ArticleMalaria journal2016
Mosquito bite immunization with radiation-attenuated Plasmodium falciparum sporozoites: safety, tolerability, protective efficacy and humoral immunogenicity.
Article in Malaria journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Modest heterologous protection after Plasmodium falciparum sporozoite immunization: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial.BMC medicine · 2017Trial
- Profiling the antibody response of humans protected by immunization with Plasmodium vivax radiation-attenuated sporozoites.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A genetically engineeredScience translational medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Five decades of clinical assessment of whole-sporozoite malaria vaccines.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Orientation of Antigen Display on Self-Assembling Protein Nanoparticles Influences Immunogenicity.Vaccines · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Novel malaria antigen Plasmodium yoelii E140 induces antibody-mediated sterile protection in mice against malaria challenge.PloS one · 2020Article
- Vaccination With Sporozoites: Models and Correlates of Protection.Frontiers in immunology · 2019Review
- Antibody Responses to Antigenic Targets of Recent Exposure Are Associated With Low-Density Parasitemia in Controlled HumanFrontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Controlled Human Malaria Infection: Applications, Advances, and Challenges.Infection and immunity · 2018Review
- Novel ELISA method as exploratory tool to assess immunity induced by radiated attenuated sporozoites to decipher protective immunity.Malaria journal · 2017Article
- Sporozoite immunization: innovative translational science to support the fight against malaria.Expert review of vaccinesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn this phase 1 clinical trial, healthy adult, malaria-naïve subjects were immunized with radiation-attenuated Plasmodium falciparum sporozoites (PfRAS) by mosquito bite and then underwent controlled human malaria infection (CHMI). The PfRAS model for immunization against malaria had previously induced >90 % sterile protection against homologous CHMI. This study was to further explore the safety, tolerability and protective efficacy of the PfRAS model and to provide biological specimens to characterize protective immune responses and identify protective antigens in support of malaria vaccine development.
methodsFifty-seven subjects were screened, 41 enrolled and 30 received at least one immunization. The true-immunized subjects received PfRAS via mosquito bite and the mock-immunized subjects received mosquito bites from irradiated uninfected mosquitoes. Sera and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected before and after PfRAS immunizations.
resultsImmunization with PfRAS was generally safe and well tolerated, and repeated immunization via mosquito bite did not appear to increase the risk or severity of AEs. Local adverse events (AEs) of true-immunized and mock-immunized groups consisted of erythaema, papules, swelling, and induration and were consistent with reactions from mosquito bites seen in nature. Two subjects, one true- and one mock-immunized, developed large local reactions that completely resolved, were likely a result of mosquito salivary antigens, and were withdrawn from further participation as a safety precaution. Systemic AEs were generally rare and mild, consisting of headache, myalgia, nausea, and low-grade fevers. Two true-immunized subjects experienced fever, malaise, myalgia, nausea, and rigours approximately 16 h after immunization. These symptoms likely resulted from pre-formed antibodies interacting with mosquito salivary antigens. Ten subjects immunized with PfRAS underwent CHMI and five subjects (50 %) were sterilely protected and there was a significant delay to parasitaemia in the other five subjects. All ten subjects developed humoral immune responses to whole sporozoites and to the circumsporozoite protein prior to CHMI, although the differences between protected and non-protected subjects were not statistically significant for this small sample size.
conclusionsThe protective efficacy of this clinical trial (50 %) was notably less than previously reported (>90 %). This may be related to differences in host genetics or the inherent variability in mosquito biting behavior and numbers of sporozoites injected. Differences in trial procedures, such as the use of leukapheresis prior to CHMI and of a longer interval between the final immunization and CHMI in these subjects compared to earlier trials, may also have reduced protective efficacy. This trial has been retrospectively registered at ISRCTN ID 17372582, May 31, 2016.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.