Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39026236›Full record

Trial reportMalaria journal2024

Entomological effects of attractive targeted sugar bait station deployment in Western Zambia: vector surveillance findings from a two-arm cluster randomized phase III trial.

Joseph Wagman, Benjamin Chanda, Javan Chanda, Kochelani Saili, Erica Orange, Patricia Mambo, Rayford Muyabe, Tresford Kaniki, Mwansa Mwenya, Mirabelle Ng'andu and 23 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report 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 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

33 authors.

Joseph WagmanPATH, Washington, DC, USA. jowagman@gmail.com.
Benjamin ChandaPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Javan ChandaPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Kochelani SailiPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Erica OrangePATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Patricia MamboPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Rayford MuyabePATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Tresford KanikiPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Mwansa MwenyaPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Mirabelle Ng'anduPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Jimmy SakalaPATH, Kaoma, Zambia.
Willy NgulubeNational Malaria Elimination Centre, Lusaka, Zambia.
John MillerPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Annie ArnzenPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Kafula SilumbePATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Gift MwaangaMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Limonty SimubaliMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Alice MungoMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Monicah M MburuMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Edgar SimulunduMacha Research Trust, Choma, Zambia.
Brenda MambwePATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Racheal KasaroPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Conceptor MulubePATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Mulenga MwendaPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Busiku HamainzaNational Malaria Elimination Centre, Lusaka, Zambia.
Ruth A AshtonCentre for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Thomas P EiseleCentre for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Angela F HarrisInnovative Vector Control Consortium, Liverpool, UK.
Julian EntwistleInnovative Vector Control Consortium, Liverpool, UK.
Joshua YukichCentre for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Laurence SlutskerIndependent Consultant, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Thomas R BurkotAustralian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia.
Megan LittrellPATH, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAttractive targeted sugar bait (ATSB) stations are a novel tool with potential to complement current approaches to malaria vector control. To assess the public health value of ATSB station deployment in areas of high coverage with standard vector control, a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial (cRCT) of Sarabi ATSB® stations (Westham Ltd., Hod-Hasharon, Israel) was conducted in Western Province, Zambia, a high-burden location were Anopheles funestus is the dominant vector. The trial included 70 clusters and was designed to measure the effect of ATSBs on case incidence and infection prevalence over two 7-month deployments. Reported here are results of the vector surveillance component of the study, conducted in a subset of 20 clusters and designed to provide entomological context to guide overall interpretation of trial findings.

methodsEach month, 200 paired indoor-outdoor human landing catch (HLC) and 200 paired light trap (LT) collections were conducted to monitor An. funestus parity, abundance, biting rates, sporozoite prevalence, and entomological inoculation rates (EIR).

resultsDuring the study 20,337 female An. funestus were collected, 11,229 from control and 9,108 from intervention clusters. A subset of 3,131 HLC specimens were assessed for parity: The mean non-parous proportion was 23.0% (95% CI 18.2-28.7%, total n = 1477) in the control and 21.2% (95% CI 18.8-23.9%, total n = 1654) in the intervention arm, an OR = 1.05 (95% CI 0.82-1.34; p = 0.688). A non-significant reduction in LT abundance (RR = 0.65 [95% CI 0.30-1.40, p = 0.267]) was associated with ATSB deployment. HLC rates were highly variable, but model results indicate a similar non-significant trend with a RR = 0.68 (95%CI 0.22-2.00; p = 0.479). There were no effects on sporozoite prevalence or EIR.

conclusionsAnopheles funestus parity did not differ across study arms, but ATSB deployment was associated with a non-significant 35% reduction in vector LT density, results that are consistent with the epidemiological impact reported elsewhere. Additional research is needed to better understand how to maximize the potential impact of ATSB approaches in Zambia and other contexts. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04800055, 16 March 2021).

Indexed as

AnophelesMosquito ControlMosquito VectorsAnimalsFemaleHumansMalariaSugarsZambiaSugars

Identifiers

PMID39026236
PMCPMC11264679

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.