Dataset Information

Two snakebite antivenoms have potential to reduce Eswatini's dependency upon a single, increasingly unavailable product: Results of preclinical efficacy testing.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Snakebite is a major public health concern in Eswatini, where treatment relies upon one antivenom-SAIMR Polyvalent. Although effective in treating snakebite, SAIMR Polyvalent is difficult to source outside its manufacturing country (South Africa) and is dauntingly expensive. We compared the preclinical venom-neutralising efficacy of two alternative antivenoms with that of SAIMR Polyvalent against the lethal and tissue-destructive effects of venoms from five species of medically important snakes using in vivo murine assays. The test antivenoms were 'Panafrican' manufactured by Instituto Clodomiro Picado and 'PANAF' manufactured by Premium Serums & Vaccines.

Principal findings

In vivo murine preclinical studies identified both test antivenoms were equally or more effective than SAIMR Polyvalent at neutralising lethal and tissue-destructive effects of Naja mossambica venom. Both test antivenoms were less effective than SAIMR Polyvalent at neutralising the lethal effects of Bitis arietans, Dendroaspis polylepis, Hemachatus haemachatus and Naja annulifera venoms, but similarly effective at neutralising tissue damage induced by B. arietans and H. haemachatus venoms. In vitro immunological assays identified that the titres and toxin-specificities of immunoglobulins (iGs) in the test antivenoms were comparable to that of SAIMR Polyvalent. Plasma clotting disturbances by H. haemachatus and N. mossambica were neutralised by the test antivenoms, whereas SAIMR Polyvalent failed to neutralise this bioactivity of N. mossambica venom. B. arietans SVMP activity was equally reduced by all three antivenoms, and H. haemachatus and N. mossambica PLA2 activities were neutralised by all three antivenoms.

Conclusions

While both Panafrican and PANAF antivenoms exhibited promising preclinical efficacies, both were less poly-specifically effective than SAIMR Polyvalent in these murine assays. The efficacy of these antivenoms against the lethal and tissue-destructive effects of N. mossambica venom, the most common biting species in Eswatini, identify that Panafrican and PANAF antivenoms offer effective alternatives to SAIMR Polyvalent for the treatment of snakebite in Eswatini, and potentially for neighbouring countries.

SUBMITTER: Menzies SK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9529146 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Two snakebite antivenoms have potential to reduce Eswatini's dependency upon a single, increasingly unavailable product: Results of preclinical efficacy testing.

Menzies Stefanie K SK Litschka-Koen Thea T Edge Rebecca J RJ Alsolaiss Jaffer J Crittenden Edouard E Hall Steven R SR Westhorpe Adam A Thomas Brent B Murray James J Shongwe Nondusimo N Padidar Sara S Lalloo David G DG Casewell Nicholas R NR Pons Jonathan J Harrison Robert A RA

PLoS neglected tropical diseases 20220915 9

<h4>Background</h4>Snakebite is a major public health concern in Eswatini, where treatment relies upon one antivenom-SAIMR Polyvalent. Although effective in treating snakebite, SAIMR Polyvalent is difficult to source outside its manufacturing country (South Africa) and is dauntingly expensive. We compared the preclinical venom-neutralising efficacy of two alternative antivenoms with that of SAIMR Polyvalent against the lethal and tissue-destructive effects of venoms from five species of medicall ...[more]

PMID: 36108067

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSnakebite envenoming is a major public health problem throughout the rural tropics. Antivenom is effective in reducing mortality and remains the mainstay of therapy. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of using effective antivenoms for Snakebite envenoming in Nigeria.MethodologyEconomic analysis was conducted from a public healthcare system perspective. Estimates of model inputs were obtained from the literature. Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were quantified as deaths and Disability-Adjusted-Life-Years (DALY) averted from antivenom therapy. A decision analytic model was developed and analyzed with the following model base-case parameter estimates: type of snakes causing bites, antivenom effectiveness to prevent death, untreated mortality, risk of Early Adverse Reactions (EAR), mortality risk from EAR, mean age at bite and remaining life expectancy, and disability risk (amputation). End-user costs applied included: costs of diagnosing and monitoring envenoming, antivenom drug cost, supportive care, shipping/freezing antivenom, transportation to-and-from hospital and feeding costs while on admission, management of antivenom EAR and free alternative snakebite care for ineffective antivenom.Principal findingsWe calculated a cost/death averted of ($2330.16) and cost/DALY averted of $99.61 discounted and $56.88 undiscounted. Varying antivenom effectiveness through the 95% confidence interval from 55% to 86% yield a cost/DALY averted of $137.02 to $86.61 respectively. Similarly, varying the prevalence of envenoming caused by carpet viper from 0% to 96% yield a cost/DALY averted of $254.18 to $78.25 respectively. More effective antivenoms and carpet viper envenoming rather than non-carpet viper envenoming were associated with lower cost/DALY averted.Conclusions/significanceTreatment of snakebite envenoming in Nigeria is cost-effective with a cost/death averted of $2330.16 and cost/DALY averted of $99.61 discounted, lower than the country's gross domestic product per capita of $1555 (2013). Expanding access to effective antivenoms to larger segments of the Nigerian population should be a considered a priority.

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization's strategy to halve snakebite mortality and morbidity by 2030 includes an emphasis on a risk-benefit process assessing the preclinical efficacy of antivenoms manufactured for sub-Saharan Africa. To assist this process, we systematically collected, standardised and analysed all publicly available data on the preclinical efficacy of antivenoms designed for sub-Saharan Africa.Methodology/principal findingsUsing a systematic search of publication databases, we focused on publicly available preclinical reports of the efficacy of 16 antivenom products available in sub Saharan Africa. Publications since 1999 reporting the industry standard intravenous pre-incubation method of murine in vivo neutralisation of venom lethality (median effective dose [ED50]) were included. Eighteen publications met the criteria. To permit comparison of the several different reported ED50 values, it was necessary to standardise these to microlitre of antivenom resulting in 50% survival of mice challenged per milligram of venom (μl/mg). We were unable to identify publicly available preclinical data on four antivenoms, whilst data for six polyspecific antivenoms were restricted to a small number of venoms. Only four antivenoms were tested against a wide range of venoms. Examination of these studies for the reporting of key metrics required for interpreting antivenom ED50s were highly variable, as evidenced by eight different units being used for the described ED50 values.Conclusions/significanceThere is a disturbing lack of (i) preclinical efficacy testing of antivenom for sub Saharan Africa, (ii) publicly available reports and (iii) independent scrutiny of this medically important data. Where reports do exist, the methods and metrics used are highly variable. This prevents comprehensive meta-analysis of antivenom preclinical efficacy, and severely reduces the utility of antivenom ED50 results in the decision making of physicians treating patients and of national and international health agencies. Here, we propose the use of a standardised result reporting checklist to resolve this issue. Implementation of these straightforward steps will deliver uniform evaluation of products across laboratories, facilitate meta-analyses, and contribute vital information for designing the clinical trials needed to achieve the WHO target of halving snakebite morbidity and mortality by 2030.

Project description:BackgroundAntivenom is the treatment of choice for snakebite, which annually kills an estimated 32,000 people in sub-Saharan Africa and leaves approximately 100,000 survivors with permanent physical disabilities that exert a considerable socioeconomic burden. Over the past two decades, the high costs of the most polyspecifically-effective antivenoms have sequentially reduced demand, commercial manufacturing incentives and production volumes that have combined to create a continent-wide vacuum of effective snakebite therapy. This was quickly filled with new, less expensive antivenoms, many of which are of untested efficacy. Some of these successfully marketed antivenoms for Africa are inappropriately manufactured with venoms from non-African snakes and are dangerously ineffective. The uncertain efficacy of available antivenoms exacerbates the complexity of designing intervention measures to reduce the burden of snakebite in sub-Saharan Africa. The objective of this study was to preclinically determine the ability of antivenoms available in Kenya to neutralise the lethal effects of venoms from the most medically important snakes in East Africa.MethodsWe collected venom samples from the most medically important snakes in East Africa and determined their toxicity in a mouse model. Using a 'gold standard' comparison protocol, we preclinically tested the comparative venom-neutralising efficacy of four antivenoms available in Kenya with two antivenoms of clinically-proven efficacy. To explain the variant efficacies of these antivenoms we tested the IgG-venom binding characteristics of each antivenom using in vitro IgG titre, avidity and venom-protein specificity assays. We also measured the IgG concentration of each antivenom.FindingsNone of the six antivenoms are preclinically effective, at the doses tested, against all of the most medically important snakes of the region. The very limited snake polyspecific efficacy of two locally available antivenoms is of concern. In vitro assays of the abilities of 'test' antivenom IgGs to bind venom proteins were not substantially different from that of the 'gold standard' antivenoms. The least effective antivenoms had the lowest IgG content/vial.ConclusionsManufacture-stated preclinical efficacy statements guide decision making by physicians and antivenom purchasers in sub-Saharan Africa. This is because of the lack of both clinical data on the efficacy of most of the many antivenoms used to treat patients and independent preclinical assessment. Our preclinical efficacy assessment of antivenoms available in Kenya identifies important limitations for two of the most commonly-used antivenoms, and that no antivenom is preclinically effective against all the regionally important snakes. The potential implication to snakebite treatment is of serious concern in Kenya and elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa, and underscores the dilemma physicians face, the need for clinical data on antivenom efficacy and the medical and societal value of establishing independent preclinical antivenom-efficacy testing facilities throughout the continent.

Dataset Information

Two snakebite antivenoms have potential to reduce Eswatini's dependency upon a single, increasingly unavailable product: Results of preclinical efficacy testing.

Background

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

Two snakebite antivenoms have potential to reduce Eswatini's dependency upon a single, increasingly unavailable product: Results of preclinical efficacy testing.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets