Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37196017›Full record

Trial reportPLoS neglected tropical diseases2023

A general framework to support cost-efficient fecal egg count methods and study design choices for large-scale STH deworming programs-monitoring of therapeutic drug efficacy as a case study.

Luc E Coffeng, Johnny Vlaminck, Piet Cools, Matthew Denwood, Marco Albonico, Shaali M Ame, Mio Ayana, Daniel Dana, Giuseppe Cringoli, Sake J de Vlas and 19 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03465488 (Validation of Both Automated Quality Assured Egg Counting System and Molecular Markers for Monitoring the Spread of Anthelmintic Resistance.), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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.

NCT03465488 nacompletednot on this map

Validation of Both Automated Quality Assured Egg Counting System and Molecular Markers for Monitoring the Spread of Anthelmintic Resistance.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity GhentRan2016 to 2019Enrolled1,000ConditionsSoil-transmitted Helminth InfectionsArmsAlbendazole Pill 400mg (GSK)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Triclabendazole and Other Fasciolicides: Resistance ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Improving the Cost-efficiency of Preventive Chemotherapy: Impact of New Diagnostics on Stopping Decisions for Control of Schistosomiasis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

29 authors at 15 institutions in 11 countries.

Luc E CoffengDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4425-2264
Johnny VlaminckDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Piet CoolsDepartment of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Matthew DenwoodDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Marco AlbonicoNational Health System, Turin, Italy.
Shaali M AmeLaboratory Division, Public Health Laboratory-Ivo de Carneri, Chake Chake, United Republic of Tanzania.
Mio AyanaDepartment of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Daniel DanaDepartment of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Giuseppe CringoliDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Sake J de VlasDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Alan FenwickSchistosomiasis Control Initiative, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, St Mary's Campus, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Michael FrenchSchistosomiasis Control Initiative, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, St Mary's Campus, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Adama KaziengaDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Jennifer KeiserSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Stefanie KnoppSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Gemechu LetaEthiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Leonardo F MatosoLaboratory of Molecular and Cellular Immunology, Research Center René Rachou-FIOCRUZ, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Maria P MaurelliDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Antonio MontresorDepartment of Control of Neglected Tropical Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Greg MiramsTechion Group Ltd, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Zeleke MekonnenJimma University Institute of Health, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.
Rodrigo Corrêa-OliveiraLaboratory of Molecular and Cellular Immunology, Research Center René Rachou-FIOCRUZ, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Simone A PintoLaboratory of Molecular and Cellular Immunology, Research Center René Rachou-FIOCRUZ, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Laura RinaldiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Somphou SayasoneLao Tropical and Public Health Institute, Ministry of Health, Vientiane, Lao People's Democratic Republic.
Peter SteinmannSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Eurion ThomasTechion Group Ltd, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom.
Jozef VercruysseDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Bruno LeveckeDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Ghent University · BEJimma University · ETSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CHUniversity of Naples Federico II · ITErasmus MC · NLFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRAberystwyth University · GBEthiopian Public Health Institute · ETImperial College London · GBMinistry of Health · LAPublic Health Laboratory Ivo de Carneri · TZRTI International · USUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRUniversity of Copenhagen · DKWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSoil-transmitted helminth (STH) control programs currently lack evidence-based recommendations for cost-efficient survey designs for monitoring and evaluation. Here, we present a framework to provide evidence-based recommendations, using a case study of therapeutic drug efficacy monitoring based on the examination of helminth eggs in stool.

methodsWe performed an in-depth analysis of the operational costs to process one stool sample for three diagnostic methods (Kato-Katz, Mini-FLOTAC and FECPAKG2). Next, we performed simulations to determine the probability of detecting a truly reduced therapeutic efficacy for different scenarios of STH species (Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura and hookworms), pre-treatment infection levels, survey design (screen and select (SS); screen, select and retest (SSR) and no selection (NS)) and number of subjects enrolled (100-5,000). Finally, we integrated the outcome of the cost assessment into the simulation study to estimate the total survey costs and determined the most cost-efficient survey design. PRINCIPAL

findingsKato-Katz allowed for both the highest sample throughput and the lowest cost per test, while FECPAKG2 required both the most laboratory time and was the most expensive. Counting of eggs accounted for 23% (FECPAKG2) or ≥80% (Kato-Katz and Mini-FLOTAC) of the total time-to-result. NS survey designs in combination with Kato-Katz were the most cost-efficient to assess therapeutic drug efficacy in all scenarios of STH species and endemicity. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We confirm that Kato-Katz is the fecal egg counting method of choice for monitoring therapeutic drug efficacy, but that the survey design currently recommended by WHO (SS) should be updated. Our generic framework, which captures laboratory time and material costs, can be used to further support cost-efficient choices for other important surveys informing STH control programs. In addition, it can be used to explore the value of alternative diagnostic techniques, like automated egg counting, which may further reduce operational costs.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03465488.

Indexed as

HelminthiasisHelminthsAnimalsAscaris lumbricoidesFecesHumansSensitivity and SpecificitySoilTrichurisSoil

Identifiers

PMID37196017
PMCPMC10228800
OpenAlexW4376959352

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.