METHODS: WHO resistance bioassays of mosquitoes with deltamethrin, permethrin and DDT were used in conjunction with TaqMan® SNP Genotyping Assays to characterize mutation profiles of Ae. aegypti.
RESULTS: Screening of the voltage-sensitive sodium channel (Vssc), the pyrethroid target site, revealed mutations at codons 989, 1016 and 1534 in Ae. aegypti from two districts of Jeddah. The triple mutant homozygote (1016G/1534C/989P) was confirmed from Al Safa and Al Rawabi. Bioassays with pyrethroids (Type I and II) and DDT showed that mosquitoes were resistant to each of these compounds based on WHO definitions. An association between Vssc mutations and resistance was established for the Type II pyrethroid, deltamethrin, with one genotype (989P/1016G/1534F) conferring a survival advantage over two others (989S/1016V/1534C and the triple heterozygote). An indication of synergism of Type I pyrethroid activity with piperonyl butoxide suggests that detoxification by cytochrome P450s accounts for some of the pyrethroid resistance response in Ae. aegypti populations from Jeddah.
CONCLUSIONS: The results provide a baseline for monitoring and management of resistance as well as knowledge of Vssc genotype frequencies required in Wolbachia release populations to ensure homogeneity with the target field population. Vssc mutation haplotypes observed show some similarity with those from Ae. aegypti in southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific, but the presence of the triple mutant haplotype in three genotypes indicates that the species in this region may have a unique population history.
METHODS: On Ambae Island, blood samples were collected from 231 and 282 individuals in 2003 and 2007, respectively. Parasite prevalence was determined by microscopy. Antibodies to three Plasmodium falciparum (PfSE, PfMSP-119, and PfAMA-1) and three Plasmodium vivax (PvSE, PvMSP-119, and PvAMA-1) antigens, as well as the Anopheles-specific salivary antigen gSG6, were detected by ELISA. Age-specific seroprevalence was analysed using a reverse catalytic modelling approach to estimate seroconversion rates (SCRs).
RESULTS: Parasite rate decreased significantly (P
OBJECTIVES: To examine whether housing interventions were effective in reducing mosquito densities in homes and the impact on the incidence of mosquito-borne diseases.
METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched 16 online databases, including NIH PubMed, CINAHL Complete, LILACS, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized trials published from database inception to June 30, 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of any mosquito-borne diseases. Secondary outcomes encompassed entomological indicators of the disease transmission. I2 values were used to explore heterogeneity between studies. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to assess the primary and secondary outcomes, with sub-group analyses for type of interventions on home environment, study settings (rural, urban, or mixed), and overall house type (traditional or modern housing).
RESULTS: The literature search yielded 4,869 articles. After screening, 18 studies were included in the qualitative review, of which nine were included in the meta-analysis. The studies enrolled 7,200 households in Africa and South America, reporting on malaria or dengue only. The type of home environmental interventions included modification to ceilings and ribbons to close eaves, screening doors and windows with nets, insecticide-treated wall linings in homes, nettings over gables and eaves openings, mosquito trapping systems, metal-roofed houses with mosquito screening, gable windows and closed eaves, and prototype houses using southeast Asian designs. Pooled analysis depicted a lower risk of mosquito-borne diseases in the housing intervention group (OR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.95; P = 0.03). Subgroup analysis depicted housing intervention reduced the risk of malaria in all settings (OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.39 to 1.01; P = 0.05). In urban environment, housing intervention was found to decrease the risk of both malaria and dengue infections (OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.99; P = 0.05).Meta-analysis of pooled odds ratio showed a significant benefit of improved housing in reducing indoor vector densities of both Aedes and Anopheles (OR = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.54; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Housing intervention could reduce transmission of malaria and dengue among people living in the homes. Future research should evaluate the protective effect of specific house features and housing improvements associated with urban development.