Samson T. Ogunlade
Adeshina I. Adekunle1,2- 1Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia
- 2Defence Science and Technology Group, Department of Defence, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- 3Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Introduction
Dengue fever is a mosquito-borne viral disease that poses a significant public health concern globally (1–3). The disease is primarily transmitted by Aedes aegypti mosquitoes and the range of clinical manifestations vary from flu-like symptoms (4, 5) to more serious conditions such as dengue haemorrhagic fever and dengue shock syndrome (6). The dengue virus (DENV) infects about 400 million people yearly, of which 50–100 million of those become symptomatic, with over 20,000 deaths (3).
Dengue notifications are increasing in Africa (1, 2). The continent's tropical and subtropical climatic conditions create a conducive breeding environment for mosquitoes and hence, contribute to the spread of the virus (1, 4, 7, 8). While recent statistics show that there were 15.7 million reported dengue infections in 2010, recent studies (1, 7, 8) show that dengue cases are on the rise in Africa. This situation presents an increasing threat to public health systems already under pressure from other infectious illnesses.
Traditionally established vector control methods such as the use of insecticide, emptying or covering water-filled containers and eliminating mosquito breeding sites have had limited success in curbing the spread of dengue (9, 10). This calls for experimental and innovative strategies to combat the disease effectively (9). One promising approach—the Wolbachia-based approach, involves the deployment of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes into the wild mosquito population. This technique has shown great potential in reducing dengue transmission (11, 12). While the Wolbachia-based technique has demonstrated highly positive results in mitigating DENV, it is not always successful—Wolbachia strategies may struggle in high temperature settings, because some mosquitoes infected with Wolbachia (such as wMel strain) are unable to transmit Wolbachia maternally to their offspring and establish themselves under high temperatures (13, 14). Therefore, using thermally tolerant strains may be beneficial in establishing Wolbachia infections in mosquitoes especially in regions with high heat conditions (14–16). Although Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes have been rolled out in different countries such as Brazil (17), Colombia (18) in South America; Indonesia (19), Taiwan (20), Viet Nam (21), Thailand (22), Malaysia (23), India (24) in South Asia; Northern Queensland in Australia (16, 25); and the United States of America (26), there is arguably no deployment yet made in Africa.
In this opinion piece, we discuss the urgent need to begin the implementation the Wolbachia-based strategy in Africa as a complimentary control strategy to other existing control methods on the continent. This may be useful in contributing to the mitigation or eradication of DENV especially in high endemic settings.
The burden of dengue in Africa
Several factors are contributing to the rise of Dengue fever in Africa (1, 2, 8). With a tropical and subtropical climate, regions of Africa have ideal breeding grounds, but DENV is also known to increase with urbanization (1, 8). Many countries in Africa have had rapid urbanization and population growth in the setting of inadequate public health infrastructure (2, 27, 28). The continent's tropical and subtropical climates create ideal breeding conditions for Aedes mosquitoes, increasing the spread of the virus (29). Furthermore, rapid urbanization, population growth, and inadequate public health infrastructure contribute to the increasing dengue burden (30). According to the World Health Organization, dengue is now endemic in many African countries, posing a significant challenge to public health systems already strained by other infectious diseases (31).
Established and experimental vector control measures
Established measures of vector control include chemical and environmental control methods such as insecticide use, emptying or covering water-filled containers and clearing of mosquitoes' breeding sites (9). Some of these methods of controlling dengue vectors have limitations (32). While insecticide use is widely practiced and initially effective with estimates suggesting up to a 50% reduction in mosquito population (10), it may lead to increased resistance in Aedes mosquito populations, thereby reducing its long-term efficacy (33). Although, chemical control methods such as larvicides and pyrethroids are estimated to reduce adult population by around 80% (34), the effects are not sustained and mosquito populations generally revert to baseline levels within few days to weeks (35). In addition, despite their effectiveness, chemical control methods could cause harmful environmental and health problems such as pollution and contamination of aquatic animals and irritation to humans (9). Efforts to eliminate mosquito breeding sites through community participation and environmental management such as regular covering or emptying of water-filled containers are crucial but often faced with challenges in implementation and sustainability (36). These limitations highlight the need for novel and more sustainable interventions to control dengue transmission, particularly in Africa where constraints are presented by limited resources, heterogeneous environmental conditions.
Wolbachia-based strategy: a promising solution
Wolbachia is an endosymbiotic bacterium found in many insect species (9, 37). When introduced into Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, Wolbachia reduces the mosquitoes' ability to transmit dengue viruses (38). Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes have lower life-span (39) and reduced viral replication (9), effectively decreasing the likelihood of virus transmission to humans (38). Field trials in several countries, such as Australia, Brazil, and Indonesia, have demonstrated significant reductions in dengue incidence following the release of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes (17, 19, 25). As a demonstration, studies in Northern Queensland, Australia, revealed that dengue incidence has decreased by roughly 96% (CI: 84–99%) (25). In the Brazilian city of Niteroi, dengue incidence has decreased by an estimated 69% (CI: 54–79%) (17). Similarly, the release of mosquitoes carrying the Wolbachia bacteria averted the number of dengue cases in Indonesia by ~86.2% [Uncertainty Interval (UI): 32.2 – 99.9%] (13). Another recent study conducted in Medellin, Colombia evaluated the prevalence and distribution of Wolbachia-carrying Aedes mosquitoes 2 years after rollout completion. The authors found that Wolbachia prevalence remained lower than expected, with only 33.5% of mosquito pools testing positive 2 years after rollout, indicating significant geographical variance (40). Similar study carried out in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (41) also showed that wMel-Wolbachia reduced dengue incidence by just 38%. Recently, studies have shown that Wolbachia-based methods could be temperature-sensitive as Wolbachia infections in mosquito may not be established via maternal transmission in high temperature regions (13, 15, 42). This information suggests that sustaining stable Wolbachia prevalence may be difficult, most likely due to environmental conditions, emphasizing the necessity for continuing monitoring and future reintroduction (15, 16). Overall, these findings provide strong support for the implementation of Wolbachia-based strategy in other areas, particularly Africa, by highlighting its efficacy in a variety of ecological and epidemiological contexts, notwithstanding some concerns about sustaining the incidence of Wolbachia in these settings.
The case for Wolbachia in Africa
The successful introduction of Wolbachia-infected mosquito programs can change the paradigm for dengue control in Africa. This strategy allows for the following benefits:
• Sustainable: Once introduced, Wolbachia-infected mosquito populations can thrive and replace themselves without additional releases forever eliminating dengue transmission (43).
• Eco-friendly: Wolbachia-based technique is environmentally safe and does not have any impact on non-target species compared to chemical insecticides (44).
• Wolbachia presence: Wolbachia-based programs can incorporate and benefit local communities, promoting acceptance and compliance (11).
• Cost effectiveness: While initial costs for Wolbachia-based programs may be high and expensive, after several years these burdens can recede, and dengue-related healthcare costs would decline, hence it is a cost-saving intervention (45).
Challenges and recommendations
Despite the potential success of Wolbachia-based strategies, the future of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes' releases in Africa remains challenging (46). Challenges include logistics, the regulations and community engagement and orientation (16, 38). To overcome these challenges, the following recommendations are proposed:
• Collaboration: Governing bodies, international organizations, and research institutions must collaborate to facilitate the deployment of Wolbachia programs to combat viral diseases. The success of these programs will depend critically on the sharing of resources such as demographic data and information.
• Regulatory support: African countries must create a robust regulatory framework for the successful deployment and surveillance of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes (47). This involves making sure safety inspections are conducted and ensuring the people is convinced (47).
• Community engagement: Effective communication strategies and support must be developed to educate communities about the benefits of Wolbachia and to address any misconceptions or fears (48, 49). Community involvement is essential for the acceptance and success of the program (48).
• Variation in temperature: Although Wolbachia has shown great success in mitigating DENV, high temperate conditions could dampen its effectiveness in establishing Wolbachia and becoming self-sustaining (13, 15, 42, 50). Therefore, Wolbachia rollout in Africa would require continuous thermally resistant Wolbachia strain to boost effectiveness and efficacy in reducing arboviruses such as dengue especially in high temperate African regions (1, 14).
• Funding and Resources: Wolbachia-based programs need ongoing funding and resources for their initial deployment and consistent continuous supervision before they may eventually become self-sustaining (11, 51). It will be essential to have both governmental and private sector investment for successful deployment of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes (1, 19, 45).
Discussion
The introduction of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes into African countries is a novel strategy that has the potential to significantly reduce the dengue epidemic (1, 46). However, putting such a program into action necessitates giving careful thought to many different factors.
Firstly, a careful assessment of the ecological effects of releasing mosquitoes infected with Wolbachia is necessary (52). Despite Wolbachia's natural occurrence and relative safety, it is important to monitor its entry into new settings to avoid unintentionally harming nearby ecosystems (9, 11). Extensive research is required to guarantee that the advantages outweigh any possible hazards (38). It is critical to investigate the ecological dangers and uncertainties of introducing Wolbachia-infected mosquitos (9, 44) as variations in dengue virus serotypes across Africa may potentially have an impact on Wolbachia's efficacy (53).
Secondly, Wolbachia program success is largely reliant on community acceptance and engagement (36, 48, 49). African cultures can differ greatly in their attitudes about modern technologies and mosquitoes (54). Customized communication plans that consider regional traditions and community issues are crucial (48). Building trust and gaining support for the program can be facilitated by involving community leaders and stakeholders in the planning and implementation process (11, 36).
Thirdly, integrating Wolbachia programs with existing vector control measures can enhance their effectiveness (9, 55). A more effective defense against dengue transmission can be achieved by combining Wolbachia-based program with established vector control techniques like environmental management and insecticide application (55). Coordination between various public health initiatives such as the African Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization Africa Region will be necessary to optimize resources and achieve the best feasible Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes rollout outcomes (56).
Fourthly, studies have shown that Wolbachia infections in mosquitoes are sensitive to high temperature conditions (13, 15, 16). These conditions can reduce the effectiveness in establishing Wolbachia-carrying mosquitoes, resulting in an increase in dengue transmission (42, 50). Considering Africa's diverse climate, variations in temperature may have an impact on Wolbachia's performance, indicating the need for specialized strategies such as employing Wolbachia strains that are more heat-resistant (42, 50, 57).
Finally, sustainable resources and funding are essential for the long-term success of Wolbachia programs (58). Initial investments are required for research, development, and implementation of Wolbachia-based techniques (15, 58). In addition, continuous support and monitoring is needed for the maintenance of the mosquito population (47). International funding, public-private and non-governmental organization partnerships can play a vital role in ensuring that these programs are adequately resourced (32, 45, 51). Wolbachia-based mosquito control is a long-term solution and while it is more expensive than insecticides and the removal of mosquito breeding sites, it reduces dengue transmission without the need for repeated interventions after establishment (9, 32). Success in Brazil and Indonesia has demonstrated that community engagement through collaborations with local leaders, educational orientation programs, and open communication is critical to establishing public confidence and support for Wolbachia initiatives (17, 59). Adopting comparable engagement tactics in African contexts could capitalize on community networks and local expertise, increasing program acceptance and adaptability to tackle Aedes-borne diseases effectively and sustainably (1).
Conclusion
Dengue fever remains a significant public health challenge in Africa, calling for creative methods of containing its spread. A safe and sustainable biological method of mitigating dengue transmission in Africa is via mosquitoes carrying the intra-cellular endosymbiont Wolbachia bacteria. It is imperative that this strategy urgently be developed so that it can safely and sustainably be implemented in Africa. Wolbachia programs have the potential to become an essential component of dengue control initiatives, enhancing public health results throughout the continent by tackling barriers related to logistics, regulations, and community engagement. Africa may take the lead in implementing this ground-breaking technique to suppress the effects of dengue viral disease through corroborative efforts, regulatory support, community participation, and ongoing funding and resources.
Author contributions
SO: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AA: Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. EM: Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Were F. The dengue situation in Africa. Paediatr Int Child Health. (2012) 32(Suppl.1):18–21. doi: 10.1179/2046904712Z.00000000048
2. Eltom K, Enan K, El Hussein ARM, Elkhidir IM. Dengue virus infection in Sub-Saharan Africa between 2010 and 2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. (2021) 11:678945. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.678945
3. Bhatt S, Gething PW, Brady OJ, Messina JP, Farlow AW, Moyes CL, et al. The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature. (2013) 496:504–7. doi: 10.1038/nature12060
5. Simmons CP, Farrar JJ, Nguyen vV, Wills B. Dengue. N Engl J Med. (2012) 366:1423–32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1110265
7. Simo FBN, Bigna JJ, Kenmoe S, Ndangang MS, Temfack E, Moundipa PF, et al. Dengue virus infection in people residing in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence studies. Sci Rep. (2019) 9:13626. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-50135-x
8. Amarasinghe A, Kuritsk JN, Letson GW, Margolis HS. Dengue virus infection in Africa. Emerg Infect Dis. (2011) 17:1349–54. doi: 10.3201/eid1708.101515
9. Ogunlade ST, Meehan MT, Adekunle AI, Rojas DP, Adegboye OA, McBryde ES. A review: aedes-borne arboviral infections, controls and Wolbachia-based strategies. Vaccines. (2021) 9:10032. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9010032
10. Dusfour I, Vontas J, David J-P, Weetman D, Fonseca DM, Corbel V, et al. Management of insecticide resistance in the major Aedes vectors of arboviruses: advances and challenges. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2019) 13:e0007615. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007615
11. O'Neill SL, Ryan PA, Turley AP, Wilson G, Retzki K, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, et al. Scaled deployment of Wolbachia to protect the community from dengue and other Aedes transmitted arboviruses. Gates Open Res. (2018) 2:36. doi: 10.12688/gatesopenres.12844.2
12. Hoffmann AA, Montgomery BL, Popovici J, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Johnson PH, Muzzi F, et al. Successful establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes populations to suppress dengue transmission. Nature. (2011) 476:454–7. doi: 10.1038/nature10356
13. Ross PA, Axford JK, Yang Q, Staunton KM, Ritchie SA, Richardson KM, et al. Heatwaves cause fluctuations in wMel Wolbachia densities and frequencies in Aedes aegypti. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2020) 14:e0007958. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007958
14. Ogunlade ST, Adekunle AI, McBryde ES, Meehan MT. Modelling the ecological dynamics of mosquito populations with multiple co-circulating Wolbachia strains. Sci Rep. (2022) 12:20826. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-25242-x
15. Ross PA, Elfekih S, Collier S, Klein MJ, Lee SS, Dunn M, et al. Developing Wolbachia-based disease interventions for an extreme environment. PLoS Pathog. (2023) 19:e1011117. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1011117
16. Ogunlade ST, Adekunle AI, Meehan MT, McBryde ES. Quantifying the impact of Wolbachia releases on dengue infection in Townsville, Australia. Sci Rep. (2023) 13:14932. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-42336-2
17. Pinto SB, Riback TIS, Sylvestre G, Costa G, Peixoto J, Dias FBS, et al. Effectiveness of Wolbachia-infected mosquito deployments in reducing the incidence of dengue and other Aedes-borne diseases in Niteroi, Brazil: a quasi-experimental study. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2021) 15:e0009556. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009556
18. Velez ID, Santacruz E, Kutcher SC, Duque SL, Uribe A, Barajas J, et al. The impact of city-wide deployment of Wolbachia-carrying mosquitoes on arboviral disease incidence in Medellin and Bello, Colombia: study protocol for an interrupted time-series analysis and a test-negative design study. F1000Res. (2019) 8:1327. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.19858.1
19. Anders KL, Indriani C, Ahmad RA, Tantowijoyo W, Arguni E, Andari B, et al. The AWED trial (Applying Wolbachia to Eliminate Dengue) to assess the efficacy of Wolbachia-infected mosquito deployments to reduce dengue incidence in Yogyakarta, Indonesia: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial. Trials. (2018) 19:302. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2670-z
20. Liu WL, Yu HY, Chen YX, Chen BY, Leaw SN, Lin CH, et al. Lab-scale characterization and semi-field trials of Wolbachia Strain wAlbB in a Taiwan Wolbachia introgressed Ae aegypti strain. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2022) 16:e0010084. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010084
21. Hien NT, Anh DD, Le NH, Yen NT, Phong TV, Nam VS, et al. Environmental factors influence the local establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in two small communities in central Vietnam. Gates Open Res. (2021) 5:147. doi: 10.12688/gatesopenres.13347.1
22. Kittayapong P, Ninphanomchai S, Limohpasmanee W, Chansang C, Chansang U, Mongkalangoon P. Combined sterile insect technique and incompatible insect technique: the first proof-of-concept to suppress Aedes aegypti vector populations in semi-rural settings in Thailand. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2019) 13:e0007771. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007771
23. Nazni WA, Hoffmann AA, NoorAfizah A, Cheong YL, Mancini MV, Golding N, et al. Establishment of Wolbachia strain wAlbB in Malaysian populations of Aedes aegypti for dengue control. Curr Biol. (2019) 29:4241–8.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2019.11.007
24. Gunasekaran K, Sadanandane C, Panneer D, Kumar A, Rahi M, Dinesh S, et al. Sensitivity of wMel and wAlbB Wolbachia infections in Aedes aegypti Puducherry (Indian) strains to heat stress during larval development. Parasit Vectors. (2022) 15:221. doi: 10.1186/s13071-022-05345-0
25. Ryan PA, Turley AP, Wilson G, Hurst TP, Retzki K, Brown-Kenyon J, et al. Establishment of wMel Wolbachia in Aedes aegypti mosquitoes and reduction of local dengue transmission in Cairns and surrounding locations in northern Queensland, Australia. Gates Open Res. (2019) 3:1547. doi: 10.12688/gatesopenres.13061.1
26. Torres R, Hernandez E, Flores V, Ramirez JL, Joyce AL. Wolbachia in mosquitoes from the Central Valley of California, USA. Parasit Vectors. (2020) 13:558. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04429-z
27. Kuddus MA, Tynan E, McBryde E. Urbanization: a problem for the rich and the poor? Public Health Rev. (2020) 41:1. doi: 10.1186/s40985-019-0116-0
28. Gainor EM, Harris E, LaBeaud AD. Uncovering the burden of dengue in Africa: considerations on magnitude, misdiagnosis, and ancestry. Viruses. (2022) 14:20233. doi: 10.3390/v14020233
29. Caldwell JM, LaBeaud AD, Lambin EF, Stewart-Ibarra AM, Ndenga BA, Mutuku FM, et al. Climate predicts geographic and temporal variation in mosquito-borne disease dynamics on two continents. Nat Commun. (2021) 12:1233. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-21496-7
30. Sarker R, Roknuzzaman ASM, Haque MA, Islam MR, Kabir ER. Upsurge of dengue outbreaks in several WHO regions: public awareness, vector control activities, and international collaborations are key to prevent spread. Health Sci Rep. (2024) 7:e2034. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.2034
31. WHO. Dengue—Global Situation. Disease Outbreak News. (2024). Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2023-DON498 (accessed October 1, 2024).
32. Ogunlade ST, Meehan MT, Adekunle AI, McBryde ES. A systematic review of mathematical models of dengue transmission and vector control: 2010-2020. Viruses. (2023) 15:254. doi: 10.3390/v15010254
33. Lima EP, Paiva MH, de Araújo AP, da Silva EV, da Silva UM, de Oliveira LN, et al. Insecticide resistance in Aedes aegypti populations from Ceara, Brazil. Parasit Vectors. (2011) 4:5. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-4-5
34. Samuel M, Maoz D, Manrique P, Ward T, Runge-Ranzinger S, Toledo J, et al. Community effectiveness of indoor spraying as a dengue vector control method: a systematic review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2017) 11:e0005837. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005837
35. Horstick O, Boyce R, Runge-Ranzinger S. Dengue vector control: assessing what works? South Asian J Trop Med Publ Health. (2017) 48(Suppl.1):2017.
36. Elsinga J, van der Veen HT, Gerstenbluth I, Burgerhof JGM, Dijkstra A, Grobusch MP, et al. Community participation in mosquito breeding site control: an interdisciplinary mixed methods study in Curacao. Parasit Vectors. (2017) 10:434. doi: 10.1186/s13071-017-2371-6
37. Hilgenboecker K, Hammerstein P, Schlattmann P, Telschow A, Werren JH. How many species are infected with Wolbachia? a statistical analysis of current data. FEMS Microbiol Lett. (2008) 281:215–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2008.01110.x
38. Kamtchum-Tatuene J, Makepeace BL, Benjamin L, Baylis M, Solomon T. The potential role of Wolbachia in controlling the transmission of emerging human arboviral infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis. (2017) 30:108–16. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000342
39. McMeniman CJ, Lane RV, Cass BN, Fong AWC, Sidhu M, Wang YF, et al. Stable introduction of a life-shortening Wolbachia infection into the mosquito Aedes aegypti. Science. (2009) 323:141–4. doi: 10.1126/science.1165326
40. Calle-Tobón A, Rojo-Ospina R, Zuluaga S, Giraldo-Muñoz JF, Cadavid JM. Evaluation of Wolbachia infection in Aedes aegypti suggests low prevalence and highly heterogeneous distribution in Medellin, Colombia. Acta Trop. (2024) 260:107423. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2024.107423
41. Gesto JSM, Pinto SB, Dias FBS, Peixoto J, Costa G, Kutcher S, et al. Large-scale deployment and establishment of Wolbachia into the Aedes aegypti population in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Front Microbiol. (2021) 12:711107. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.711107
42. Mancini MV, Ant TH, Herd CS, Martinez J, Murdochy SM, Gingell DD, et al. High temperature cycles result in maternal transmission and dengue infection differences between Wolbachia strains in Aedes aegypti. MBio. (2021) 12:e0025021. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00250-21
43. Hoffmann AA, Ahmad NW, Keong WM, Ling CY, Ahmad NA, Golding N, et al. Introduction of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes carrying wAlbB Wolbachia sharply decreases dengue incidence in disease hotspots. iScience. (2024) 27:108942. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.108942
44. Weng SC, Masri RA, Akbari OS. Advances and challenges in synthetic biology for mosquito control. Trends Parasitol. (2024) 40:75–88. doi: 10.1016/j.pt.2023.11.001
45. Turner HC. Cost-effectiveness of a Wolbachia-based replacement strategy for dengue control in Brazil. Lancet Reg Health Am. (2024) 35:100789. doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2024.100789
46. Ayoade F, Ogungbuyi TS. The potential for Wolbachia-based mosquito biocontrol strategies in Africa. In:Puerta-Guardo H, Manrique-Saide P, , editors. Mosquito Research - Recent Advances in Pathogen Interactions, Immunity, and Vector Control Strategies. IntechOpen (2023). p. 282. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.98177
47. Coulibaly ZI, Gowelo S, Traore I, Mbewe RB, Ngulube W, Olanga EA, et al. Strengthening adult mosquito surveillance in Africa for disease control: learning from the present. Curr Opin Insect Sci. (2023) 60:101110. doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2023.101110
48. Sánchez-González L, Adams LE, Saavedra R, Little EM, Medina NA, Major CG, et al. Assessment of community support for Wolbachia-mediated population suppression as a control method for Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in a community cohort in Puerto Rico. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. (2021) 15:e0009966. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009966
49. Liew C, Soh LT, Chen I, Ng LC. Public sentiments towards the use of Wolbachia-Aedes technology in Singapore. BMC Public Health. (2021) 21:1417. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11380-w
50. Ahmad NA, Mancini M-V, Ant TH, Martinez J, Kamarul GMR, Nazni WA, et al. Wolbachia strain wAlbB maintains high density and dengue inhibition following introduction into a field population of Aedes aegypti. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. (2021) 376:20190809. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0809
51. O'Reilly KM, Hendrickx E, Kharisma DD, Wilastonegoro NN, Carrington LB, Elyazar IRF, et al. Estimating the burden of dengue and the impact of release of wMel Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes in Indonesia: a modelling study. BMC Med. (2019) 17:172. doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1396-4
52. Murray JV, Jansen CC, De Barro P. Risk associated with the release of Wolbachia-infected Aedes aegypti mosquitoes into the environment in an effort to control dengue. Front Public Health. (2016) 4:43. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00043
53. Ndii MZ, Allingham D, Hickson RI, Glass K. The effect of Wolbachia on dengue dynamics in the presence of two serotypes of dengue: symmetric and asymmetric epidemiological characteristics. Epidemiol Infect. (2016) 144:2874–82. doi: 10.1017/S0950268816000753
54. Finda MF, Juma EO, Kahamba NF, Mthawanji RS, Sambo M, Emidi B, et al. Perspectives of African stakeholders on gene drives for malaria control and elimination: a multi-country survey. Malar J. (2023) 22:384. doi: 10.1186/s12936-023-04787-w
55. Mushtaq I, Sarwar MS, Chaudhry A, Shah SAH, Ahmad MM. Updates on traditional methods for combating malaria and emerging Wolbachia-based interventions. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. (2024) 14:1330475. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2024.1330475
56. George NS, David SC, Nabiryo M, Sunday BA, Olanrewaju OF, Yangaza Y, et al. Addressing neglected tropical diseases in Africa: a health equity perspective. Glob Health Res Policy. (2023) 8:30. doi: 10.1186/s41256-023-00314-1
57. Ogunlade ST, Adekunle AI, Meehan MT, Rojas DP, McBryde ES. Modeling the potential of wAu-Wolbachia strain invasion in mosquitoes to control Aedes-borne arboviral infections. Sci Rep. (2020) 10:16812. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-73819-1
58. Hollingsworth BD, Cho C, Vella M, Roh H, Sass J, Lloyd AL, et al. Economic optimization of Wolbachia-infected Aedes aegypti release to prevent dengue. Pest Manag Sci. (2024) 80:3829–38. doi: 10.1002/ps.8086
59. Indriani C, Tantowijoyo W, Rancès E, Andari B, Prabowo E, Yusdi D, et al. Reduced dengue incidence following deployments of Wolbachia-infected Aedes aegypti in Yogyakarta, Indonesia: a quasi-experimental trial using controlled interrupted time series analysis. Gates Open Res. (2020) 4:50. doi: 10.12688/gatesopenres.13122.1
Keywords: dengue, Wolbachia, mosquitoes, rollout, Africa
Citation: Ogunlade ST, Adekunle AI and McBryde ES (2024) Mitigating dengue transmission in Africa: the need for Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes' rollout. Front. Public Health 12:1506072. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1506072
Received: 04 October 2024; Accepted: 29 November 2024;
Published: 16 December 2024.
Edited by:
Guido Favia, University of Camerino, ItalyReviewed by:
Magno Junqueira, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, BrazilAmit Sinha, New England Biolabs, United States
Copyright © 2024 Ogunlade, Adekunle and McBryde. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Samson T. Ogunlade, c2Ftc29uLm9ndW5sYWRlJiN4MDAwNDA7amN1LmVkdS5hdQ==