ArticlePloS one2025
The impact of intermittent preventive treatment in school aged children with dihydroartemisinin piperaquine and artesunate amodiaquine on IgG response against six blood stage Plasmodium falciparum antigens.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several interventional strategies have been implemented in malaria endemic areas where the burden is high, that include among others, intermittent preventive treatment (IPT), a tactic that blocks transmission and can reduce disease morbidity. However, the implementation IPT strategies raises a genuine concern, intervening the development of naturally acquired immunity to malaria which requires continuous contact with parasite antigens. This study investigated whether dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) or artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ) IPT in schoolchildren (IPTsc) impairs IgG reactivity to six malaria antigens. An IPTsc trial in north-eastern Tanzania administered three doses of DP or ASAQ at four-monthly intervals and the schoolchildren were followed up. This study compared IgG reactivity against GLURP-R2, MSP1, MSP3, and CIDR domains (CIDRa1.1, CIDRa1.4, and CIDRa1.5) of Plasmodium falciparum erythrocyte membrane protein 1 (PfEMP-1) in intervention and control groups using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technique. During the study, 369 schoolchildren were available for analysis, 119, 134 and 116 participants in the control, DP and ASAQ groups, respectively. Breadth of malaria antigen recognition increased significantly during and after the intervention phases and did not differ between the study groups (Trend test: DP, z-score = 5.92, p < 0.001, ASAQ, z-score = 6.64, p < 0.001 and control, z-score = 5.85, p < 0.001). There were no differences between the control and ASAQ group in the recognition of any of the tested antigens at all visits. In the DP group, however, during the intervention period IPTsc did not impair antibody against MSP1, MSP3, CIDRa1.1, CIDRa1.4 and CIDRa1.5, but it did impair against GLURP-R2. The current study has shown that effective IPTsc with DP or ASAQ does not interfere with the development of antibodies against malaria antigens of the blood stages, suggesting that the advancement of naturally acquired immunity to malaria is not impeded by IPTsc interventions.
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.