Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings
Background: Antimalarial antibody measurements are useful because they reflect historical and recent exposure to malaria. As such, they may provide additional information to assess ongoing transmission in low endemic or pre-elimination settings where cases are rare. In addition, the absence of antib...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-09-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Public Health |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00480/full |
id |
doaj-1f81d62607024db1a1ddc1523cf8b53d |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Lotus L. van den Hoogen Paolo Bareng Joana Alves Ralph Reyes Malou Macalinao Júlio M. Rodrigues José M. Fernandes Lara F. Goméz Tom Hall Susheel K. Singh Susheel K. Singh Kimberly Fornace Jennifer Luchavez Alan Kitchen Peter Chiodini Fe Espino Kevin K. A. Tetteh Gillian Stresman Nuno Sepúlveda Nuno Sepúlveda Chris Drakeley |
spellingShingle |
Lotus L. van den Hoogen Paolo Bareng Joana Alves Ralph Reyes Malou Macalinao Júlio M. Rodrigues José M. Fernandes Lara F. Goméz Tom Hall Susheel K. Singh Susheel K. Singh Kimberly Fornace Jennifer Luchavez Alan Kitchen Peter Chiodini Fe Espino Kevin K. A. Tetteh Gillian Stresman Nuno Sepúlveda Nuno Sepúlveda Chris Drakeley Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings Frontiers in Public Health malaria elimination pre-elimination ELISA commercial ELISA kits antibody |
author_facet |
Lotus L. van den Hoogen Paolo Bareng Joana Alves Ralph Reyes Malou Macalinao Júlio M. Rodrigues José M. Fernandes Lara F. Goméz Tom Hall Susheel K. Singh Susheel K. Singh Kimberly Fornace Jennifer Luchavez Alan Kitchen Peter Chiodini Fe Espino Kevin K. A. Tetteh Gillian Stresman Nuno Sepúlveda Nuno Sepúlveda Chris Drakeley |
author_sort |
Lotus L. van den Hoogen |
title |
Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings |
title_short |
Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings |
title_full |
Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination Settings |
title_sort |
comparison of commercial elisa kits to confirm the absence of transmission in malaria elimination settings |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Public Health |
issn |
2296-2565 |
publishDate |
2020-09-01 |
description |
Background: Antimalarial antibody measurements are useful because they reflect historical and recent exposure to malaria. As such, they may provide additional information to assess ongoing transmission in low endemic or pre-elimination settings where cases are rare. In addition, the absence of antibody responses in certain individuals can indicate the cessation of transmission. Commercial malaria enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) detect antimalarial antibodies and are commonly used to screen blood donations for possible malaria infection. However, there is no standardized test to detect antimalarial antibodies for epidemiological use. Here we compared five commercially available ELISA kits (Trinity Biotech, newbio, DiaPro, Cellabs, and NovaTec) in search of a standardized tool for supporting claims of absence of malaria transmission. For comparison, a research-based (RB) ELISA protocol was performed alongside the commercial kits.Results: The commercial kits were first compared using serum samples from known malaria-unexposed individuals (n = 223) and Toxoplasma-infected individuals (n = 191) to assess specificity and cross-reactivity against non-malaria infections. In addition, 134 samples from ≥10-year-olds collected in a hyperendemic region in the Gambia in the early 1990s were used to assess sensitivity. Three out of five kits showed high sensitivity (90–92%), high specificity (98–99%), low cross-reactivity (0–3%) and were considered user-friendly (Trinity Biotech, newbio and NovaTec). Two of these kits (Trinity Biotech and NovaTec) were taken forward for epidemiological evaluation and results were compared to those using the RB-ELISA. Samples from two pre-elimination settings (Praia, Cape Verde; n = 1,396, and Bataan, the Philippines; n = 1,824) were tested. Serological results from both the Trinity Biotech kit and the RB-ELISA concurred with recent passively detected case counts in both settings. Results from the Trinity Biotech kit reflected a significant decrease in the number of reported cases in Bataan in the 1990s better than the RB-ELISA. Results from the NovaTec kit did not reflect transmission patterns in either setting.Conclusion: The Trinity Biotech commercial ELISA kit was considered reliable for epidemiological use and accurately described transmission patterns in two (previously) malaria endemic settings. The use of this simple and standardized serological tool may aid national control and elimination programs by confirming that regions are free from malaria. |
topic |
malaria elimination pre-elimination ELISA commercial ELISA kits antibody |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00480/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT lotuslvandenhoogen comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT paolobareng comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT joanaalves comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT ralphreyes comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT maloumacalinao comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT juliomrodrigues comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT josemfernandes comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT larafgomez comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT tomhall comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT susheelksingh comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT susheelksingh comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT kimberlyfornace comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT jenniferluchavez comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT alankitchen comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT peterchiodini comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT feespino comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT kevinkatetteh comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT gillianstresman comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT nunosepulveda comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT nunosepulveda comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings AT chrisdrakeley comparisonofcommercialelisakitstoconfirmtheabsenceoftransmissioninmalariaeliminationsettings |
_version_ |
1724727087301918720 |
spelling |
doaj-1f81d62607024db1a1ddc1523cf8b53d2020-11-25T02:53:02ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Public Health2296-25652020-09-01810.3389/fpubh.2020.00480539066Comparison of Commercial ELISA Kits to Confirm the Absence of Transmission in Malaria Elimination SettingsLotus L. van den Hoogen0Paolo Bareng1Joana Alves2Ralph Reyes3Malou Macalinao4Júlio M. Rodrigues5José M. Fernandes6Lara F. Goméz7Tom Hall8Susheel K. Singh9Susheel K. Singh10Kimberly Fornace11Jennifer Luchavez12Alan Kitchen13Peter Chiodini14Fe Espino15Kevin K. A. Tetteh16Gillian Stresman17Nuno Sepúlveda18Nuno Sepúlveda19Chris Drakeley20Department of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomDepartment of Health, Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, Manila, PhilippinesNational Institute of Public Health, Praia, Cape VerdeDepartment of Health, Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, Manila, PhilippinesDepartment of Health, Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, Manila, PhilippinesNational Institute of Public Health, Praia, Cape VerdeFaculty of Science and Technology, University of Cape Verde, Praia, Cape VerdeDepartment of Natural, Life and Environmental Sciences, Jean Piaget University of Cape Verde, Praia, Cape VerdeDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomDepartment of Congenital Disorders, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, DenmarkDepartment of Immunology and Microbiology, Centre for Medical Parasitology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DenmarkDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomDepartment of Health, Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, Manila, PhilippinesNHS Blood and Transplant, London, United KingdomHospital for Tropical Diseases and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomDepartment of Health, Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, Manila, PhilippinesDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom0Centre of Statistics and Applications, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, PortugalDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United KingdomBackground: Antimalarial antibody measurements are useful because they reflect historical and recent exposure to malaria. As such, they may provide additional information to assess ongoing transmission in low endemic or pre-elimination settings where cases are rare. In addition, the absence of antibody responses in certain individuals can indicate the cessation of transmission. Commercial malaria enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) detect antimalarial antibodies and are commonly used to screen blood donations for possible malaria infection. However, there is no standardized test to detect antimalarial antibodies for epidemiological use. Here we compared five commercially available ELISA kits (Trinity Biotech, newbio, DiaPro, Cellabs, and NovaTec) in search of a standardized tool for supporting claims of absence of malaria transmission. For comparison, a research-based (RB) ELISA protocol was performed alongside the commercial kits.Results: The commercial kits were first compared using serum samples from known malaria-unexposed individuals (n = 223) and Toxoplasma-infected individuals (n = 191) to assess specificity and cross-reactivity against non-malaria infections. In addition, 134 samples from ≥10-year-olds collected in a hyperendemic region in the Gambia in the early 1990s were used to assess sensitivity. Three out of five kits showed high sensitivity (90–92%), high specificity (98–99%), low cross-reactivity (0–3%) and were considered user-friendly (Trinity Biotech, newbio and NovaTec). Two of these kits (Trinity Biotech and NovaTec) were taken forward for epidemiological evaluation and results were compared to those using the RB-ELISA. Samples from two pre-elimination settings (Praia, Cape Verde; n = 1,396, and Bataan, the Philippines; n = 1,824) were tested. Serological results from both the Trinity Biotech kit and the RB-ELISA concurred with recent passively detected case counts in both settings. Results from the Trinity Biotech kit reflected a significant decrease in the number of reported cases in Bataan in the 1990s better than the RB-ELISA. Results from the NovaTec kit did not reflect transmission patterns in either setting.Conclusion: The Trinity Biotech commercial ELISA kit was considered reliable for epidemiological use and accurately described transmission patterns in two (previously) malaria endemic settings. The use of this simple and standardized serological tool may aid national control and elimination programs by confirming that regions are free from malaria.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00480/fullmalariaeliminationpre-eliminationELISAcommercial ELISA kitsantibody |