Although trachoma and
C. trachomatis infection have not been eliminated from this village after two rounds of mass treatment, the data suggest that rates were substantially lower at 3.5 years after the last round compared with baseline. The rates had clearly not returned to pretreatment levels, although infection rates were higher than at 18 months after the first round of mass treatment. These rates could reflect several factors. First, infection rates may be slowly returning to pretreatment levels, but will take much more time to return. As this was only a single survey, we do not have data to model a trajectory of re-emergent infection. Second, coverage rates were lower for the second round. Another factor is that, although no directed health education or infrastructure development occurred over the 5 years, the village is part of a district with other villages enrolled in the National Trachoma Control Program of Tanzania. The program includes mass treatment and national media attention to face-washing and sanitation through radio announcements. This suggests another possibility: After treatment lowered the community infectious pool, a change occurred in the stability of transmission within the study village, reflecting less intense transmission as well as pressure of infection, which could decrease trachoma and keep infection rates from returning quickly. Thus, this village, in the absence of further treatment or intervention, may be stabilizing at a lower rate of disease and infection. The fact that trachoma rates continued to decline steadily over the course of the 5 years supports this possibility. We do not feel that our results could be due to field contamination of laboratory specimens, as we strictly followed previously standardized field protocols at each visit. Even if there was some contamination, the rates of infection would be even lower and again not at pretreatment levels. Finally, we cannot exclude other secular trends, apart from antibiotic treatment and the National Program, resulting in a decline in trachoma as well. This study focused on a population cohort in a single village, and ideally, secular trends would be studied by comparison with populations in other villages that have had no intervention. Chidambaram et al.
9 observed, in hyperendemic areas of Ethiopia, that the infection rates were about half in children aged 1 to 5 years in the villages enrolled in the study 12 months after the baseline compared with rates in the baseline villages. They attributed the difference to secular trends of declining disease, but acknowledged that the findings could be due to selection of very different villages at 12 months than at baseline. In our years of performing studies in the hyperendemic villages in Tanzania, we have not observed such dramatic declines in 12 months as Chidambaram et al.
9 reported with no intervention. Other researchers, observing secular trends, describe a much longer time scale. In Malawi, for example, Hoechsmann et al.
13 observed a halving of disease prevalence, but after a 16-year period.
We expected, compared to residents, that new arrivals to the village after the last round of mass treatment would have higher rates of infection and disease as they did not have the benefit of previous treatment. However, new arrivals did not have disease or infection rates that were significantly different from those who had been in the village. Possible explanations for this finding include the following: First, we do not have data on the actual arrival dates of the new persons, except the births. Those “new” to the village may have in fact been there for, on average, 2.5 years since baseline. Thus, it is not unexpected that the trachoma and infection rates in this group would equilibrate to those persons already in the village. We have previously demonstrated that spread of infection across households occurs within 12 months.
11 This explanation is supported by the finding at 5 years that the 0- to 3-year-olds, who were born into the village after the last treatment, were not protected from incident infection but rather have rates of disease and infection similar to the 4- to 7-year-olds with whom they doubtlessly mingle. Second, we do not know from which villages the new arrivals came—whether it was from other program villages—the new arrivals may have had equally low or lower rates of infection and trachoma when they arrived, comparable to those in the village. Finally, the village had high rates of in and out migration, and we have shown that those who left the village after the 18-month survey were less likely to have trachoma and infection compared with those who stayed. Thus, if there had been less migration, the rates in the village residents may have been lower than were observed at the 5-year survey. However, migration is a factor that national trachoma control programs will have to contend with in planning coverage of villages and districts.
We feel our findings of sustained low rates of infection likely reflect the antibiotic mass treatment coverage. As we have reported previously, the first round of mass treatment had very high antibiotic coverage, which resulted in a dramatic drop in infection, but did not eliminate either trachoma or infection by 18 months.
6 In hyperendemic villages, there will be persons with very high loads for whom a single dose may be insufficient to clear infection. We previously reported re-emergent infection within families by 6 months, from family members who had not cleared infection despite treatment.
6 The second round of mass treatment had much lower coverage, although more than 70% of the highest risk group, preschool-age children, was treated. These coverage rates are lower than ideal, but may be more typical of what programs providing multiple rounds of mass treatment are able to achieve. We can speculate that if coverage of the second round had been especially high, the rates observed at 5 years may have even been lower. Solomon et al.,
3 in another village with lower rates of trachoma and infection at baseline, achieved virtual elimination of infection 2 years after mass treatment, with very high coverage rates (98%) plus interim (2, 6, 12, and 18 months) treatment of trachoma cases with antibiotic ointment. Even though our coverage for the second round was less than the 80% target, at 3.5 years after treatment, the infection and trachoma rates were not back to pretreatment levels, suggesting a long-term benefit of two rounds of mass treatment even at <80% in the second round.
However, to reach the Ultimate Intervention Goal of WHO of trachoma in less than 10% of children younger than 10 years and to be certain the low rate of infection will be sustainable, more must be done. Attaining the goal may require more than two rounds of mass treatment, probably spaced closer together, as projected by a model of infection elimination,
14 and more improvements in the environment and hygiene, as recommended by the WHO SAFE strategy approach.
The authors thank Billie Jo Wood for careful laboratory assistance and the Kongwa Trachoma Project team for their field efforts.