Journal Article > LetterFull Text
Nature. 2015 June 17; Volume 524 (Issue 7563); 97-101.; DOI:10.1038/nature14594
Carroll MW, Matthews DA, Hiscox JA, Elmore MJ, Pollakis G, et al.
Nature. 2015 June 17; Volume 524 (Issue 7563); 97-101.; DOI:10.1038/nature14594
West Africa is currently witnessing the most extensive Ebola virus (EBOV) outbreak so far recorded. Until now, there have been 27,013 reported cases and 11,134 deaths. The origin of the virus is thought to have been a zoonotic transmission from a bat to a twoyear-old boy in December 2013 (ref. 2). From this index case the virus was spread by human-to-human contact throughout Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. However, the origin of the particular virus in each country and time of transmission is not known and currently relies on epidemiological analysis, which may be unreliable owing to the difficulties of obtaining patient information. Here we trace the genetic evolution of EBOV in the current outbreak that has resulted in multiple lineages. Deep sequencing of 179 patient samples processed by the European Mobile Laboratory, the first diagnostics unit to be deployed to the epicentre of the outbreak in Guinea, reveals an epidemiological and evolutionary history of the epidemic from March 2014 to January 2015. Analysis of EBOV genome evolution has also benefited from a similar sequencing effort of patient samples from Sierra Leone. Our results confirm that the EBOV from Guinea moved into Sierra Leone, most likely in April or early May. The viruses of the Guinea/Sierra Leone lineage mixed around June/July 2014. Viral sequences covering August, September and October 2014 indicate that this lineage evolved independently within Guinea. These data can be used in conjunction with epidemiological information to test retrospectively the effectiveness of control measures, and provides an unprecedented window into the evolution of an ongoing viral haemorrhagic fever outbreak.
Journal Article > Short ReportFull Text
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 November 14; Volume 63; 1067-71.
Sharma A, Heijenberg N, Peter C, Bolongei J, Reeder B, et al.
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 November 14; Volume 63; 1067-71.
WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS TOPIC?
Lofa County in Liberia has one of the highest numbers of reported cases of Ebola virus disease (Ebola) in West Africa. Government health offices, nongovernmental organizations, and technical agencies coordinated response activities to reduce transmission of Ebola in Lofa County. The intensity and thoroughness of activities increased in response to the resurgence of Ebola in early June.
WHAT IS ADDED BY THIS REPORT?
Trends in new reported cases, admissions to the dedicated Ebola treatment unit in the town of Foya, and test results of community decedents evaluated for Ebola virus suggest transmission of Ebola virus decreased in Lofa County as early as August 17, 2014, following rapid scale-up of response activities after a resurgence of Ebola in early June.
WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE?
A comprehensive Ebola response strategy developed with participation from the local community and rapidly scaled up following resurgence of Ebola might have reduced the spread of Ebola virus in Lofa County. The strategy implemented in Lofa County might serve as a model for reducing transmission of Ebola virus in other affected areas.
Lofa County in Liberia has one of the highest numbers of reported cases of Ebola virus disease (Ebola) in West Africa. Government health offices, nongovernmental organizations, and technical agencies coordinated response activities to reduce transmission of Ebola in Lofa County. The intensity and thoroughness of activities increased in response to the resurgence of Ebola in early June.
WHAT IS ADDED BY THIS REPORT?
Trends in new reported cases, admissions to the dedicated Ebola treatment unit in the town of Foya, and test results of community decedents evaluated for Ebola virus suggest transmission of Ebola virus decreased in Lofa County as early as August 17, 2014, following rapid scale-up of response activities after a resurgence of Ebola in early June.
WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE?
A comprehensive Ebola response strategy developed with participation from the local community and rapidly scaled up following resurgence of Ebola might have reduced the spread of Ebola virus in Lofa County. The strategy implemented in Lofa County might serve as a model for reducing transmission of Ebola virus in other affected areas.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
N Engl J Med. 2016 January 7; Volume 374 (Issue 1); 23-32.; DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1504605
Gignoux EM, Azman AS, de Smet M, Azuma P, Massaquoi M, et al.
N Engl J Med. 2016 January 7; Volume 374 (Issue 1); 23-32.; DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1504605
BACKGROUND
Malaria treatment is recommended for patients with suspected Ebola virus disease (EVD) in West Africa, whether systematically or based on confirmed malaria diagnosis. At the Ebola treatment center in Foya, Lofa County, Liberia, the supply of artemether–lumefantrine, a first-line antimalarial combination drug, ran out for a 12-day period in August 2014. During this time, patients received the combination drug artesunate–amodiaquine; amodiaquine is a compound with anti–Ebola virus activity in vitro. No other obvious change in the care of patients occurred during this period.
METHODS
We fit unadjusted and adjusted regression models to standardized patient-level data to estimate the risk ratio for death among patients with confirmed EVD who were prescribed artesunate–amodiaquine (artesunate–amodiaquine group), as compared with those who were prescribed artemether–lumefantrine (artemether–lumefantrine group) and those who were not prescribed any antimalarial drug (no-antimalarial group).
RESULTS
Between June 5 and October 24, 2014, a total of 382 patients with confirmed EVD were admitted to the Ebola treatment center in Foya. At admission, 194 patients were prescribed artemether–lumefantrine and 71 were prescribed artesunate–amodiaquine. The characteristics of the patients in the artesunate–amodiaquine group were similar to those in the artemether–lumefantrine group and those in the no-antimalarial group. A total of 125 of the 194 patients in the artemether–lumefantrine group (64.4%) died, as compared with 36 of the 71 patients in the artesunate–amodiaquine group (50.7%). In adjusted analyses, the artesunate–amodiaquine group had a 31% lower risk of death than the artemether–lumefantrine group (risk ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.89), with a stronger effect observed among patients without malaria.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients who were prescribed artesunate–amodiaquine had a lower risk of death from EVD than did patients who were prescribed artemether–lumefantrine. However, our analyses cannot exclude the possibility that artemether–lumefantrine is associated with an increased risk of death or that the use of artesunate–amodiaquine was associated with unmeasured patient characteristics that directly altered the risk of death.
Malaria treatment is recommended for patients with suspected Ebola virus disease (EVD) in West Africa, whether systematically or based on confirmed malaria diagnosis. At the Ebola treatment center in Foya, Lofa County, Liberia, the supply of artemether–lumefantrine, a first-line antimalarial combination drug, ran out for a 12-day period in August 2014. During this time, patients received the combination drug artesunate–amodiaquine; amodiaquine is a compound with anti–Ebola virus activity in vitro. No other obvious change in the care of patients occurred during this period.
METHODS
We fit unadjusted and adjusted regression models to standardized patient-level data to estimate the risk ratio for death among patients with confirmed EVD who were prescribed artesunate–amodiaquine (artesunate–amodiaquine group), as compared with those who were prescribed artemether–lumefantrine (artemether–lumefantrine group) and those who were not prescribed any antimalarial drug (no-antimalarial group).
RESULTS
Between June 5 and October 24, 2014, a total of 382 patients with confirmed EVD were admitted to the Ebola treatment center in Foya. At admission, 194 patients were prescribed artemether–lumefantrine and 71 were prescribed artesunate–amodiaquine. The characteristics of the patients in the artesunate–amodiaquine group were similar to those in the artemether–lumefantrine group and those in the no-antimalarial group. A total of 125 of the 194 patients in the artemether–lumefantrine group (64.4%) died, as compared with 36 of the 71 patients in the artesunate–amodiaquine group (50.7%). In adjusted analyses, the artesunate–amodiaquine group had a 31% lower risk of death than the artemether–lumefantrine group (risk ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.89), with a stronger effect observed among patients without malaria.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients who were prescribed artesunate–amodiaquine had a lower risk of death from EVD than did patients who were prescribed artemether–lumefantrine. However, our analyses cannot exclude the possibility that artemether–lumefantrine is associated with an increased risk of death or that the use of artesunate–amodiaquine was associated with unmeasured patient characteristics that directly altered the risk of death.
Journal Article > Short ReportFull Text
Euro Surveill. 2014 December 11
Baggi FM, Taybi A, Kurth A, Van Herp M, Di Caro A, et al.
Euro Surveill. 2014 December 11
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Society. 2020 June 29; Volume 117 (Issue 2); 411-424.; DOI:10.1111/add.15630
Mafirakureva N, Stone J, Fraser H, Nzomukunda Y, Maina A, et al.
Society. 2020 June 29; Volume 117 (Issue 2); 411-424.; DOI:10.1111/add.15630
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment is essential for eliminating HCV in people who inject drugs (PWID), but has limited coverage in resource-limited settings. We measured the cost-effectiveness of a pilot HCV screening and treatment intervention using directly observed therapy among PWID attending harm reduction services in Nairobi, Kenya.
DESIGN
We utilized an existing model of HIV and HCV transmission among current and former PWID in Nairobi to estimate the cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment for HCV, including prevention benefits versus no screening and treatment. The cure rate of treatment and costs for screening and treatment were estimated from intervention data, while other model parameters were derived from literature. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a life-time horizon from the health-care provider's perspective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
SETTING
Nairobi, Kenya.
POPULATION
PWID.
MEASUREMENTS
Treatment costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per disability-adjusted life year averted).
FINDINGS
The cost per disability-adjusted life-year averted for the intervention was $975, with 92.1% of the probabilistic sensitivity analyses simulations falling below the per capita gross domestic product for Kenya ($1509; commonly used as a suitable threshold for determining whether an intervention is cost-effective). However, the intervention was not cost-effective at the opportunity cost-based cost-effectiveness threshold of $647 per disability-adjusted life-year averted. Sensitivity analyses showed that the intervention could provide more value for money by including modelled estimates for HCV disease care costs, assuming lower drug prices ($75 instead of $728 per course) and excluding directly-observed therapy costs.
CONCLUSIONS
The current strategy of screening and treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs in Nairobi is likely to be highly cost-effective with currently available cheaper drug prices, if directly-observed therapy is not used and HCV disease care costs are accounted for.
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment is essential for eliminating HCV in people who inject drugs (PWID), but has limited coverage in resource-limited settings. We measured the cost-effectiveness of a pilot HCV screening and treatment intervention using directly observed therapy among PWID attending harm reduction services in Nairobi, Kenya.
DESIGN
We utilized an existing model of HIV and HCV transmission among current and former PWID in Nairobi to estimate the cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment for HCV, including prevention benefits versus no screening and treatment. The cure rate of treatment and costs for screening and treatment were estimated from intervention data, while other model parameters were derived from literature. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a life-time horizon from the health-care provider's perspective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
SETTING
Nairobi, Kenya.
POPULATION
PWID.
MEASUREMENTS
Treatment costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per disability-adjusted life year averted).
FINDINGS
The cost per disability-adjusted life-year averted for the intervention was $975, with 92.1% of the probabilistic sensitivity analyses simulations falling below the per capita gross domestic product for Kenya ($1509; commonly used as a suitable threshold for determining whether an intervention is cost-effective). However, the intervention was not cost-effective at the opportunity cost-based cost-effectiveness threshold of $647 per disability-adjusted life-year averted. Sensitivity analyses showed that the intervention could provide more value for money by including modelled estimates for HCV disease care costs, assuming lower drug prices ($75 instead of $728 per course) and excluding directly-observed therapy costs.
CONCLUSIONS
The current strategy of screening and treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs in Nairobi is likely to be highly cost-effective with currently available cheaper drug prices, if directly-observed therapy is not used and HCV disease care costs are accounted for.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Nature. 2016 May 4; Volume 533 (Issue 7601); 100-104.; DOI:10.1038/nature17949
Ruibal P, Oestereich L, Ludtke A, Becker-Ziaja B, Wozniak DM, et al.
Nature. 2016 May 4; Volume 533 (Issue 7601); 100-104.; DOI:10.1038/nature17949
Despite the magnitude of the Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa, there is still a fundamental lack of knowledge about the pathophysiology of EVD. In particular, very little is known about human immune responses to Ebola virus. Here we evaluate the physiology of the human T cell immune response in EVD patients at the time of admission to the Ebola Treatment Center in Guinea, and longitudinally until discharge or death. Through the use of multiparametric flow cytometry established by the European Mobile Laboratory in the field, we identify an immune signature that is unique in EVD fatalities. Fatal EVD was characterized by a high percentage of CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells expressing the inhibitory molecules CTLA-4 and PD-1, which correlated with elevated inflammatory markers and high virus load. Conversely, surviving individuals showed significantly lower expression of CTLA-4 and PD-1 as well as lower inflammation, despite comparable overall T cell activation. Concomitant with virus clearance, survivors mounted a robust Ebola-virus-specific T cell response. Our findings suggest that dysregulation of the T cell response is a key component of EVD pathophysiology.