succeeded in controlling morbidity associated to these diseases but failed to interrupt their transmission. In areas were filarial diseases are co-endemic, another anthelminthic drug (Ivermectin) is distributed to almost the entire population, following the community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) strategy. Since Ivermectin is a broad spectrum anthelmintic known to be effective against STH, we conducted cross-sectional surveys in two health districts with very contrasting histories of Ivermectin/Albendazole-based PC in order to investigate whether CDTI might have contributed in STH transmission interruption. Methodology Cross-sectional surveys were conducted in two health districts with similar socio-environmental patterns but with very contrasting CDTI histories (Akonolinga health district where CDTI was yet to be implemented vs. Yabassi health district where CDTI has been ongoing for two decades). Stool samples were collected from all volunteers aged >2 years old and analyzed using the Kato-Katz technique. Infections by different STH species were compared between Akonolinga and Yabassi health districts to decipher the impact of Ivermectin/Albendazole-based MDA on STH transmission. Principal findings A total of 610 and 584 participants aged 2–90 years old were enrolled in Akonolinga and Yabassi health districts, respectively. Two STH species (Ascaris lumbricoides and Trichuris trichiura) were found, with prevalence significantly higher in Akonolinga health district (43.3%; 95% CI: 38.1–46.6) compared to Yabassi health district (2.5%; 95% CI: 1.1–5.1) (chi-square: 90.8; df: 1; p < 0.001). Conclusion/significance These findings (i) suggest that Mebendazole- or Albendazole-based MDA alone distributed only to at-risk populations might not be enough to eliminate STH, (ii) support the collateral impact of Ivermectin/Albendazole MDA on A. lumbricoides and T. trichiura infections, and (iii) suggest that Ivermectin/Albendazole-based PC could accelerate STH transmission interruption.

Background Mass drug administration (MDA) with ivermectin is the main strategy for onchocerciasis elimination. Ivermectin is generally safe but associated with serious adverse events in individuals with high Loa loa microfilarial densities (MFD). Therefore, ivermectin MDA is not recommended in areas where onchocerciasis is hypo-endemic and L. loa is co-endemic. To eliminate onchocerciasis in those areas, a test-and-not-treat (TaNT) strategy has been proposed. We investigated whether onchocerciasis elimination can be achieved using TaNT and the required duration. Methods We used the individual-based model ONCHOSIM to predict the impact of TaNT on onchocerciasis microfilarial (mf) prevalence. We simulated pre-control mf prevalence levels from 2-40%. The impact of TaNT was simulated under varying levels of participation, systematic non-participation and exclusion from ivermectin due to high L. loa MFD. For each scenario, we assessed the time to elimination, defined as bringing onchocerciasis mf prevalence below 1.4%. Results In areas with 30-40% pre-control mf prevalence, the model predicted that it would take between 14 and 16 years to bring the mf prevalence below 1.4% using conventional MDA, assuming 65% participation. TaNT would increase the time to elimination by up to 1.5 years, depending on the level of systematic non-participation and the exclusion rate. At lower exclusion rates (≤2.5%), the delay would be less than six months. Conclusions Our model predicts that onchocerciasis can be eliminated using TaNT in L. loa co-endemic areas. The required treatment duration using TaNT would be only slightly longer than in areas with conventional MDA, provided that participation is good.

Background: Many control methods have been implemented to tackle onchocerciasis and great successes have been achieved, leading to a paradigm shift from control of morbidity to interruption of transmission and ultimately elimination. The mandate of the African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control (APOC) ended in 2015, and endemic countries are to plan and conduct elimination activities by themselves, with technical assistance by the Expanded Special Project for Elimination of Neglected Tropical Diseases (ESPEN). To this end, an elimination expert committee was set up in Cameroon in 2018. This committee identified the need to update the data on the current situation of onchocerciasis. The present study aims to systematically review and report all available epidemiological data, including prevalence, intensity and transmission of onchocerciasis to provide pertinent information that will be useful to design optimal strategies to achieve onchocerciasis elimination in Cameroon. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science will be searched from inception onwards. Grey literature will be identified through Google Scholar searches, dissertation databases and other relevant documents such as government reports. Eligible studies will be mostly observational, including cohort and cross-sectional surveys. No limitations will be imposed on publication status and study period. The primary outcomes will be (1) the prevalence and intensity of Onchocerca volvulus infection in humans, (2) transmission intensity and (3) impact of interventions on prevalence, intensity and transmission of onchocerciasis. Secondary outcomes will be environmental and sociodemographic factors supporting the primary outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. Methodological quality including bias will be appraised using appropriate approaches. A narrative synthesis will describe quality and content of the epidemiological evidence. Prevalence and intensity of infection estimates will be stratified according to gender, age, geographical location and year of publication.