COSTECH Integrated Repository

Comparison of cone bioassay estimates at two laboratories with different Anopheles mosquitoes for quality assurance of pyrethroid insecticide-treated nets

Show simple item record

dc.creator Mbwambo, Stephen
dc.creator Bubun, Nakei
dc.creator Mbuba, Emmanuel
dc.creator Moore, Jason
dc.creator Mbina, Kasiani
dc.creator Kamande, Dismas
dc.creator Laman, Moses
dc.creator Mpolya, Emmanuel
dc.creator Odufuwa, Olukayode
dc.creator Freeman, Tim
dc.creator Karl, Stephan
dc.creator Moore, Sarah
dc.date 2022-08-24T12:51:04Z
dc.date 2022-08-24T12:51:04Z
dc.date 2022-07-07
dc.date.accessioned 2022-10-25T09:20:38Z
dc.date.available 2022-10-25T09:20:38Z
dc.identifier https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04217-3
dc.identifier https://dspace.nm-aist.ac.tz/handle/20.500.12479/1490
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/95102
dc.description This research article was published by Springer Nature, 2022
dc.description ckground: Quality assurance (QA) of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) delivered to malaria-endemic countries is con ducted by measuring physiochemical parameters, but not bioefcacy against malaria mosquitoes. This study explored utility of cone bioassays for pre-delivery QA of pyrethroid ITNs to test the assumption that cone bioassays are consist ent across locations, mosquito strains, and laboratories. Methods: Double-blinded bioassays were conducted on twenty unused pyrethroid ITNs of 4 brands (100 nets, 5 subsamples per net) that had been delivered for mass distribution in Papua New Guinea (PNG) having passed pre delivery inspections. Cone bioassays were performed on the same net pieces following World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines at the PNG Institute of Medical Research (PNGIMR) using pyrethroid susceptible Anopheles farauti sensu stricto (s.s.) and at Ifakara Health Institute (IHI), Tanzania using pyrethroid susceptible Anopheles gambiae s.s. Additionally, WHO tunnel tests were conducted at IHI on ITNs that did not meet cone bioefcacy thresholds. Results from IHI and PNGIMR were compared using Spearman’s Rank correlation, Bland–Altman (BA) analysis and analysis of agreement. Literature review on the use of cone bioassays for unused pyrethroid ITNs testing was conducted. Results: In cone bioassays, 13/20 nets (65%) at IHI and 8/20 (40%) at PNGIMR met WHO bioefcacy criteria. All nets met WHO bioefcacy criteria on combined cone/tunnel tests at IHI. Results from IHI and PNGIMR correlated on 60-min knockdown (KD60) (rs=0.6,p=0.002,n=20) and 24-h mortality (M24) (rs=0.9,p<0.0001,n=20) but BA showed systematic bias between the results. Of the 5 nets with discrepant result between IHI and PNGIMR, three had confdence intervals overlapping the 80% mortality threshold, with averages within 1–3% of the threshold. Including these as a pass, the agreement between the results to predict ITN failure was good with kappa=0.79 (0.53–1.00) and 90% accuracy. Conclusions: Based on these study fndings, the WHO cone bioassay is a reproducible bioassay for ITNs with>80% M24, and for all ITNs provided inherent stochastic variation and systematic bias are accounted for. The literature
dc.format application/pdf
dc.language en
dc.publisher Springer Nature.
dc.subject Bioefficacy
dc.subject Bioassay
dc.subject Cone bioassay
dc.subject Tunnel test Insecticide treated nets
dc.subject Long lasting insecticidal nets
dc.subject Pyrethroid
dc.subject Mosquito
dc.subject Anopheles
dc.subject Malaria
dc.title Comparison of cone bioassay estimates at two laboratories with different Anopheles mosquitoes for quality assurance of pyrethroid insecticide-treated nets
dc.type Article


Files in this item

Files Size Format View
JA_LiSBE_2022 (4).pdf 1.798Mb application/pdf View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search COSTECH


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account