Abstract Background Daily trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TS) protects against malaria, but efficacy may be diminished as anti-folate resistance increases. This study assessed the incidence of falciparum malaria and the prevalence of resistance-conferring Plasmodium falciparum mutations in HIV-infected children receiving daily TS and HIV-uninfected children not taking TS. Materials and methods Subjects were 292 HIV-infected and 517 uninfected children from two cohort studies in Kampala, Uganda observed from August 2006 to December 2008. Daily TS was given to HIV-infected, but not HIV-uninfected children and all participants were provided an insecticide-treated bed net. Standardized protocols were used to measure the incidence of malaria and identify markers of antifolate resistance. Results Sixty-five episodes of falciparum malaria occurred in HIV-infected and 491 episodes in uninfected children during the observation period. TS was associated with a protective efficacy of 80% (0.10 vs. 0.45 episodes per person year, p < 0.001), and efficacy did not vary over three consecutive 9.5 month periods (81%, 74%, 80% respectively, p = 0.506). The prevalences of dhfr 51I, 108N, and 59R and dhps 437G and 540E mutations were each over 90% among parasites infecting both HIV-infected and uninfected children. Prevalence of the dhfr 164L mutation, which is associated with high-level resistance, was significantly higher in parasites from HIV-infected compared to uninfected children (8% vs. 1%, p = 0.001). Sequencing of the dhfr and dhps genes identified only one additional polymorphism, dhps 581G, in 2 of 30 samples from HIV-infected and 0 of 54 samples from uninfected children. Conclusion Despite high prevalence of known anti-folate resistance-mediating mutations, TS prophylaxis was highly effective against malaria, but was associated with presence of dhfr 164L mutation.

Background

Multidisciplinary and multisectoral approaches such as One Health and related concepts (e.g., Planetary Health, EcoHealth) offer opportunities for synergistic expertise to address complex health threats. The connections between humans, animals, and the environment necessitate collaboration among sectors to comprehensively understand and reduce risks and consequences on health and wellbeing. One Health approaches are increasingly emphasized for national and international plans and strategies related to zoonotic diseases, food safety, antimicrobial resistance, and climate change, but to date, the possible applications in clinical practice and benefits impacting human health are largely missing.

Methods

In 2018 the "Application of the One Health Approach to Global Health Centers" conference held at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine convened experts involved in One Health policy and practice. The conference examined issues relevant to One Health approaches, sharing examples of challenges and successes to guide application to medical school curricula and clinical practice for human health. This paper presents a synthesis of conference proceedings, framed around objectives identified from presentations and audience feedback.

Findings and recommendations

The following objectives provide opportunities for One Health involvement and benefits for medical schools and global health centers by: 1) Improving One Health resource sharing in global health and medical education; 2) Creating pathways for information flow in clinical medicine and global health practice; 3) Developing innovative partnerships for improved health sector outcomes; and 4) Informing and empowering health through public outreach. These objectives can leverage existing resources to deliver value to additional settings and stakeholders through resource efficiency, more holistic and effective service delivery, and greater ability to manage determinants of poor health status. We encourage medical and global health educators, practitioners, and students to explore entry points where One Health can add value to their work from local to global scale.

Substantial global attention is focused on how to reduce the risk of future pandemics. Reducing this risk requires investment in prevention, preparedness, and response. Although preparedness and response have received significant focus, prevention, especially the prevention of zoonotic spillover, remains largely absent from global conversations. This oversight is due in part to the lack of a clear definition of prevention and lack of guidance on how to achieve it. To address this gap, we elucidate the mechanisms linking environmental change and zoonotic spillover using spillover of viruses from bats as a case study. We identify ecological interventions that can disrupt these spillover mechanisms and propose policy frameworks for their implementation. Recognizing that pandemics originate in ecological systems, we advocate for integrating ecological approaches alongside biomedical approaches in a comprehensive and balanced pandemic prevention strategy.