Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38811947›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2024

Residual bioefficacy of attractive targeted sugar bait stations targeting malaria vectors during seasonal deployment in Western Province of Zambia.

Gift Mwaanga, Jacob Ford, Joshua Yukich, Benjamin Chanda, Ruth A Ashton, Javan Chanda, Buster Munsanje, Emliny Muntanga, Malon Mulota, Christine Simuyandi and 12 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04800055 (Attractive Targeted Sugar Bait Phase III Trial in Zambia), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT04800055 naunknown statusnot on this map

Attractive Targeted Sugar Bait Phase III Trial in Zambia

TypeinterventionalSponsorPATHRan2020 to 2023Enrolled3,480ConditionsMalaria, Malaria,Falciparum, Vector-Borne Transmission of InfectionArmsAttractive Targeted Sugar Bait
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

22 authors.

Gift Mwaanga *Macha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia. gift.mwaanga@macharesearch.org.
Jacob Ford *Center for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Department of Tropical Medicine, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, USA.
Joshua Yukich *Center for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Department of Tropical Medicine, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, USA.
Benjamin Chanda *PATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Ruth A AshtonCenter for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Department of Tropical Medicine, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, USA.
Javan ChandaPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Buster MunsanjeMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Emliny MuntangaMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Malon MulotaMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Christine SimuyandiMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Boyd MulalaMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Limonty SimubaliMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Kochelani SailiMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Edgar SimulunduMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
John MillerPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Busiku HamainzaNational Malaria Elimination Centre, Lusaka, Zambia.
Erica OrangePATH, Seattle, USA.
Joseph WagmanPATH, Washington DC, USA.
Monicah M MburuMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Angela F HarrisIVCC, Liverpool, UK.
Julian EntwistleIVCC, Liverpool, UK.
Megan LittrellPATH, Washington DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe primary vector control interventions in Zambia are long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor residual spraying. Challenges with these interventions include insecticide resistance and the outdoor biting and resting behaviours of many Anopheles mosquitoes. Therefore, new vector control tools targeting additional mosquito behaviours are needed to interrupt transmission. Attractive targeted sugar bait (ATSB) stations, which exploit the sugar feeding behaviours of mosquitoes, may help in this role. This study evaluated the residual laboratory bioefficacy of Westham prototype ATSB® Sarabi v.1.2.1 Bait Station (Westham Ltd., Hod-Hasharon, Israel) in killing malaria vectors in Western Province, Zambia, during the first year of a large cluster randomized phase-III trial (Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT04800055).

methodsThis was a repeat cross-sectional study conducted within three districts, Nkeyema, Kaoma, and Luampa, in Western Province, Zambia. The study was conducted in 12 intervention clusters among the 70 trial clusters (35 interventions, 35 controls) between December 2021 and June 2022. Twelve undamaged bait stations installed on the outer walls of households were collected monthly (one per cluster per month) for bioassays utilizing adult female and male Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto (Kisumu strain) mosquitoes from a laboratory colony.

resultsA total of 84 field-deployed ATSB stations were collected, and 71 ultimately met the study inclusion criteria for remaining in good condition. Field-deployed stations that remained in good condition (intact, non-depleted of bait, and free of dirt as well as mold) retained high levels of bioefficacy (mean induced mortality of 95.3% in males, 71.3% in females, 83.9% combined total) over seven months in the field but did induce lower mortality rates than non-deployed ATSB stations (mean induced mortality of 96.4% in males, 87.0% in females, 91.4% combined total). There was relatively little variation in corrected mortality rates between monthly rounds for those ATSB stations that had been deployed to the field.

conclusionWhile field-deployed ATSB stations induced lower mortality rates than non-deployed ATSB stations, these stations nonetheless retained relatively high and stable levels of bioefficacy across the 7-month malaria transmission season. While overall mean mosquito mortality rates exceeded 80%, mean mortality rates for females were 24 percentage points lower than among males and these differences merit attention and further evaluation in future studies. The duration of deployment was not associated with lower bioefficacy. Westham prototype ATSB stations can still retain bioefficacy even after deployment in the field for 7 months, provided they do not meet predetermined criteria for replacement.

Indexed as

AnophelesMosquito ControlMosquito VectorsAnimalsCross-Sectional StudiesFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansInsecticidesMalariaMaleSeasonsSugarsZambiaInsecticidesSugars

Identifiers

PMID38811947
PMCPMC11138038

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.