READER FEEDBACK

Printable Copy

Dear Robert,

Apologies for the late sending of this information promised to you so long ago. Please find below a very brief summary of each of the open source items:

1.      Van Bortel et al (2009) Impact of insecticide-treated nets on wild pyrethroid resistant Anopheles epiroticus population from southern Vietnam tested in experimental huts. Malaria J, 8, 248.

• This study showed that PermaNet® 3.0 meets WHO Phase 2 criteria for an LLIN and that insecticide resistance in An. epiroticus as defined by the WHO susceptibility test is not yet having an impact on the performance of the LLINs tested in this study.

2.       Tungu et al, (2010) Evaluation of PermaNet 3.0 a deltamethrin-PBO combination net against Anopheles gambiae and pyrethroid resistant Culex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes: an experimental hut trial in Tanzania. Malaria J, 9, 21.

• This study showed that PermaNet 3.0 performed according to current WHOPES guidelines and fulfilled the criteria of an LLIN. This study does not provide evidence of increased bioefficacy against pyrethroid-resistant malaria vectors because the vectors in the study area were susceptible. No conclusions can be drawn from the Culex data because of the extremely low numbers caught throughout the study.

3.      Corbel et al (2010) Field efficacy of a new mosaic long-lasting mosquito net (PermaNet 3.0) against pyrethroid-resistant malaria vectors: a multi centre study in Western and Central Africa. Malaria J, 9, 113.

• This study showed that PermaNet® 3.0 caused better efficacy against both kdr and metabolic resistant malaria vectors than PermaNet® 2.0.

Please let me know if you have any questions on any of the above,

Best wishes

Helen