Measuring mosquito control: adult-mosquito catches vs egg-trap data as endpoints of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of mosquito-disseminated pyriproxyfen.
Cluster randomized controlled trial
Mosquito control
Mosquito-borne diseases
Pyriproxyfen
Vector surveillance
Journal
Parasites & vectors
ISSN: 1756-3305
Titre abrégé: Parasit Vectors
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101462774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Jul 2020
14 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
17
05
2020
accepted:
08
07
2020
entrez:
16
7
2020
pubmed:
16
7
2020
medline:
17
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus are the main urban vectors of arthropod-borne viruses causing human disease, including dengue, Zika, or West Nile. Although key to disease prevention, urban-mosquito control has met only limited success. Alternative vector-control tactics are therefore being developed and tested, often using entomological endpoints to measure impact. Here, we test one promising alternative and assess how three such endpoints perform at measuring its effects. We conducted a 16-month, two-arm, cluster-randomized controlled trial (CRCT) of mosquito-disseminated pyriproxyfen (MD-PPF) in central-western Brazil. We used three entomological endpoints: adult-mosquito density as directly measured by active aspiration of adult mosquitoes, and egg-trap-based indices of female Aedes presence (proportion of positive egg-traps) and possibly abundance (number of eggs per egg-trap). Using generalized linear mixed models, we estimated MD-PPF effects on these endpoints while accounting for the non-independence of repeated observations and for intervention-unrelated sources of spatial-temporal variation. On average, MD-PPF reduced adult-mosquito density by 66.3% (95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 47.3-78.4%); Cx. quinquefasciatus density fell by 55.5% (95% CI: 21.1-74.8%), and Ae. aegypti density by 60.0% (95% CI: 28.7-77.5%). In contrast, MD-PPF had no measurable effect on either Aedes egg counts or egg-trap positivity, both of which decreased somewhat in the intervention cluster but also in the control cluster. Egg-trap data, therefore, failed to reflect the 60.0% mean reduction of adult Aedes density associated with MD-PPF deployment. Our results suggest that the widely used egg-trap-based monitoring may poorly measure the impact of Aedes control; even if more costly, direct monitoring of the adult mosquito population is likely to provide a much more realistic and informative picture of intervention effects. In our CRCT, MD-PPF reduced adult-mosquito density by 66.3% in a medium-sized, spatially non-isolated, tropical urban neighborhood. Broader-scale trials will be necessary to measure MD-PPF impact on arboviral-disease transmission.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus are the main urban vectors of arthropod-borne viruses causing human disease, including dengue, Zika, or West Nile. Although key to disease prevention, urban-mosquito control has met only limited success. Alternative vector-control tactics are therefore being developed and tested, often using entomological endpoints to measure impact. Here, we test one promising alternative and assess how three such endpoints perform at measuring its effects.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a 16-month, two-arm, cluster-randomized controlled trial (CRCT) of mosquito-disseminated pyriproxyfen (MD-PPF) in central-western Brazil. We used three entomological endpoints: adult-mosquito density as directly measured by active aspiration of adult mosquitoes, and egg-trap-based indices of female Aedes presence (proportion of positive egg-traps) and possibly abundance (number of eggs per egg-trap). Using generalized linear mixed models, we estimated MD-PPF effects on these endpoints while accounting for the non-independence of repeated observations and for intervention-unrelated sources of spatial-temporal variation.
RESULTS
RESULTS
On average, MD-PPF reduced adult-mosquito density by 66.3% (95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 47.3-78.4%); Cx. quinquefasciatus density fell by 55.5% (95% CI: 21.1-74.8%), and Ae. aegypti density by 60.0% (95% CI: 28.7-77.5%). In contrast, MD-PPF had no measurable effect on either Aedes egg counts or egg-trap positivity, both of which decreased somewhat in the intervention cluster but also in the control cluster. Egg-trap data, therefore, failed to reflect the 60.0% mean reduction of adult Aedes density associated with MD-PPF deployment.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that the widely used egg-trap-based monitoring may poorly measure the impact of Aedes control; even if more costly, direct monitoring of the adult mosquito population is likely to provide a much more realistic and informative picture of intervention effects. In our CRCT, MD-PPF reduced adult-mosquito density by 66.3% in a medium-sized, spatially non-isolated, tropical urban neighborhood. Broader-scale trials will be necessary to measure MD-PPF impact on arboviral-disease transmission.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32665032
doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04221-z
pii: 10.1186/s13071-020-04221-z
pmc: PMC7362459
doi:
Substances chimiques
Insecticides
0
Pyridines
0
pyriproxyfen
3Q9VOR705O
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
352Subventions
Organisme : Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Distrito Federal
ID : 6142
Organisme : CSRD VA
ID : 1
Pays : United States
Organisme : CSRD VA
ID : 1
Pays : United States
Organisme : CSRD VA
ID : 1
Pays : United States
Références
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(8):e1793
pubmed: 22953015
Microbes Infect. 2009 Dec;11(14-15):1177-85
pubmed: 19450706
Parasit Vectors. 2019 May 21;12(1):250
pubmed: 31113454
Nature. 2018 Jul;559(7715):490-497
pubmed: 30046071
Acta Trop. 2014 Jul;135:96-103
pubmed: 24713197
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019 Jan 3;13(1):e0006822
pubmed: 30605475
Trop Med Int Health. 2010 May;15(5):619-31
pubmed: 20214764
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jul 14;106(28):11530-4
pubmed: 19561295
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1994 Jul;51(1):89-97
pubmed: 8059920
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1990 Mar;6(1):1-6
pubmed: 2324712
PLoS Med. 2017 Jan 17;14(1):e1002219
pubmed: 28095418
PLoS Med. 2017 Jan 17;14(1):e1002213
pubmed: 28095414
J Med Entomol. 2009 Nov;46(6):1256-9
pubmed: 19960668
Acta Trop. 2009 Sep;111(3):279-83
pubmed: 19481998
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018 Apr 06;12(4):e0006378
pubmed: 29624581
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Jan 15;9(1):e0003406
pubmed: 25590626
Med Vet Entomol. 2003 Jun;17(2):211-20
pubmed: 12823839
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 May 07;9(5):e0003655
pubmed: 25951103
Ecol Lett. 2005 Nov;8(11):1235-46
pubmed: 21352447
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2016 Sep;32(3):194-202
pubmed: 27802398
J Med Entomol. 2005 Jul;42(4):620-30
pubmed: 16119551
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Jul 17;11(7):e0005651
pubmed: 28715426
PLoS Med. 2008 Mar 18;5(3):e68
pubmed: 18351798
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2013 Dec;108(8):1024-30
pubmed: 24402144
Environ Health Insights. 2020 Jan 6;14:1178630219886570
pubmed: 31933523
J Med Entomol. 2015 Jul;52(4):705-12
pubmed: 26335478
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016 Mar 17;10(3):e0004551
pubmed: 26986468
PLoS One. 2013 Jul 02;8(7):e67045
pubmed: 23843982
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2008 Sep;103(6):602-5
pubmed: 18949333
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016 Dec 29;10(12):e0005235
pubmed: 28033379
Pest Manag Sci. 2018 Apr;74(4):885-895
pubmed: 29087613
Parasit Vectors. 2017 Mar 9;10(1):139
pubmed: 28279191
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Apr 07;9(4):e0003702
pubmed: 25849040
Parasit Vectors. 2019 May 3;12(1):202
pubmed: 31053095
Trends Parasitol. 2015 Aug;31(8):380-90
pubmed: 25999026
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2017 Sep;33(3):193-199
pubmed: 28854105
Ecology. 2014 Mar;95(3):631-6
pubmed: 24804445
Trends Ecol Evol. 2009 Mar;24(3):127-35
pubmed: 19185386
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2013 Mar;44(2):167-78
pubmed: 23691625
Annu Rev Entomol. 2020 Jan 7;65:191-208
pubmed: 31594415
Parasit Vectors. 2014 Apr 25;7:200
pubmed: 24766772
BMC Public Health. 2017 May 30;17(Suppl 1):384
pubmed: 28699552
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2012 Dec;28(4 Suppl):123-6
pubmed: 23401952
Trop Med Int Health. 2019 May;24(5):530-552
pubmed: 30771267
J Med Entomol. 2020 Jul 4;57(4):1120-1130
pubmed: 32006427