Effectiveness of Monoclonal Antibody Therapy vs. Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention (SMC) in Children under Five in High-Transmission Areas

Malaria remains a critical public health issue in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly for children under five, who are at the highest risk for severe complications and death. This review critically examined the effectiveness of monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy versus seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) in preventing malaria in high-transmission areas. mAb therapy targets specific antigens on the Plasmodium parasite, preventing it from infecting red blood cells, and has the potential to provide long-lasting protection with a single dose. SMC, on the other hand, involves administering antimalarial drugs at regular intervals during the malaria season, which has proven highly effective in reducing malaria incidence and severity in children. The review discussed the mechanisms, outcomes, and challenges of both strategies, focusing on their applicability in high-transmission regions. Although SMC has been widely adopted, it faces challenges such as drug resistance and logistical constraints. mAb therapy, while promising, presents concerns regarding cost, scalability, and production feasibility. This review synthesized data from clinical trials and field studies to compare both interventions in terms of efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and feasibility. Ultimately, a hybrid approach combining mAb therapy with SMC may provide comprehensive protection, addressing the limitations of each strategy and offering the best potential for malaria prevention in vulnerable populations. Keywords: Malaria Prevention, Monoclonal Antibody Therapy, Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention (SMC), High-Transmission Areas, Children Under Five.