RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 How geographic access to care shapes disease burden: the current impact of post-exposure prophylaxis and potential for expanded access to prevent human rabies deaths in Madagascar
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.10.02.20205948
DO 10.1101/2020.10.02.20205948
A1 Rajeev, Malavika
A1 Guis, Hélène
A1 Edosoa, Glenn
A1 Hanitriniaina, Chantal
A1 Randrianarijaona, Anjasoa
A1 Mangahasimbola, Reziky Tiandraza
A1 Hierink, Fleur
A1 Ramiandrasoa, Ravo
A1 Nely, José
A1 Heraud, Jean-Michel
A1 Andriamandimby, Soa Fy
A1 Baril, Laurence
A1 Metcalf, C.J.E.
A1 Hampson, Katie
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/05/2020.10.02.20205948.abstract
AB Background Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is highly effective at preventing human rabies deaths, however access to PEP is limited in many rabies endemic countries. The 2018 decision by Gavi to add human rabies vaccine to its investment portfolio should expand PEP availability and reduce rabies deaths. We explore how geographic access to PEP impacts the rabies burden in Madagascar and the potential benefits of improved provisioning.Methodology & Principal Findings We use travel times to the closest clinic providing PEP (N=31) as a proxy for access. We find that travel times strongly predict reported bite incidence across the country. Using resulting estimates in an adapted decision tree framework we extrapolate rabies deaths and reporting and find that geographic access to PEP shapes burden sub-nationally. We estimate 960 human rabies deaths annually (95% Prediction Intervals (PI):790 - 1120), with PEP averting an additional 800 deaths (95% PI: 800 (95% PI: 640 - 970) each year. Under these assumptions, we find that expanding PEP to one clinic per district could reduce deaths by 19%, but even with all major health centers provisioning PEP (1733 additional clinics), we still expect substantial rabies mortality. Our quantitative estimates are most sensitive to assumptions of underlying rabies exposure incidence, but qualitative patterns of the impacts of travel times and expanded PEP access are robust.Conclusions & Significance PEP is effective at preventing rabies deaths, and in the absence of strong surveillance, targeting underserved populations may be the most equitable way to provision PEP. Our framework could be used to guide PEP expansion and improve targeting of interventions in similar endemic settings where PEP access is geographically restricted. While better PEP access should save many lives, improved outreach and surveillance is needed and if rolled out with Gavi investment could catalyze progress towards achieving zero rabies deaths.Author Summary Canine rabies causes an estimated 60,000 deaths each year across the world, primarily in low- and middle-income countries where people have limited access to both human vaccines (post-exposure prophylaxis or PEP) and dog rabies vaccines. Given that we have the tools to prevent rabies deaths, a global target has been set to eliminate deaths due to canine rabies by 2030, and recently, Gavi, a multilateral organization that aims to improve access to vaccines in the poorest countries, added human rabies vaccine to it’s portfolio. In this study, we estimated reported bite incidence in relation to travel times to clinics provisioning PEP, and extrapolate human rabies deaths in Madagascar. We find that PEP currently averts around 800 deaths each year, but that the burden remains high (1000 deaths/ year), particularly in remote, hard-to-reach areas. We show that expanding PEP availability to more clinics could significantly reduce rabies deaths in Madagascar, but our results suggest that expansion alone will not eliminate deaths. Combining PEP expansion with outreach, surveillance, and mass dog vaccination programs will be necessary to move Madagascar, and other Low- and Middle-Income countries, forward on the path to rabies elimination.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by grants from the Center for Health and Wellbeing and the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Princeton University to CJEM and MR. MR is supported by an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. KH is supported by the Wellcome Trust (207569/Z/17/Z).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:This work was approved by the Princeton University IRB (7801) and the Madagascar Ministry of Public Health Ethics Committee (105-MSANP/CE).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).YesI 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.YesAll processed data, code, and outputs are archived (here)[zenodo] and maintained at github.com/mrajeev08/MadaAccess. Anonymized raw bite patient data and full data on geolocated clinics are available from IPM following insitutional data transfer protocols. https://github.com/mrajeev08/MadaAccess