ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1987
Two-site immunoradiometric assay for detection of Plasmodium falciparum antigen in blood using monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1987. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory Detection of Malaria Antigens: a Strong Tool for Malaria Research, Diagnosis, and Epidemiology.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three systems of immunoradiometric assays (IRMAs), a two-site monoclonal antibody sandwich IRMA (MAb-IRMA), two-site polyclonal antibody-monoclonal antibody sandwich IRMA (PAb-MAb-IRMA), and two-site polyclonal antibody sandwich IRMA (PAb-IRMA), were developed to detect low-grade infections with Plasmodium falciparum. The assays showed good correlation with parasitemia when tested against parasites from in vitro cultures (r = 0.996, 0.994, and 0.998 for MAb-, PAb-MAb-, and PAb-IRMA, respectively), with the ability to detect as few as 0.24, 0.67, and 1.82 parasites per 10(7) erythrocytes, respectively. The assays were specific for P. falciparum, since a serially diluted specimen from a patient with vivax malaria with an initial parasitemia of 0.8% and almost all of the undiluted specimens from five other vivax malaria patients were negative. The assays were performed on patients with falciparum malaria before and after treatment with antimalarial drugs. Before treatment, all 24 patients were positive by all three systems of two-site sandwich IRMAs. Two weeks after treatment, 81.8% (18 of 22) of the patients were positive by microscopic examination, but the IRMA positivity rates were 90.9% (20 of 22), 86.4% (19 of 22), and 81.8% (18 of 22) for MAb-, PAb-MAb-, and PAb-IRMA, respectively. Four weeks after treatment, all 19 patients were negative by microscopic examination, but 52.6% (10 of 19) of the patients were still positive with MAb- and PAb-MAb-IRMA and 31.6% (6 of 19) were positive with PAb-IRMA. Comparison between the three systems of IRMA showed that the MAb-IRMA was superior to the other two systems for three reasons. First, it gave a lower count when tested with blood from healthy individuals. Second, it gave a higher count when tested with blood from patients with falciparum malaria. Third, it gave better correlation with parasitemia when blood from falciparum malaria patients was tested. MAb-IRMA is recommended for use for the detection of low-grade P. falciparum infection.
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.