Malaria transmission remains high in Sub-Saharan Africa despite large-scale implementation of malaria control interventions. A comprehensive understanding of the transmissibility of infections to mosquitoes may guide the design of more effective transmission reducing strategies. The impact of P. falciparum sexual stage immunity on the infectious reservoir for malaria has never been studied in natural settings. Repeated measurements were carried out at start-wet, peak-wet and dry season, and provided data on antibody responses against gametocyte/gamete antigens Pfs48/45 and Pfs230 as anti-gametocyte immunity. Data on high and low-density infections and their infectiousness to anopheline mosquitoes were obtained using quantitative molecular methods and mosquito feeding assays, respectively. An event-driven model for P. falciparum sexual stage immunity was developed and fit to data using an agent based malaria model infrastructure. We found that Pfs48/45 and Pfs230 antibody densities increased with increasing concurrent gametocyte densities; associated with 55–70% reduction in oocyst intensity and achieved up to 44% reduction in proportions of infected mosquitoes. We showed that P. falciparum sexual stage immunity significantly reduces transmission of microscopic (p < 0.001) but not submicroscopic (p = 0.937) gametocyte infections to mosquitoes and that incorporating sexual stage immunity into mathematical models had a considerable impact on the contribution of different age groups to the infectious reservoir of malaria. Human antibody responses to gametocyte antigens are likely to be dependent on recent and concurrent high-density gametocyte exposure and have a pronounced impact on the likelihood of onward transmission of microscopic gametocyte densities compared to low density infections. Our mathematical simulations indicate that anti-gametocyte immunity is an important factor for predicting and understanding the composition and dynamics of the human infectious reservoir for malaria.

Background: Malaria transmission is highly heterogeneous, generating malaria hotspots that can fuel malaria transmission across a wider area. Targeting hotspots may represent an efficacious strategy for reducing malaria transmission. We determined the impact of interventions targeted to serologically defined malaria hotspots on malaria transmission both inside hotspots and in surrounding communities. Methods and Findings: Twenty-seven serologically defined malaria hotspots were detected in a survey conducted from 24 June to 31 July 2011 that included 17,503 individuals from 3,213 compounds in a 100-km2 area in Rachuonyo South District, Kenya. In a cluster-randomized trial from 22 March to 15 April 2012, we randomly allocated five clusters to hotspot-targeted interventions with larviciding, distribution of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets, indoor residual spraying, and focal mass drug administration (2,082 individuals in 432 compounds); five control clusters received malaria control following Kenyan national policy (2,468 individuals in 512 compounds). Our primary outcome measure was parasite prevalence in evaluation zones up to 500 m outside hotspots, determined by nested PCR (nPCR) at baseline and 8 wk (16 June–6 July 2012) and 16 wk (21 August–10 September 2012) post-intervention by technicians blinded to the intervention arm. Secondary outcome measures were parasite prevalence inside hotpots, parasite prevalence in the evaluation zone as a function of distance from the hotspot boundary, Anopheles mosquito density, mosquito breeding site productivity, malaria incidence by passive case detection, and the safety and acceptability of the interventions. Intervention coverage exceeded 87% for all interventions. Hotspot-targeted interventions did not result in a change in nPCR parasite prevalence outside hotspot boundaries (p ≥ 0.187). We observed an average reduction in nPCR parasite prevalence of 10.2% (95% CI −1.3 to 21.7%) inside hotspots 8 wk post-intervention that was statistically significant after adjustment for covariates (p = 0.024), but not 16 wk post-intervention (p = 0.265). We observed no statistically significant trend in the effect of the intervention on nPCR parasite prevalence in the evaluation zone in relation to distance from the hotspot boundary 8 wk (p = 0.27) or 16 wk post-intervention (p = 0.75). Thirty-six patients with clinical malaria confirmed by rapid diagnostic test could be located to intervention or control clusters, with no apparent difference between the study arms. In intervention clusters we caught an average of 1.14 female anophelines inside hotspots and 0.47 in evaluation zones; in control clusters we caught an average of 0.90 female anophelines inside hotspots and 0.50 in evaluation zones, with no apparent difference between study arms. Our trial was not powered to detect subtle effects of hotspot-targeted interventions nor designed to detect effects of interventions over multiple transmission seasons. Conclusions: Despite high coverage, the impact of interventions targeting malaria vectors and human infections on nPCR parasite prevalence was modest, transient, and restricted to the targeted hotspot areas. Our findings suggest that transmission may not primarily occur from hotspots to the surrounding areas and that areas with highly heterogeneous but widespread malaria transmission may currently benefit most from an untargeted community-wide approach. Hotspot-targeted approaches may have more validity in settings where human settlement is more nuclear. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01575613.