Accounting for the impact of mass-drug administration for NTDs prevalence mapping using geostatistical methods

A decay-adjusted spatio-temporal (DAST) model

Emanuele Giorgi, Claudio Fronterre, Jana Purkiss, Freya Clark

Lancaster University

Presentation Overview

  1. Neglected Tropical Diseases and Mass Drug Administration
  2. The standard geostatistical model for prevalence mapping
  3. A decay-adjusted spatio-temporal model
  4. Application to lymphatic filariasis in Madagascar
  5. Summary

Neglected tropical diseases

NTD endemic areas

The impact of NTDs

NTDs Risk Factors

Common risk factors:
- Poor sanitation and lack of clean water
- Limited healthcare access
- Poverty and overcrowding
- Exposure to disease vectors (e.g., mosquitoes, flies)
- Lack of education and awareness

Mass Drug Administration (MDA): A Preventive Strategy

What is MDA? Mass Drug Administration involves the periodic distribution of safe, effective medications to entire at-risk populations—regardless of disease status—to reduce transmission and prevent infections.

Why is it used?

  • Controls or eliminates disease in endemic areas

  • Reduces the community-level parasite burden

  • Prevents long-term complications and disability

Key Features:

  • Delivered at regular intervals (annually or biannually)

  • Often combined with public health education

  • Supported by WHO and major global health initiatives

Albendazole

How it works:
Albendazole disrupts the metabolism of parasitic worms by inhibiting microtubule formation, which is essential for their survival.

Used for NTDs such as:

  • Lymphatic filariasis (in combination with ivermectin or DEC)

  • Soil-transmitted helminths (e.g., ascariasis, hookworm, trichuriasis)

MDA use:
Distributed in large-scale deworming campaigns, particularly targeting children and at-risk communities.

Ivermectin

How it works:

Ivermectin paralyzes and kills parasites by interfering with their nerve and muscle function via chloride channel disruption. Parasites cannot move and feed.

Used for NTDs such as:

  • Onchocerciasis (river blindness)

  • Lymphatic filariasis (in combination with albendazole)

  • Strongyloidiasis

MDA use: Ivermectin is given to both adults and children (weighing more than 15kg), but its use is carefully considered for pregnant women.

Praziquantel

How it works:
Praziquantel increases permeability of the parasite’s cell membranes to calcium ions, causing muscle contraction and paralysis.

Used for NTDs such as:

  • Schistosomiasis

  • Tapeworm infections

MDA use:
Key drug in school-based and community-wide treatment campaigns in regions with high schistosomiasis burden.

Treating NTDs

Disease Alb PZQ IVM AZM DEC MOX Other
STH MBD
Schisto ✓† OXA
LF ✓† DOX*
Trachoma ✓‡ TEO

Abbreviations:

Alb = Albendazole, PZQ = Praziquantel, IVM = Ivermectin, AZM = Azithromycin, DEC = Diethylcarbamazine, MOX = Moxidectin, MBD = Mebendazole, OXA = Oxamniquine, DOX = Doxycycline, TEO = Tetracycline eye ointment

Symbols:

† Used in combination therapy

‡ Only in onchocerciasis co-endemic areas

*Adjunctive treatment

Assessing MDA Impact

Timeframe for observable impact:

  • STH: Reduced prevalence seen after 1-2 annual rounds

  • Schistosomiasis: Egg reduction visible after 1-2 years

  • LF: Microfilariae reduction within months, but breaking transmission requires 5+ years

  • Trachoma: Active disease reduction in 1-3 years

Monitoring surveys:

  • Baseline surveys (pre-MDA)

  • Transmission Assessment Surveys (TAS) for LF after 5+ rounds

  • Impact surveys (after 3-5 rounds)

  • Post-treatment surveillance (after reaching elimination targets)

Key indicators:

  • Parasitological prevalence (STH, schisto)

  • Antigenemia (LF)

  • TF/TI rates (trachoma)

  • Entomological indices (for vector-borne NTDs)

Modelling the impact of MDA

The standard geostatistical model for prevalence mapping

  • Outcome: \(Y_i\) number of cases out \(n_i\) sampled
  • Locations: \(X = (x_1, \ldots, x_n)\)
  • Covariates (optional): \(d(x)\) (e.g. elevation, distance from waterways)
  • Spatial Gaussian process: \(S(x)\) (stationary and isotropic) \[ {\rm cov}\{S(x), S(x')\} = \sigma^2 \rho(||x - x'||; \phi) \] Example: \(\rho(u; \phi) = \exp\{-u/\phi\}\).
  • Conditional independence: \(Y_{i}\) conditionally on \(S(x_i)\) are mutually independent \(Bin(n_i , p(x_i))\)
  • The linear predictor \[ \log\left\{\frac{p(x_i)}{1-p(x_i)}\right\} = \beta_0 + d(x_i)^\top \beta + S(x_i) \]

Spatial and temporal confounding with MDA

Issues:

  • Areas with different levels of transmission are sampled at different times.

  • Use of MDA rounds can even show a positive associated with disease risk

Modelling the Impact of MDA

We model observed prevalence \(P(x,t)\) as a product of:

  • Counterfactual prevalence, \(P^*(x,t)\), in the absence of MDA
  • A cumulative MDA effect, based on rounds of effective treatment

\[ P(x, t) = P^*(x, t)\prod_{j=1}^{r(t)} \left[1 - f(t - u_j)\right]^{I(x, u_j)} \]

  • \(u_j\): times of effective MDA rounds
  • \(I(x, u_j)\): indicator of MDA coverage at location \(x\) and time \(u_j\)
  • \(r(t)\) is the number of MDA rounds carried out before time \(t\)

Parametric form of MDA decay function

\[ f(v) = \alpha \exp\left\{ -\left(\frac{v}{\gamma}\right)^{\kappa} \right\} \]

  • \(\alpha\): maximum reduction immediately after MDA
  • \(\gamma\): scale of decay
  • \(\kappa\): shape of decay (fixed)

Monte Carlo Maximum Likelihood

  • Let \(W_i = S(x_i) + Z_i\) and \(W = (W_1, \ldots, W_n)\)
  • The likelihood function for parameters \(\theta = (\beta, \sigma^2, \phi, \tau^2)\) is given by:

    \[ L(\theta) = \int N(W; D\beta, \Omega) f(y| W) dW \]

    where \(\Omega = \sigma^2 R(\phi) + \tau^2I_n\).

  • We approximate this using Monte Carlo integration:

    \[ L_m(\theta) = \frac{1}{B} \sum_{j=1}^{B} \frac{N\left(W^{(j)}; D\beta, \Omega \right)}{N\left(W^{(j)}; D\beta_0, \Omega_0\right)} \] where \(W^{(i)}\) are sampled from the distribution of \(W\) given \(y\) using an MCMC algorithm.

  • All implemented in the dast function of the RiskMap package

Applications

Example: Lymphatic filariasis in Madagascar

The data

Timeline of surveys and MDA

Monotone likelihood for \(\alpha\)

Introducing penalization for \(\alpha\)

  • Let \(p(\alpha) > 0\) be a positive function.
  • The penalized likelihood for \(\alpha\) is \[ L_{p}(\theta) = L(\theta) - p(\alpha) \]
  • Proposed penalty

    \[ p(\alpha) = -\left[\lambda_1 \log\alpha + \lambda_2\log(1-\alpha) \right] \]

  • We set \(\lambda_1 = 20\) and \(\lambda_2 = 14\). (This inspired by a Beta distribution with mode in around 0.6, with 0.42 and 0.7 as its 0.025 and 0.975 quantiles, respectively.)

Introducing penalization for \(\alpha\)

Paramter estimates

MDA impact function: \(f(v) = \alpha\exp\{-v/\gamma\}\), with \(v\) denoting the years since last MDA

Parameter Estimates
Intercept -2.582 (-2.622, -2.541)
Spatial variance 2.204 (1.891, 2.569)
Spatial scale 79.153 (70.874, 88.399)
Max. reduction (\(\alpha\)) 0.856 (0.839, 0.872)
Decay scale (\(\gamma\)) 1.802 (1.768, 1.837)

Estimated MDA impact function

Prevalence prediction 2000-2024

Example: soil-transmitted helminths in Kenya

The data

Timeline of surveys and MDA

Paramter estimates

MDA impact function: \(f(v) = \alpha\exp\{-v/\gamma\}\), with \(v\) denoting the years since last MDA

Parameter Ascaris Trichuris Hookworm
Intercept -2.41 (-2.45, -2.37) -2.44 (-2.51, -2.37) -1.94 (-1.98, -1.90)
Spatial variance 26.83 (14.70, 48.97) 15.57 (8.35, 29.06) 29.75 (20.17, 43.89)
Spatial scale 263.31 (178.38, 388.66) 109.02 (72.34, 164.32) 198.63 (152.33, 258.99)
Max. reduction (\(\alpha\)) 0.318 (0.299, 0.338) 0.837 (0.533, 0.958) 0.892 (0.871, 0.909)
Decay scale (\(\gamma\)) 9.49 (7.41, 12.16) 1.23 (1.01, 1.49) 6.46 (6.06, 6.90)

The MDA impact by STH species

Prevalence prediction 2012-2023

Next steps and extenions

  • Need for extension that includes \(S(x,t)\) rather than \(S(x)\).

  • Apply DAST to other NTDs.

  • Key assumptions of DAST

    • The MDA effect is the same across time

    • Incorporating data from multiple diagnostics

    • Accounting for the effect of different types of treatments

    • Uncertainty in the MDA coverage

THANK YOU!

🔗 giorgistat.github.io
📧 e.giorgi@lancaster.ac.uk
📍 CHICAS, Lancaster Medical School, Lancaster University, UK