RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Analytical approaches for antimalarial antibody responses to confirm historical and recent malaria transmission: an example from the Philippines
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.06.16.22276488
DO 10.1101/2022.06.16.22276488
A1 Macalinao, Maria Lourdes M.
A1 Fornace, Kimberly M.
A1 Reyes, Ralph A.
A1 Bareng, Alison Paolo N.
A1 Hall, Tom
A1 Adams, John H.
A1 Huon, Christèle
A1 Chitnis, Chetan E.
A1 Luchavez, Jennifer S.
A1 Tetteh, Kevin K. A.
A1 Yui, Katsuyuki
A1 Hafalla, Julius Clemence R.
A1 Espino, Fe Esperanza J.
A1 Drakeley, Chris J.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/15/2022.06.16.22276488.abstract
AB Background Assessing the status of malaria transmission in endemic areas becomes increasingly challenging as countries approach elimination. Serology can provide robust estimates of malaria transmission intensities, and multiplex serological assays allow for simultaneous assessment of markers of recent and historical malaria exposure.Methods Here, we evaluated different statistical and machine learning methods for analyzing multiplex malaria-specific antibody response data to classify recent and historical exposure to Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax. To assess these methods, we utilized samples from a health-facility based survey (n=9132) in the Philippines, where we quantified antibody responses against 8 P. falciparum and 6 P. vivax-specific antigens from 3 sites with varying transmission intensity.Findings Measurements of antibody responses and seroprevalence were consistent with the 3 sites’ known endemicity status. For predicting P. falciparum infection, a machine learning (ML) approach (Random Forest model) using 4 serological markers (PfGLURP R2, Etramp5.Ag1, GEXP18 and PfMSP119) gave better predictions for cases in Palawan (AUC: 0·9591, CI 0·9497-0·9684) than individual antigen seropositivity. Although the ML approach did not improve P. vivax infection predictions, ML classifications confirmed the absence of recent exposure to P. falciparum and P. vivax in both Occidental Mindoro and Bataan. For predicting historical P. falciparum and P. vivax transmission, seroprevalence and seroconversion rates based on cumulative exposure markers AMA1 and MSP119 showed reliable trends in the 3 sites.Interpretation Our study emphasizes the utility of serological markers in predicting recent and historical exposure in a sub-national elimination setting, and also highlights the potential use of machine learning models using multiplex antibody responses to improve assessment of the malaria transmission status of countries aiming for elimination. This work also provides baseline antibody data for monitoring risk in malaria-endemic areas in the Philippines.Funding Newton Fund, Philippine Council for Health Research and Development, and UK Medical Research Council.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was supported by the Newton Fund, Philippine Council for Health Research and Development, and UK Medical Research Council through funding received for ENSURE: Enhanced surveillance for control and elimination of malaria in the Philippines (MR/N019199/1). This work is also supported by the Nagasaki University “Doctoral Program for World-leading Innovative and Smart Education” for Global Health, “Global Health Elite Programme for Building a Healthier World”.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was reviewed and approved by the Research Institute for Tropical Medicine Institutional Review Board (RITM IRB 2016-04) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Research Ethics Committee (11597).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data analyzed in this study are available from authors upon reasonable request and with permission of relevant institutional review boards.