Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30590537›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2019

Human Direct Skin Feeding Versus Membrane Feeding to Assess the Mosquitocidal Efficacy of High-Dose Ivermectin (IVERMAL Trial).

Menno R Smit, Eric O Ochomo, Ghaith Aljayyoussi, Titus K Kwambai, Bernard O Abong'o, Teun Bousema, David Waterhouse, Nabie M Bayoh, John E Gimnig, Aaron M Samuels and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02511353 (Efficacy and Safety of High-dose Ivermectin for Reducing Malaria Transmission), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02511353 phase2completednot on this map

Efficacy and Safety of High-dose Ivermectin for Reducing Malaria Transmission: A Dose Finding Study (IVERMAL)

TypeinterventionalSponsorLiverpool School of Tropical MedicineRan2015 to 2016Enrolled141ConditionsMalariaArmsivermectin, placebo, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Large-scale production ofFrontiers in tropical diseases · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Broadening the range of use cases for ivermectin - a review of the evidence.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Menno R SmitLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Eric O OchomoKenya Medical Research Institute, Centre for Global Health Research, Kisumu.
Ghaith AljayyoussiLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Titus K KwambaiLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Bernard O Abong'oKenya Medical Research Institute, Centre for Global Health Research, Kisumu.
Teun BousemaRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
David WaterhouseLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Nabie M BayohUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Global Health, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Atlanta, Georgia.
John E GimnigUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Global Health, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Atlanta, Georgia.
Aaron M SamuelsUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Global Health, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Atlanta, Georgia.
Meghna R DesaiUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Global Health, Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Atlanta, Georgia.
Penelope A Phillips-HowardLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Simon K KariukiKenya Medical Research Institute, Centre for Global Health Research, Kisumu.
Duolao WangLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Stephen A WardLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.
Feiko O Ter KuileLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIvermectin is being considered for mass drug administration for malaria, due to its ability to kill mosquitoes feeding on recently treated individuals. In a recent trial, 3-day courses of 300 and 600 mcg/kg/day were shown to kill Anopheles mosquitoes for at least 28 days post-treatment when fed patients' venous blood using membrane feeding assays. Direct skin feeding on humans may lead to higher mosquito mortality, as ivermectin capillary concentrations are higher. We compared mosquito mortality following direct skin and membrane feeding.

methodsWe conducted a mosquito feeding study, nested within a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 141 adults with uncomplicated malaria in Kenya, comparing 3 days of ivermectin 300 mcg/kg/day, ivermectin 600 mcg/kg/day, or placebo, all co-administered with 3 days of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. On post-treatment day 7, direct skin and membrane feeding assays were conducted using laboratory-reared Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto. Mosquito survival was assessed daily for 28 days post-feeding.

resultsBetween July 20, 2015, and May 7, 2016, 69 of 141 patients participated in both direct skin and membrane feeding (placebo, n = 23; 300 mcg/kg/day, n = 24; 600 mcg/kg/day, n = 22). The 14-day post-feeding mortality for mosquitoes fed 7 days post-treatment on blood from pooled patients in both ivermectin arms was similar with direct skin feeding (mosquitoes observed, n = 2941) versus membrane feeding (mosquitoes observed, n = 7380): cumulative mortality (risk ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-1.03, P = .69) and survival time (hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.91-1.02, P = .19). Results were consistent by sex, by body mass index, and across the range of ivermectin capillary concentrations studied (0.72-73.9 ng/mL).

conclusionsDirect skin feeding and membrane feeding on day 7 resulted in similar mosquitocidal effects of ivermectin across a wide range of drug concentrations, suggesting that the mosquitocidal effects seen with membrane feeding accurately reflect those of natural biting. Membrane feeding, which is more patient friendly and ethically acceptable, can likely reliably be used to assess ivermectin's mosquitocidal efficacy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02511353.

Indexed as

AdultAnimalsAnophelesAntiparasitic AgentsCulicidaeFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansInsecticidesIvermectinMalariaMaleMosquito ControlYoung AdultAntiparasitic AgentsInsecticidesIvermectinAnopheles gambiaedirect skin feedingivermectinmalariamembrane feeding

Identifiers

PMID30590537
PMCPMC6743833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.