Background: Rapid diagnostic tests based on Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein II (PfHRP-II) and P. falciparum lactate dehydrogenase (PfLDH) antigens are widely deployed for detection of P. falciparum infection; however, these tests often miss cases of low-level parasitemia, and PfHRP-II tests can give false-negative results when P. falciparum strains do not express this antigen. Methods: We screened proteomic data for highly expressed P. falciparum proteins and compared their features to those of PfHRP-II and PfLDH biomarkers. Search criteria included high levels of expression, conservation in all parasite strains, and good correlation of antigen levels with parasitemia and its clearance after drug treatment. Different assay methods were compared for sensitive detection of parasitemia in P. falciparum cultures. Results: Among potential new biomarkers, a P. falciparum homolog of insulin-degrading enzyme (PfIDEh) met our search criteria. Comparative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays with monoclonal antibodies against PfLDH or PfIDEh showed detection limits of 100-200 parasites/µL and 200-400 parasites/µL, respectively. Detection was dramatically improved by use of real-time immuno-polymerase chain reaction (PCR), to parasitemia limits of 0.02 parasite/µL and 0.78 parasite/µL in PfLDH- and PfIDEh-based assays, respectively. Conclusions: The ability of PfLDH- or PfIDEh-based immuno-PCR assays to detect <1 parasite/µL suggests that improvements of bound antibody sensor technology may greatly increase the sensitivity of malaria rapid diagnostic tests. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2017. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.
Background: Rapid diagnostic tests based on Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein II (PfHRP-II) and P. falciparum lactate dehydrogenase (PfLDH) antigens are widely deployed for detection of P. falciparum infection; however, these tests often miss cases of low-level parasitemia, and PfHRP-II tests can give false-negative results when P. falciparum strains do not express this antigen. Methods: We screened proteomic data for highly expressed P. falciparum proteins and compared their features to those of PfHRP-II and PfLDH biomarkers. Search criteria included high levels of expression, conservation in all parasite strains, and good correlation of antigen levels with parasitemia and its clearance after drug treatment. Different assay methods were compared for sensitive detection of parasitemia in P. falciparum cultures. Results: Among potential new biomarkers, a P. falciparum homolog of insulin-degrading enzyme (PfIDEh) met our search criteria. Comparative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays with monoclonal antibodies against PfLDH or PfIDEh showed detection limits of 100-200 parasites/µL and 200-400 parasites/µL, respectively. Detection was dramatically improved by use of real-time immuno-polymerase chain reaction (PCR), to parasitemia limits of 0.02 parasite/µL and 0.78 parasite/µL in PfLDH- and PfIDEh-based assays, respectively. Conclusions: The ability of PfLDH- or PfIDEh-based immuno-PCR assays to detect <1 parasite/µL suggests that improvements of bound antibody sensor technology may greatly increase the sensitivity of malaria rapid diagnostic tests. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2017. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.
Authors: Francesco Silvestrini; Edwin Lasonder; Anna Olivieri; Grazia Camarda; Ben van Schaijk; Massimo Sanchez; Sumera Younis Younis; Robert Sauerwein; Pietro Alano Journal: Mol Cell Proteomics Date: 2010-03-22 Impact factor: 5.911
Authors: Mateusz M Plucinski; Eric Rogier; Pedro Rafael Dimbu; Filomeno Fortes; Eric S Halsey; Michael Aidoo Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: R L Coppel; A F Cowman; R F Anders; A E Bianco; R B Saint; K R Lingelbach; D J Kemp; G V Brown Journal: Nature Date: 1984 Aug 30-Sep 5 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Jennifer Luchavez; Joanne Baker; Sheila Alcantara; Vicente Belizario; Qin Cheng; James S McCarthy; David Bell Journal: Malar J Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Laurence Florens; Michael P Washburn; J Dale Raine; Robert M Anthony; Munira Grainger; J David Haynes; J Kathleen Moch; Nemone Muster; John B Sacci; David L Tabb; Adam A Witney; Dirk Wolters; Yimin Wu; Malcolm J Gardner; Anthony A Holder; Robert E Sinden; John R Yates; Daniel J Carucci Journal: Nature Date: 2002-10-03 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Sophie C Oehring; Ben J Woodcroft; Suzette Moes; Johanna Wetzel; Olivier Dietz; Andreas Pulfer; Chaitali Dekiwadia; Pascal Maeser; Christian Flueck; Kathrin Witmer; Nicolas M B Brancucci; Igor Niederwieser; Paul Jenoe; Stuart A Ralph; Till S Voss Journal: Genome Biol Date: 2012-11-26 Impact factor: 13.583
Authors: Theodoor Visser; Jennifer Daily; Nora Hotte; Caitlin Dolkart; Jane Cunningham; Prashant Yadav Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Seda Yerlikaya; Ewurama D A Owusu; Augustina Frimpong; Robert Kirk DeLisle; Xavier C Ding Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 9.079