Skip to main content
  • ASM Journals
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Research and News from ASM Journals
    • mSphere of Influence: Commentaries from Early Career Microbiologists
    • Archive
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Getting Started
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mSphere
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • ASM Journals
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
mSphere
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Research and News from ASM Journals
    • mSphere of Influence: Commentaries from Early Career Microbiologists
    • Archive
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Getting Started
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mSphere
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
Editor's Pick Research Article | Clinical Science and Epidemiology

Antibody Biomarkers Associated with Sterile Protection Induced by Controlled Human Malaria Infection under Chloroquine Prophylaxis

Joshua M. Obiero, Joseph J. Campo, Anja Scholzen, Arlo Randall, Else M. Bijker, Meta Roestenberg, Cornelus C. Hermsen, Andy Teng, Aarti Jain, D. Huw Davies, Robert W. Sauerwein, Philip L. Felgner
Marcela F. Pasetti, Editor
Joshua M. Obiero
aVaccine Research and Development Center, Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Joshua M. Obiero
Joseph J. Campo
cAntigen Discovery, Inc., Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anja Scholzen
bRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Microbiology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arlo Randall
cAntigen Discovery, Inc., Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Else M. Bijker
bRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Microbiology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Meta Roestenberg
bRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Microbiology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cornelus C. Hermsen
bRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Microbiology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andy Teng
cAntigen Discovery, Inc., Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aarti Jain
aVaccine Research and Development Center, Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D. Huw Davies
aVaccine Research and Development Center, Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert W. Sauerwein
bRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Medical Microbiology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philip L. Felgner
aVaccine Research and Development Center, Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marcela F. Pasetti
University of Maryland School of Medicine
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lars Hviid
University of Copenhagen
Roles: Solicited external reviewer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anne Frosch
University of Minnesota
Roles: Solicited external reviewer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/mSphereDirect.00027-19
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Supplemental Material
  • FIG 1
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 1

    CPS immunization induces broad and variable humoral responses against P. falciparum antigens. (A) Plasma samples from 38 CPS-immunized volunteers from 3 clinical trials (n = 9 from study 1, n = 5 from study 2, and n = 24 from study 3) were probed on whole P. falciparum proteome microarrays. Thirty CPS-immunized volunteers were protected and eight were not protected from malaria challenge. RBC, red blood cells. (B) Plasma samples collected preimmunization (I1-7) and postimmunization/prechallenge (C-1) were probed, and signals were quantified. The heat map represents the signal intensity at time point C-1, corrected for background reactivity by subtracting the signal intensity at I1-7, against 548 immunogenic P. falciparum features (or 483 unique proteins) printed on proteome microarrays. For an antigen to be considered immunogenic, (i) its levels had to have increased 100% at C-1 compared to I1-7 and (ii) its seroprevalence had to be >15%. The specimens are ordered in clinical groups, nonprotected (n = 8) and protected (n = 30). Samples are arranged with increasing reactivity from left to right, while the antigens are arranged with decreasing reactivity from top to bottom. A color gradient is used to display the signal intensity detected for each antigen, as shown by the key. (C) Comparison of aggregated C-1 reactivity of the 548 immunogenic antigens among the 3 different immunization dose groups. During the 3 rounds of immunization, 10, 9, and 19 volunteers received 5, 10, and 15 mosquito bites, respectively. Dots show individual data points, center lines show the medians, box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR). Aggregate antibody levels were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. To detect only malaria-specific responses, the I1-7 responses were subtracted from the C-1 responses.

  • FIG 2
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 2

    CPS immunization induces trimodal IgG responses in previously malaria-naive adults. (A) Three-component mixture model for breadth counts observed in CPS-immunized individuals (n = 38). The solid curved lines show the fitted breadth count distributions in the mixture model. The dashed curve line shows the mixture-model fit for components 1 (orange), 2 (blue), and 3 (green). The two dashed straight lines show the estimated cutoff points at 180 and 681 antigens, which distinguish the different responder groups (low, medium, and high responders). The histogram represents the frequency of the breadth counts in the different bins. Breadth counts are ranked from the lowest to the highest (range, 9 to 881). (B) Box plots of low-, medium-, and high-responder groups showing protected and nonprotected volunteers. Comparison of breadth counts within the medium-responder group was performed by a Wilcoxon rank sum test. Gray dotted lines show the cutoff points between responder groups. Dots show individual data points, center lines show the medians, box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers extend to show the minimum and maximum breadth counts. (C) Humoral reactivity was compared prechallenge (C-1) and post-CHMI challenge (C+35). Mean antibody signal intensities measured against the top 50 most reactive antigens after CHMI challenge are shown, comparing low, medium, and high responders. The medium-responder group is further stratified into protected (“Med-P”) and nonprotected (“Med-NP”) volunteers. The mean reactivities of the top 5 most seroprevalent antigens, CSP, LSA1, LISP2, EXP1, and MSP2, are shown. Black dotted lines indicate the other boosted antigens after challenge (see Table S2 in the supplemental material).

  • FIG 3
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 3

    Stage of expression of proteins printed on the microarray. Publicly available tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) data on protein expression were obtained from PlasmoDB. (A) Venn diagram showing stage-specific profiles of the proportions of proteins expressed by sporozoite and blood stages with MS/MS evidence of expression and printed on the microarray. (B and C) Bar plots showing numbers of P. falciparum proteins uniquely or commonly expressed at sporozoite and/or blood stages and recognized by at least 25% of nonprotected or protected volunteers (B) or low, medium, and high responders (C). The names and gene annotations of these proteins are indicated in Table S1 in the supplemental material.

  • FIG 4
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 4

    Novel antigens associated with CPS immunization-induced sterile protection. (A) Differential signal intensities of 229 antigens at C-1 in plasma samples of protected (n = 7) and nonprotected (n = 12) medium responders. The red dotted line indicates the threshold P value of <0.05; dots in the green area and dots in the orange area represent antigens significantly more reactive in protected and nonprotected subjects, respectively. (B) Gene identifications of the antigens associated with protection and susceptibility in medium responders. Wilcoxon rank sum test P values (Wilcox Pval), Wilcoxon rank sum test P values with Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons (Wilcox Pval BH), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values, and leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) AUC values for protected and nonprotected volunteers are shown. (C and D) Specific antigens associated with protection (C) or susceptibility (D). Boxes represent individual antigens in nonprotected (orange) (n = 7) and protected (green) (n = 12) subjects. Dots show individual data points, center lines show the medians, box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers extend 1.5 times the IQR. Comparisons were tested by a Wilcoxon rank sum test.

  • FIG 5
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 5

    Breadth of antigen response as a correlate of protection. (A and B) Breadth counts of protective (A) and nonprotective (B) antigens in protected (n = 30) and nonprotected volunteers (n = 8). Dots show individual data points, center lines show the medians, box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers extend 1.5 times the IQR. Antibody intensities were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. (C) The difference between protective and susceptible seropositivity counts was used to construct an ROC curve. LOOCV analysis was also performed. An AUC value of 0.5 indicates that there is no difference between the groups.

Supplemental Material

  • Figures
  • TABLE S1

    Plasmodium falciparum proteins printed on the microarrays. Shown is a list of all proteins printed on the microarray. Gene identifications, gene product descriptions, protein lengths, and the presence of transmembrane domains and signal peptides according to PlasmoDB are shown. Additionally, the numbers of nonprotected and protected subjects reactive and the seroprevalence of a specific feature are indicated. Proteins with a seropositive response in at least 25% of the subjects in a group and with mass spectrometry evidence of protein expression from PlasmoDB are shown. Download Table S1, XLSX file, 0.7 MB.

    Copyright © 2019 Obiero et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S1

    Raw microarray antibody reactivity. (A) Bar plots showing representative samples at the C-1 time point. Humoral reactivity against 7,455 P. falciparum antigens on the microarray is sorted from most reactive to least reactive. The black dotted line shows the cutoff point obtained using a mixture-model analysis. (B) Each subject’s humoral response data from all time points were analyzed using a mixture model. This allowed for identification of positive (blue curved line) and negative (yellow curved line) signal intensity distributions in an overall population of signals. The mean of the negative signal distribution plus 3 standard deviations is used as a cutoff point (shown here as a dotted black line). This individualized cutoff point is applied to data from each time point (C-1 shown in panel A) to identify reactive antigens in each of the samples. For each individual sample, the number of seropositive antigens was counted to determine the breadth count. For better visualization, the horizontal axis scale was transformed using the function sqrt_trans() in the R package “scales.” Download FIG S1, TIF file, 0.5 MB.

    Copyright © 2019 Obiero et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • TABLE S2

    Antigens boosted after challenge in nonprotected volunteers. Download Table S2, TIF file, 1.9 MB.

    Copyright © 2019 Obiero et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S2

    Antibodies to top immunogenic antigens are not associated with protection. (A) Box plots showing comparisons of these antigens between protected (green) (n = 12) and nonprotected (red) (n = 7) subjects. Dots show individual data points, center lines show the medians, box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers extend 1.5 times the IQR. (B) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to test individual antigens for association with protection. The performances of the top five most immunogenic antigens with an area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (AUC) are shown. LOOCV analysis was also performed for these antigens. An AUC value of 0.5 indicates that there is no difference between the groups. Download FIG S2, TIF file, 0.5 MB.

    Copyright © 2019 Obiero et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • TABLE S3

    Breadth counts and protective and susceptible seropositivity counts. Download Table S3, TIF file, 0.9 MB.

    Copyright © 2019 Obiero et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S3

    Reactivity against representative antigens of early- and mid/late-liver-stage development of parasites. Antibody reactivity in low responders (light gray) (n = 16) was compared to that in medium/high responders (dark gray) (n = 25) by a Wilcoxon rank sum test. Dots show individual data points, center lines show the medians, box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers extend 1.5 times the IQR. Download FIG S3, TIF file, 0.3 MB.

    Copyright © 2019 Obiero et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Antibody Biomarkers Associated with Sterile Protection Induced by Controlled Human Malaria Infection under Chloroquine Prophylaxis
Joshua M. Obiero, Joseph J. Campo, Anja Scholzen, Arlo Randall, Else M. Bijker, Meta Roestenberg, Cornelus C. Hermsen, Andy Teng, Aarti Jain, D. Huw Davies, Robert W. Sauerwein, Philip L. Felgner
mSphere Feb 2019, 4 (1) e00027-19; DOI: 10.1128/mSphereDirect.00027-19

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this mSphere article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Antibody Biomarkers Associated with Sterile Protection Induced by Controlled Human Malaria Infection under Chloroquine Prophylaxis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from mSphere
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in mSphere.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Antibody Biomarkers Associated with Sterile Protection Induced by Controlled Human Malaria Infection under Chloroquine Prophylaxis
Joshua M. Obiero, Joseph J. Campo, Anja Scholzen, Arlo Randall, Else M. Bijker, Meta Roestenberg, Cornelus C. Hermsen, Andy Teng, Aarti Jain, D. Huw Davies, Robert W. Sauerwein, Philip L. Felgner
mSphere Feb 2019, 4 (1) e00027-19; DOI: 10.1128/mSphereDirect.00027-19
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

CHMI
antibody
malaria
preerythrocytic immunity
protein microarrays
sterile protection
vaccines

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About mSphere
  • Board of Editors
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • Embargo Policy
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Warranty
  • Types of Articles
  • Getting Started
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #mSphereJ

@ASMicrobiology

       

 

Website feedback

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Online ISSN: 2379-5042