4.4 Article

In silico epitope mapping and experimental evaluation of the Merozoite Adhesive Erythrocytic Binding Protein (MAEBL) as a malaria vaccine candidate

Journal

MALARIA JOURNAL
Volume 17, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12936-017-2144-x

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2012/16525-2]
  2. Instituto Nacional de Ciencia e Tecnologia de Vacinas (INCTV)
  3. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  4. CAPES fellowship
  5. FAPESP fellowships
  6. CNPq fellowship
  7. SIgN under the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR, Singapore)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Technical limitations for culturing the human malaria parasite Plasmodium vivax have impaired the discovery of vaccine candidates, challenging the malaria eradication agenda. The immunogenicity of the M2 domain of the Merozoite Adhesive Erythrocytic Binding Protein (MAEBL) antigen cloned from the Plasmodium yoelii murine parasite, has been previously demonstrated. Results: Detailed epitope mapping of MAEBL through immunoinformatics identified several MHCI, MHCII and B cell epitopes throughout the peptide, with several of these lying in the M2 domain and being conserved between P. vivax, P. yoelii and Plasmodium falciparum, hinting that the M2-MAEBL is pan-reactive. This hypothesis was tested through functional assays, showing that P. yoelii M2-MAEBL antisera are able to recognize and inhibit erythrocyte invasion from both P. falciparum and P. vivax parasites isolated from Thai patients, in ex vivo assays. Moreover, the sequence of the M2-MAEBL is shown to be highly conserved between P. vivax isolates from the Amazon and Thailand, indicating that the MAEBL antigen may constitute a vaccine candidate outwitting strain-specific immunity. Conclusions: The MAEBL antigen is promising candidate towards the development of a malaria vaccine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available