It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Dengue exhibits focal clustering in households and neighborhoods, driven by local mosquito population dynamics, human population immunity, and fine scale human and mosquito movement. We tested the hypothesis that spatiotemporal clustering of homotypic dengue cases is disrupted by introduction of the arbovirus-blocking bacterium Wolbachia (wMel-strain) into the Aedes aegypti mosquito population. We analysed 318 serotyped and geolocated dengue cases (and 5921 test-negative controls) from a randomized controlled trial in Yogyakarta, Indonesia of wMel deployments. We find evidence of spatial clustering up to 300 m among the 265 dengue cases (3083 controls) in the untreated trial arm. Participant pairs enrolled within 30 days and 50 m had a 4.7-fold increase (compared to 95% CI on permutation-based null distribution: 0.1, 1.2) in the odds of being homotypic (i.e. potentially transmission-related) as compared to pairs occurring at any distance. In contrast, we find no evidence of spatiotemporal clustering among the 53 dengue cases (2838 controls) resident in the wMel-treated arm. Introgression of wMel Wolbachia into Aedes aegypti mosquito populations interrupts focal dengue virus transmission leading to reduced case incidence; the true intervention effect may be greater than the 77% efficacy measured in the primary analysis of the Yogyakarta trial.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 University of California, Berkeley, Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Berkeley, USA (GRID:grid.47840.3f) (ISNI:0000 0001 2181 7878)
2 Monash University, World Mosquito Program, Institute of Vector-borne Disease, Clayton, Australia (GRID:grid.1002.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7857)
3 Universitas Gadjah Mada, World Mosquito Program Yogyakarta, Centre for Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Yogyakarta, Indonesia (GRID:grid.8570.a) (ISNI:0000 0001 2152 4506)
4 University of California, Berkeley, Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Berkeley, USA (GRID:grid.47840.3f) (ISNI:0000 0001 2181 7878); London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK (GRID:grid.8991.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0425 469X)