Measuring naturally acquired immune responses to candidate malaria vaccine antigens in Ghanaian adults
2011

Measuring Immune Responses to Malaria Vaccine Antigens in Ghanaian Adults

Sample size: 35 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Dodoo Daniel, Hollingdale Michael R, Anum Dorothy, Koram Kwadwo A, Gyan Ben, Akanmori Bartholomew D, Ocran Josephine, Adu-Amankwah Susan, Geneshan Harini, Abot Esteban, Legano Jennylyn, Banania Glenna, Sayo Renato, Brambilla Donald, Kumar Sanjai, Doolan Denise L, Rogers William O, Epstein Judith, Richie Thomas L, Sedegah Martha

Primary Institution: Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research, University of Ghana

Hypothesis

To determine baseline antibody and T cell responses to candidate malaria vaccine antigens in Ghanaian adults.

Conclusion

All participants were positive for at least one malaria protein by ELISA, indicating significant biological variability in immune responses.

Supporting Evidence

  • Positive antibody responses varied widely from 17%-100%, according to the antigen and statistical method.
  • ELISA titres were higher in rural subjects.
  • DR-restricted peptides showed stronger responses than Class I-restricted peptides.
  • Results varied significantly between the two-week time-points for many participants.

Takeaway

Researchers wanted to see how people's immune systems reacted to malaria vaccine candidates, and they found that everyone had some response.

Methodology

Antibody titres were measured using ELISA and IFA, and T cell responses were assessed using ex vivo IFN-γ ELISpot assays.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to the variability of immune responses and the small sample size.

Limitations

Results varied significantly between samples taken two weeks apart, indicating significant biological variability.

Participant Demographics

Healthy adults aged 18-55 from urban and rural communities in Ghana.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.081

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1475-2875-10-168

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication