Brazil, a country of continental proportions, presents three profiles of malaria transmission. The first and most important numerically, occurs inside the Amazon. The Amazon accounts for approximately 60% of the nation’s territory and approximately 13% of the Brazilian population. This region hosts 99.5% of the nation’s malaria cases, which are predominantly caused by Plasmodium vivax (i.e., 82% of cases in 2013). The second involves imported malaria, which corresponds to malaria cases acquired outside the region where the individuals live or the diagnosis was made. These cases are imported from endemic regions of Brazil (i.e., the Amazon) or from other countries in South and Central America, Africa and Asia. Imported malaria comprised 89% of the cases found outside the area of active transmission in Brazil in 2013. These cases highlight an important question with respect to both therapeutic and epidemiological issues because patients, especially those with falciparum malaria, arriving in a region where the health professionals may not have experience with the clinical manifestations of malaria and its diagnosis could suffer dramatic consequences associated with a potential delay in treatment. Additionally, because the Anopheles vectors exist in most of the country, even a single case of malaria, if not diagnosed and treated immediately, may result in introduced cases, causing outbreaks and even introducing or reintroducing the disease to a non-endemic, receptive region. Cases introduced outside the Amazon usually occur in areas in which malaria was formerly endemic and are transmitted by competent vectors belonging to the subgenus Nyssorhynchus (i.e., Anopheles darlingi, Anopheles aquasalis and species of the Albitarsis complex). The third type of transmission accounts for only 0.05% of all cases and is caused by autochthonous malaria in the Atlantic Forest, located primarily along the southeastern Atlantic Coast. They are caused by parasites that seem to be (or to be very close to) P. vivax and, in a less extent, by Plasmodium malariae and it is transmitted by the bromeliad mosquito Anopheles (Kerteszia) cruzii. This paper deals mainly with the two profiles of malaria found outside the Amazon: the imported and ensuing introduced cases and the autochthonous cases. We also provide an update regarding the situation in Brazil and the Brazilian endemic Amazon.

Pyrimethamine resistance in cultivated laboratory isolates of Plasmodium falciparum is linked to the dihydrofolate reductase mutation Asn-108, a mutation that acts by interrupting drug binding within the active site of the enzyme. To determine the prevalence of this mutation in endemic regions harboring pyrimethamine-resistant malaria, we used a mutation-specific polymerase chain reaction assay to survey P. falciparum strains from a wide section of the Brazilian Amazon. Mutations were identified directly from blood samples without intervening steps of in vitro cultivation. Of 42 samples collected from four states in Brazil, 38 (90%) contained the Asn-108 codon AAC that confers pyrimethamine resistance, four samples contained only the wild-type Ser-108 codon AGC, and none contained the Thr-108 codon ACC found in cycloguanil-resistant pyrimethamine-sensitive strains. These findings indicate that a very high incidence of the Asn-108 DHFR mutation is responsible for pyrimethamine resistance in the Amazon, and they are consistent with recent failure rates reported for Fansidar (pyrimethamine-sulfadoxine). We suggest that limited use of proguanil be evaluated as an alternative to pyrimethamine.

Malaria in Brazil is endemic in the Amazon region, but autochthonous cases with low parasitaemia occur in the Atlantic Forest area of the country. According to Brazilian legislation no test is mandatory for blood donors from non-endemic areas. However if they have traveled to malaria transmission regions they are deferred for six months before they can donate. This report describes a transfusion-transmitted malaria case in Sao Paulo, Brazil, where one recipient received infected blood and developed the disease. He lived in Sao Paulo and had no previous transfusion or trips to endemic areas, including those of low endemicity, such as Atlantic Forest. Thick blood smears confirmed Plasmodium malariae. All donors lived in Sao Paulo and one of them (Donor 045-0) showed positive hemoscopy and PCR. This asymptomatic donor had traveled to Juquia, in the Atlantic Forest area of S ao Paulo State, where sporadic cases of autochthonous malaria are described. DNA assay revealed P. malariae in the donor's (Donor 045-0) blood. Serum archives of the recipient and of all blood donors were analyzed by ELISA using both P. vivax and P. falciparum antigens, and IFAT with P. malariae. Donor 045-0's serum was P. malariae IFAT positive and the P. vivax ELISA was reactive. In addition, two out of 44 donors' archive sera were also P. vivax ELISA reactive. All sera were P. falciparum ELISA negative. This case suggests the need of reviewing donor selection criteria and deferral strategies to prevent possible cases of transfusion-transmitted malaria.

Malaria diagnoses has traditionally been made using thick blood smears, but more sensitive and faster techniques are required to process large numbers of samples in clinical and epidemiological studies and in blood donor screening. Here, we evaluated molecular and serological tools to build a screening platform for pooled samples aimed at reducing both the time and the cost of these diagnoses. Positive and negative samples were analysed in individual and pooled experiments using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), nested PCR and an immunochromatographic test. For the individual tests, 46/49 samples were positive by real-time PCR, 46/49 were positive by nested PCR and 32/46 were positive by immunochromatographic test. For the assays performed using pooled samples, 13/15 samples were positive by real-time PCR and nested PCR and 11/15 were positive by immunochromatographic test. These molecular methods demonstrated sensitivity and specificity for both the individual and pooled samples. Due to the advantages of the real-time PCR, such as the fast processing and the closed system, this method should be indicated as the first choice for use in large-scale diagnosis and the nested PCR should be used for species differentiation. However, additional field isolates should be tested to confirm the results achieved using cultured parasites and the serological test should only be adopted as a complementary method for malaria diagnosis.