Assessment of anthelmintic efficacy of mebendazole in school children in six countries where soil-transmitted helminths are endemic.

BACKGROUND: Robust reference values for fecal egg count reduction (FECR) rates of the most widely used anthelmintic drugs in preventive chemotherapy (PC) programs for controlling soil-transmitted helminths (STHs; Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura, and hookworm) are still lacking. However, they are urgently needed to ensure detection of reduced efficacies that are predicted to occur due to growing drug pressure. Here, using a standardized methodology, we assessed the FECR rate of a single oral dose of mebendazole (MEB; 500 mg) against STHs in six trials in school children in different locations around the world. Our results are compared with those previously obtained for similarly conducted trials of a single oral dose of albendazole (ALB; 400 mg). METHODOLOGY: The efficacy of MEB, as assessed by FECR, was determined in six trials involving 5,830 school children in Brazil, Cambodia, Cameroon, Ethiopia, United Republic of Tanzania, and Vietnam. The efficacy of MEB was compared to that of ALB as previously assessed in 8,841 school children in India and all the above-mentioned study sites, using identical methodologies. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The estimated FECR rate [95% confidence interval] of MEB was highest for A. lumbricoides (97.6% [95.8; 99.5]), followed by hookworm (79.6% [71.0; 88.3]). For T. trichiura, the estimated FECR rate was 63.1% [51.6; 74.6]. Compared to MEB, ALB was significantly more efficacious against hookworm (96.2% [91.1; 100], p<0.001) and only marginally, although significantly, better against A. lumbricoides infections (99.9% [99.0; 100], p = 0.012), but equally efficacious for T. trichiura infections (64.5% [44.4; 84.7], p = 0.906). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: A minimum FECR rate of 95% for A. lumbricoides, 70% for hookworm, and 50% for T. trichiura is expected in MEB-dependent PC programs. Lower FECR results may indicate the development of potential drug resistance.

A comparison of the sensitivity and fecal egg counts of the McMaster egg counting and Kato-Katz thick smear methods for soil-transmitted helminths.

BACKGROUND: The Kato-Katz thick smear (Kato-Katz) is the diagnostic method recommended for monitoring large-scale treatment programs implemented for the control of soil-transmitted helminths (STH) in public health, yet it is difficult to standardize. A promising alternative is the McMaster egg counting method (McMaster), commonly used in veterinary parasitology, but rarely so for the detection of STH in human stool. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The Kato-Katz and McMaster methods were compared for the detection of STH in 1,543 subjects resident in five countries across Africa, Asia and South America. The consistency of the performance of both methods in different trials, the validity of the fixed multiplication factor employed in the Kato-Katz method and the accuracy of these methods for estimating 'true' drug efficacies were assessed. The Kato-Katz method detected significantly more Ascaris lumbricoides infections (88.1% vs. 75.6%, p<0.001), whereas the difference in sensitivity between the two methods was non-significant for hookworm (78.3% vs. 72.4%) and Trichuris trichiura (82.6% vs. 80.3%). The sensitivity of the methods varied significantly across trials and magnitude of fecal egg counts (FEC). Quantitative comparison revealed a significant correlation (Rs >0.32) in FEC between both methods, and indicated no significant difference in FEC, except for A. lumbricoides, where the Kato-Katz resulted in significantly higher FEC (14,197 eggs per gram of stool (EPG) vs. 5,982 EPG). For the Kato-Katz, the fixed multiplication factor resulted in significantly higher FEC than the multiplication factor adjusted for mass of feces examined for A. lumbricoides (16,538 EPG vs. 15,396 EPG) and T. trichiura (1,490 EPG vs. 1,363 EPG), but not for hookworm. The McMaster provided more accurate efficacy results (absolute difference to 'true' drug efficacy: 1.7% vs. 4.5%). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The McMaster is an alternative method for monitoring large-scale treatment programs. It is a robust (accurate multiplication factor) and accurate (reliable efficacy results) method, which can be easily standardized.