Tropical Health Matters

World Malaria Day 2023 is focusing on three key themes, Investment, Innovation, and Implementation, the 3 I’s. The recently approved malaria vaccines and those still under development embody these themes fully.  They all represent decades of investment in innovation, research, and now implementation.

After extensive several decades of clinical research and three years of field implementation in Ghana, Malawi, and Kenya by the World Health Organization and National Malaria and Immunization Programs, the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine is being rolled out with assistance of GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance. During the malaria vaccine implementation program (MVIP) and also based on GAVI’s philosophy for vaccine programs generally, a key strategy was to provide RTS,S as routine immunization services alongside other essential services including a comprehensive package of malaria control and elimination interventions. RTS,S is not only being made available to the three MVIP countries, but as supplies come on board, other falciparum malaria endemic countries have started to apply for supplies and funding through GAVI.

It was well known from the beginning that although RTS,s might be first out the gate, other vaccines would be following closely on its heels. The benefits as well as the efficacy limitations of RTS,S were well known.  Therefore, talk was common for new products being available by 2026. Now in 2023, countries have started to move ahead on another vaccine candidate.

BBC reported that “Ghana is the first country to approve a(nother) new malaria vaccine that has been described as a ‘world-changer’ by the scientists who developed it.” R21 appears to be more effective than its predecessor, so Ghana’s drug regulators moved ahead quickly using final trial data on the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness, which is not even public, to approve it. Interestingly, this move is in parallel to the World Health Organization’s consideration of approving the vaccine.  Shortly thereafter, Nigerian medicine regulators also approved R21. Reuters noted that these “approvals are unusual as they have come before the publication of final-stage trial data for the vaccine.” The actual roll out will ultimately depend on official publication of the safety data and sourcing of funds.

As mentioned above, these malaria vaccines represented considerable investment of time and resources, embody the kind of innovation that is needed to tackle malaria as drug and insecticide resistance threaten progress toward elimination, and require detailed planning right down to the grassroots levels to ensure that a malaria vaccine delivery is part of a comprehensive package of malaria and child health services.

We need to return to the theme of investment. While international organizations, universities, ministries of health, and of course pharmaceutical companies have been investing in developing a safe, effective, and feasible product, these innovative products will not save lives until funds are invested for both purchase and service delivery are guaranteed. GAVI and Partners have put together over $200 million in support for RTS,S implementation for three years. The first window was open in September 2022 for the initial three MVIP countries, and a second window for others, depending on available supplies was open in December 2022.

Investment FOR implementation is a challenging subject because GAVI and collaborating agencies are not a bottomless well of money. What level of national investment by a country to protect its own children is feasible? Is there the national political will to contribute and invest in children in endemic countries, and not continue depending heavily on donors?

Malaria vaccines are a perfect example of what the 3 I’s can achieve. But beyond celebrating this addition to the malaria elimination toolkit, will we also be celebrating commitments by endemic countries of local funds to make zero malaria a reality?

Today’s news and abstracts look at a variety of issues ranging from overall malaria funding funding needs to the effect of climate change on different types of mosquitoes and the diseases they carry (e.g. malaria vs dengue). We also examine the need for surveillance among nomadic groups and the use of cell phones in a saliva based malaria testing system. Please click the links below to read more on each subject.

Rwanda: Government Needs U.S.$70 Million to Fill Malaria Financing Gap

By Nasra Bishumba: The Government needs $73 million to bridge the funding in the funds needed to fight malaria between 2020 and 2024, The New Times can reveal. The Rwanda National Strategic Plan 2020-2024 to fight malaria drawn up in June this year indicates that although the implementation requires Rwf295bn ($280 million), the government already has funding commitment to the tune of $206.8m (equivalent to 74 per cent).

According to the strategic plan, a copy of which The New Times has seen, this leaves a gap of $73m which it hopes to mobilize from different sources. With these funds, the government is seeking to protect at least 85 per cent of the population with preventive interventions and to work towards promptly testing and treating suspected malaria cases by 2024. To achieve this, the biggest chunk of the funds will be invested in malaria prevention to a tune of $186m, an equivalent of 66 per cent of the entire budget.

Climate Change May Shift Risks of Mosquito-borne Diseases

By Asher Jones: More dengue, less malaria. That may be the future in parts of Africa on a warming planet, depending on where you live. New research says it’s all about which mosquitoes will thrive. And the methods to control one don’t necessarily work on the other.

The mosquito that spreads malaria prefers relatively cool temperatures of 25 degrees Celsius (77 degrees Fahrenheit). The dengue mosquito does best at 29 degrees Celsius (84.2 degrees Fahrenheit). Because of this difference in optimal temperatures, “We would actually predict that climate change might have opposing effects [on disease transmission],” said Erin Mordecai, assistant professor of biology at Stanford University and lead author on the study. “Climate change might make it less suitable for malaria to be transmitted but more suitable for dengue to be transmitted.”

Africa’s Nomadic Pastoralists and Their Animals Are an Invisible Frontier in Pandemic Surveillance

@ASTMH The effects of COVID-19 have gone undocumented in nomadic pastoralist communities across Africa, which are largely invisible to health surveillance systems despite the fact that they are of key significance in the setting of emerging infectious disease. We expose these landscapes as a “blind spot” in global health surveillance, elaborate on the ways in which current health surveillance infrastructure is ill-equipped to capture pastoralist populations and the animals with which they coexist, and highlight the consequential risks of inadequate surveillance among pastoralists and their livestock to global health. As a platform for further dialogue, we present concrete solutions to address this gap.

Mobile phone-based saliva test wins NIH prize

Cornell researchers’ concept for a quick, non-invasive, mobile phone-based system to detect infectious diseases, inflammation and nutritional deficiencies in saliva was awarded a $100,000 National Institutes of Health Technology Accelerator Challenge prize. The NIH’s prize challenge encourages the development of new, non-invasive diagnostic technologies important for global health. For the group’s saliva-based test, a small 3D-printed adapter is clipped to a mobile phone and synced with a mobile app. The app uses the phone’s camera to image test strips to detect malaria, iron deficiency and inflammation, with results in under 15 minutes.

The proposal builds on the FeverPhone and NutriPhone platforms developed by the team at Cornell’s Institute for Nutritional Sciences, Global Health and Technology (INSiGHT). The technologies, funded by the NIH and the National Science Foundation, evaluate infections and nutritional status using blood. According to Mehta, technologies using salivary biomarkers could revolutionize how conditions such as malaria and iron deficiency are identified and addressed, especially in settings where access to primary health care and traditional, laboratory-based tests is limited.

Monsoon infections: How to tell the difference between dengue and malaria? Watch out for these symptoms

While both diseases are mosquito-borne and cause similar symptoms such as fever, joint/muscle pain, headaches, and fatigue, some differences between their symptoms can help you identify the specific infections. Unique symptoms of Malaria: Stomach problems such as vomiting, Diarrhoea, Dry cough, Shivering, Spleen enlargement Unique symptoms of Dengue: Pain behind the eyes, Swollen glands, Rashes

These malaria and related news and abstracts stress the importance of sentinel surveillance systems, strong political and systems commitment to disease elimination, malachite green loop-mediated isothermal amplification for better malaria detection, and the threat of neglected fungal infections. An article from The Lancet shows that it is not just money that is needed to eliminate malaria, but better management and systems. Finally a bit of history from 18th Century North Carolina is shared. Click the links in each section to learn more about each topic.

Implementation of a malaria sentinel surveillance system in Togo: a pilot study

Since July 2017, 16 health facilities called sentinel sites, 4 hospitals and 12 peripheral care units located in 2 epidemiologically different health regions of Togo, have provided weekly data on malaria morbidity and mortality for the following 3 target groups:?<?5-years-old children,???5-years-old children and adults, and pregnant women. Data from week 29 in 2017 to week 13 in 2019 were analysed.

Each sentinel site provided complete data and the median time to data entry was 4 days. The number of confirmed malaria cases increased during the rainy seasons both in children under 5 years old and in children over 5 years old and adults. Malaria-related deaths occurred mainly in children under 5 years old and increased during the rainy seasons. The mean percentage of tested cases for malaria among suspected malaria cases was 99.0%. The mean percentage of uncomplicated malaria cases handled in accordance with national guidelines was 99.4%. The mean percentage of severe malaria cases detected in peripheral care units that were referred to a hospital was 100.0%. Rapid diagnostic tests and artemisinin-based combination therapies were out of stock several times, mainly at the beginning and end of the year. No hospital was out of stock of injectable artesunate or injectable artemether.

These indicators showed good management of malaria cases in the sentinel sites. Real-time availability of data requires a good follow-up of data entry on the online platform. The management of input stocks and the promptness of data need to be improved to meet the objectives of this malaria sentinel surveillance system.

Evaluation of the colorimetric malachite green loop-mediated isothermal amplification (MG-LAMP) assay …

… for the detection of malaria species at two different health facilities in a malaria endemic area of western Kenya. Prompt diagnosis and effective malaria treatment is a key strategy in malaria control. However, the recommended diagnostic methods, microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), are not supported by robust quality assurance systems in endemic areas. This study compared the performance of routine RDTs and smear microscopy with a simple molecular-based colorimetric loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) at two different levels of the health care system in a malaria-endemic area of western Kenya.

Patients presenting with clinical symptoms of malaria at Rota Dispensary (level 2) and Siaya County Referral Hospital (level 4) were enrolled into the study after obtaining written informed consent. Capillary blood was collected to test for malaria by RDT and microscopy at the dispensary and county hospital, and for preparation of blood smears and dried blood spots (DBS) for expert microscopy and real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).

Results of the routine diagnostic tests were compared with those of malachite green loop-mediated isothermal amplification (MG-LAMP) performed at the two facilities.
A total of 264 participants were enrolled into the study. At the dispensary level, the positivity rate by RDT, expert microscopy, MG-LAMP and RT-PCR was 37%, 30%, 44% and 42%, respectively, and 42%, 43%, 57% and 43% at the county hospital. Using RT-PCR as the reference test, the sensitivity of RDT and MG-LAMP was 78.1% (CI 67.5–86.4) and 82.9% (CI 73.0–90.3) at Rota dispensary.

At Siaya hospital the sensitivity of routine microscopy and MG-LAMP was 83.3% (CI 65.3–94.4) and 93.3% (CI 77.9–99.2), respectively. Compared to MG-LAMP, there were 14 false positives and 29 false negatives by RDT at Rota dispensary and 3 false positives and 13 false negatives by routine microscopy at Siaya Hospital. MG-LAMP is more sensitive than RDTs and microscopy in the detection of malaria parasites at public health facilities and might be a useful quality control tool in resource-limited settings.

Terminating Trachoma. How Myanmar eliminated blinding trachoma.

Download the book  from WHO New Delhi: World Health Organization, Regional Office for South-East Asia; 2020. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.  Myanmar’s three-phase approach to eliminating trachoma has been a great success, which will certainly continue. The country’s visionary National Eye Health Plan 2017-2021, which is closely aligned with international policies for prevention of blindness, gives confidence that Myanmar will maintain its elimination status. This book chronicles how a combination of good leadership, effective partnerships, health-care facilities and hardworking health-care personnel helped Myanmar eliminate trachoma as a public health problem.

Health sector spending and spending on HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and development assistance for health, SDG Progress

Although the progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3, which aims to “ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages”, has been assessed in various works, there is less research focusing on tracking spending towards this goal. In this study, spending estimates were used to determine progress in financing the priority areas of SDG3, examine the correlation between outcomes and financing, and identify where resource gains are most required to attain the SDG3 indicators for which data are available.

From 1995 to 2017, domestic health spending was determined, disaggregated by source (government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private) for 195 countries and territories. Outcomes suggest a global rise in total health spending since the state of the SDGs in 2015, reaching $7·9 trillion (7·8–8·0) in 2017, and is estimated to rise to $11·0 trillion (10·7–11·2) by 2030, although with substantial disparity across countries. Per estimates, low-income and middle-income countries, in 2017, had an estimated spending of $20·2 billion on HIV/AIDS, $10·9 billion on tuberculosis, and $5·1 billion on malaria in endemic countries.

Although there is an increase in both domestic government and DAH spending, across these three diseases, variation in the accompanied changes in outcomes was observed. Malaria was noted to have the most consistent reductions in outcomes across countries as spending has raised. Findings thereby suggest mixed progress towards meeting the SDG3 targets; the progress varied by country and by target. The evidence on the scale-up of spending and improvements in health outcomes suggest a nuanced relationship, such that outcomes do not always improve with increases in spending.

Although more resources may be required by the countries to achieve SDG3, there will also be a necessity for addressing other constraints in the broader health system such as inefficient allocation of resources across interventions and populations, weak governance systems, human resource shortages, and drug shortages.

Ignored fungal infections kill more people annually than HIV and malaria combined

Carolina Pohl-Albertyn says that, “You may also know that there are other infections causing great concern, such as HIV (690 000 deaths/year), tuberculosis (1.5-million deaths/year), and malaria (405,000 deaths/year). But what would be your reaction if you knew that fungal infections (ranging from skin and mucosal infections (e.g. vaginal or oral thrush) to deadly systemic and organ infections (e.g. candidiasis, cryptococcal meningitis, and bronchopulmonary aspergillosis]) affect more than one-billion people each year, of which more than 150-million cases are severe and life-threatening and cause 1.7 million deaths per year?”

Malaria was once scourge in Chowan County, North Carolina

Nicole Bowman-Layton (Editor) provides some history of malaria. It’s fascinating to think that less than 100 years ago this disease was still a major scourge in Chowan County. I’ve wanted to write about this topic for a long time since the coronavirus popped up but was a bit concerned about writing about a somewhat depressing topic.

According to NCPedia malaria came to North Carolina in the 1500s from some of the first European explorers who were bitten by our friendly Anopheles mosquitoes and then transmitted to the native population. And as we well know, we live in a very damp environment surrounded by sitting water which certainly increases the harvest of mosquitos. Some of the most prominent Revolutionary Edentonians suffered from the “Ague” during their lives. Declaration signer Joseph Hewes suffered from “intermittent fever and ague” throughout his life which were certainly symptoms of malaria.

The German traveler Dr. Johan Schoepf wrote in his book Travels in the Confederation, 1783-1784, of “…the sickliness of the inhabitants, especially prevalent in the low, overflowed, and swampy parts of this country, and giving the people a pale, decayed, and prematurely old look. This is the case not only about Edenton, but along the entire low-lying coast, which this fall, from Virginia to South Carolina, was visited with numerous fevers.

The World Malaria Report shows that malaria cases are up, and even though there are fewer reported cases in 2017 than 2010, the number is greater than 2016. So once again high burden countries are being targeted. Today this focus is on “High Burden to High Impact”, but in 2012-13 it was the “Malaria Situation Room” that also focused on 10 high burden countries.

Progress was being made up to around 2015-16, it then started to reverse. The challenge was not just funding. As the WHO Director General noted in the foreword to the 2018 World Malaria Report (WMR), “Importantly, ‘High burden to high impact’ calls for increased funding, with an emphasis on domestic funding for malaria, and better targeting of resources. The latter is especially pertinent because many people who could have benefited from malaria interventions missed out because of health system inefficiencies.”

Over the years there have never been enough pledged funds to fully achieve targets, but as funding has never reached desired levels, attention is now being drawn more and more to the source of that funding (more emphasis on domestic/endemic countries) and especially how the health system functions to use the funds that are made available. In 1998 during one of the early meetings establishing the Roll Back Malaria Partnership, a speaker stressed that malaria control could not succeed without concomitant health systems strengthening and reform. That 20-year-old thought was prescient for today’s dilemma.

First, what is the funding situation? As outlined in the World Malaria Report …

• In 2017, an estimated US$ 3.1 billion was invested in malaria control and elimination efforts globally by governments of malaria endemic countries and international partners – an amount slighter higher than the figure reported for 2016.
• Governments of endemic countries contributed 28% of total funding (US$ 900 million) in 2017, a figure unchanged from 2016.
• Funding for malaria has remained relatively stable since 2010
• To reach the Global Technical Strategy 2030 targets, it is estimated that annual malaria funding will need to increase to at least US$ 6.6 billion per year by 2020

The question remains – does investment lead to results. The WMR shows, for example, that “Between 2015 and 2017, a total of 624 million insecticide-treated mosquito nets (ITNs/LLINs), were reported by manufacturers as having been delivered globally. This represents a substantial increase over the previous period 2012–2014, when 465 million ITNs were delivered globally”.

At the same time the report states that, “Households with at least one ITN for every two people doubled to 40% between 2010 and 2017. However, this figure represents only a modest increase over the past 3 years, and remains far from the target of universal coverage.” Is it simply a matter of funding to reach the other 60% of households, or are there serious management problems on the ground?

Then there is the issue of using nets. The WMR traces new ownership and use from 2010 to 2017, and we can see that overall the proportion of the population at risk who slept under a net increased from around 30% to 50%, but only 56% of those with access to a net were sleeping under them. This can be attributed in part but not completely to the adequacy of nets in a household.

We should ask are enough nets getting to the right places, and also are efforts in place to promote their use. Behavior change efforts should be a major component of malaria program management. Even the so called biological challenges to malaria control have a human element. Monkey malaria transmission to people results from deforestation. Malaria parasite resistance to medicines comes from poor drug management on individual and systems levels.

The target year 2030 will be here before we know it. Will malaria still be here, or will countries and donors get serious about malaria financing AND program management?

Dr Pedro Alonso who directed the World Health Organization’s Global Malaria Program, has had several opportunities in the past two weeks to remind the global community that complacency on malaria control and elimination must not take hold as there are still over 400,000 deaths globally from malaria each year. At the Seventh Multilateral Initiative for Malaria Conference (MIM) in Dakar, Dr Alonso drew attention to the challenges revealed in the most recent World Malaria Report (WMR). While there have been decreases in deaths, there are places where the number of actual cases is increasing.

Around twenty years ago the course of malaria changed with the holding of the first MIM, also in Dakar and the establishment of the Roll Bank Malaria (RBM) Partnership. These were followed in short order by the Abuja Declaration that set targets for 2010 and embodied political in endemic countries, as well as major funding mechanisms such as the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. This spurred what has been termed a ‘Golden Decade’ of increasing investment and intervention coverage, leading to decreasing malaria morbidity and mortality. The Millennium Development Goals provided additional impetus to reduce the toll of malaria by 2015.

On Facebook Live yesterday Dr Alonso talked about that ‘Golden Decade.’ There was a 60% decrease in mortality and a 40% decreases in malaria cases. But progress slowing down and we may be stalled at a crossroads. He noted that history show unless accelerate efforts, malaria will come back with a vengeance. Not only is renewed political leadership and funding, particularly from affected countries needed, but we also need new tools. Dr Alonso explained that the existing tools allowed 7m deaths be diverted in that golden decade, but these tools are not perfect. We are reaching limits on these tools such that we need R&D for tools to enable quantum leap forward. Even old tools like nets are threatened by insecticide resistance, and research on alternative safe insecticides is crucial.

Dr Alonso at MIM pointed to the worrying fact that investment in malaria overall peaked in 2013. Investment by endemic countries themselves has remained stable throughout and never gone reached $1 billion despite advocacy and leadership groups like the Africa Leaders Malaria Alliance. The 2017 WMR shows that while 16 countries achieved a greater that 20% reduction in malaria cases, 25 saw a greater that 20% increase in cases. The outnumbering of decreasing countries by increasing was 4 to 8 in Africa, the region with the highest burden of the disease. Overall 24 African countries saw increases in cases between 2015 and 2016 versus 5 that saw a decrease. A review of the Demographic and Health and the Malaria Information Surveys in recent years show that most countries continue to have difficulty coming close to the Abuja 2010 targets for Insecticide treated net (ITN) use, prompt and appropriate malaria case management and intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy (IPTp).

The coverage gap is real. The WMR shows that while there have been small but steady increase in 3 doses of IPTp, coverage of the first dose has leveled off. Also while ownership of a net by households has increased, less than half of households have at least one net for every two residents.

In contrast a new form of IPT – seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) for children in the Sahel countries has taken off with over 90% of children receiving at least one of the monthly doses during the high transmission season. Community case management is taking off as is increased use of rapid diagnostic testing. Increased access to care may explain how in spite of increased cases, deaths can be reduced. This situation could change rapidly if drug resistance spreads.

While some international partners are stepping up, we are far short of the investment needed. The Gates Foundation is pledging more for research and development to address the need for new tools as mentioned by Dr Alonso. A big challenge is adequate funding to sustain the implementation of both existing tools and the new ones when they come online. Even in the context of a malaria elimination framework, WHO stresses the need to maintain appropriate levels of intervention with case management, ITNs and other measures regardless of the stage of elimination at which a country or sub-strata of a country is focused.

Twenty years after the formation of RBM and 70 years after the foundation of WHO, the children, families and communities of endemic countries are certainly ready to beat malaria. The question is whether the national and global partners are equally ready.

The first time the global community observed a day devoted to tackling the problem of malaria was April 25^th 2001. This was agreed upon at the African Summit on Roll Back Malaria held in Abuja, Nigeria in 2000. The first seven annual observances were titled “Africa Malaria Day,” and recognized that the largest global burden of the disease affects people on the African continent. As thoughts moved toward elimination, the importance of addressing all endemic communities resulted in the first “World Malaria Day” in 2008.

Thus on April 25^th 2017 we are observing the 17^th Malaria Day overall and the 10^th anniversary of World Malaria Day. This observance has been complimented over the years with a malaria day for the Southern African Development Community and for countries in the Americas.

Each year Malaria Day has had a theme or themes to help focus education and advocacy. Regardless of the theme, the special day has been a time to mark progress and rally partners from the global to community level to continue the fight against the disease. The list below shows some of the issues/themes raised on the past Malaria Days. As noted, in some years advocacy efforts dealt with more than one key idea, though all are not presented.

• 2001 – Africa Malaria Day 2001: The First Africa Malaria Day; Malaria – A Crisis With Solutions; A Malaria Free-World
• 2002 – Mobilizing Communities to Roll Back Malaria
• 2003 – Insecticide Treated Nets and effective malaria treatment for pregnant
• women and young children
• 2004 – A Malaria-Free Future: Children for Children to Roll Back Malaria
• 2005 – Unite against malaria: Together we can beat malaria
• 2006 – Get Your ACT Together: Universal Access to Effective Malaria Treatment is a Human Right
• 2007 – Leadership and Partnership for Results
• 2008 – Malaria, A Disease without Borders
• 2009 – Counting Malaria Out
• 2010 – Counting Malaria Out; (and in the Africa Region) Communities engage to conquer malaria!
• 2011 – Achieving Progress and Impact
• 2012 – Sustain Gains. Save Lives. Invest in Malaria
• 2013-15 – Invest in the Future: Defeat Malaria
• 2016-17 – End Malaria for Good

In sum these themes emphasize the importance of access to malaria interventions, documenting that access, using the data to stimulate more investment ultimately leading to an end (elimination) of malaria. The most recent World Malaria Report (2016) provides several important examples of the progress so far.

• Households with least one ITN increased to 79% in 2015
• 53% of the population at risk slept under an ITN in 2015 in Africa increasing from 30% in 2010
• The proportion of suspected malaria cases receiving a parasitological test in the public sector increased from 40% in the WHO African Region in 2010 to 76% in 2015
• In 2015, 31% of eligible pregnant women received three or more doses of intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) among 20 countries with sufficient data, a major increase from 6% in 2010

In addition to noting progress, the report also points out gaps in appropriate care seeking for malaria, attendance at antenatal care clinics, and adequate numbers of nets for a household. As implied in the IPTp data, there is the additional problem of obtaining timely and accurate date to document progress and/or gaps. Looking at the Malaria Day themes around investing, we know that unless one can show investors results, it will be difficult to “End Malaria for Good.”

The Global Fund Observer (aidspan) has provided information on the 2017-19 allocations by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. Here we take a closer look at the malaria component.

Overall malaria grants account for $US 3.3b or 32% of total funding for the period. This includes 71 countries as follows:

• 41 countries in WHO’s Africa Region
• 6 in the Eastern Mediterranean Region
• 7 in the Americas
• 10 in Southeast Asia
• 7 in the Western Pacific

2017-2019 GFATM Allocation

The Global Fund Observer also noted that the GFATM board is very much aware of risks to these grants. An example comes from the management pharmaceuticals. Risks can be found along the whole supply chain process. The GFATM found that, “artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) are more commonly targeted for theft or illegal diversion than are antiretrovirals (ARVs) or medicines for opportunistic infections (OIs).”

In fact the GFATM has identified 40 high or very high risk countries, most of which overlap with the list receiving current grant allocations. Therefore while we praise the provision of needed malaria funds for the upcoming three years, we also call on the Global Fund managers, country coordinating mechanisms, grant recipients and watchdogs in civil society and the media to ensure these grants continue to save lives from malaria.

Efosa Ojomo, Senior Researcher, Harvard Business School, Forum for Growth and Innovation looks at the new innovation award recipient, the designers of the Urine Malaria Test, and explains how the technology disrupts the system that has made it difficult to reach the average malaria sufferer with appropriate diagnostics and treatment.

In 2015, 214 million people were infected with malaria, 190 million of whom were in African countries. Of those infected, 438,000 died, 91% of who were in Africa. In addition, malaria has significant financial implications on families, companies and countries. Experts estimate that in countries burdened with malaria, the disease is responsible for as much as 40% of public health expenditures, 30 to 50% of in-patient hospital visits, and 50% of out-patient visits.

From a financial standpoint, direct costs of managing the disease is up to $12 billion annually, while the cost in lost economic growth is many times more. Considering the scale of malaria’s impact on Africa, there have been many innovations that have helped curb the spread of the disease, but perhaps one of the most significant is Fyodor Biotechnology’s disruptive Urine Malaria Test (UMT).

The UMT, a Significant Malaria Milestone

Fyodor’s UMT is a simple urine test where patients simply pee on a stick in order to find out whether they have malaria. The World Health Organization states that “Early diagnosis and treatment of malaria reduces disease and prevents deaths. Access to diagnostic testing and treatment should be seen… as a fundamental right of all populations at risk.” In other words, if we diagnose early, we will save many more lives and limit transmission.

UMT is an inexpensive (introductory price: ~$2 per test to end user) malaria diagnostic test that does not require the expertise of a trained professional. The UMT kit also does not require a lab or special disposal due to its simplicity. It is a three step process that lets patients know, in 20 minutes, if they have malaria.

Why the UMT is Disruptive

The most important hallmark of a disruptive innovation is that it makes complicated and expensive products simple and affordable, enabling many more people in society to benefit from the innovation. The UMT fits this model as the differences between the UMT and existing blood-testing kit below clearly illustrate.

One of the most exciting things about the UMT is Dr. Agbo’s goal to manufacture the product in Africa. “With an investment of $5 million, we can build a fully equipped manufacturing plant in Nigeria. That amount will only get us a building in the United States,” he explained.

It is solutions like these that African investors and policy makers need to support in order to get Africa on a path to sustainable economic development. As reported by Forbes, the UMT is an innovative product by Africans for Africans. This is why the UMT is an innovation winner.

(A longer version of this posting appeared on the World Bank Africa Can blog.)

Eight members of the Southern African Development Community are strategizing toward the pre-elimination phase of malaria.  The four frontline states are Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland and Botswana.  The second tier includes Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Mozambique.

Malaria prevalence varies by province in Angola with greater burden in the north (see map on right). Huambo in the central highlands is the second most populous province at 2 million and in some of the 11 municipalities malaria transmission is low.  This has led provincial health authorities to strategize how to invest in pre-elimination efforts where appropriate while maintaining full prevention interventions where needed.

An analysis of routine health information system (HIS) data is a first step. Rapid Diagnostic tests are part of the basic protocol for case management in all health centers. Data for 2014 was summarized by municipality. Test positivity rates for each municipality are shown in the map to the left. These range from a low of 2% in Katchiungo in the east to 54% Bailundo in the north.

More detailed geospatial analysis will be needed looking at variations within municipalities by health center catchment area, but a broad picture emerges that three municipalities in the northern part of the province have higher RDT positivity rates, and require sustained interventions like long lasting insecticide-treated nets and intermittent preventive treatment for pregnant women.

Reactive case detection such as being practiced in Swaziland might be considered in the remaining 8 municipalities after some initial pilot testing. Community based surveys using RDTs and more precise tests like polymerase chain reaction (PCR) could also be tried in order to supplement current HIS data and provide better targeting of interventions.

Hopefully government and partners will invest in helping Huambo test these processes. Huambo could then provide a good model for approaching malaria elimination for the rest if the country and the region.

A special World Malaria Day 2015 Blog has been established. So far nine postings are available at http://www.worldmalariaday.org/blog. Please read and share with colleagues.