Cost and community acceptability of enhanced antibiotic distribution approaches for trachoma in the Republic of South Sudan: enhancing the A in SAFE (ETAS) study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization targeted trachoma for global elimination as a public health problem by 2030. Reaching elimination thresholds by the year 2030 in the Republic of South Sudan will be a considerable challenge, as the country currently has many counties considered hyper-endemic (> 30% trachomatous inflammation-follicular [TF]) that have yet to receive interventions. Evidence from randomized trials, modeling, and population-based surveys suggests that enhancements may be needed to the standard-of-care annual mass drug administration (MDA) to reach elimination thresholds in a timely manner within highly endemic areas. We describe a protocol for a study to determine the cost and community acceptability of enhanced antibiotic strategies for trachoma in South Sudan. METHODS: The Enhancing the A in SAFE (ETAS) study is a community randomized intervention costing and community acceptability study. Following a population-based trachoma prevalence survey in 1 county, 30 communities will be randomized 1:1 to receive 1 of 2 enhanced MDA interventions, with the remaining communities receiving standard-of-care annual MDA. The first intervention strategy will consist of a community-wide MDA followed by 2 rounds of targeted treatment to children ages 6 months to 9 years, 2 weeks and 4 weeks after the community MDA. The second strategy will consist of a community-wide biannual MDA approximately 6 to 8 months apart. The costing analysis will use a payer perspective and identify the total cost of the enhanced interventions and annual MDA. Community acceptability will be assessed through MDA coverage monitoring and mixed-methods research involving community stakeholders. A second trachoma-specific survey will be conducted 12 months following the original survey. DISCUSSION: ETAS has received ethical clearance and is expected to be conducted between 2022 and 2023. Results will be shared through subsequent manuscripts. The study's results will provide information to trachoma programs on whether enhanced interventions are affordable and acceptable to communities. These results will further help in the design of future trachoma-specific antibiotic efficacy trials. Enhanced MDA approaches could help countries recover from delays caused by conflict or humanitarian emergencies and could also assist countries such as South Sudan in reaching trachoma elimination as a public health problem by 2030. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on December 1st, 2022 (clinicaltrails.org: NCT05634759).

Epidemiology and control of trachoma in the state of Ceará, Northeast Brazil, 2007-2021.

BACKGROUND: To analyze the epidemiology, surveillance, and control strategies for trachoma in the state of Ceará, northeast Brazil, from 2007 to 2021. METHODS: This ecological study was based on secondary data from the Information System on Notifiable Diseases of the Secretary of Health of the state of Ceará. Data from school and home surveys for trachoma detection obtained during the study period were analyzed, the percentage of positivity was estimated, and sociodemographic and clinico-epidemiological factors were investigated. RESULTS: The coverage of trachoma surveillance and control actions in Ceará municipalities increased from 12.5% in 2007 to 55.9% in 2019, but with an average restriction of 8.0% during the COVID-19 pandemic. The estimated trachoma positivity (mean overall positivity) was less than 5.0% (2.76%, 95% CI 1.2-5.2), with a higher proportion of cases in the 5-9-year age group (45.0%, 95% CI 44.6-45.4), in females (53.2%, 95% CI 52.8-53.6), and rural areas (52.6%, 95% CI 52.2-53.0). Positivity above 10.0% was observed in the Litoral Leste/Jaguaribe and Sertão Central regions, with a higher occurrence of the follicular inflammatory clinical form (98.1%, 95% CI 98.0-98.2). CONCLUSIONS: Trachoma remains in the state of Ceará and is likely underreported. Despite recent advances, the fragility of health surveillance activities compromises the recognition of the actual magnitude and distribution of trachoma in the state. Accurate information is fundamental for planning, monitoring, and evaluating surveillance and disease control.

Evaluating and mitigating the potential indirect effect of COVID-19 on control programmes for seven neglected tropical diseases: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: In line with movement restrictions and physical distancing essential for the control of the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO recommended postponement of all neglected tropical disease (NTD) control activities that involve community-based surveys, active case finding, and mass drug administration in April, 2020. Following revised guidance later in 2020, and after interruptions to NTD programmes of varying lengths, NTD programmes gradually restarted in the context of an ongoing pandemic. However, ongoing challenges and service gaps have been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the potential effect of the programmatic interruptions and strategies to mitigate this effect. METHODS: For seven NTDs, namely soil-transmitted helminths, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, trachoma, visceral leishmaniasis, and human African trypanosomiasis, we used mathematical transmission models to simulate the effect of programme interruptions on the dynamics of each of these diseases in different endemic settings. We also explored the potential benefit of implementing mitigation strategies, primarily in terms of minimising the delays to control targets. FINDINGS: We show that the effect of the COVID-19-induced interruption in terms of delay to achieving elimination goals might in some cases be much longer than the duration of the interruption. For schistosomiasis, onchocerciasis, trachoma, and visceral leishmaniasis, a mean delay of 2-3 years for a 1-year interruption is predicted in areas of highest prevalence. We also show that these delays can largely be mitigated by measures such as additional mass drug administration or enhanced case-finding. INTERPRETATION: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought infectious disease control to the forefront of global consciousness. It is essential that the NTDs, so long neglected in terms of research and financial support, are not overlooked, and remain a priority in health service planning and funding. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Medical Research Council, and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office.

Stopping azithromycin mass drug administration for trachoma: A systematic review.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends continuing azithromycin mass drug administration (MDA) for trachoma until endemic regions drop below 5% prevalence of active trachoma in children aged 1-9 years. Azithromycin targets the ocular strains of Chlamydia trachomatis that cause trachoma. Regions with low prevalence of active trachoma may have little if any ocular chlamydia, and, thus, may not benefit from azithromycin treatment. Understanding what happens to active trachoma and ocular chlamydia prevalence after stopping azithromycin MDA may improve future treatment decisions. We systematically reviewed published evidence for community prevalence of both active trachoma and ocular chlamydia after cessation of azithromycin distribution. We searched electronic databases for all peer-reviewed studies published before May 2020 that included at least 2 post-MDA surveillance surveys of ocular chlamydia and/or the active trachoma marker, trachomatous inflammation-follicular (TF) prevalence. We assessed trends in the prevalence of both indicators over time after stopping azithromycin MDA. Of 140 identified studies, 21 met inclusion criteria and were used for qualitative synthesis. Post-MDA, we found a gradual increase in ocular chlamydia infection prevalence over time, while TF prevalence generally gradually declined. Ocular chlamydia infection may be a better measurement tool compared to TF for detecting trachoma recrudescence in communities after stopping azithromycin MDA. These findings may guide future trachoma treatment and surveillance efforts.

Lessons from the field: delivering trachoma mass drug administration safely in a COVID-19 context.

The first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) interim guidance released by the World Health Organization recommended suspension of non-urgent community health interventions, including mass drug administration (MDA) for neglected tropical diseases. However, with no end in sight for the COVID-19 pandemic, it was crucial to find ways to restart MDA while testing measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission between health workers, volunteers and communities. Consequently, guidelines were developed for delivering MDA safely in a COVID-19 context and the training and implementation were assessed through an observation checklist. The study also gathered data on the feasibility of using the MDA platform to disseminate COVID-19 health education. The results suggest that delivering MDA safely in a COVID-19 context is possible but revealed significant challenges in using the MDA platform for COVID-19 education.

Modelling trachoma post-2020: opportunities for mitigating the impact of COVID-19 and accelerating progress towards elimination.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted planned annual antibiotic mass drug administration (MDA) activities that have formed the cornerstone of the largely successful global efforts to eliminate trachoma as a public health problem. METHODS: Using a mathematical model we investigate the impact of interruption to MDA in trachoma-endemic settings. We evaluate potential measures to mitigate this impact and consider alternative strategies for accelerating progress in those areas where the trachoma elimination targets may not be achievable otherwise. RESULTS: We demonstrate that for districts that were hyperendemic at baseline, or where the trachoma elimination thresholds have not already been achieved after three rounds of MDA, the interruption to planned MDA could lead to a delay to reaching elimination targets greater than the duration of interruption. We also show that an additional round of MDA in the year following MDA resumption could effectively mitigate this delay. For districts where the probability of elimination under annual MDA was already very low, we demonstrate that more intensive MDA schedules are needed to achieve agreed targets. CONCLUSION: Through appropriate use of additional MDA, the impact of COVID-19 in terms of delay to reaching trachoma elimination targets can be effectively mitigated. Additionally, more frequent MDA may accelerate progress towards 2030 goals.

Implications of the COVID-19 pandemic in eliminating trachoma as a public health problem.

BACKGROUND: Progress towards elimination of trachoma as a public health problem has been substantial, but the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted community-based control efforts. METHODS: We use a susceptible-infected model to estimate the impact of delayed distribution of azithromycin treatment on the prevalence of active trachoma. RESULTS: We identify three distinct scenarios for geographic districts depending on whether the basic reproduction number and the treatment-associated reproduction number are above or below a value of 1. We find that when the basic reproduction number is <1, no significant delays in disease control will be caused. However, when the basic reproduction number is >1, significant delays can occur. In most districts, 1 y of COVID-related delay can be mitigated by a single extra round of mass drug administration. However, supercritical districts require a new paradigm of infection control because the current strategies will not eliminate disease. CONCLUSIONS: If the pandemic can motivate judicious, community-specific implementation of control strategies, global elimination of trachoma as a public health problem could be accelerated.

Use of modelling to modify trachoma elimination strategies affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Models predict that the negative effects of delayed implementation in trachoma elimination programmes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic will be minimal, except in high prevalence districts where progress may be reversed. During times of change we must stand by our principles of evidence-based decision-making, but also be willing to show flexibility. Slow progress to elimination in high prevalence districts was already a significant challenge to the global programme and mitigation of COVID-related delays with enhanced implementation provides an opportunity to simultaneously address an unprecedented challenge and a pre-existing one.