Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25889324›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2015

Studying the effect of chloroquine on sporozoite-induced protection and immune responses in Plasmodium berghei malaria.

Else M Bijker, Krystelle Nganou-Makamdop, Geert-Jan van Gemert, Fidel Zavala, Ian Cockburn, Robert W Sauerwein

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The host targeting effect of chloroquine in malaria.Current opinion in immunology · 2020
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Varying Immunizations WithFrontiers in immunology · 2018
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Else M BijkerDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. else.bijker@radboudumc.nl.
Krystelle Nganou-MakamdopDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. knganou@yahoo.fr.
Geert-Jan van GemertDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Geert-Jan.vanGemert@radboudumc.nl.
Fidel ZavalaJohns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute and Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. fzavala1@jhu.edu.
Ian CockburnJohns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute and Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. ian.cockburn@anu.edu.au.
Robert W SauerweinDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. robert.sauerwein@radboudumc.nl.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLAustralian National University · AUJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSporozoite immunization of animals and humans under a chemo-prophylactic cover of chloroquine (CPS-CQ) efficiently induces sterile protection against malaria. In humans, CPS-CQ is strikingly more efficient than immunization with radiation attenuated sporozoites (RAS), raising the hypothesis that this might be partially due to CQ. Chloroquine, an established anti-malarial drug, is also well known for its immune modulating properties including improvement of cross-presentation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether co-administration of CQ during sporozoite immunization improves cellular responses and protective efficacy in Plasmodium berghei models.

methodsA number of experiments in selected complimentary P. berghei murine models in Balb/cByJ and C57BL/6j mice was performed. First, the effect of CQ administration on the induction of protection and immune responses by RAS immunization was studied. Next, the effect of CQ on the induction of circumsporozoite (CS) protein-specific CD8(+) T cells by immunization with P. berghei parasites expressing a mutant CS protein was investigated. Finally, a direct comparison of CPS-CQ to CPS with mefloquine (MQ), an anti-malarial with little known immune modulating effects, was performed.

resultsWhen CQ was co-administered during immunization with graded numbers of RAS, this did not lead to an increase in frequencies of total memory CD8(+) T cells or CS protein-specific CD8(+) T cells. Also parasite-specific cytokine production and protection remained unaltered. Replacement of CQ by MQ for CPS immunization resulted in significantly reduced percentages of IFNγ producing memory T cells in the liver (p = 0.01), but similar protection.

conclusionsThis study does not provide evidence for a direct beneficial effect of CQ on the induction of sporozoite-induced immune responses and protection in P. berghei malaria models. Alternatively, the higher efficiency of CPS compared to RAS might be explained by an indirect effect of CQ through limiting blood-stage exposure after immunization or to increased antigen exposure and, therefore, improved breadth of the immune response.

Indexed as

Immunologic MemoryAnimalsAntimalarialsCD8-Positive T-LymphocytesChloroquineImmunity, CellularInterferon-gammaMalariaMefloquineMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMice, Inbred C57BLPlasmodium bergheiSporozoitesAntimalarialsChloroquineInterferon-gammaMefloquine

Identifiers

PMID25889324
PMCPMC4389414
OpenAlexW1995604887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.