It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Standard and direct membrane-feeding assays (SMFA and DMFA) are fundamental assays to evaluate efficacy of transmission-blocking intervention (TBI) candidates against Plasmodium falciparum and vivax. To compare different candidates precisely, it is crucial to understand the error range of measured activity, usually expressed as percent inhibition in either oocyst intensity (% transmission reducing activity, %TRA), or in prevalence of infected mosquitoes (% transmission blocking activity, %TBA). To this end, mathematical models have been proposed for P. falciparum SMFA (PfSMFA), but such study for DMFA is limited. In this study, we analyzed P. vivax DMFA (PvDMFA) data from 22,236 mosquitoes tested from 96 independent assays. While the two assays are quite different, a zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) model could reasonably explain the PvDMFA results, as it has for PfSMFA. Our simulation studies based on the ZINB model revealed it is better to report %TRA values with a proper error range, rather than observed %TBA both in SMFA and DMFA. Furthermore, the simulations help in designing a better assay and aid in estimating an error range of a %TRA value when the uncertainty is not reported. This study strongly supports future TBI development by providing a rational method to compare different candidates.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Laboratory of Malaria and Vector Research, Rockville, USA (GRID:grid.419681.3) (ISNI:0000 0001 2164 9667)
2 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Biostatistics Research Branch, Rockville, USA (GRID:grid.419681.3) (ISNI:0000 0001 2164 9667)
3 Mahidol University, Mahidol Vivax Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand (GRID:grid.10223.32) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0490)