Selection of Antibody Responses Associated With Plasmodium falciparum Infections in the Context of Malaria Elimination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In our aim to eliminate malaria, more sensitive tools to detect residual transmission are quickly becoming essential. Antimalarial antibody responses persist in the blood after a malaria infection and provide a wider window to detect exposure to infection compared to parasite detection metrics. Here, we aimed to select antibody responses associated with recent and cumulative exposure to malaria using cross-sectional survey data from Haiti, an elimination setting. Using a multiplex bead assay, we generated data for IgG antibody responses to 23 Plasmodium falciparum targets in 29,481 participants across three surveys. This included one community-based survey in which participants were enrolled during household visits and two sentinel group surveys in which participants were enrolled at schools and health facilities. First, we correlated continuous antibody responses with age (Spearman) to determine which showed strong age-related associations indicating accumulation over time with limited loss. AMA-1 and MSP-119 antibody levels showed the strongest correlation with age (0.47 and 0.43, p<0.001) in the community-based survey, which was most representative of the underlying age structure of the population, thus seropositivity to either of these antibodies was considered representative of cumulative exposure to malaria. Next, in the absence of a gold standard for recent exposure, we included antibody responses to the remaining targets to predict highly sensitive rapid diagnostic test (hsRDT) status using receiver operating characteristic curves. For this, only data from the survey with the highest hsRDT prevalence was used (7.2%; 348/4,849). The performance of the top two antigens in the training dataset (two-thirds of the dataset; n=3,204) – Etramp 5 ag 1 and GLURP-R0 (area-under-the-curve, AUC, 0.892 and 0.825, respectively) – was confirmed in the test dataset (remaining one-third of the dataset; n=1,652, AUC 0.903 and 0.848, respectively). As no further improvement was seen by combining seropositivity to GLURP-R0 and Etramp 5 ag 1 (p=0.266), seropositivity to Etramp 5 ag 1 alone was selected as representative of current or recent exposure to malaria. The validation of antibody responses associated with these exposure histories simplifies analyses and interpretation of antibody data and facilitates the application of results to evaluate programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".