Taking Sharper Pictures of Malaria with CAMERAs: Combined Antibodies to Measure Exposure Recency Assays.

Antibodies directed against malaria parasites are easy and inexpensive to measure but remain an underused surveillance tool because of a lack of consensus on what to measure and how to interpret results. High-throughput screening of antibodies from well-characterized cohorts offers a means to substantially improve existing assays by rationally choosing the most informative sets of responses and analytical methods. Recent data suggest that high-resolution information on malaria exposure can be obtained from a small number of samples by measuring a handful of properly chosen antibody responses. In this review, we discuss how standardized multi-antibody assays can be developed and efficiently integrated into existing surveillance activities, with potential to greatly augment the breadth and quality of information available to direct and monitor malaria control and elimination efforts

The long-term safety, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness of routine vaccination with a recombinant, live-attenuated dengue vaccine (Dengvaxia): a model comparison study

This is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.Background: Large Phase III trials across Asia and Latin America have recently demonstrated the efficacy of a recombinant, live-attenuated dengue vaccine (Dengvaxia) over the first 25 mo following vaccination. Subsequent data collected in the longer-term follow-up phase, however, have raised concerns about a potential increase in hospitalization risk of subsequent dengue infections, in particular among young, dengue-naïve vaccinees. We here report predictions from eight independent modelling groups on the long-term safety, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness of routine vaccination with Dengvaxia in a range of transmission settings, as characterised by seroprevalence levels among 9-y-olds (SP9). These predictions were conducted for the World Health Organization to inform their recommendations on optimal use of this vaccine. Methods and Findings: The models adopted, with small variations, a parsimonious vaccine mode of action that was able to reproduce quantitative features of the observed trial data. The adopted mode of action assumed that vaccination, similarly to natural infection, induces transient, heterologous protection and, further, establishes a long-lasting immunogenic memory, which determines disease severity of subsequent infections. The default vaccination policy considered was routine vaccination of 9-y-old children in a three-dose schedule at 80% coverage. The outcomes examined were the impact of vaccination on infections, symptomatic dengue, hospitalised dengue, deaths, and cost-effectiveness over a 30-y postvaccination period. Case definitions were chosen in accordance with the Phase III trials. All models predicted that in settings with moderate to high dengue endemicity (SP9 ≥ 50%), the default vaccination policy would reduce the burden of dengue disease for the population by 6%–25% (all simulations: –3%–34%) and in high-transmission settings (SP9 ≥ 70%) by 13%–25% (all simulations: 10%– 34%). These endemicity levels are representative of the participating sites in both Phase III trials. In contrast, in settings with low transmission intensity (SP9 ≤ 30%), the models predicted that vaccination could lead to a substantial increase in hospitalisation because of dengue. Modelling reduced vaccine coverage or the addition of catch-up campaigns showed that the impact of vaccination scaled approximately linearly with the number of people vaccinated. In assessing the optimal age of vaccination, we found that targeting older children could increase the net benefit of vaccination in settings with moderate transmission intensity (SP9 = 50%). Overall, vaccination was predicted to be potentially cost-effective in most endemic settings if priced competitively. The results are based on the assumption that the vaccine acts similarly to natural infection. This assumption is consistent with the available trial results but cannot be directly validated in the absence of additional data. Furthermore, uncertainties remain regarding the level of protection provided against disease versus infection and the rate at which vaccine-induced protection declines. Conclusions: Dengvaxia has the potential to reduce the burden of dengue disease in areas of moderate to high dengue endemicity. However, the potential risks of vaccination in areas with limited exposure to dengue as well as the local costs and benefits of routine vaccination are important considerations for the inclusion of Dengvaxia into existing immunisation programmes. These results were important inputs into WHO global policy for use of this licensed dengue vaccinSF and MJ received funding from WHO and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, to conduct this work. LC is a paid employee at Sanofi Pasteur. GM and JK were funded by the University of Western Australia, with computing resources provided by the Pawsey Supercomputing Centre, which is funded by the Australian Government and the Government of Western Australia. MR is funded by a Royal Society University Research Fellowship. NF, ID and DJL received research funding from the UK Medical Research Council, the UK NIHR under the Health Protection Research Unit initiative, NIGMS under the MIDAS initiative, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. IRB and DATC were funded by MIDAS Center Grant NIH/NIGMS U54-GM088491 and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. DATC was also supported by NIH/NIAID R01-AI114703. TJH, IL, and CABP were funded by a Dengue Vaccine Initiative Grant to IL, NIH/NIAID R37 AI32042. THJ, IL, and KK were funded by MIDAS Center Grant NIH/NIGMS 1135 U54 GM111274. All other authors have received no specific funding to conduct this work. The funders had no role in the study design, data analyses, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript

Variability in dengue titer estimates from plaque reduction neutralization tests poses a challenge to epidemiological studies and vaccine development.

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of neutralization antibody titers supports epidemiological studies of dengue virus transmission and vaccine trials. Neutralization titers measured using the plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) are believed to provide a key measure of immunity to dengue viruses, however, the assay's variability is poorly understood, making it difficult to interpret the significance of any assay reading. In addition there is limited standardization of the neutralization evaluation point or statistical model used to estimate titers across laboratories, with little understanding of the optimum approach. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We used repeated assays on the same two pools of serum using five different viruses (2,319 assays) to characterize the variability in the technique under identical experimental conditions. We also assessed the performance of multiple statistical models to interpolate continuous values of neutralization titer from discrete measurements from serial dilutions. We found that the variance in plaque reductions for individual dilutions was 0.016, equivalent to a 95% confidence interval of 0.45-0.95 for an observed plaque reduction of 0.7. We identified PRNT75 as the optimum evaluation point with a variance of 0.025 (log10 scale), indicating a titer reading of 1∶500 had 95% confidence intervals of 1∶240-1∶1000 (2.70±0.31 on a log10 scale). The choice of statistical model was not important for the calculation of relative titers, however, cloglog regression out-performed alternatives where absolute titers are of interest. Finally, we estimated that only 0.7% of assays would falsely detect a four-fold difference in titers between acute and convalescent sera where no true difference exists. CONCLUSIONS: Estimating and reporting assay uncertainty will aid the interpretation of individual titers. Laboratories should perform a small number of repeat assays to generate their own variability estimates. These could be used to calculate confidence intervals for all reported titers and allow benchmarking of assay performance

Are Seroprevalence Estimates for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Biased?

Biased seroprevalence estimates can occur using serological assays optimized with validation sets unrepresentative of disease spectrum in the general population. Correct interpretation of serosurveys for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 requires quantifying variations in sensitivity with disease severity and over time

Are SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence estimates biased?

Growing evidence suggests that asymptomatic and mild SARS-CoV-2 infections, together comprising >95% of all infections, may be associated with lower antibody titers than severe infections. In addition, antibody levels peak a few weeks after infection and decay gradually. Yet, positive controls used for determining the sensitivity of serological assays are usually limited to samples from hospitalized patients with severe disease, leading to what is commonly known as spectrum bias in estimating seroprevalence in the general population. We performed simulations to quantify the bias potentially introduced by the choice of positive controls used. Our results suggest that assays with imperfect sensitivity will underestimate the true seroprevalence, but this can be corrected if assay sensitivity in the general population is known. If sensitivity is determined from validation sets skewed towards those with severe or recent infections and thus higher antibody levels, corrected prevalence will still underestimate the true prevalence. Correct interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies requires quantifying the extent to which the sensitivity of assays being used varies with disease severity and over time. Optimization and validation of serological assays should involve samples from across the spectrum of severity and time since infection, and performance characteristics should be stratified by these factors

Dcifer: an IBD-based method to calculate genetic distance between polyclonal infections.

An essential step toward reconstructing pathogen transmission and answering epidemiologically relevant questions from genomic data is obtaining pairwise genetic distance between infections. For recombining organisms such as malaria parasites, relatedness measures quantifying recent shared ancestry would provide a meaningful distance, suggesting methods based on identity by descent (IBD). While the concept of relatedness and consequently an IBD approach is fairly straightforward for individual parasites, the distance between polyclonal infections, which are prevalent in malaria, presents specific challenges, and awaits a general solution that could be applied to infections of any clonality and accommodate multiallelic (e.g. microsatellite or microhaplotype) and biallelic [single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)] data. Filling this methodological gap, we present Dcifer (Distance for complex infections: fast estimation of relatedness), a method for calculating genetic distance between polyclonal infections, which is designed for unphased data, explicitly accounts for population allele frequencies and complexity of infection, and provides reliable inference. Dcifer's IBD-based framework allows us to define model parameters that represent interhost relatedness and to propose corresponding estimators with attractive statistical properties. By using combinatorics to account for unobserved phased haplotypes, Dcifer is able to quickly process large datasets and estimate pairwise relatedness along with measures of uncertainty. We show that Dcifer delivers accurate and interpretable results and detects related infections with statistical power that is 2-4 times greater than that of approaches based on identity by state. Applications to real data indicate that relatedness structure aligns with geographic locations. Dcifer is implemented in a comprehensive publicly available software package