Pro‐inflammatory cytokines induced by glycosylphosphatidylinositols (GPIs) of Plasmodium falciparum contribute to malaria pathogenesis and hence, the naturally acquired anti‐GPI antibody thought to provide protection against severe malaria (SM) by neutralizing the stimulatory activity of GPIs. In previous studies, the anti‐GPI antibody levels increased with age in parallel with the development of acquired immunity, and high levels of anti‐GPI antibodies were associated with mild malaria (MM) cases. In the present study, the relationship between the levels of pro‐inflammatory cytokines and anti‐GPI IgG antibody responses, parasitemia, and the clinical outcomes were evaluated in SM and mild malaria (MM) patients. Sera from a total of 110 SM and 72 MM cases after excluding of ineligible patients were analyzed for the levels of anti‐GPI antibodies, IgG subclasses, and cytokine responses by ELISA. While the total anti‐GPI antibody levels were similar in overall SM and MM groups, they were significantly higher in surviving SM patients than in fatal SM cases. In the case of cytokines, the TNF‐α and IL‐6 levels were significantly higher in SM compared to MM, whereas the IL‐10 levels were similar in both groups. The data presented here demonstrate that high levels of the circulatory pro‐inflammatory, TNF‐α, and IL‐6, are indicators of malaria severity, whereas anti‐inflammatory cytokine IL‐10 level does not differentiate SM and MM cases. Further, among SM patients, relatively low levels of anti‐GPI antibodies are indicators of fatal outcomes compared to survivors, suggesting that anti‐GPI antibodies provide some level of protection against SM fatality.
Recent control scale-up has reduced malaria in many areas but new tools are needed to monitor further progress, including indicators of decreasing exposure to parasite infection. Although serology is considered a promising approach in this regard, the serological impact of control interventions has been so far studied using indirect quantification of exposure. Cohort surveys concomitantly recording entomological and malariometric indices have been conducted in two Senegalese settings where supervised control intensification implemented in 2006 shifted malaria from historically holoendemic in Dielmo and mesoendemic in Ndiop to hypoendemic in both settings by 2013. We analyse here serological signatures of declining transmission using archived blood samples. Responses against ten pre-erythrocytic and erythrocytic antigens from Plasmodium falciparum and P. malariae alongside an Anopheles gambiae salivary gland antigen were analysed. Cross-sectional surveys conducted before (2002) and after (2013) control intensification showed a major impact of control intensification in both settings. The age-associated prevalence, magnitude and breadth of the IgG responses to all antigens were village-specific in 2002. In 2013, remarkably similar patterns were observed in both villages, with marginal responses against all parasite antigens in the 0-5y children and reduced responses in all previously seropositive age groups. Waning of humoral responses of individuals who were immune at the time of control intensification was studied from 2006 to 2013 using yearly samplings. Longitudinal data were analysed using the Cochran-Armittage trend test and an age-related reversible catalytic conversion model. This showed that the antigen-specific antibody declines were more rapid in older children than adults. There was a strong association of antibody decline with the declining entomological inoculation rate. We thus identified serological markers of declining exposure to malaria parasites that should help future monitoring of progress towards malaria elimination.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.