We read with interest the letter by Anastasio and colleagues, “Severe imported falciparum malaria — Clinical and drug supply challenges.” [1] We appreciate their calling to attention the critical issue of the limited availability of intravenous antimalarials in the United States. However, we would also like to add some clarification regarding the availability of parenteral artesunate, and the prospects for its approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in particular. | | The authors correctly point out that parenteral artesunate is not FDA approved, but is available through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under an investigational new drug (IND) protocol. In partnership with Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, CDC has made limited quantities of artesunate available through this IND since 2007. Anastasio et al. assert that FDA's lengthy approval process is the reason why artesunate is not yet available for widespread use. However, the reality is that to date, no pharmaceutical company has sought to make artesunate commercially available in the United States through the submission of a new drug application to FDA.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Malaria in humans is caused by intraerythrocytic protozoa of the genus Plasmodium. These parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infective female Anopheles species mosquito. The majority of malaria infections in the United States occur among persons who have traveled to regions with ongoing malaria transmission. However, malaria is occasionally acquired by persons who have not traveled out of the country through exposure to infected blood products, congenital transmission, laboratory exposure, or local mosquitoborne transmission. Malaria surveillance in the United States is conducted to provide information on its occurrence (e.g., temporal, geographic, and demographic), guide prevention and treatment recommendations for travelers and patients, and facilitate transmission control measures if locally acquired cases are identified. PERIOD COVERED: This report summarizes confirmed malaria cases in persons with onset of illness in 2016 and summarizes trends in previous years. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: Malaria cases diagnosed by blood film microscopy, polymerase chain reaction, or rapid diagnostic tests are reported to local and state health departments by health care providers or laboratory staff members. Case investigations are conducted by local and state health departments, and reports are transmitted to CDC through the National Malaria Surveillance System (NMSS), the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS), or direct CDC consultations. CDC reference laboratories provide diagnostic assistance and conduct antimalarial drug resistance marker testing on blood samples submitted by health care providers or local or state health departments. This report summarizes data from the integration of all NMSS and NNDSS cases, CDC reference laboratory reports, and CDC clinical consultations. RESULTS: CDC received reports of 2,078 confirmed malaria cases with onset of symptoms in 2016, including two congenital cases, three cryptic cases, and one case acquired through blood transfusion. The number of malaria cases diagnosed in the United States has been increasing since the mid-1970s. However, in 2015 a decrease occurred in the number of cases, specifically from the region of West Africa, likely due to altered travel related to the Ebola virus disease outbreak. The number of confirmed malaria cases in 2016 represents a 36% increase compared with 2015, and the 2016 total is 153 more cases than in 2011, which previously had the highest number of cases (1,925 cases). In 2016, a total of 1,729 cases originated from Africa, and 1,061 (61.4%) of these came from West Africa. P. falciparum accounted for the majority of the infections (1,419 [68.2%]), followed by P. vivax (251 [12.1%]). Fewer than 2% of patients were infected by two species (23 [1.1%]). The infecting species was not reported or was undetermined in 10.8% of cases. CDC provided diagnostic assistance for 12.1% of confirmed cases and tested 10.8% of specimens with P. falciparum infections for antimalarial resistance markers. Of the U.S. resident patients who reported reason for travel, 69.4% were travelers who were visiting friends and relatives. The proportion of U.S. residents with malaria who reported taking any chemoprophylaxis in 2016 (26.3%) was similar to that in 2015 (26.6%), and adherence was poor among those who took chemoprophylaxis. Among the 964 U.S. residents with malaria for whom information on chemoprophylaxis use and travel region were known, 94.0% of patients with malaria did not adhere to or did not take a CDC-recommended chemoprophylaxis regimen. Among 795 women with malaria, 50 were pregnant, and one had adhered to mefloquine chemoprophylaxis. Forty-one (2.0%) malaria cases occurred among U.S. military personnel in 2016, a comparable proportion to that in 2015 (23 cases [1.5%]). Among all reported cases in 2016, a total of 306 (14.7%) were classified as severe illnesses, and seven persons died. In 2016, CDC analyzed 144 P. falciparum-positive and nine P. falciparum mixed species samples for surveillance of antimalarial resistance markers (although certain loci were untestable in some samples); genetic polymorphisms associated with resistance to pyrimethamine were identified in 142 (97.9%), to sulfadoxine in 98 (70.5%), to chloroquine in 67 (44.7%), to mefloquine in six (4.3%), and to atovaquone in one (<1.0%). The completeness of key variables (e.g., species, country of acquisition, and resident status) was 79.4% in 2016 and 75.7% in 2015. INTERPRETATION: The number of reported malaria cases in 2016 continued a decades-long increasing trend and is the highest since 1972. The importation of malaria reflects the overall increase in global travel trends to and from areas where malaria is endemic; a transient decrease in the acquisition of cases, predominantly from West Africa, occurred in 2015. In 2016, more cases (absolute number) originated from regions of the world with widespread malaria transmission. Since the early 2000s, worldwide interventions to reduce malaria have been successful; however, progress has plateaued in recent years, the disease remains endemic in many regions, and the use of appropriate prevention measures by travelers remains inadequate. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: The best way to prevent malaria is to take chemoprophylaxis medication during travel to a country where malaria is endemic. Malaria infections can be fatal if not diagnosed and treated promptly with antimalarial medications appropriate for the patient's age and medical history, the likely country of malaria acquisition, and previous use of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis. In 2018, two tafenoquine-based antimalarials were approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in the United States. Arakoda was approved for use by adults for chemoprophylaxis and is available as a weekly dosage that is convenient during travel, which might improve adherence and also can prevent relapses from P. vivax and P. ovale infections. Krintafel was approved for radical cure of P. vivax infections in those >16 years old. In April 2019, intravenous artesunate became the first-line medication for treatment of severe malaria in the United States. Because intravenous artesunate is not FDA approved, it is available from CDC under an investigational new drug protocol. Detailed recommendations for preventing malaria are available to the general public at the CDC website (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/travelers/drugs.html). Health care providers should consult the CDC Guidelines for Treatment of Malaria in the United States and contact the CDC's Malaria Hotline for case management advice when needed. Malaria treatment recommendations are available online (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/diagnosis_treatment) and from the Malaria Hotline (770-488-7788 or toll-free at 855-856-4713). Persons submitting malaria case reports (care providers, laboratories, and state and local public health officials) should provide complete information because incomplete reporting compromises case investigations and efforts to prevent infections and examine trends in malaria cases. Adherence to recommended malaria prevention strategies is low among U.S. travelers; reasons for nonadherence include prematurely stopping after leaving the area where malaria was endemic, forgetting to take the medication, and experiencing a side effect. Molecular surveillance of antimalarial drug resistance markers (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/features/ars.html) enables CDC to track, guide treatment, and manage drug resistance in malaria parasites both domestically and internationally. More samples are needed to improve the completeness of antimalarial drug resistance analysis; therefore, CDC requests that blood specimens be submitted for all cases of malaria diagnosed in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion-transmitted malaria (TTM) is a rare occurrence with serious consequences for the recipient. A case study is presented as an example of best practices for conducting a TTM investigation. CASE REPORT: A 15-year-old male with a history of sickle cell disease developed fever after a blood transfusion. He was diagnosed with Plasmodium falciparum malaria and was successfully treated. The American Red Cross, New York State Department of Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention investigated the eight donors who provided components to the transfusion. The investigation to identify a malaria-positive donor included trace back of donors, serologic methods to identify donor(s) with a history of malaria exposure, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, microsatellite analysis to identify the parasite in a donor and match its genotype to the parasite in the recipient, and reinterview of all donors to clarify malaria risk factors. RESULTS: One donor had evidence of infection with P. falciparum by PCR, elevated antibody titers, and previously undisclosed malaria risk factors. Reinterview revealed that the donor immigrated to the United States from Togo just short of 3 years before the blood donation. The donor was treated for asymptomatic low parasitemia infection. CONCLUSION: This investigation used standard procedures for investigating TTM but also demonstrated the importance of applying sensitive laboratory techniques to identify the infected donor, especially a donor with asymptomatic infection with low parasitemia. Repeat interview of all donors identified as having contributed to the transfused component provides complementary epidemiologic information to confirm the infected donor.

In their response to our August 2017 editorial, Behrens et al.1 make assertions and assumptions that are not reflective of the main points of our editorial or our current methodologies for making prophylaxis recommendations. We would like to provide further clarification on these points. | | The authors may have misunderstood the main premise of our argument. We are not advocating that risk calculations for travellers be derived from malaria rates among the endemic population. What we were emphasizing were the perils of trying to calculate precise attack rates and risks, and that these numbers should not be seen as concrete values of risk when there are flaws with the numerators and denominators being used. Behrens and colleagues claim to be calculating rates among European travellers, but because they are not counting prevented cases or the cases not captured by surveillance, their rates are most likely underestimated.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Malaria in humans is caused by intraerythrocytic protozoa of the genus Plasmodium. These parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infective female Anopheles species mosquito. The majority of malaria infections in the United States occur among persons who have traveled to regions with ongoing malaria transmission. However, malaria is occasionally acquired by persons who have not traveled out of the country through exposure to infected blood products, congenital transmission, laboratory exposure, or local mosquitoborne transmission. Malaria surveillance in the United States is conducted to provide information on its occurrence (e.g., temporal, geographic, and demographic), guide prevention and treatment recommendations for travelers and patients, and facilitate transmission control measures if locally acquired cases are identified. PERIOD COVERED: This report summarizes confirmed malaria cases in persons with onset of illness in 2015 and summarizes trends in previous years. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: Malaria cases diagnosed by blood film microscopy, polymerase chain reaction, or rapid diagnostic tests are reported to local and state health departments by health care providers or laboratory staff members. Case investigations are conducted by local and state health departments, and reports are transmitted to CDC through the National Malaria Surveillance System (NMSS), the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS), or direct CDC consultations. CDC reference laboratories provide diagnostic assistance and conduct antimalarial drug resistance marker testing on blood samples submitted by health care providers or local or state health departments. This report summarizes data from the integration of all NMSS and NNDSS cases, CDC reference laboratory reports, and CDC clinical consultations. RESULTS: CDC received reports of 1,517 confirmed malaria cases, including one congenital case, with an onset of symptoms in 2015 among persons who received their diagnoses in the United States. Although the number of malaria cases diagnosed in the United States has been increasing since the mid-1970s, the number of cases decreased by 208 from 2014 to 2015. Among the regions of acquisition (Africa, West Africa, Asia, Central America, the Caribbean, South America, Oceania, and the Middle East), the only region with significantly fewer imported cases in 2015 compared with 2014 was West Africa (781 versus 969). Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. ovale, and P. malariae were identified in 67.4%, 11.7%, 4.1%, and 3.1% of cases, respectively. Less than 1% of patients were infected by two species. The infecting species was unreported or undetermined in 12.9% of cases. CDC provided diagnostic assistance for 13.1% of patients with confirmed cases and tested 15.0% of P. falciparum specimens for antimalarial resistance markers. Of the U.S. resident patients who reported purpose of travel, 68.4% were visiting friends or relatives. A lower proportion of U.S. residents with malaria reported taking any chemoprophylaxis in 2015 (26.5%) compared with 2014 (32.5%), and adherence was poor in this group. Among the U.S residents for whom information on chemoprophylaxis use and travel region were known, 95.3% of patients with malaria did not adhere to or did not take a CDC-recommended chemoprophylaxis regimen. Among women with malaria, 32 were pregnant, and none had adhered to chemoprophylaxis. A total of 23 malaria cases occurred among U.S. military personnel in 2015. Three cases of malaria were imported from the approximately 3,000 military personnel deployed to an Ebola-affected country; two of these were not P. falciparum species, and one species was unspecified. Among all reported cases in 2015, 17.1% were classified as severe illnesses and 11 persons died, compared with an average of 6.1 deaths per year during 2000-2014. In 2015, CDC received 153 P. falciparum-positive samples for surveillance of antimalarial resistance markers (although certain loci were untestable for some samples); genetic polymorphisms associated with resistance to pyrimethamine were identified in 132 (86.3%), to sulfadoxine in 112 (73.7%), to chloroquine in 48 (31.4%), to mefloquine in six (4.3%), and to artemisinin in one (<1%), and no sample had resistance to atovaquone. Completion of data elements on the malaria case report form decreased from 2014 to 2015 and remains low, with 24.2% of case report forms missing at least one key element (species, travel history, and resident status). INTERPRETATION: The decrease in malaria cases from 2014 to 2015 is associated with a decrease in imported cases from West Africa. This finding might be related to altered or curtailed travel to Ebola-affected countries in in this region. Despite progress in reducing malaria worldwide, the disease remains endemic in many regions, and the use of appropriate prevention measures by travelers is still inadequate. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: The best way to prevent malaria is to take chemoprophylaxis medication during travel to a country where malaria is endemic. As demonstrated by the U.S. military during the Ebola response, use of chemoprophylaxis and other protection measures is possible in stressful environments, and this can prevent malaria, especially P. falciparum, even in high transmission areas. Detailed recommendations for preventing malaria are available to the general public at the CDC website (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/travelers/drugs.html). Malaria infections can be fatal if not diagnosed and treated promptly with antimalarial medications appropriate for the patient's age and medical history, the likely country of malaria acquisition, and previous use of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis. Health care providers should consult the CDC Guidelines for Treatment of Malaria in the United States and contact the CDC's Malaria Hotline for case management advice when needed. Malaria treatment recommendations are available online (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/diagnosis_treatment) and from the Malaria Hotline (770-488-7788 or toll-free at 855-856-4713). Persons submitting malaria case reports (care providers, laboratories, and state and local public health officials) should provide complete information because incomplete reporting compromises case investigations and efforts to prevent infections and examine trends in malaria cases. Compliance with recommended malaria prevention strategies is low among U.S. travelers visiting friends and relatives. Evidence-based prevention strategies that effectively target travelers who are visiting friends and relatives need to be developed and implemented to reduce the numbers of imported malaria cases in the United States. Molecular surveillance of antimalarial drug resistance markers (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/features/ars.html) has enabled CDC to track, guide treatment, and manage drug resistance in malaria parasites both domestically and internationally. More samples are needed to improve the completeness of antimalarial drug resistance marker analysis; therefore, CDC requests that blood specimens be submitted for all cases diagnosed in the United States.

Malaria infection during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk for maternal and fetal complications. In the United States, treatment options for uncomplicated, chloroquine-resistant Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax malaria in pregnant women are limited to mefloquine or quinine plus clindamycin (1). However, limited availability of quinine and increasing resistance to mefloquine restrict these options. Strong evidence now demonstrates that artemether-lumefantrine (AL) (Coartem) is effective and safe in the treatment of malaria in pregnancy. The World Health Organization (WHO) has endorsed artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs), such as AL, for treatment of uncomplicated malaria during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy and is currently considering whether to add ACTs, including AL, as an option for malaria treatment during the first trimester (2,3). This policy note reviews the evidence and updates CDC recommendations to include AL as a treatment option for uncomplicated malaria during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy and during the first trimester of pregnancy when other treatment options are unavailable. These updated recommendations reflect current evidence and are consistent with WHO treatment guidelines.

The recent advances in next-generation sequencing technologies provide a new and effective way of tracking malaria drug resistant parasites. To take advantage of this technology an end-to-end Illumina targeted amplicon deep sequencing (TADS) and bioinformatics pipeline for molecular surveillance of drug resistance in P. falciparum, called Malaria Resistance Surveillance (MaRS), was developed. TADS relies on PCR enriching genomic regions, specifically target genes of interest, prior to deep sequencing. MaRS enables researchers to simultaneously collect data on allele frequencies of multiple full-length P. falciparum drug resistance genes (crt, mdr1, k13, dhfr, dhps, and cytochrome b) as well as the mitochondrial genome. Information is captured at the individual patient level for both known and potential new single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with drug resistance. MaRS pipeline was validated using 245 imported malaria cases that were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The chloroquine resistant crt CV IET genotype was observed in 42% of samples, the highly pyrimethamine resistant triple mutant dhpsIRN in 92% of samples, and the sulfadoxine resistant dhps S GE AA in 26% of samples. The mdr1 N F SND genotype was found in 40% of samples. With the exception of two cases imported from Cambodia, no artemisinin resistant K13 alleles were identified and 99% of patients carried parasites susceptible to atovaquone-proguanil. Our goal is to implement MaRS at the CDC for routine surveillance of imported malaria cases in the U.S. and aid in the adoption of this system in participating state public health laboratories as well as global partners.

Every year, millions of travellers visit countries in which malaria is endemic. To help inform prevention guidelines, there have been many attempts to quantify malaria risk in travellers. Unfortunately, the data needed to accurately calculate such risk do not exist. Current methods and datasets can provide approximations, but as we will explain, they greatly underestimate the true risk value. Presenting such underestimates as precise measurements and using them as the basis for policy decisions has the potential to cause real harm or death to travellers from a disease easily preventable by chemoprophylaxis. Instead, a more holistic approach to determining malaria risk is needed to best protect travellers. Such an approach could include a qualitative assessment of surveillance data and individual characteristics of the traveller. | It is common to use attack rates to estimate risk. However, in the travel medicine literature, the methods used to calculate malaria attack rates to approximate individual risk1–3 are flawed. For example, authors often determine the number of cases of imported malaria from an endemic area to non-endemic countries reported in national surveillance systems, divide by the estimated total number of travellers from non-endemic countries to this region, and use the resulting quotient to make recommendations on chemoprophylaxis for travellers. Such a calculation has limitations that have been acknowledged in passing, but as we will describe, these limitations are actually quite major and if overlooked can result in very dangerous and erroneous conclusions.

In their recent article, Lachish et al.1 suggest that a twice weekly atovaquone–proguanil (AP) regimen may be effective malaria prophylaxis for long-term travellers. There are limitations to this study and related papers, and therefore we caution against any change in AP prophylaxis practice. We provide data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Malaria Surveillance System (NMSS) for US travelers who developed acute malaria while taking a complete or partial course of AP. | The current recommended prophylactic regimen for AP (day prior to travel, daily during travel and 7 days after departing) is based on the pharmacokinetics of the two drugs and their synergistic activity against the tissue schizont and blood stages of Plasmodium spp. parasites.2 In Lachish et al.’s study, participants started AP after arriving in the endemic area, and outcomes are only reported for their time in the malaria-endemic country while still taking the drug twice weekly. There may have been individuals with pre-patent infections prior to starting AP, or even breakthrough parasitemias that were partially treated by the intermittent AP dosing. Failure in these cases could have been observed in the weeks after the post-trip prophylaxis course; however, this time period was not examined, and would be a critical piece of evidence needed to make conclusions about the prophylactic efficacy of the modified AP course.

The Caribbean island of Hispaniola is targeted for malaria elimination. Currently, this is the only island with ongoing transmission of malaria in the Caribbean. In 2015, six patients from Puerto Rico and one from Massachusetts, who traveled to Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, were confirmed to be infected with Plasmodium falciparum. Additional molecular analysis was performed at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to characterize the drug-resistant alleles and Plasmodium population genetic markers. All specimens carried wildtype genotypes for chloroquine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, and artemisinin resistance genetic markers. A mutation in codon 184 (Y/F) of Pfmdr-1 gene was observed in all samples and they shared an identical genetic lineage as determined by microsatellite analysis. This genetic profile was similar to the one reported from Hispaniola suggesting that a clonal P. falciparum residual parasite population present in Punta Cana is the source population for these imported malaria cases.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Malaria in humans is caused by intraerythrocytic protozoa of the genus Plasmodium. These parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infective female Anopheles mosquito. The majority of malaria infections in the United States occur among persons who have traveled to regions with ongoing malaria transmission. However, malaria is occasionally acquired by persons who have not traveled out of the country through exposure to infected blood products, congenital transmission, laboratory exposure, or local mosquitoborne transmission. Malaria surveillance in the United States is conducted to identify episodes of local transmission and to guide prevention recommendations for travelers. PERIOD COVERED: This report summarizes cases in persons with onset of illness in 2014 and trends during previous years. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: Malaria cases diagnosed by blood film, polymerase chain reaction, or rapid diagnostic tests are reported to local and state health departments by health care providers or laboratory staff. Case investigations are conducted by local and state health departments, and reports are transmitted to CDC through the National Malaria Surveillance System, National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System, or direct CDC consultations. CDC conducts antimalarial drug resistance marker testing on blood samples submitted by health care providers or local or state health departments. Data from these reporting systems serve as the basis for this report. RESULTS: CDC received reports of 1,724 confirmed malaria cases, including one congenital case and two cryptic cases, with onset of symptoms in 2014 among persons in the United States. The number of confirmed cases in 2014 is consistent with the number of confirmed cases reported in 2013 (n = 1,741; this number has been updated from a previous publication to account for delayed reporting for persons with symptom onset occurring in late 2013). Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. ovale, and P. malariae were identified in 66.1%, 13.3%, 5.2%, and 2.7% of cases, respectively. Less than 1.0% of patients were infected with two species. The infecting species was unreported or undetermined in 11.7% of cases. CDC provided diagnostic assistance for 14.2% of confirmed cases and tested 12.0% of P. falciparum specimens for antimalarial resistance markers. Of patients who reported purpose of travel, 57.5% were visiting friends and relatives (VFR). Among U.S. residents for whom information on chemoprophylaxis use and travel region was known, 7.8% reported that they initiated and adhered to a chemoprophylaxis drug regimen recommended by CDC for the regions to which they had traveled. Thirty-two cases were among pregnant women, none of whom had adhered to chemoprophylaxis. Among all reported cases, 17.0% were classified as severe illness, and five persons with malaria died. CDC received 137 P. falciparum-positive samples for the detection of antimalarial resistance markers (although some loci for chloroquine and mefloquine were untestable for up to nine samples). Of the 137 samples tested, 131 (95.6%) had genetic polymorphisms associated with pyrimethamine drug resistance, 96 (70.0%) with sulfadoxine resistance, 77 (57.5%) with chloroquine resistance, three (2.3%) with mefloquine drug resistance, one (<1.0%) with atovaquone resistance, and two (1.4%) with artemisinin resistance. INTERPRETATION: The overall trend of malaria cases has been increasing since 1973; the number of cases reported in 2014 is the fourth highest annual total since then. Despite progress in reducing global prevalence of malaria, the disease remains endemic in many regions and use of appropriate prevention measures by travelers is still inadequate. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: Completion of data elements on the malaria case report form increased slightly in 2014 compared with 2013, but still remains unacceptably low. In 2014, at least one essential element (i.e., species, travel history, or resident status) was missing in 21.3% of case report forms. Incomplete reporting compromises efforts to examine trends in malaria cases and prevent infections. VFR travelers continue to be a difficult population to reach with effective malaria prevention strategies. Evidence-based prevention strategies that effectively target VFR travelers need to be developed and implemented to have a substantial impact on the number of imported malaria cases in the United States. Fewer U.S. resident patients reported taking chemoprophylaxis in 2014 (27.2%) compared with 2013 (28.6%), and adherence was poor among those who did take chemoprophylaxis. Proper use of malaria chemoprophylaxis will prevent the majority of malaria illnesses and reduce risk for severe disease (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/travelers/drugs.html). Malaria infections can be fatal if not diagnosed and treated promptly with antimalarial medications appropriate for the patient's age and medical history, likely country of malaria acquisition, and previous use of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis. Recent molecular laboratory advances have enabled CDC to identify and conduct molecular surveillance of antimalarial drug resistance markers (https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/features/ars.html) and improve the ability of CDC to track, guide treatment, and manage drug resistance in malaria parasites both domestically and globally. For this effort to be successful, specimens should be submitted for all cases diagnosed in the United States. Clinicians should consult CDC Guidelines for Treatment of Malaria in the United States and contact the CDC Malaria Hotline for case management advice, when needed. Malaria treatment recommendations can be obtained online at https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/diagnosis_treatment/ or by calling the Malaria Hotline at 770-488-7788 or toll-free at 855-856-4713.

The recent article describing apparent artemether-lumefantrine (AL) treatment failure in four travelers returning to the United Kingdom (1) is well detailed. Passive surveillance for treatment failures, particularly in countries where malaria is not endemic and where greater attention and resources can be directed at individual malaria cases, is an important tool for antimalarial resistance monitoring. In fact, chloroquine resistance in sub-Saharan Africa was first documented in travelers returning to Europe and North America prior to being confirmed through efficacy trials at clinical sites in Africa (2). Toward this goal, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention performs molecular resistance testing of samples from passively reported imported cases and investigates cases of suspected treatment failure. | However, treatment failures detected passively must be interpreted with caution and an attempt should be made to estimate the relevant denominator—the total number of cases treated with an antimalarial during the same period. Without denominator information, it is difficult to know whether the four cases reported by Sutherland et al. are indicative of a trend of decreasing AL efficacy or are consistent with the known background rate of AL treatment failure.

BACKGROUND: A primary reason for non-adherence to malaria chemoprophylaxis is fear of latent side effects. We examined latent effects of malaria chemoprophylaxis among Returned Peace Corps Volunteers (RPCVs). METHODS: During July 18-September 16, 2016, RPCVs who served during 1995-2014 with an e-mail address in Peace Corps' RPCV database were invited to take an internet-based survey on malaria prophylaxis and medical diagnoses. "Good adherence" meant taking prophylaxis "as prescribed" or "most of the time." Prevalence of diseases diagnosed after Peace Corps service was compared between users and nonusers of each antimalarial using log-binomial regression. RESULTS: Of 8931 participants (11% response rate), 5055 (57%) took chemoprophylaxis. Initial chemoprophylaxis was mefloquine 59%, chloroquine 13%, doxycycline 16%, atovaquone-proguanil 4%, and "other" 8%. Sixty percent reported good adherence. Mefloquine users had the best adherence (67% good adherence). Prevalences of most diseases were similar between exposed and unexposed groups. Certain psychiatric diagnoses were slightly more likely among mefloquine users (PR 1.14, 95% CI [1.04-1.25], P = 0.0048). When excluding those with prior psychiatric illness, there were no differences in psychiatric diagnosis rates. CONCLUSION: Malaria chemoprophylaxis use by Peace Corps Volunteers is safe. Avoiding mefloquine use in those with prior psychiatric illness can reduce psychiatric side effects.

Meg: I'm in Angola right now where the country is seeing the largest yellow fever outbreak since 1986 and the number of malaria cases appear to be higher than normal this time of the year. I was at dinner the other night among seasoned travelers and I was struck by how different our attitudes were about malaria prophylaxis. | Paul: I hope you're taking yours. | Meg: Of course! I'm religiously taking mine every morning. Some of us are meticulous about not missing a dose whereas others seem to have a more cavalier attitude about it. They don't seem to be aware of the potential serious consequences of a malaria infection. And I was surprised by the spectrum of side effects they say they've experienced in the past with the different prophylaxis options. A lot of GI upset, and of course, the most common – weird, vivid dreams with mefloquine. But I've also heard people tell me about neuropsychiatric side effects even on other antimalarials.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the availability of effective antimalarial prophylaxis, imported adult and pediatric malaria occurs in the United States, and this can pose diagnostic issues. We examined the clinical characteristics and diagnostic challenges of imported malaria requiring adult or pediatric inpatient admission at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx which provides care for a large population of immigrants from malaria endemic areas. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective single center review of patients admitted with a diagnosis of malaria at Montefiore Medical Center from 2005 through 2012. We extracted historical, clinical, and laboratory values from the electronic medical record and patient charts. RESULTS: We identified 95 patients who were diagnosed and hospitalized with malaria from 2005 to 2012, 33 (35%) of them were children and 17 (18%) were with severe malaria. Most patients contracted malaria while visiting friends and relatives in West Africa. Only 38% of travelers took prophylaxis, and fewer than half reported taking it as prescribed. Misdiagnosis by emergency room or primary care doctors was observed in almost one quarter of all of the patients. Misdiagnosis occurred significantly more frequently in children (43%) compared to adults (13%) (P = 0.002). Pediatric patients were more likely to present with abdominal pain (42% vs. 15%; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patients admitted for imported malaria at Montefiore Medical Center had a higher rate of misdiagnosis and presented with more gastrointestinal symptoms than hospitalized adults. By describing the clinical characteristics of patients with imported malaria, we hope to improve diagnostic accuracy by health care workers and raise awareness that friends and relatives may require more intensive pretravel counseling.

On July 16 2015, the Puerto Rico Department of Health (PRDH) was notified of a case of malaria, diagnosed by a hospital parasitology laboratory in a student who had traveled to Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, during late June for a school-organized graduation trip. Malaria is a mosquito-borne parasitic infection, characterized by fever, shaking chills, headaches, muscle pains, nausea, general malaise, and vomiting. Malaria can be clinically difficult to distinguish from other acute febrile illnesses, and a definitive diagnosis requires demonstration of malaria parasites using microscopy or molecular diagnostic tests. The student's initial diagnosis on July 10 was suspected dengue virus infection. Puerto Rico eliminated local malaria transmission during the mid-1950s; however, reintroduction remains a risk because of the presence of a competent vector (Anopheles albimanus) and ease of travel to areas where the disease is endemic, including Hispaniola, the island shared by the Dominican Republic and Haiti, and the only island in the Caribbean with endemic malaria. During 2014, the Dominican Republic reported 496 confirmed malaria cases and four associated deaths; Haiti reported 17,662 confirmed cases and nine deaths. During 2000-2014, Puerto Rico reported a total of 35 imported malaria cases (range = 0-7 per year); three cases were imported from Hispaniola. During June-August 2015, eight confirmed malaria cases among travelers to the Dominican Republic were reported to CDC's National Malaria Surveillance System (CDC, unpublished data, 2015).

BACKGROUND: Atovaquone-proguanil (AP) is the most commonly used treatment for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the United States. Apparent AP treatment failures were reported 7 months apart in 2 American travelers who stayed in the same compound for foreign workers in Rivers State, Nigeria. METHODS: We analyzed pretreatment (day 0) and day of failure samples from both travelers for mutations in the P falciparum cytochrome B (pfcytb) and dihydrofolate reductase (pfdhfr) genes associated with resistance to atovaquone and cycloguanil, the active metabolite of proguanil, respectively. We genotyped the parasites and sequenced their mitochondrial genomes. RESULTS: On day 0, both travelers had proguanil-resistant genotypes but atovaquone-sensitive cytb sequences. Day of failure samples exhibited mutations in cytb for both travelers. One traveler had the common Y268S mutation, whereas the other traveler had a previously unreported mutation, I258M. The travelers had unrelated parasite genotypes and different mitochondrial genomes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the infections likely having been contracted in the same site, there is no evidence that the cases were related. The mutations likely arose independently during the acute infection or treatment. Our results highlight the importance of genotyping parasites and sequencing the full cytb and dhfr genes in AP failures to rule out transmission of AP-resistant strains and identify novel mechanisms of AP resistance.

The rapid emergence of drug resistant malaria parasites during the course of an infection remains a major challenge for providing accurate treatment guidelines. This is particularly important in malaria treatment failure cases. Using a previously well-characterized malaria treatment failure case, we show the utility of using next generation sequencing for the early detection of the rise and selection of a previously reported atovaquone proguanil (malarone) drug resistance associated mutation.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports of Plasmodium vivax associated with severe syndromes and mortality from malaria endemic areas questions the "benign" course of non-falciparum malarias. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients reported to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with a diagnosis of malaria parasite single-species infection between 1985 and 2011. Patients classified as having severe illness were further classified according to outcome (survival versus death) and clinical syndrome. RESULTS: Among all cases, .9% of Plasmodium falciparum cases resulted in death and 9.3% were classified as severe, whereas .09% of P. vivax cases resulted in death and 1.3% were classified as severe. The odds ratios for severe illness among 15 272 diagnoses of P. falciparum relative to patients diagnosed with P. vivax (n = 12 152), Plasmodium malariae (n = 1254), or Plasmodium ovale (n = 903) was 7.5, 5.7, and 5.0, respectively (P < .0001 for all); in contrast, the corresponding odds ratios for death among those severely ill was 1.6, 1.1, and .8 (P > .1 for all), respectively. Compared with P. vivax (n = 163), the odds of P. falciparum cases classified as severely ill (n = 1416) were 1.9 (P = .0006), .5 (P = .001), and 1.3 times (P = .1) as likely to present as cerebral, acute respiratory distress, and renal syndromes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although less common, patients presenting with non-falciparum even in the United States can develop severe illness, and severe illness in patients having malaria of any species threatens life.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Malaria in humans is caused by intraerythrocytic protozoa of the genus Plasmodium. These parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infective female Anopheles mosquito. The majority of malaria infections in the United States occur among persons who have traveled to regions with ongoing malaria transmission. However, malaria is also occasionally acquired by persons who have not traveled out of the country through exposure to infected blood products, congenital transmission, laboratory exposure, or local mosquitoborne transmission. Malaria surveillance in the United States is conducted to identify episodes of local transmission and to guide prevention recommendations for travelers. PERIOD COVERED: This report summarizes cases in persons with onset of illness in 2013 and summarizes trends during previous years. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: Malaria cases diagnosed by blood film, polymerase chain reaction, or rapid diagnostic tests are mandated to be reported to local and state health departments by health care providers or laboratory staff. Case investigations are conducted by local and state health departments, and reports are transmitted to CDC through the National Malaria Surveillance System, National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System, or direct CDC consultations. CDC conducted antimalarial drug resistance marker testing on blood samples submitted to CDC by health care providers or local/state health departments. Data from these reporting systems serve as the basis for this report. RESULTS: CDC received 1,727 reported cases of malaria, including two congenital cases, with an onset of symptoms in 2013 among persons in the United States. The total number of cases represents a 2% increase from the 1,687 cases reported for 2012. Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. malariae, and P. ovale were identified in 61%, 14%, 3%, and 4% of cases, respectively. Forty (2%) patients were infected by two species. The infecting species was unreported or undetermined in 17% of cases. Polymerase chain reaction testing determined or corrected the species for 85 of the 137 (62%) samples evaluated for drug resistance marker testing. Of the 904 patients who reported purpose of travel, 635 (70%) were visiting friends or relatives (VFR). Among the 961 cases in U.S. civilians for whom information on chemoprophylaxis use and travel region was known, 42 (4%) patients reported that they had initiated and adhered to a chemoprophylaxis drug regimen recommended by CDC for the regions to which they had traveled. Thirty-six cases were reported in pregnant women, none of whom had adhered to chemoprophylaxis. Among all reported cases, approximately 270 (16%) were classified as severe illnesses in 2013. Of these, 10 persons with malaria died in 2013, the highest number since 2001. In 2013, a total of 137 blood samples submitted to CDC were tested for molecular markers associated with antimalarial drug resistance. Of the 100 P. falciparum-positive samples, 95 were tested for pyrimethamine resistance: 88 (93%) had genetic polymorphisms associated with pyrimethamine drug resistance, 74 (76%) with sulfadoxine resistance, 53 (53%) with chloroquine resistance, one (1%) with atovaquone resistance, none with mefloquine drug resistance, and none with artemisinin resistance. INTERPRETATION: The overall trend of malaria cases has been increasing since 1973; the number of cases reported in 2013 is the third highest annual total since then. Despite progress in reducing the global burden of malaria, the disease remains endemic in many regions, and the use of appropriate prevention measures by travelers is still inadequate. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: Completion of data elements on the malaria case report form increased slightly in 2013 compared with 2012, but still remains unacceptably low. This incomplete reporting compromises efforts to examine trends in malaria cases and prevent infections. VFRs continue to be a difficult population to reach with effective malaria prevention strategies. Evidence-based prevention strategies that effectively target VFRs need to be developed and implemented to have a substantial impact on the numbers of imported malaria cases in the United States. Fewer patients reported taking chemoprophylaxis in 2013 (32%) compared with 2012 (34%), and adherence was poor among those who did take chemoprophylaxis. Proper use of malaria chemoprophylaxis will prevent the majority of malaria illness and reduce the risk for severe disease (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/travelers/drugs.html). Malaria infections can be fatal if not diagnosed and treated promptly with antimalarial medications appropriate for the patient's age and medical history, the likely country of malaria acquisition, and previous use of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis. Recent molecular laboratory advances have enabled CDC to identify and conduct molecular surveillance of antimalarial drug resistance markers (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/features/ars.html). These advances will allow CDC to track, guide treatment, and manage drug resistance in malaria parasites both domestically and globally. For this to be successful, specimens should be submitted for all cases diagnosed in the United States. Clinicians should consult the CDC Guidelines for Treatment of Malaria and contact the CDC's Malaria Hotline for case management advice, when needed. Malaria treatment recommendations can be obtained online (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/diagnosis_treatment) or by calling the Malaria Hotline (770-488-7788 or toll-free at 855-856-4713).

In the Case Record discussed by Biddinger et al. (Sept. 10 issue),1 the authors describe the care of a febrile traveler who was returning from an area in which malaria is highly endemic and who was considered to be in the “low (but not zero) risk category” for Ebola virus disease (EVD).2 Modifications made to safely assess the patient for EVD are reported, including the use of only a rapid diagnostic test to diagnose malaria. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends immediate microscopy of thin and thick blood smears for the diagnosis of malaria, which can be safely performed by observing precautions against the transmission of EVD.3 Diagnosis by means of microscopy allows for the identification of species and the quantification of parasitemia, both of which are needed to determine the most appropriate treatment. Microscopy must always be performed after a rapid diagnostic test in order to confirm the result and obtain this additional information.4 The patient discussed could have had undiagnosed hyperparasitemia, which requires parenteral therapy. In addition, without identifying the species by means of microscopy or polymerasechain-reaction assay, the authors may have missed a mixed infection, which could have been treated with primaquine, thereby preventing a 6-week relapse. Correct determination of the initial infecting species is preferred over the reliance on knowledge of the geographic distribution of species that cause relapsing malaria and the use of empirical therapy with primaquine.

Among 1,683 persons in the United States who developed malaria following international travel during 2012, more than half acquired disease in one of 16 countries* in West Africa (1). Since March 2014, West Africa has experienced the world's largest epidemic of Ebola virus disease (Ebola), primarily affecting Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia; in 2014, approximately 20,000 Ebola cases were reported (2). Both Ebola and malaria are often characterized by fever and malaise and can be clinically indistinguishable, especially early in the course of disease. Immediate laboratory testing is critical for diagnosis of both Ebola and malaria, so that appropriate lifesaving treatment can be initiated. CDC recommends prompt malaria testing of patients with fever and history of travel to an area that is endemic for malaria, using blood smear microscopy, with results available within a few hours (3). Empiric treatment of malaria is not recommended by CDC (4). Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing is recommended to diagnose Ebola (5). During the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, CDC received reports of delayed laboratory testing for malaria in travelers returning to the United States because of infection control concerns related to Ebola (6). CDC reviewed documented calls to its malaria consultation service and selected three patient cases to present as examples of deficiencies in the evaluation and treatment of malaria among travelers returning from Africa during the Ebola epidemic.

This month’s cover image,1 Plate 99 from Birds of America (printed in stages during 1827−1838) by American ornithologist, naturalist, and painter John James Audubon (1785–1851), shows a pair of oft-vilified brown-headed cowbirds. This painting appears in the book as one of 435 life-sized watercolors that were reproduced from Audubon’s hand-engraved plates. In this painting, he portrays the birds frozen in act of foraging, a technique he honed from observing birds where they lived. Audubon’s own words best describe the work: “Male with the head and neck sooty-brown, the body black, glossed with green, the fore part of the back with blue. Female considerably smaller, greyish-brown, the lower parts lighter.” | | The genus of this bird, Molothrus ater—as well as the bronze-headed variant Molothrus aeneus—comes from Molothrus, the Greek work meaning vagabond or parasite. Although there are other bird species that prey on the parental skills of their feathered neighbors by laying eggs in their nests, only birds of those two species practice obligate parasitism in North America, placing them among approximately one percent of avian species worldwide.

BACKGROUND: Quinidine gluconate, the only U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for life-threatening malaria in the United States, has a problematic safety profile and is often unavailable in hospitals. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and clinical benefit of intravenous artesunate as an alternative to quinidine. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: U.S. hospitals. PATIENTS: 102 patients aged 1 to 72 years (90% adults; 61% men) with severe and complicated malaria. Patients received 4 weight-based doses of intravenous artesunate (2.4 mg/kg) under a treatment protocol implemented by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention between January 2007 and December 2010. At baseline, 35% had evidence of cerebral malaria, and 17% had severe hepatic impairment. Eligibility required the presence of microscopically confirmed malaria, need for intravenous treatment, and an impediment to quinidine. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical and laboratory data from each patient's hospital records were abstracted retrospectively, including information from baseline through a maximum 7-day follow-up, and presented before a physician committee to evaluate safety and clinical benefit outcomes. RESULTS: 7 patients died (mortality rate, 6.9%). The most frequent adverse events were anemia (65%) and elevated hepatic enzyme levels (49%). All deaths and most adverse events were attributed to the severity of malaria. Patients' symptoms generally improved or resolved within 3 days, and the median time to discharge from the intensive care unit was 4 days, even for patients with severe liver disease or cerebral malaria. More than 100 concomitant medications were used, with no documented drug-drug interactions. LIMITATION: Potential late-presenting safety issues might occur outside the 7-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: Artesunate was a safe and clinically beneficial alternative to quinidine. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the U.S. Army.

BACKGROUND: Data from clinical studies show that artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is effective and well tolerated in adults and children with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. However, data on effectiveness and safety of AL in patients in non-endemic settings are limited. METHODS: A 5-year surveillance plan included all AL-treated adult and paediatric patients with confirmed or suspected P. falciparum malaria in the USA, as reported to the National Malaria Surveillance System at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Descriptive analyses included demographics, baseline characteristics, clinical effectiveness, and safety. From May 2010 to April 2015, demographics and baseline characteristics were collected for 203 patients and safety data for 108 patients. Treatment effectiveness data at day 7 were collected for 117 patients and at day 28 for 98 patients. RESULTS: The majority of patients were male (58.6 %), Black (62.6 %), non-Hispanic (92.6 %), and likely malaria non-immune (80.8 %). The median age was 32 (range 1-88) years and the median body mass index was 25.5 (range 13.8-42.4) kg/m(2). All patients with effectiveness data had confirmed (n = 116) or suspected (n = 1) malaria. The overall cure rate for patients treated with AL was 91.5 % (95 % CI 84.8-95.8 %) at day 7 and 96.9 % (95 % CI 91.3-99.4 %) at day 28. Adverse events were reported in four (3.7 %) patients, and there were no new or unexpected safety signals. CONCLUSION: AL was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of likely non-immune patients with P. falciparum malaria.

BACKGROUND: Data on imported malaria in pregnant women are scarce. METHOD: A retrospective, descriptive study of pooled data on imported malaria in pregnancy was done using data from 1991 to 2014 from 8 different collaborators in Europe, the United States and Japan. National malaria reference centres as well as specialists on this topic were asked to search their archives for cases of imported malaria in pregnancy. A total of 631 cases were collated, providing information on Plasmodium species, region of acquisition, nationality, country of residence, reason for travel, age, gestational age, prophylactic measures and treatment used, as well as on complications and outcomes in mother and child. RESULTS: Datasets from some sources were incomplete. The predominant Plasmodium species was P. falciparum (78.5% of cases). Among the 542 cases where information on the use of chemoprophylaxis was known, 464 (85.6%) did not use chemoprophylaxis. The main reason for travelling was "visiting friends and relatives" VFR (57.8%) and overall, most cases of malaria were imported from West Africa (57.4%). Severe anaemia was the most frequent complication in the mother. Data on offspring outcome were limited, but spontaneous abortion was a frequently reported foetal outcome (n = 14). A total of 50 different variants of malaria treatment regimens were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Imported cases of malaria in pregnancy are mainly P. falciparum acquired in sub-Saharan Africa. Malaria prevention and treatment in pregnant travellers is a challenge for travel medicine due to few data on medication safety and maternal and foetal outcomes. International, collaborative efforts are needed to capture standardized data on imported malaria cases in pregnant women.

The most notable finding in Luthi and Shlagenhauf’s [1] recent review - that failure to use chemoprophylaxis while traveling to malaria-endemic areas is a major risk factor for severe malaria and death - is concerning, but not at all surprising. This conclusion should be so obvious to the travel medicine community that one might think it did not merit publication at all. But clearly it does. | Malaria chemoprophylaxis is an effective means of preventing both morbidity and mortality among international travelers to malaria endemic countries. It is a proven public health intervention, but unfortunately it is not being utilized sufficiently. There are, of course, many reasons for this. Some travelers are not aware of the risk or do not have access to appropriate preventive health services. People sometimes forget their medicines, or are non-adherent to the correct chemoprophylaxis schedule. Repeat and frequent travelers to malaria-endemic countries may become complacent about malaria prevention in general or may be reluctant to use specific medications for malaria prevention due to side effects they might have experienced, perceived, or simply heard about. But the more concerning one is the travel medicine health care provider who misses the opportunity to recommend effective chemoprophylaxis for the travelers who actually made it in to the clinic seeking such advice. Despite clear and consistent evidence that lack of chemoprophylaxis is a risk factor for severe malaria and death [1], risk-benefit analyses, special considerations for certain types of travelers and settings, promotion of standby emergency medicine, and cost-effectiveness calculations are proffered—all of which have the potential to undermine the use of malaria chemoprophylaxis [2–5]. Luthi and Schlagenhauf [1] demonstrated that even in instances where malaria was not prevented, suboptimal chemoprophylaxis (wrong medications or incorrect usage) reduced mortality and the risk of severe disease. The travel medicine specialist should be advocating for malaria prevention rather than looking for opportunities to avoid prescribing effective chemoprophylaxis. This should include educating the travelers on different available options and choosing the chemoprophylaxis that would be most suitable for each traveler.

BACKGROUND: Although malaria can be prevented with prophylaxis, it is diagnosed in over 100 Africa-region Peace Corps Volunteers annually. This suggests that prophylaxis non-adherence is a problem in these non-immune travelers. METHODS: We investigated Volunteers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding prophylaxis using an internet-based survey during August 19-September 30, 2013. Adherence was defined as taking doxycycline or atovaquone-proguanil daily, or taking mefloquine doses no more than 8 days apart. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 3248 Volunteers. Of 781 whose responses were analyzed, 514 (73%) reported adherence to prophylaxis. The most common reasons for non-adherence were forgetting (n = 530, 90%); fear of long-term adverse effects (LTAEs; n = 316, 54%); and experiencing adverse events that Volunteers attributed to prophylaxis (n = 297, 51%). Two hundred fourteen (27%) Volunteers reported not worrying about malaria. On multivariate analysis controlling for sex and experiencing adverse events Volunteers attributed to prophylaxis, the factor most strongly associated with non-adherence was being prescribed mefloquine (OR 5.4, 95% confidence interval 3.2-9.0). CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate adherence and a prevailing fear of LTAEs among Volunteers. Strategies to improve prophylaxis adherence may include medication reminders, increasing education about prophylaxis safety and malaria risk, and promoting prompt management of prophylaxis side effects.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Malaria in humans is caused by intraerythrocytic protozoa of the genus Plasmodium. These parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infective female Anopheles mosquito. The majority of malaria infections in the United States occur among persons who have traveled to regions with ongoing malaria transmission. However, malaria is also occasionally acquired by persons who have not traveled out of the country, through exposure to infected blood products, congenital transmission, laboratory exposure, or local mosquitoborne transmission. Malaria surveillance in the United States is conducted to identify episodes of local transmission and to guide prevention recommendations for travelers. PERIOD COVERED: This report summarizes cases in persons with onset of symptoms in 2012 and summarizes trends during previous years. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: Malaria cases diagnosed by blood film, polymerase chain reaction, or rapid diagnostic tests are mandated to be reported to local and state health departments by health-care providers or laboratory staff. Case investigations are conducted by local and state health departments, and reports are transmitted to CDC through the National Malaria Surveillance System (NMSS), National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS), or direct CDC consults. For the first time, CDC conducted antimalarial drug resistance testing on blood samples submitted to CDC by health-care providers or local/state health departments. Data from these reporting systems serve as the basis for this report. RESULTS: CDC received 1,687 reported cases of malaria with an onset of symptoms in 2012 among persons in the United States, including 1,683 cases classified as imported, one laboratory-acquired case, one nosocomial case, and two cryptic cases. The total number of cases represents a 12% decrease from the 1,925 cases reported for 2011. Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. malariae, and P. ovale were identified in 58%, 17%, 3%, and 3% of cases, respectively. Twenty (1%) patients were infected by two species. The infecting species was unreported or undetermined in 17% of cases, a decrease of 6 percentage points from 2011. Polymerase chain reaction testing determined or corrected the species for 45 (43%) of the 104 samples submitted for drug resistance testing. Of the 909 patients who reported purpose of travel, 604 (66%) were visiting friends or relatives (VFR). Among the 983 cases in U.S. civilians for whom information on chemoprophylaxis use and travel region was known, 63 (6%) patients reported that they had followed and adhered to a chemoprophylaxis drug regimen recommended by CDC for the regions to which they had traveled. Thirty-two cases were reported in pregnant women, among whom only one adhered to chemoprophylaxis. Among all reported cases, 231 (14%) were classified as severe infections in 2012. Of these, six persons with malaria died in 2012. Beginning in 2012, there were 104 blood samples submitted to CDC that were tested for molecular markers associated with antimalarial drug resistance. Of the 65 P. falciparum-positive samples, 53 (82%) had genetic polymorphisms associated with pyrimethamine drug resistance, 61 (94%) with sulfadoxine resistance, 29 (45%) with chloroquine resistance, 1 (2%) with mefloquine drug resistance, 2 (3%) with atovaquone resistance, and none with artemisinin resistance. INTERPRETATION: Despite the 12% decline in the number of cases reported in 2012 compared with 2011, the overall trend in malaria cases has been increasing since 1973. Although progress has been made in reducing the global burden of malaria, the disease remains endemic in many regions, and the use of appropriate prevention measures by travelers is still inadequate. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: Completion of data elements on the malaria case report form increased slightly in 2012 compared with 2011, but still remains unacceptably low. This incomplete reporting compromises efforts to examine trends in malaria cases and prevent infections. VFRs continue to be a difficult population to reach with effective malaria prevention strategies. Evidence-based prevention strategies that effectively target VFRs need to be developed and implemented to have a substantial impact on the numbers of imported malaria cases in the United States. Although more patients reported taking chemoprophylaxis to prevent malaria, the majority reported not taking it, and adherence was poor among those who did take chemoprophylaxis. Proper use of malaria chemoprophylaxis will prevent the majority of malaria illness and reduce the risk for severe disease (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/travelers/drugs.html). Malaria infections can be fatal if not diagnosed and treated promptly with antimalarial medications appropriate for the patient's age and medical history, the likely country of malaria acquisition, and previous use of antimalarial chemoprophylaxis. Recent molecular laboratory advances have enabled CDC to identify and conduct molecular surveillance of antimalarial drug resistance (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/features/ars.html). These advances will allow CDC to track, guide treatment, and manage drug resistant malaria parasites both domestically and globally. For this to be successful, specimens should be submitted for cases diagnosed in the United States and for ongoing specimen collection and testing globally. Clinicians should consult the CDC Guidelines for Treatment of Malaria and contact the CDC's Malaria Hotline for case management advice when needed. Malaria treatment recommendations can be obtained online (http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/diagnosis_treatment) or by calling the Malaria Hotline (770-488-7788 or toll-free at 855-856-4713).

Parenteral artesunate, a first-line treatment for severe malaria in several countries, is associated with increased survival and has a better safety profile compared with parenteral quinine or quinidine. However, parenteral artesunate has been associated with delayed hemolysis, leading to concerns about drug toxicity. Postartemisinin delayed hemolysis (PADH) can occur 1-3 weeks after initiation of treatment with artemisinin-based antimalarials such as artesunate and is characterized by a decline in hemoglobin levels amid hemolysis. CDC conducted a literature review and identified 18 cases of PADH since 2012, mostly in European travelers. In addition, malaria case reports were reviewed retrospectively, and active surveillance was implemented in the United States, identifying two additional PADH cases, for a total of 20. A few patients with PADH required blood transfusions, but among patients where complete follow-up information was available, all made a full recovery. Results from this review suggest that PADH occurs because of delayed clearance of once-infected erythrocytes, probably as a result of a pharmacologic effect of parenteral artesunate and not drug-related toxicity. Therefore, parenteral artesunate can still be considered a safe treatment for severe malaria and should remain an option for its treatment.