Benefits of using multiple first-line therapies against malaria.
Despite the availability of many drugs and therapies to treat malaria, many countries' national policies recommend using a single first-line therapy for most clinical malaria cases. To assess whether this is the best strategy for the population as a whole, we designed an evolutionary-epidemiological modeling framework for malaria and compared the benefits of different treatment strategies in the context of resistance evolution. Our results show that the population-wide use of multiple first-line therapies (MFT) against malaria yields a better clinical outcome than using a single therapy or a cycling strategy where therapies are rotated, either on a fixed cycling schedule or when resistance levels or treatment failure become too high. MFT strategies also delay the emergence and slow the fixation of resistant strains (phenotypes), and they allow a larger fraction of the population to be treated without trading off future treatment of cases that may be untreatable because of high resistance levels. Earlier papers have noted that cycling strategies have the disadvantage of creating a less temporally variable environment than MFT strategies, making resistance evolution easier for the parasite. Here, we illustrate a second feature of parasite ecology that impairs the performance of cycling policies, namely, that cycling policies degrade the mean fitness of the parasite population more quickly than MFT policies, making it easier for new resistant types to invade and spread. The clinical benefits of using multiple first-line therapies against malaria suggest that MFT policies should play a key role in malaria elimination and control programs.
Boni
Maciej F
MF
Resources for the Future, Washington, DC 20036, USA. mboni@oucru.org
Smith
David L
DL
Laxminarayan
Ramanan
R
D000962:Antimalarials / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D003198:Computer Simulation; D006801:Humans; D008288:Malaria / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000453:epidemiology*; D008954:Models, Biological; D013997:Time Factors
D000962:Antimalarials
Drug Resist Updat. 2005 Feb-Apr;8(1-2):43-50
15939341
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1994 Aug;51(2):123-37
8074247
Drug Resist Updat. 1998;1(6):389-96
17092820
Nature. 2005 Nov 24;438(7067):492-5
16306991
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004 Jan;17(1):235-54
14726463
Proc Biol Sci. 1997 Jan 22;264(1378):61-7
9061961
Acta Trop. 2005 Jun;94(3):230-40
15878154
Pharmacol Rev. 2005 Mar;57(1):117-45
15734729
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Sep 7;101(36):13285-90
15308772
Science. 2008 Apr 18;320(5874):330-4
18420924
Parasitology. 2006 May;132(Pt 5):615-24
16426485
Parassitologia. 1999 Sep;41(1-3):241-6
10697862
Trends Parasitol. 2003 Feb;19(2):70-3
12586474
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1992 Jul-Aug;86(4):355-8
1359683
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1991 May-Jun;85(3):349-55
1683034
Adv Parasitol. 2002;52:235-64
12521262
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2005 Feb;72(2):163-73
15741553
Parasitol Today. 1993 May;9(5):168-74
15463746
Parasitol Today. 2000 Aug;16(8):340-7
10900482
Trop Med Int Health. 2000 Nov;5(11):755-64
11123822
Drug Resist Updat. 1998 Mar;1(1):3-9
17092790
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1998 Mar-Apr;92(2):188-95
9764331
Lancet. 1999 Jun 5;353(9168):1965-7
10371589
J Health Econ. 2002 Jul;21(4):709-18
12146599
Parasitology. 1997 Aug;115 ( Pt 2):133-41
10190169
Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Mar 7;270(1514):545-54
12641911
Malar J. 2008 Apr 25;7:67
18439283
J Natl Malar Soc. 1951 Dec;10(4):327-36
14908561
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Oct 28;94(22):12106-11
9342370
Acta Trop. 2005 Jun;94(3):207-17
15894181
Evolution. 2005 Mar;59(3):477-91
15856691
Bull World Health Organ. 1960;22:669-83
13846510
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1986;80(6):889-92
3603638
J Clin Invest. 2004 Apr;113(8):1084-92
15085184
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Apr 29;357(1420):505-19
12028788
Malar J. 2007 May 29;6:72
17535417