P. knowlesi versus P. falciparum: Treatment and Prevention

QUESTION

I would like to know about the P. knowlesi – treatment compared to P. falciparum? preventive medicine?

ANSWER

At this point in time, P. knowlesi is completely susceptible to chloroquine, and so can be treated successfully using this drug. P. falciparum, on the other hand, is known to have widespread resistance to chloroquine, and so the World Health Organization recommends that chloroquine should not be used to treat P. falciparum malaria. Instead, for non-complicated malaria, the WHO recommends treatment with artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs). These drugs can also be used against other forms of malaria, including P. knowlesi, particularly if the hospital also treats cases of P. falciparum regularly and so has supplies of ACTs on hand. One study even showed that treatment with ACTs (specifically artemether-lumefantrine) was more effective than chloroquine in treating P. knowlesi. Severe cases of either infection should be treated with intravenous artesunate or quinine.

Prevention for both is roughly similar – chemoprophylaxis should be taken by people travelling to an area where transmission of these types of malaria occurs. However, given P. knowlesi‘s susceptibility to chloroquine, this drug is effective as a prophylactic for this malaria species, whereas it is not appropriate for P. falciparum, given high levels of resistance. In terms of prevention of mosquito bites, this differs due to the types of mosquito vectors each of these species of malaria uses. P. knowlesi is only found in south-east Asia, where the mosquitoes that transmit it tend to be forest dwelling. As such, people who spend time in the forest in the evening and at night are most at risk of contracting P. knowlesi. Wearing long-sleeved clothing and insecticide while in the forest may help prevention in this case. P. falciparum is found throughout the world, and uses many different species of mosquito vector. In Africa, the mosquitoes which transmit P. falciparum tend to rest indoors and thus bite people at night while they are sleeping. Therefore, in these settings, it is especially beneficial to sleep under a long-lasting insecticide treated bednet. Indoor residual spraying, which coats the inside walls of a house with insecticide to kill indoor-resting mosquitoes, can also be beneficial.

Toxic Sugar Bait Can Help Control Mosquitos

An improved knowledge of mosquito life history could strengthen malaria vector control efforts that primarily focus on killing mosquitoes indoors using insecticide treated nets and indoor residual spraying.

Natural sugar sources, usually floral nectars of plants, are a primary energy resource for adult mosquitoes but their role in regulating the dynamics of mosquito populations is unclear. To determine how the sugar availability impacts Anopheles sergentii populations, mark-release-recapture studies were conducted in two oases in Israel with either absence or presence of the local primary sugar source, flowering Acacia raddiana trees.

Compared with population estimates from the sugar-rich oasis, An. sergentii in the sugar-poor oasis showed smaller population size (37,494 vs. 85,595), lower survival rates (0.72 vs. 0.93), and prolonged gonotrophic cycles (3.33 vs. 2.36 days). The estimated number of females older than the extrinsic incubation period of malaria (10 days) in the sugar rich site was 4 times greater than in the sugar poor site.

Sugar feeding detected in mosquito guts in the sugar-rich site was significantly higher (73%) than in the sugar-poor site (48%). In contrast, plant tissue feeding (poor quality sugar source) in the sugar-rich habitat was much less (0.3%) than in the sugar-poor site (30%). More important, the estimated vectorial capacity, a standard measure of malaria transmission potential, was more than 250-fold higher in the sugar-rich oasis than that in the sugar-poor site.

Our results convincingly show that the availability of sugar sources in the local environment is a major determinant regulating the dynamics of mosquito populations and their vector potential, suggesting that control interventions targeting sugar-feeding mosquitoes pose a promising tactic for combating transmission of malaria parasites and other pathogens.

Authors: Weidong Gu1*, Günter Müller2, Yosef Schlein2, Robert J. Novak1, John C. Beier3

1 Division of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America, 2 Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, IMRIC, Kuvin Centre for the Study of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel, 3 Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Miller School of Medicine, Center for Global Health Sciences, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, United States of America

Citation: Gu W, Müller G, Schlein Y, Novak RJ, Beier JC (2011) Natural Plant Sugar Sources of Anopheles Mosquitoes Strongly Impact Malaria Transmission Potential. PLoS ONE 6(1): e15996. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015996

Editor: Anne Charlotte Gruner, Singapore Immunology Network, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore

Copyright: © 2011 Gu et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This project was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (grant 47302). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

See full text: Natural Plant Sugar Sources of Anopheles Mosquitoes Strongly Impact Malaria Transmission Potential (PDF)