| Literature DB >> 27809852 |
Karen Kerkhof1,2, Vincent Sluydts3,4, Laura Willen3,5, Saorin Kim6, Lydie Canier6, Somony Heng7, Takafumi Tsuboi8, Tho Sochantha7, Siv Sovannaroth7, Didier Ménard6, Marc Coosemans3,5, Lies Durnez9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Serological markers for exposure to different Plasmodium species have recently been used in multiplex immunoassays based on the Luminex technology. However, interpretation of the assay results requires consideration of the half-life of specific antibodies against these markers. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to document the half-life of malaria specific serological makers, as well as assessing the sensitivity of these markers to pick up recent changes in malaria exposure.Entities:
Keywords: Half life; Malaria; Malaria transmission; Serological markers
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27809852 PMCID: PMC5096337 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-016-1576-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Overview of the study, indicating the antigens used in each step
Overview of the antigens (peptides and recombinant proteins) used in this study
| Antigens | Sequence (N-terminal to C-terminal) | g/mol | Life-cycle stages |
| Peptide or recombinant protein | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSP | NANPNANPNANPNANPNVDPNVDPC | 2257.67 | Sporozoite |
| Peptide | [ |
| Pf13 | C-terminal His-tag produced in | Sporozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | |
| STARP.R | STDNNNTKTISTDNNNTKTIC | 2299.42 | Sporozoite and liver stage |
| Peptide | [ |
| SALSA2 | NGKDDVKEEKKTNEKKDDGKTDKVQEKVLEKSPKC | 4019.52 | Sporozoite and liver stage |
| Peptide | [ |
| SR11.1 | EEVVEELIEEVIPEELVLC | 2213.50 | Sporozoite and liver stage |
| Peptide | [ |
| LSA1.41 | LAKEKLQEQQSDLEQERLAKEKLQEQQSDLEQERLAKEKE | 5297.97 | Liver stage |
| Peptide | [ |
| LSA1.J | ERRAKEKLQEQQSDLEQRKADTKKC | 3046.43 | Liver stage |
| Peptide | [ |
| LSA3.RE | VESVAPSVEESVAPSVEESVAENVEESVC | 2991.20 | Liver stage |
| Peptide | [ |
| Pf.MSP1.19 | Glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusion protein. C-terminal expressed in | Merozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | |
| GLURP | EDKNEKGQHEIVEVEEILC | 2241.47 | Trophozoite |
| Peptide | [ |
| Pf.GLURP.R2 | C-terminal produced in | Trophozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | |
| PvVK210.CSP | DGQPAGDRAAGQPAGDRADGQPAGDRADGQPAGC | 3206.30 | Sporozoite |
| Peptide | [ |
| PvVK247.CSP | ANGAGNQPGANGAGNQPGANGAGNQPGANG AGNC | 2905.95 | Sporozoite |
| Peptide | [ |
| PvCSP (chimera) | Soluble His-tag protein expressed in a wheat-germ cell free expression system | Sporozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | |
| PvAMA1 | Merozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | ||
| PvEBP | Merozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | ||
| PvDBP | Merozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | ||
| Pv.MSP1.19 | C-terminal produced in the baculovirus expression system | Merozoite |
| Recombinant protein | [ | |
| PmCSP | GNAAGNAAGNDAGNAAGNAAGNAAGNAAGNAAC | 2358.37 | Sporozoite |
| Peptide | [ |
| SALIV1 | EKVWVDRDNVYCGHLDCTRVATFC | 2830.22 | Salivary gland proteins |
| Peptide | [ |
| SALIV2 | ATFKGERFCTLCDTRHFCECKETREPLC | 3324.84 | Salivary gland proteins |
| Peptide | [ |
Ags are organized according to the Plasmodium species and the life-cycle stages in the human host
Fig. 2Antibody responses to Plasmodium antigens, stratified by age and the presence or absence of malaria infection. Individuals were divided into three age groups (1–5, 6–15 and 16–50) to explore the relation with age. Previous obtained PCR results [4, 5] were used to determine the presence and absence of the Plasmodium infection. Boxplots represent the medians, interquartile ranges and error bars show 95% confidence intervals. Circles represent outlier values. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were conducted taking into account Cluster as a random effect. Ags with non-significant results were not included in the figure
Fig. 3Plasmodium falciparum Ab profiles in relation to time since last infection compared to the systematically negative individuals. Each serological marker is analysed for Plasmodium falciparum infections and three age groups (1–5, 6–15 and 16–50). Samples collected through longitudinal follow-up were aligned, starting with putting the malaria episode detected by PCR at time point zero. Points represent the different samples in which a linear regression is drawn through with the 95% confidence intervals. These outcomes were then compared to the group of individuals being systematically negative over time, to see if the Ab-levels follow a similar or different decay over time between the parasite positive and negative individuals
Fig. 4Plasmodium vivax Ab profiles in relation to time since last infection compares to the systematically negative individuals over time. Each serological marker is analysed for Plasmodium vivax infections and three age groups (1–5, 6–15 and 16–50). Samples collected through longitudinal follow-up were aligned, starting with putting the malaria episode detected by PCR at time point zero. Points represent the different samples in which a linear regression is drawn through with the 95% confidence intervals. These outcomes were then compared to the group of individuals being systematically negative over time, to see if the Ab-levels follow a similar or different decay over time between the parasite positive and negative individuals
Fig. 5Forest plot representing the half-life per Ag in days. The half-lives based on the repeated measurement samples were estimated in days. A linear regression model was fitted on log-transformed MFI data taking into account age as factor. Estimated slopes and their 95% confidence intervals were used to obtain the half-life in days (). This forest plot represents the half-lives of each Ag ordered from the shortest to the longest half-life. The purple crosses represent an estimated half-life shorter than 7.5 months, the blue squares range from 8.5 months until 1 year, the red dots range from 13 until 19 months, and the green triangles represent an estimated half-life longer than 2 years. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals. A remarkable founding in this figure is that P. falciparum shows a clear difference between the short and long lived Ab-responses, while for the P. vivax only long lived Ab-responses are seen
Amount of cluster communities selected per species and per PCR prevalence level
| PCR prevalence |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | S2 | 13 | 14 | 19 |
| S4 | 3 | 9 | 10 | |
| Medium | S2 | 18 | 26 | 24 |
| S4 | 21 | 23 | 24 | |
| Low | S2 | 52 | 39 | 26 |
| S4 | 61 | 44 | 31 | |
Cluster communities were ordered per survey exhibiting high-, medium- and low-levels of PCR prevalence. This was performed on PCR data from all Plasmodium species (mono and mixed infections), P. falciparum (mono infections) and P. vivax (mono infections)
Fig. 6Ab-responses to Plasmodium Ags in relation to the risk of malaria exposure in different villages. To examine the associations between the Ab-levels and the malaria exposure clusters of villages were divided into three groups (those with high—(7– >10%), medium—(1–3.5%), and low—(0– <1%) prevalence levels). In addition, because age plays a major role in the analysis of Ab-responses, the three age groups (2–5, 6–15 and 16–50 years old) were included. Boxplots represent the medians, interquartile ranges and error bars show 95% confidence intervals. Circles represent outlier values. Ags showed to be statistical significant for model 3, a model with three groups of villages and age groups as a dependent variable (without interaction) taking into account Cluster and Survey as random effects. The figure only represents the Ags with the steepest decay (slope < −0.6)
Three criteria to select the most promising antigens
| Antigens | Ags selection based on the three criteria | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCR+ vs PCR− valuesa | Half-lives (PCR+)b | Differences in interceptc | Sensitivity by endemicityd | ||
|
| CSP | + | + | + | + |
| Pf13 | + | + | − | + | |
| STARP.R | ++ | + | + | + | |
| SALSA2 | + | ++ | + | + | |
| SR11.1 | + | + | + | + | |
| LSA1.41 | ++ | + | − | ++ | |
| LSA1.J | + | + | + | ± | |
| LSA3.RE | ++ | ++ | ++ | ++ | |
| Pf.MSP1.19 | + | − | − | − | |
| GLURP | ++ | ++ | ++ | ++ | |
| Pf.GLURP.R2 | ++ | ++ | ++ | ++ | |
|
| PvVK210.CSP | − | − | − | ± |
| PvVK247.CSP | − | − | − | ± | |
| PvCSP | − | − | − | – | |
| PvAMA1 | − | − | − | ± | |
| PvEBP | ++ | − | ++ | ++ | |
| PvDBP | − | − | − | − | |
| Pv.MSP1.19 | − | − | − | − | |
| Vectors | SALIV1 | − | − | − | − |
| SALIV2 | − | + | − | − | |
Three criteria are used to select the most promising Ags for recent malaria infection. These criteria are based on: (1) the outcome of the estimated Ab-responses based on the differences in ln(MFI) between PCR positive and PCR negative individuals, (2) the assessed half-lives with the best Ab-responses of <7.5 months followed by Ab-responses between 8.5 months until 1 year and finally (3) the sensitivity to the level of malaria endemicity in communities
aDifference in ln(MFI) (ln-MFI PCR+ −ln-MFI PCR−); ++ (value > 1), + (value > 0.5),−(value < 0.5)
bHalf-lives estimated via linear regression models; ++ (half-life < 7.5 months), + (half-life between 8.5 months–1 year),− (half-life > 1 year)
cDifference in intercept between PCR+ and PCR− for half-life estimation; ++ (intercept difference > 2), + (intercept difference between 1 and 2), − (intercept difference < 1)
dSensitivity by endemicity estimated via linear regression models; ++ (IRR of PCR prev. decline with > 0.2, IRR increase by age with >4), + (IRR of PCR prev. decline with >0.1, IRR increase by age with >1)