MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225998050 · doi:10.1186/s12936-022-04073-1

5WBF: a low-cost and straightforward whole blood filtration method suitable for whole-genome sequencing of Plasmodium falciparum clinical isolates

2022· article· en· W4225998050 on OpenAlexaff
Romain Coppée, Atikatou Mama, Véronique Sarrasin, Claire Kamaliddin, Lucie Adoux, Lawrence Palazzo, Nicaise Tuikue Ndam, Franck Letourneur, Frédéric Ariey, Sandrine Houzé, Jérôme Clain

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaria Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPlasmodium falciparumMalariaWhole bloodWhole genome sequencingBiologyParasite hostingFiltration (mathematics)ParasitologyDNA extractionGenomeVirologyImmunologyPolymerase chain reactionGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is becoming increasingly helpful to assist malaria control programmes. A major drawback of this approach is the large amount of human DNA compared to parasite DNA extracted from unprocessed whole blood. As red blood cells (RBCs) have a diameter of about 7-8 µm and exhibit some deformability, it was hypothesized that cheap and commercially available 5 µm filters might retain leukocytes but much less of Plasmodium falciparum-infected RBCs. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that such a filtration method, named 5WBF (for 5 µm Whole Blood Filtration), may provide highly enriched parasite material suitable for P. falciparum WGS. METHODS: Whole blood was collected from five patients experiencing a P. falciparum malaria episode (ring-stage parasitaemia range: 0.04-5.5%) and from mock samples obtained by mixing synchronized, ring-stage cultured P. falciparum 3D7 parasites with uninfected human whole blood (final parasitaemia range: 0.02-1.1%). These whole blood samples (50 to 400 µL) were diluted in RPMI 1640 medium or PBS 1× buffer and filtered with a syringe connected to a 5 µm commercial filter. DNA was extracted from 5WBF-treated and unfiltered counterpart blood samples using a commercial kit. The 5WBF method was evaluated on the ratios of parasite:human DNA assessed by qPCR and by sequencing depth and percentages of coverage from WGS data (Illumina NextSeq 500). As a comparison, the popular selective whole-genome amplification (sWGA) method, which does not rely on blood filtration, was applied to the unfiltered counterpart blood samples. RESULTS: After applying 5WBF, qPCR indicated an average of twofold loss in the amount of parasite template DNA (Pf ARN18S gene) and from 4096- to 65,536-fold loss of human template DNA (human β actin gene). WGS analyses revealed that > 95% of the parasite nuclear and organellar genomes were all covered at ≥ 10× depth for all samples tested. In sWGA counterparts, the organellar genomes were poorly covered and from 47.7 to 82.1% of the nuclear genome was covered at ≥ 10× depth depending on parasitaemia. Sequence reads were homogeneously distributed across gene sequences for 5WBF-treated samples (n = 5460 genes; mean coverage: 91×; median coverage: 93×; 5th percentile: 70×; 95th percentile: 103×), allowing the identification of gene copy number variations such as for gch1. This later analysis was not possible for sWGA-treated samples, as a much more heterogeneous distribution of reads across gene sequences was observed (mean coverage: 80×; median coverage: 51×; 5th percentile: 7×; 95th percentile: 245×). CONCLUSIONS: The novel 5WBF leucodepletion method is simple to implement and based on commercially available, standardized 5 µm filters which cost from 1.0 to 1.7€ per unit depending on suppliers. 5WBF permits extensive genome-wide analysis of P. falciparum ring-stage isolates from minute amounts of whole blood even with parasitaemias as low as 0.02%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaria JournalSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207