Assessing the burden of dengue among household members in Alaminos, Laguna, the Philippines: a prospective cohort study

Maria Rosario Capeding, Melanie de Boer, Silvia Damaso, Adrienne Guignard, Maria Rosario Capeding, Melanie de Boer, Silvia Damaso, Adrienne Guignard

Abstract

Background: The incidence of dengue is increasing rapidly and is a challenging health issue in the Philippines. Epidemiological data are largely based on a passive-surveillance reporting system, which leads to substantial under-reporting of cases.

Objectives: To estimate dengue infection and disease incidence prospectively at the community level in an endemic area of the Philippines using an active surveillance strategy.

Methods: We implemented active surveillance in the highly endemic community of Alaminos, Laguna. The study consisted of a 1-year follow-up with 2 visits scheduled at the start and end of the study, as well as regular active surveillance in between and unscheduled visits for suspected cases. Blood samples were collected and analyzed to detect dengue during the first scheduled visit and all unscheduled visits, and clinical examination was performed at all visits (registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT02766088).

Results: We enrolled 500 participants, aged from 6 months to 50 years; 76.2% were found positive for immunoglobulin G (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.9-80.0), with 92.0% among those aged 9-17 years. Active (weekly) surveillance identified 4 virologically confirmed cases of dengue (incidence proportion 0.8; 95% CI 0.3-2.1); all in participants aged ≤14 years.

Conclusions: Routine surveillance programs such as sentinel sites are needed to characterize the entire clinical spectrum of symptomatic dengue, disease incidence, and transmission in the community.

Keywords: Philippines; dengue; epidemiology; reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction; sentinel surveillance.

© 2021 GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA, published by Sciendo.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic representation of the study design. *Blood samples were collected at Visit 2, but not analyzed due to early study termination. **Body temperature ≥ 38.0 °C within the past 8 days lasting from 36–48 h to 7 days, potentially accompanied by other signs of dengue that by the study investigator’s opinion could only be related to dengue; †SDCs confirmed by RT-qPCR or NS1. 1. Detailed clinical examination assessing the participant’s general condition, cardiac and respiratory rates, blood pressure, dengue-associated clinical signs, and symptoms. 2a. Used for ELISA to detect anti-DENV indirect IgG. 2b. Used for i. DENV RT-qPCR, ii. DENV isolation for sequencing purposes, iii. DENV sequence, iv. DENV NS1 rapid test (ICT) or ELISA, v. IgM/IgG rapid test (ICT) or SD Bioline Dengue Duo (dengue NS1 antigen and IgG/IgM). 3. Participants were advised to contact study investigators to report any sign or symptom they perceived as an SAE. All SAEs related to study procedures (blood collection) were recorded and evaluated by the study investigator along with related signs, symptoms, and relevant clinical information. 4. A. Warning signs. At least one of the following should be present: abdominal pain or tenderness, persistent vomiting, clinical fluid accumulation, mucosal bleeding, liver enlargement, increase in hematocrit concurrent with a rapid decrease in platelet count, lethargy, restlessness. B. Criteria for severe dengue. Dengue with at least one of the following: severe plasma leakage leading to shock, fluid accumulation with respiratory distress, severe bleeding, severe organ involvement, failure of heart and other organs. DENV, dengue virus; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; ICT, immunochromatographic assay; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IgM, immunoglobulin M; NS1, nonstructural protein 1; RT-qPCR, reverse-transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction; SAE, serious adverse event; SDC, suspected dengue case.
Figure 2
Figure 2
SDCs. *SDCs confirmed by RT-qPCR or NS1. To be classified with a SDC a study participant should have a body temperature of ≥38.0 °C within the past 8 days lasting from 36–48 h to 7 days, potentially accompanied by other signs of dengue that by the study investigator’s opinion could only be related to dengue; †SDCs not classified as confirmed virologically or probable. Warning signs. At least one of the following should be present: abdominal pain or tenderness, persistent vomiting, clinical fluid accumulation, mucosal bleeding, liver enlargement, increase in hematocrit concurrent with a rapid decrease in platelet count, lethargy, restlessness. Criteria for severe dengue. Dengue with at least one of the following: severe plasma leakage leading to shock, fluid accumulation with respiratory distress, severe bleeding, severe organ involvement, failure of heart and other organs. DENV, dengue virus; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; ICT, immunochromatographic assay; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IgM, immunoglobulin M; na, not available; NS1, nonstructural protein 1; RT-qPCR, reverse-transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction; SDC, suspected dengue case.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Plain language summary.

References

    1. Holmes EC, Twiddy SS. The origin, emergence and evolutionary genetics of dengue virus. Infect Genet Evol. 2003;3:19–28.
    1. World Health Organization. Dengue: Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, prevention and control. [Internet] Geneva: WHO; 2009. [cited 2020 June 10]. Available from: .
    1. Guzman MG, Harris E. Dengue. Lancet. 2015;385(9966):453–65.
    1. World Health Organization. Dengue and severe dengue. [Internet] Geneva: WHO; 2021. [cited 2021 July 20]. Available from: .
    1. Bravo L, Roque VG, Brett J, Dizon R, L’Azou M. Epidemiology of dengue disease in the Philippines (2000–2011): a systematic literature review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8:e3027. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003027.
    1. World Health Organization. Global Strategy for dengue prevention and control, 2012–2020. [Internet] Geneva: WHO; 2012. [cited 2020 June 10]. Available from: .
    1. Undurraga EA, Edillo FE, Erasmo JNV, Alera MTP, Yoon I-K, Largo FM, Shepard DS. Disease burden of dengue in the Philippines: adjusting for underreporting by comparing active and passive dengue surveillance in Punta Princesa, Cebu City. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;96:887–98.
    1. Cheng KJG, Lam HY, Rivera AS, Tumanan-Mendoza BA, Alejandria MM, Wu DBC. Estimating the burden of dengue in the Philippines using a dynamic transmission model. Acta Medica Philippina. 2018;52:153–9.
    1. World Health Organization, World Meteorological Organization. Atlas of health and climate. [Internet] Geneva: WHO Press; 2009. [cited 2020 June 10]. Available from: .
    1. Gyawali N, Bradbury RS, Taylor-Robinson AW. The epidemiology of dengue infection: Harnessing past experience and current knowledge to support implementation of future control strategies. J Vector Borne Dis. 2016;53:293–4.
    1. Runge-Ranzinger S, McCall PJ, Kroeger A, Horstick O. Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review. Trop Med Int Health. 2014;19:1116–60.
    1. Shepard DS, Undurraga EA, Betancourt-Cravioto M, Guzmán MG, Halstead SB, Harris E. et al. Approaches to refining estimates of global burden and economics of dengue. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8:e3306. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003306.
    1. Sarti E, L’Azou M, Mercado M, Kuri P, Siqueira JB Jr, Solis E. et al. A comparative study on active and passive epidemiological surveillance for dengue in five countries of Latin America. Int J Infect Dis. 2016;44:44–9.
    1. Gupta BP, Singh S, Kurmi R, Malla R, Sreekumar E, Manandhar KD. Re-emergence of dengue virus serotype 2 strains in the 2013 outbreak in Nepal. Indian J Med Res. 2015;142(Suppl 1):S1–6.
    1. Cucunawangsih, Lugito NPH. Trends of dengue disease epidemiology. Virology (Auckl) 2017;8 doi: 10.1177/1178122×17695836. 1178122×17695836.
    1. Gupta B, Reddy BPN. Fight against dengue in India: progresses and challenges. Parasitol Res. 2013;112:1367–78.
    1. World Health Organization. Dengue vaccine: WHO position paper – September 2018. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2018;93(36):457–76. [in English and French]
    1. Blacksell SD, Jarman RG, Gibbons RV, Tanganuchitcharnchai A, Mammen MP Jr, Nisalak A. et al. Comparison of seven commercial antigen and antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for detection of acute dengue infection. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2012;19:804–10.
    1. Sasmono RT, Aryati A, Wardhani P, Yohan B, Trimarsanto H, Fahri S. et al. Performance of Simplexa dengue molecular assay compared to conventional and SYBR green RT-PCR for detection of dengue infection in Indonesia. PLoS One. 2014;9:e103815. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103815.
    1. Kikuti M, Cruz JS, Rodrigues MS, Tavares AS, Paploski IAD, Silva MMO. et al. Accuracy of the SD BIOLINE Dengue Duo for rapid point-of-care diagnosis of dengue. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0213301. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213301.
    1. Dussart P, Labeau B, Lagathu G, Louis P, Nunes MR, Rodrigues SG. et al. Evaluation of an enzyme immunoassay for detection of dengue virus NS1 antigen in human serum. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2006;13:1185–9.
    1. World Bank Group. Climate Change Knowledge Portal. Philippines. [Internet] The World Bank Group; 2016. [cited 2020 June 10]. Available from: .
    1. Su GLS. Correlation of climatic factors and dengue incidence in Metro Manila, Philippines. Ambio. 2008;37:292–4.
    1. Alera MT, Srikiatkhachorn A, Velasco JM, Tac-An IA, Lago CB, Clapham HE. et al. Incidence of dengue virus infection in adults and children in a prospective longitudinal cohort in the Philippines. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:e0004337. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004337.
    1. Nealon J, Bouckenooghe A, Cortes M, Coudeville L, Frago C, Macina D, Tam CC. Dengue endemicity, force of infection and variation in transmission intensity in 13 endemic countries. J Infect Dis. 2020:jiaa132. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa132.
    1. DeAntonio R, Amaya-Tapia G, Ibarra-Nieto G, Huerta G, Damaso S, Guignard A, de Boer M. Incidence of dengue illness in Mexican people aged 6 months to 50 years old: a prospective cohort study conducted in Jalisco. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0250253. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250253.
    1. de Aguiar DF, de Barros ENC, Ribeiro GS, Brasil P, Mourao MPG, Luz K. et al. A prospective, multicentre, cohort study to assess the incidence of dengue illness in households from selected communities in Brazil (2014–2018) Int J Infect Dis. 2021;108:443–53.
    1. Pawaria A, Mishra D, Juneja M, Meena J. Atypical manifestations of dengue fever. Indian Pediatr. 2014;51:495–6.
    1. Nimmagadda SS, Mahabala C, Boloor A, Raghuram PM, Nayak UA. Atypical manifestations of dengue fever (DF): where do we stand today? J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8:71–3.
    1. Pothapregada S, Kamalakannan B, Thulasingam M. Clinical profile of atypical manifestations of dengue fever. Indian J Pediatr. 2016;83:493–9.
    1. Chatchen S, Sabchareon A, Sirivichayakul C. Serodiagnosis of asymptomatic dengue infection. Asian Pac J Trop Med. 2017;10:11–4.
    1. Anand AM, Sistla S, Dhodapkar R, Hamide A, Biswal N, Srinivasan B. Evaluation of NS1 antigen detection for early diagnosis of dengue in a tertiary hospital in Southern India. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:DC01–4. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/15758.7562.
    1. Agrupis KA, Ylade M, Aldaba J, Lopez AL, Deen J. Trends in dengue research in the Philippines: a systematic review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13:e0007280. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007280.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren