Keywords
Zika virus, epidemic, microcephaly, Aedes Aegypti, vector control, scientific agenda
This article is included in the Emerging Diseases and Outbreaks gateway.
Zika virus, epidemic, microcephaly, Aedes Aegypti, vector control, scientific agenda
In the last decades, Brazil has faced different arbovirus epidemics. However, none of them had the complexity of Zika virus and associated diseases. In April 2015, the first cases of the virus were reported in the country1. Initially, the occurrence was considered to be of no greater threat than dengue or chikungunya. Nonetheless, by the end of October, the number of microcephaly cases started to rise sharply, which triggered a thorough investigation and subsequently the declaration of a National Public Health Emergency2,3. On December 5, the President of Brazil launched the National Microcephaly Response Plan, involving 19 institutions and structured on three pillars: 1) vector control, 2) health care, and 3) research & education2.
The research agenda focused on four main areas: 1) virological, clinical and epidemiological studies, 2) alternative vector control strategies, 3) development and evaluation of diagnostic tests, and 4) development and evaluation of vaccines. After almost one year since the reporting of the first cases of microcephaly associated with Zika in the country, many developments in the agenda were achieved and other challenges emerged:
1) Virological, clinical, and epidemiological studies – Researchers in Brazil were able to characterize transplacental Zika transmission and its influence in halting neurological development4,5. These findings supported campaigns to increase awareness and protection of pregnant women against mosquitoes. Although Zika seems to be the main culprit of microcephaly increase, other cofactors are under investigation, what may lead to new policies to tackle other risk factors6. Recent studies also suggest that the consequences of Zika infection go beyond microcephaly, pointing out the need to further characterize syndromes and related diseases as well as to revise diagnostic and management protocols7.
2) Alternative vector control strategies – After the Zika emergency was declared, a range of new vector control strategies were proposed, which target different phases of the mosquito life cycle and different settings. The Brazilian Ministry of Health has been promoting effectiveness evaluations of promising strategies, including Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes and mosquito-driven dissemination of pyriproxyfen8,9. These studies will provide invaluable information to improve Aedes control policies in Brazil. Entomological studies have also been investigating if Aedes Aegypti is the only Zika virus vector in Brazil10. This is a crucial point because other mosquito species have different breeding and feeding habits; in which case, the results of these studies may have an important impact on vector control measures.
3) Development and evaluation of diagnostic tests – Since the first cases of Zika have been identified there has been an ongoing effort to improve molecular tests and to develop highly sensitive and specific serological tests, with limited cross-reaction with other arbovirus, allowing point-of-care utilization11. Candidates have arisen from private and public initiatives, which are being validated and evaluated with support from the Brazilian Ministry of Health. The inclusion of such tests in the public health system will require training of health professionals and modifying follow-up protocols. As the spectrum of Zika consequences widens, so does the need for detection and treatment.
4) Development and evaluation of vaccines – The development of an effective and secure vaccine against Zika has been one of the main goals worldwide. Different research groups are working on that, including groups in Brazil. Nonetheless, only one vaccine candidate has received FDA approval to initiate a phase I clinical trial12. Brazilian governmental bodies, such as the National Research Ethics Council, the National Clinical Trials Registry and the National Health Surveillance Agency, developed task-forces to timely evaluate research projects, clinical trials, and products related to Zika virus and associated diseases.
It has also been a race against the clock to quickly translate the results of R&D initiatives into public policies. For this purpose, the Brazilian Ministry of Health set up the Zika and Related Diseases Specialists Network, fostering greater collaboration between researchers and decision makers13. The joint effort between the Ministries of Health; Science, Technology, Innovation and Communication; and Education also made possible the launching of an open call for strategic research projects to tackle this emergency.
International research collaborations were established with partners such as the Center for Diseases Control, the World Health Organization, the US National Institutes of Health and the British Council. Since WHO declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, new communication channels have also been built between Ministries of Health from different countries14. As the world becomes more interconnected and urbanized, it is likely that many other epidemics will follow. Therefore, it is paramount that lessons learned from Zika lead to fast and effective responses to future global threats.
Tazio Vanni contributed to conception, drafting, and submission of the manuscript.
Karlos Diogo Chalegre contributed to the conception and drafting of the manuscript.
Camile Giaretta Sachetti contributed to the conception and drafting of the manuscript.
Pedro Reginaldo dos Santos Prata contributed to the conception and drafting of the manuscript.
Marco Antônio de Araújo Fireman contributed to the conception and drafting of the manuscript.
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Competing Interests: I am the Lead Scientist of the Eliminate Dengue Brazil and the Brazilian Ministry of Health has been funding the Wolbachia approach since 2012, in Brazil.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | ||
---|---|---|
1 | 2 | |
Version 1 04 Aug 16 |
read | read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (2)