PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Vilakati, Sibonakaliso
AU  - Mngadi, Nontokozo
AU  - Benjamin-Chung, Jade
AU  - Dlamini, Nomcebo
AU  - Dufour, Mi-Suk Kang
AU  - Whittemore, Brooke
AU  - Bhangu, Khayelihle
AU  - Prach, Lisa M.
AU  - Baltzell, Kimberly
AU  - Nhlabathi, Nomcebo
AU  - Malambe, Calisile
AU  - Dlamini, Bongani
AU  - Helb, Danica
AU  - Greenhouse, Bryan
AU  - Maphalala, Gugu
AU  - Pindolia, Deepa
AU  - Kalungero, Muhindo
AU  - Tesfa, Getahun
AU  - Gosling, Roly
AU  - Ntshalintshali, Nyasatu
AU  - Kunene, Simon
AU  - Hsiang, Michelle S.
TI  - Effectiveness and safety of reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) using dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine to reduce malaria transmission in very low-endemic setting of Eswatini: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial
AID  - 10.1101/2021.03.12.21252721
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.03.12.21252721
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/12/2021.03.12.21252721.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/12/2021.03.12.21252721.full
AB  - Introduction To reduce malaria transmission in very low-endemic settings, screening and treatment near index cases (reactive case detection (RACD)), is widely practiced, but the rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) used miss low-density infections. Presumptive treatment near index cases (reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA)) may be safe and more effective.Methods We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial in Eswatini, a very low-endemic setting. 77 clusters were randomised to rfMDA using dihydroartemisin-piperaquine (DP) or RACD involving RDTs and artemether lumefantrine (AL). Interventions were delivered by the local programme. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to compare cluster-level cumulative confirmed malaria incidence among clusters with cases. Secondary outcomes included safety and adherence.Results From Sept 2015–Aug 2017, 220 index cases from 47 clusters triggered 49 RACD events and 68 rfMDA events. RACD and rfMDA were delivered to 1696 and 1932 individuals, respectively. Index case and target population intervention coverages for both arms were 75.6%–81.4% and adherence to DP was 98.7%. For rfMDA versus RACD, cumulative incidences (per 1000 person-years) of all malaria were 2.11 (95% CI 1.73–2.59) and 1.97 (1.57–2.47), respectively; and of locally acquired malaria, they were 1.29 (95% CI 1.00–1.67) and 0.97 (0.71–1.34), respectively. Adjusting for imbalance in baseline incidence, incidence rate ratio (aIRR) for rfMDA versus RACD was 0.93 (95% CI 0.54–1.60) for all malaria and 0.77 (95% CI 0.38–1.56) for locally acquired malaria. No serious adverse events occurred.Conclusion In a very low-endemic, real-world setting, this trial is the first to evaluate rfMDA using DP. rfMDA was safe and resulted in lower cumulative incidence compared to RACD, but we were unable to confirm its effectiveness, potentially due to insufficient power. To assess impact of interventions in very low-endemic settings, multi-site, adaptive trials and use of complementary interventions may be needed.What is already known?Reactive case detection (RACD), or malaria testing and treatment in the vicinity of passively detected malaria cases, is a standard of care intervention used in low and very low transmission settings aiming for malaria elimination.Despite the use of RACD, progress toward malaria elimination has stalled in many countries and new strategies are needed.Reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) is a transmission reducing strategy that has been shown to be effective in a low transmission setting, but there are no trial data from a very low transmission setting.What are the new findings?In a pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial of rfMDA using dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine compared to RACD, we found that rfMDA was safe.rfMDA resulted in lower cumulative incidence, but we were unable to confirm its effectiveness compared to RACD, potentially due to insufficient power (we expected 63 total clusters would have incident cases, but observed 47).What do the new findings imply?When implemented in a real-world, very low transmission setting, rMDA was safe but evidence regarding its effectiveness to reduce transmission was weak.The challenge to show a statistically significant impact of a targeted community-based intervention in a very low transmission setting highlights the need for such trials to be multi-site, adaptive, and consider use of complementary interventions.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT02315690Clinical Protocols https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02315690 Funding StatementThis study was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (A122394) and the Horchow Family Fund (5300375400). The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics approval was given by Eswatini Ministry of Health (MH/599C) and by University of California San Francisco Human Research Protection Program & IRB (Formerly Committee on Human Research) (14 15226). Written informed consent was obtained from individual participants. For children less than 18 years, written informed consent from a parent or guardian was required, as was written assent for children 12 to 17 years. All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data that support the findings of this study are available from Eswatini Ministry of Health but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of Eswatini Ministry of Health. aITTadjusted intention to treatARVantiretroviralsDPdihydroartemisinin-piperaquineHIVhuman immunodeficiency virusITTintention to treatIRSindoor residual sprayingLAMPloop mediated isothermal amplificationMDAmass drug administrationNMPNational Malaria ProgrammePCRpolymerase chain reactionRACDreactive case detectionrfMDAreactive focal mass drug administrationRDTrapid diagnostic testSAEserious adverse eventsWHOWorld Health Organization