Heterogeneity in response to serological exposure markers of recent Plasmodium vivax infections in contrasting epidemiological contexts ======================================================================================================================================= * Jason Rosado * Michael T. White * Rhea J. Longley * Marcus Lacerda * Wuelton Monteiro * Jessica Brewster * Jetsumon Sattabongkot * Mitchel Guzman-Guzman * Alejandro Llanos-Cuentas * Joseph M. Vinetz * Dionicia Gamboa * Ivo Mueller ## Abstract **Background** Antibody responses as serological markers of *Plasmodium vivax* infection have been shown to correlate with exposure, but little is known about the other factors that affect antibody responses in naturally infected people from endemic settings. To address this question, we studied IgG responses to novel serological exposure markers (SEMs) of *P. vivax* in three settings with different transmission intensity. **Methodology** We validated a panel of 34 SEMs in a Peruvian cohort with up to three years’ longitudinal follow-up using a multiplex platform and compared results to data from cohorts in Thailand and Brazil. Linear regression models were used to characterize the association between antibody responses and age, the number of detected blood-stage infections during follow-up, and time since previous infection. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to test the performance of SEMs to identify *P. vivax* infections in the previous 9 months. **Principal findings** Antibody titers were associated with age, the number of blood-stage infections, and time since previous *P. vivax* infection in all three study sites. The association between antibody titers and time since previous *P. vivax* infection was stronger in the low transmission settings of Thailand and Brazil compared to the higher transmission setting in Peru. Of the SEMs tested, antibody responses to RBP2b had the highest performance for classifying recent exposure in all sites, with area under the ROC curve (AUC) = 0.83 in Thailand, AUC = 0.79 in Brazil, and AUC = 0.68 in Peru. **Conclusions** In low transmission settings, *P. vivax* SEMs can accurately identify individuals with recent blood-stage infections. In higher transmission settings, the accuracy of this approach diminishes substantially. We recommend using *P. vivax* SEMs in low transmission settings pursuing malaria elimination, but they are likely to be less effective in high transmission settings focused on malaria control. **Author Summary** *Plasmodium vivax* still poses a threat in many countries due to its ability to cause recurrent infections. Key to achieving the goal of malaria elimination is the ability to quickly detect and treat carriers of relapsing parasites. Failing to identify this transmission reservoir will hinder progress towards malaria elimination. Recently, novel serological markers of recent exposure to *P. vivax* (SEM) have been developed and validated in low transmission settings. It is still poorly understood what factors affect the antibody response to these markers when evaluated in contrasting endemic contexts. To determine the factors that influence the antibody response to SEM, we compared the antibody levels in three sites with different transmission intensity: Thailand (low), Brazil (moderate) and Peru (high). In this study, we found that transmission intensity plays a key role in the acquisition of the antibody repertoire to *P*. *vivax*. In highly endemic sites, it is likely that immunological memory resulting from a constant and sustained exposure will impact the performance of SEMs to detect individuals with recent exposure to *P*. *vivax*. In summary, SEMs that perform well in low transmission sites do not perform as well in high transmission regions. ## Introduction *Plasmodium vivax* is the most geographically widespread *Plasmodium* species and the second largest cause of clinical malaria worldwide. Although the global burden has decreased from an estimated 24.5 million cases in 2000 to 7.5 million cases in 2018, *P. vivax* remains a challenging parasite to control and eliminate due to its biology, notably its ability to relapse from dormant liver-stage hypnozoites [1], and its high transmission potential caused by rapid production of gametocytes and short development time in the mosquito vector [2]. In tropical regions, most *P. vivax* relapses occur within 9 months of the initial mosquito bite, with longer intervals observed in temperate regions and parts of the sub-tropics [1]. Except in India, relapses typically account for greater than 80% of all *P. vivax* blood-stage infections [3]. Moreover, in cross-sectional surveys 90-100% of infections are asymptomatic [4] and up to 67% of infections are not detected by conventional screening tools such as light microscopy [5] because of low parasite density [6, 7]. Although the role of asymptomatic infections is not well understood, all *P. vivax* blood-stage infections produce gametocytes and may contribute to maintaining transmission [8]. As the number of malaria cases in a region decreases and transmission becomes more heterogeneous, monitoring and mapping of residual transmission pockets becomes increasingly important. Many countries have declared the ambitious goal of eliminating malaria by 2030, and thus, a tool able to identify residual transmission or document the absence of recent transmission is urgently needed. This tool would ideally detect the entire *P. vivax* infectious reservoir composed of individuals with asymptomatic blood-stage infections as well as silent hypnozoite carriers. Light microscopy and qPCR, although informative, are imperfect tools due to the poor sensitivity for detecting low density blood-stage infections (light microscopy) and the inability to detect hypnozoite carriers (light microscopy and qPCR). The antibody responses mounted to *P. vivax* can last weeks to several years after exposure [9, 10], making them an ideal tool for assessing transmission history. Thus, by exploiting antibody longevity to assess recent exposure, we can use antibody levels to estimate the time since previous exposure and potentially detect hypnozoite carriers [11]. Serology has been used to estimate malaria risk and endemicity at the population level, detecting temporal and spatial variation in malaria exposure [12], and evaluating malaria control efforts in areas where transmission has decreased to low levels [13]. Therefore, serological markers are an appealing tool in the context of malaria elimination because population-level serological signatures can provide insights of both current and recent exposure to malaria when parasite prevalence surveys are no longer (cost-)efficient because of the small proportion of individuals with detectable bloodstage infection. The lack of standardized methods and antigens has hindered the implementation of serology as a tool for malaria surveillance. Recently, novel Serological Exposure Markers (SEM) to *P. vivax* have been developed and validated in low transmission settings showing a promising application in detecting likely hypnozoite carriers [11]. Their performance at higher transmission levels is yet to be clarified. It is particularly important to understand what factors cause variation in SEM’s performance before their application at a population level. Here, using a sero-epidemiological approach, we compare the performance of SEMs to detect recent exposure to *P. vivax* in three different transmission settings. Epidemiological factors such as age, number of detected blood-stage infections and time since the previous infection were evaluated to understand how they affect SEM performance. ## Methods ### Ethics The Peruvian cohort was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee from the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH) (SIDISI 57395/2013) and from the University of California San Diego Human Subjects Protection Program (Project # 100765). UPCH also approved the use of the Peruvian serum samples in the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (WEHI) (SIDISI 100873/2017). The Thai cohort was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Thailand (MUTM 2013-027-01). The Brazilian study was approved by the FMT-HVD (51536/2012), and by the Brazilian National Committee of Ethics (CONEP) (349.211/2013). The Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) at WEHI approved samples for use in Melbourne (#14/02). ### Field Studies The Peruvian cohort was conducted in two Amazonian villages in the Loreto Region: San José de Lupuna, and Cahuide [14]. Lupuna is located 10 km from Iquitos district (03°44.591‘S, 73°19.615‘W), a forested area only accessible by river. Cahuide (04°13.785‘ S, 73°276‘ W) is located 60 km from Iquitos city on the Iquitos-Nauta road. Villagers work mainly in agriculture, fishing and occasional hunting. In 2016, Malaria cases in Peru represented 14.3% of all cases in South America, from which 96% were reported from Loreto Region [15, 16]. Malaria cases have been steadily increasing since 2010-2011, after the cessation of the international financial support program “PAMAFRO”, and worsening due to the Loreto flood between 2012-2013 that inundated and damaged many riverine communities [17]. Transmission is stable in both Lupuna and Cahuide, with a peak season from November to May [14]. A three year-long observational cohort study was conducted over December 2012 – December 2015 in Loreto, Peru. Using home-to-home and community-based screening, all-age asymptomatic volunteers without a recent history of fever or antimalarial drug use were invited to participate in this cohort. A total of 456 volunteers were enrolled and sampled every month over the three year-long cohort with 37 active case detection visits in total. Additionally, 244 participants were enrolled and followed up in the last year of the cohort with 13 case detection visits. A total of 700 volunteers attended the final visit at the end of year 3, and 590 serum samples were collected. The PCR prevalence at the beginning of the cohort was 16% for *P. vivax* and 2% for *P. falciparum* [18]. Data from the Thai and Brazilian cohorts had been generated previously [11]. Briefly, year-long observational cohort studies were conducted over 2013-2014 in Kanchanaburi/Ratchaburi provinces, Thailand [19], and 2014 in Brasileirinho, Ipiranga and Puraquequara, three peri-urban communities in Manaus province, Amazonas State [20]. 999 volunteers were enrolled from Thailand and sampled every month over the year-long cohort, with 14 active case detection visits performed in total. 829 volunteers attended the final visit. A total of 1274 residents of all age groups were enrolled from Brazil and sampled every month over the year-long period, with 13 active case detection visits performed in total. 928 volunteers attended the final visit with plasma from 925 available. At the end of the follow-up, the PCR prevalence of *P. vivax* was 3.0% in Thailand, and 4.2% in Brazil (Table III in S1 File), while the cumulative PCR prevalence of *P. vivax* was 11.7% and 25.43% in Thailand and Brazil, respectively. ### Sample collection and molecular diagnosis In the Peruvian cohort, blood samples were collected by finger prick onto filter paper and left to dry at room temperature. Dried blood samples were stored at -20 °C prior to molecular diagnosis. In the last visit, whole blood samples were collected and serum was separated by centrifugation and kept at -80°C until processing. DNA was isolated from dried blood samples using the E.Z.N.A. ® Blood DNA Mini Kit (Omega Bio-tek, Inc., Norcross, GA, US), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Subsequent amplification was performed by a real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) method using PerfeCTa® SYBR® Green FastMix 1250 (Quanta bio, Beverly, MA, US) as previously described [18]. In the Thai and Brazil cohorts, malaria parasites were detected by qPCR as previously described [8, 21]. ### Multiplex serological evaluation Serum samples from the Peruvian cohort were evaluated following the protocol reported by Longley et al [22]. Briefly, proteins were coupled to non-magnetic microspheres. Protein-coupled microspheres were incubated with plasma (1/100 dilution in phosphate-buffered saline containing 1% bovine serum albumin and 0.05% (v/v) Tween-20, denoted as PBT) for 30 min at room temperature. After washing, microspheres were incubated for 15 minutes at room temperature with an R-Phycoerythrin (R-PE) -conjugated Donkey Anti-Human IgG antibody (cat#709-116-098; JacksonImmunoResearch, UK) to detect total IgG (1/100 dilution). Final washing was followed by resuspension of microspheres in 100 μL of PBT. This protocol was previously validated in other cohorts as well as in this cohort by testing a small group of samples in duplicate (data not shown). Therefore, serum samples were evaluated in singlicate format (one well per sample). 34 expressed full-length proteins were tested (See Table IV in S1 File for details). They were down-selected from a larger panel as previously reported [11]. 30 of the expressed proteins corresponded to erythrocytic stages, one to pre-erythrocytic stages, one to sexual stages, and one to a putative protein. Plasma samples from healthy donors from non-malaria endemic regions (Melbourne, Australia, and Bangkok, Thailand) were used as negative controls (n = 274) [11] (noting that the control set from Rio, Brazil, was not included in the current study). A standard curve made of pooled plasma from hyper-immune Papua New Guinea adults (serial dilutions ranging from 1:50 to 1:51200) was used in each run for quality control and normalization purposes. The antibody measurements were performed in a Milliplex® platform based on Luminex® technology. Antibody levels were converted from median fluorescence intensity to relative antibody unit (RAU) using a 5-parameter logistic model written in R. Published serological data from the Thai and Brazilian cohorts were compared to Peruvian antibody profiles [11]. ### Statistical analysis All epidemiological data was obtained from the questionnaires or laboratory tests recorded in the databases from the cohorts in Peru, Thailand and Brazil. This study generated new monthly qPCR data and serological data from the final time point from the Peruvian cohort; however, we only used qPCR data of the 13 months preceding the last time-point. We characterized the association between antibody responses and PCR positive blood-stage infections in the Peruvian cohort by fitting multivariate linear regression models adjusted for confounders. A Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) was used to select the model with the best explanatory variables. A retrospective analysis was performed taking into account the last day of follow up as a point of reference, i.e. the day of the serum or plasma collection (D0 = day 0). To test the performance of the SEMs to identify recent *P. vivax* exposure, individuals in the cohorts were categorized according to their history of blood-stage infection. Individuals with at least one qPCR positive *P. vivax* sample in the previous 9 months were classified as “recently exposed”, whereas those with old infections (> 9 months) or no infections in the time of follow up (13 months for Peru and Brazil, 14 months for Thailand), were classified as “not recently exposed”. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity of using single SEMs to identify recent infections. Sensitivity was defined as the proportion of people with recent infections with antibody titers higher than a given cut-off value. Specificity was defined as the proportion of subjects without recent infections with antibody titers lowers than the same cut-off value. We used the area under the ROC curve (AUC) value for comparing the test performance given by an antibody response between the three study sites. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) was performed to identify the best combinations of antibody responses for classifying recent infections. The best combination was assessed with cross-validation on disjoint training (2/3 of data) and testing (1/3 of data) data sets, repeated 200 times. The AUC was calculated for each combination. To determine the factors which drive variation in antibody responses, multivariate linear regression models were fitted using: (i) age (a proxy of lifetime exposure); (ii) number of detected blood-stage infections during 13 months (Peru, Brazil) or 14 months (Thailand) of follow up; (iii) time since previous blood-stage infection; and (iv) an error term accounting for additional unexplained variation. Data on individuals with at least one blood-stage detection during 13 months was utilized for this purpose. The total variance of each marker was normalized to 1 and was the sum of variance given by both explained and unexplained variance, respectively. The contribution of each factor to the total variance was estimated using the “relaimpo” ([https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=relaimpo](https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=relaimpo)) and “car” ([https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=car](https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=car)) R packages [23, 24]. Statistical analysis was done using R 3.43 ([https://www.r-project.org/](https://www.r-project.org/)) and the R packages MASS, ROCR, rpart, randomForest, and Stata version 12 (StataCorp. 2011. Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.) ## Results ### Epidemiological characteristics of the Peruvian longitudinal cohort Epidemiological characteristics of the Peruvian study population are summarized in Table 1. A total of 590 individuals had a serum sample at the end of the cohort. Of these individuals, 289 lived in Cahuide (CAH, 48.9%) and 301 lived in Lupuna (LUP, 51.1%). The average age of participants was 29.7 years (range: 3.8 – 85 years old). Individuals from Cahuide were younger than those from Lupuna (p < 0.01). The overall female/male rate was 1.39, with similar proportions in both sites (CAH: 1.44, LUP: 1.35). The short duration of residency in the community had previously been identified as a risk factor for *P. vivax* infection in these communities [18]. Almost 15% (n = 89) of participants had recently settled in the communities (<2 years), with higher proportions in Cahuide (26%) than Lupuna (3%) (p < 0.0001, χ2 test). View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/T1) Table 1. Epidemiologic characteristics of the newly reported Peruvian study sites and participants. At the last day of follow up (D0), the prevalence of *P. vivax* (Pv) infections detected by qPCR was 21.2% (LUP: 23.6%, CAH: 18.7%) (Fig 1A), of which only 7% were detected by LM (9 patent infections). Age has been described as a risk factor for *P. vivax* exposure at the baseline of this cohort [14]; therefore, we compared the Pv prevalence by qPCR among three age groups at the last time point of follow up. There were no significant differences in prevalence among three defined age groups (p > 0.05). The median parasite density by qPCR was 1.55 parasites/μL (IQR: 0.74 – 8.38). In the preceding year, December 2014 to December 2015, a total of 7,612 blood samples were collected during follow-up. Of the collected blood samples, 14.2% (1083/7612) were positive for *P. vivax* by qPCR. Of these qPCR positive samples 11.8% (128/1083) were positive by microscopy, and 2.8% (30/1083) exhibited symptoms. In 13 months of follow up (the last year of the cohort), 75.3% of individuals experienced at least one blood-stage *P. vivax* infection. There was a significant difference in 225 cumulative PCR prevalence between Cahuide (66.1%) and Lupuna (84.1%) (p < 0.0001, χ2 test) (Fig 1B). ![Fig 1.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F1.medium.gif) [Fig 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F1) Fig 1. Prevalence of *P. vivax* infection in the Peruvian cohort. (A) Longitudinal prevalence of *P. vivax* infection by light microscopy or PCR in Cahuide and Lupuna. Retrospective analyses were performed using infection history over the last year of follow-up, which is indicated by the orange shadow. Day 0 is the last time point of follow-up where antibody measures were done; it is indicated in panel A by a purple arrow. (B) Proportion of individuals with PCR-detectable infection in the previous “x” days. Shaded areas represent the respective 95% confidence intervals. ### Profiles of anti-*P. vivax* antibody responses in Peru In Lupuna the geometric mean antibody response to 34 *P. vivax* proteins was 1.93 times higher than in Cahuide, although the distribution of antibody responses overlapped between both communities (0.0014 vs. 0.0007; p < 0.001, t-test, Fig II in S1 File). Henceforth, data from both communities were combined for subsequent analysis. Antibody responses to 26 out of 34 antigens were positively associated with concurrent *P. vivax* infections (Odds ratio range: 1.38 – 1.99, p < 0.01, Table I in S1 File). Most of the responses to the tested markers showed a positive correlation with the individual’s age (spearman correlation factor range ρ = 0.143 – 0.482; p <0.001, Fig 2), indicating a broader antibody repertoire and higher magnitude of the responses in individuals older than 40 years old. ![Fig 2.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F2.medium.gif) [Fig 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F2) Fig 2. Heatmap of antibody responses to *P. vivax* serological exposure markers in the Peruvian cohort. Relative antibody units (RAU) were log10 transformed. Antibody responses were strongly correlated where antigens were located in the same parasite location, showing a similar degree of immunogenicity and pattern of reactivity (Fig III in S1 File). For instance, antibody responses to invasion-related proteins (microneme proteins: PVX\_110810A (PvDBP region II Sal1 strain), AAY34130.1 (PvDBP region II AH strain), PVX_095055 (PvRiPR), PVX_090240 (PvCyRPA), and KMZ83376.1 (PvEBP region II); and rhoptry proteins: PVX_094255 (PvRBP2b), and PVX_098585 (PvRBP1a)) showed 50 to 98% correlation to each other, whereas, lower correlations were found with antigens of surface proteins (29 – 66%). To identify epidemiological factors that influence the response to SEMs, linear regression models were fitted using demographic and epidemiological data (Table II in S1 File). Age was the strongest explanatory factor for 32 out of 34 proteins (coefficient range: 0.146 – 1.127, p < 0.01). For instance, a doubling in age will give a 2.18 (2^1.127) increase in antibody levels to PVX\_082650 (PvMSP7). Living in Lupuna and being male were associated with high antibody titers to 20 SEMs (coefficient range: 0.096 – 0.538, p < 0.01) and 15 SEMs (coefficient range: 0.105 – 0.202, p < 0.01), respectively, indicating the high exposure in this community. The number of qPCR infections detected in the previous 6 months was an important predictor for 28 antibody responses (coefficient range: 0.042 – 0.194 / infection, p < 0.01), indicating that the level of antibody response to these antigens depends upon the intensity of recent exposure. The antibody responses to PVX\_099980 (PvMSP119), PVX\_096995 (Pv-fam-a), PVX_094255 (PvRBP2b161-1454 and PvRBP2b1986-2653), PVX_095055 (PvRiPR) and PVX_087885 were positively associated with the incidence of clinical episodes during the previous 6 months of follow up (coefficient: 0.384 – 0.505, p < 0.01). ### Transmission intensity and average antibody titers to SEM were higher in Peru than Brazil and Thailand At the final time point of follow-up, Peru had the highest prevalence of *P. vivax* by qPCR (21.2%, p< 0.001), followed by Brazil (4.2%) and Thailand (3.0%) (Table III in S1 File). During the preceding year of follow up, 75.3% of Peruvian individuals experienced at least one infection of *P. vivax* (Pv), followed by Brazil and Thailand where 25.4% and 11.7% of participants had at least one infection. The average antibody titer to all 34 SEMs combined in the Peruvian cohort was 1.64 times higher than Brazil (p < 0.001, t-test) and 2.43 times higher than Thailand (p < 0.001, t-test), confirming the existing high exposure burden in the communities from the Peruvian amazon. The higher antibody titers in the Peruvian children (< 15 years old) compared with the same age group from Brazil (1.70 fold, p < 0.001, t-test) and Thailand (2.25 fold, p < 0.001, t-test) is also consistent with higher *P. vivax* transmission and a more rapid acquisition of antibodies in this population. Antibody levels to 34 Pv antigens positively correlated to the time since previous infection (p < 0.001, Kruskal-Wallis test, Table VIII in S1 File) and the number of blood-stage detections during follow up in all three cohorts (p < 0.001, Kruskal-Wallis test, Table IX in S1 File). We selected three antigens (PVX_094255B (PvRBP2b), PVX_090240 (PvCyRPA) and PVX_099980 (PvMPS119)) as examples due to their documented immunogenicity [22, 25, 26]. Fig 3 shows the association between the antibody response measured at the final time point and (i) time since previous infection; (ii) number of qPCR positive blood-stage infections detected; and (iii) age. Similar patterns are seen across antibodies to all antigens in all regions (Fig IV-VI in S1 File). Antibody responses decrease with time since previous infection; increase with the number of blood-stage infections detected during one year of follow-up; and increase with age. Anti-CyRPA antibody responses in Brazil provide a notable exception, not exhibiting any significant association with the studied factors. ![Fig 3.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F3.medium.gif) [Fig 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F3) Fig 3. Association of antibody responses to PvMSP119, PvRBP2b and PvCyRPA with epidemiological features. (A) Antibody titers and time since previous infection during follow up. (B) Antibody titers and number of blood stage infections detected by qPCR. (C) Antibody titers across age groups. Note the controls are grouped together regardless of age. Mo: number of months since previous infection. ### Marker selection to detect exposure in the previous 9 months Antibody responses were assessed by their classification performance for detecting blood-stage *P. vivax* infection within the previous 9 months for each study site (with the results for Thailand and Brazil previously reported [11]). The sensitivity and specificity trade-off of each antigen was tested through the area under the ROC curve (AUC). The antibody response to PVX_094255 (PvRBP2b161-1454 and PvRBP2b1986-2653) was the top marker for the three study sites and for the combined data set (Table IV and Table V in S1 File). Across all populations, the top ranking markers were the antibody responses to PVX\_094255 (PvRBP2b), PVX_121920 (PvRBP2a), PVX_087885 (PvRAMA), PVX_099980 (PvMSP119) and PVX_097715 (hypothetical PvMSP3) (Table IV in S1 File). Although the cohort studies were carried out in co-endemic sites for *P. vivax* and *P. falciparum*, we did not find an association between the antibody levels to the top five proteins and recent *P. falciparum* infection (Fig VII in S1 File). However, the number of individuals with at least one *P. falciparum* infection in the preceding 13 months of last time point was low: Thailand n = 9, Brazil n = 17, Peru n = 61. The antibody levels to the two constructs of PvRBP2b were highly correlated (Pearson’s r = 0.83, p < 0.001), so we excluded the PvRBP2b construct with the lower level of accuracy (PvRBP2b1986-2653). At a population level, the performance of antibody responses to PVX_094255 (PvRBP2b161-1454) for classifying recent infections was better in Thailand (AUC = 0.83) and Brazil (AUC = 0.79), than in Peru (AUC = 0.68) (Fig 4A). Moreover, there were markers such as PVX_099980 (PvMPS119) that showed good performance only in Thailand and Brazil, and others such as PVX\_090240 (PvCyRPA) that performed well only in Peru. Evaluation of antibody responses to PVX_094255B (PvRBP2b), PVX_090240 (PvCyRPA) and PVX_099980 (PvMPS119), indicates that they can be used to detect previous *P. vivax* infections within a wide time range of 1 – 12 months, and not just the previously investigated 9 month target (Fig VIII in S1 File) [11]. ### Performance to detect recent exposure using combinations of antibody responses While antibody responses to single antigens are informative for detecting recent exposure, a combination of antibody responses may lead to improved sensitivity and specificity in low-transmission regions [11]. Using a linear discriminant analysis (LDA) classification algorithm, models including up to five antibody responses were tested for maximizing information of exposure in the previous 9 months. The combinations of antibody responses that were most informative of recent exposure were cross-validated, and performance plotted using ROC curves. The top combinations of antibody responses per country were the following: Thailand: PvRBP2b, PvRBP2a, Pvs16, histone-lysine N-methyltransferase SET10 and PvMSP119 (AUC = 0.87); Brazil: PvRBP2b, hypothetical PvMSP3, PvRAMA, PVX\_091710 and PVX\_094830 (AUC = 0.85); Peru: PvCyRPA, PvRBP1a, PVX_090970, and the members from the *P. vivax* Tryptophan Rich Antigens (PvTRAG or Pv-fam-a) family PVX\_096995 and PVX_092995 (AUC = 0.72). The top combinations of antibody responses for the combined data was PvRBP2b, Pvs16, PVX_091710, PVX_084720 (PTEX150) and PVX_094830 (AUC = 0.86). As expected, the multiantibody response models performed better than the single antibody ones; although to a less extent for Peru (Fig 4B). ![Fig 4.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F4.medium.gif) [Fig 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F4) Fig 4. Diagnostic performance for classifying recent exposure using antibody responses. (A) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve displays the diagnostic performance of 5 top antibody responses individually: PVX\_094255 (PvRBP2b), PVX_121920 (PvRBP2a), PVX_087885 (PvRAMA), PVX_099980 (PvMSP119) and PVX_097715 (hypothetical PvMSP3) in the study sites. (B) ROC curves displaying the diagnostic performance to detect recent infections given by combinations of the top 5 antibody responses. ### Determinants of variation of antibody responses When focusing on PVX\_094255B (PvRBP2b), PVX_090240 (PvCyRPA) and PVX_099980 (PvMPS119), the proportion of explained variance of antibody responses was different among sites and markers. For antibody responses to PvRBP2b the proportion of the variance explained was 37% in Thailand, 29% in Peru, and 21% in Brazil (Fig 5). Age (a proxy for lifetime exposure) accounted for the largest proportion of explained variance: 19% in Thailand, 9% in Brazil, and 16% in Peru. The time since previous infection explained 7% of the variance in Thailand, 7% of the variance in Brazil, and only 3% in Peru. The intensity of exposure in the previous year accounted for 12% of the explained variance in Thailand, 5% in Brazil, and 10% in Peru. The studied factors explained substantially less of the variance in anti-PvMSP119 antibody responses. This is most likely due to the high immunogenicity of PvMSP119 causing the generation of strong antibody responses after few infections. The explained variance of the antibody response to PvCyRPA represented 35% of the total variance in Peru, 22% in Thailand and only 1.5% in Brazil. Age was the most important driver of the antibody response to PvCyRPA in Peru (0.35) followed by Thailand (0.13), and Brazil (0.01). ![Fig 5.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F5.medium.gif) [Fig 5.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F5) Fig 5. Contribution of recent and lifetime exposure to the variance of antibody responses to PvMSP119, PvRBP2b and PvCyRPA across the study sites. Panels represent the variance estimated for each marker. The area of each colored bar is proportional to the variance explained by known and unknown factors. Red bars: variance explained by individual’s age. Blue bars: variance explained by number of blood stage detections by qPCR during 13 months of follow up. Green bars: variance explained by time since previous infection (days). Grey bars: unexplained variance. We assessed the suitability of serological markers for identifying recent infection across the three transmission settings (differentiated by cumulative PCR prevalence), by evaluating the geometric mean antibody levels to PvMSP119, PvRBP2b and PvCyRPA, and their performance at classifying recent exposure (Fig 6). The geometric mean antibody titer to PvMSP119 and PvRBP2b increased with the cumulative PCR prevalence, but did not for PvCyRPA. The performance to detect recent exposure (AUC value) of PvMSP119 and PvRBP2b was inversely correlated to cumulative PCR prevalence, but not for PvCyRPA. The variance explained by the time since previous infection decreased with the cumulative PCR prevalence. With each cohort contributing a single data point, it is challenging to assess the significance of these relationships. Nonetheless, these findings lead us to conclude that these *P. vivax* SEMs are most suitable in low transmission settings where population level antibody titers are low, and a high proportion of the total variation in measured antibody titer is explained by the time since last *P. vivax* infection. ![Fig 6.](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F6.medium.gif) [Fig 6.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/26/2020.07.01.20143503/F6) Fig 6. Association of cumulative PCR prevalence and antibody responses to PvMSP119, PvRBP2b and PvCyRPA. (A) Association of cumulative PCR prevalence and the geometric mean titer of antibody responses. (B) Association of cumulative PCR prevalence and the area under the ROC curve. (C) Association of cumulative PCR prevalence and the variance explained by the time since previous infection. ## Discussion The application of serology to malaria control and elimination programs has been hampered by the lack of standardized techniques, well-developed antigenic markers, and validation in various transmission scenarios. With the potential for malaria elimination in many endemic countries, a tool able to both identify pockets of residual transmission and certify the malaria free status (in elimination settings) is urgently needed. Here, we evaluated the antibody responses to 34 novel *Plasmodium vivax* antigens in participants from a longitudinal cohort implemented in a high transmission setting in Peru, and made comparisons to data from low to moderate transmission settings in Thailand and Brazil [11]. In the three cohorts, individuals with blood-stage infections detected in the previous 9 months had significantly higher antibody titers than those with older infections; however, the performance of SEM to classify recent exposure was lower in Peru than in Thailand and in Brazil. The effect of malaria transmission on antibody responses is still poorly understood [12], our data showed that antibody responses to serological markers of recent exposure are influenced by the transmission intensity of the studied population. Whilst the geometric mean titer of most antibody responses was positively correlated with the cumulative PCR prevalence of each study site, the differences of antibody titers between positive PCR and negative PCR groups were highly significant in Thailand and Brazil but less pronounced in Peru, suggesting a slow decay of antibody responses in currently non-infected people in high transmission settings. This is also evidenced by the comparatively high antibody responses in Peruvians with an absence of blood-stage infections during one year of follow-up. Furthermore, our results supported the fact that the acquisition rate of antibody responses is faster in high transmission intensity sites, a phenomenon previously described. For example, King *et al*. showed that the antibody response repertoire to *P. vivax* and *P. falciparum* antigens was broader with corresponding higher antibody levels in subjects residing in high vs low transmission conditions [27]. Anti-malaria antibodies are mostly short-lived [28], but their longevity is antigen specific [29] and may vary according to the background immunity and transmission intensity of the studied population [30, 31]. In the cases of *P*. *vivax* Merozoite Surface Protein-1 (PvMSP1), antibody responses can last up-to 30 years in sites where there has been sufficient levels of past exposure [32]. The antibody longevity is maintained by memory B cells that upon re-exposure rapidly proliferate and differentiate into antibody secretory cells, greatly boosting antibody levels [33]. In settings of low transmission, *P. vivax* infections appear to induce long-lasting B cell memory but with corresponding relatively short-lived antibody responses [9, 10], although long-lived antibody responses have also been reported [19]. In high transmission settings both memory and antibody responses appear to be long-lived. A plausible explanation of the high antibody levels in the Peruvian cohort is that frequent new infections and relapses would boost the antibody response baseline in the Peruvian population and that would result in a slow decay of these responses [34]. In light of these broad associations between transmission intensity and natural acquisition of immunity, we thus hypothesize that the differential performance of SEMs in the three study sites are likely due to the differences in malaria transmission intensity. In Thailand and Brazil, where the prevalence is low, it is likely that the immune repertoire is smaller and antibody responses are more short-lived. In Peru, the high antibody titers in the cohort individuals suggests a consistently high exposure to *P. vivax*, which is expected to elicit a broad repertoire of long-lived antibodies. In our study, antibody titers increased with individuals’ age. There are two possible explanations. Antibody levels may increase with age reflecting the cumulative nature of the immune response to *P*. *vivax*, and highlighting age as a surrogate marker of life-time exposure. This relationship has been exploited to assess malaria transmission intensity in endemic settings through modelling seroconversion rates, which are closely correlated with the entomological inoculation rate [12, 35]. On the other hand, the association of antibody responses and age may also reflect the epidemiological characteristics of each population. The transmission of *P. vivax* in Thailand is mostly related to forest jobs in adults [19], whereas in Brazil and Peru, the transmission is both peri-domestic and work-related [36, 37]. Our linear regression model showed that the time since previous infection and the intensity of exposure in the last year were important drivers of the antibody response to the top markers, PvRBP2b and PvMSP119, in Thailand and Brazil, whereas the cumulative exposure, as indicated by individuals’ age, explained most of the variance in antibody responses in Peru. In a previous study on the baseline of the Peruvian cohort, Rosas-Aguirre *et al*. reported the association of antibody responses to PvMSP10 with *P. vivax* infections in the previous 6 months and individual’s age [38]. PvMSP10 was not included in our panel of SEMs. Our results however confirm the previous finding of a strong influence of age on the performance of PvMSP10 as a marker of recent exposure to *P. vivax*. Thus, the previous life-time exposure resulting from sustained transmission would influence SEMs performance in high-transmission settings. Besides previous life-time exposure, the immunogenicity of markers and their interplay with transmission intensity were factors that affected the SEM performance. For example, the levels of antibody responses to PvRBP2b were positively correlated with the number of blood-stage detections and time since previous infection in the three cohorts, indicating that multiple antigen exposure is needed in order to boost an antibody response, and thus showcasing the moderate immunogenicity of this antigen. PvRBP2b belongs to PvRBP family of membrane proteins involved in the irreversible adhesion to reticulocytes [39]. Reports on naturally acquired immunity against PvRBP2b have shown that antibody responses correlated with age, infection status and clinical protection [25, 26, 40]. Previous reports have shown that antibodies responses against other members of the PvRBP family (i.e. PvRBP1a, PvRBP2a, PvRBP2c and PvRBP2-P2) also correlated with intensity of exposure and increased at a slower rate than antibodies against highly immunogenic antigens such as anti-PvDBPII [41] or PvCSP [22]. Recently, longitudinal studies have provided estimates of the longevity of antibody response against PvRBP2b, estimating a mean half-life of ~ 3.8 months in cohorts from Thailand and Brazil [11], indicating the moderate longevity of antibodies even in low transmission settings. Importantly, Longley *et al*. showed that the antibody response to PvRBP2b had low reactivity in the malaria-naïve negative control group, which likely also has a strong impact on classification performance [11]. These characteristics make anti-PvRBP2b antibodies the best performing SEMs for classifying recent exposure in all three cohorts. The use of highly immunogenic antigens such as PvMSP119 in serological tools has been advised in areas of low transmission, where the long-term persistence of antibody levels may be suitable for estimating changes in transmission intensity [12]. Lowly immunogenic markers with shorter half-life antibodies like PvCyRPA would be suitable for estimating the time of the last infection in high endemicity scenarios. Our antigen panel consists of constructs whose antibody responses longevity spanned up to 6 months in the absence of detectable recurrent infections in longitudinal cohorts in two low transmission sites [31] and whose performance has been validated to detect recent exposure in the context of low transmission intensity [11]. Our new findings suggest that the reactivity to these markers may not necessarily reflect recent exposure in high-transmission scenarios like Peru, and that the constant, long-term exposure to *P. vivax* may result in the long-lived IgG profiles in the absence of ongoing *P. vivax* infection in that cohort. Measurement of antibodies in longitudinal samples from the Peruvian cohort in the future would confirm our results and shed light on the antibody kinetics to *P. vivax* in a higher transmission scenario. There are a number of potential applications for SEMs in malaria control and elimination programs. At a population level, SEMs can be useful to identify pockets of residual transmission in geographic regions with heterogeneous or focalized transmission and measure the impact of interventions [42-44]. These use cases can be applied in contexts of medium to very low transmission levels. At an individual level, SEMs could be implemented in serological test and treat (PvSeroTAT) strategies for preventative treatment of *P. vivax* with Primaquine or Tafenoquine in elimination campaigns [11]. Such an intervention could reduce *P. vivax* cases with efficacy similar to mass drug administration (MDA), but with the benefit of lower rates of overtreatment. Finally, our study highlights the importance of an in-depth immunological dissection of the antibody signatures in diverse transmission contexts of *P*. *vivax*. Such an exploration will allow us to understand the antibody kinetics in a context of ongoing transmission and to select suitable markers of recent exposure in high transmission settings. Field studies have shown that IgG subclass profiles to *P. falciparum* [45] and *P*. *vivax* [46-48] differed among malaria antigens and that the subclass predominance is influenced by age and increasing exposure to infection. High IgG1 and IgG3 levels have been associated with long-term exposure to *P*. *vivax* [40, 48]. To improve performance of SEMs, further information could potentially be gained by testing IgG subclass responses and their ability to discriminate recent from distant exposure to *P. vivax* in areas with history of high past transmission. In summary, we have shown that the antibody responses to SEMs reflect exposure in the previous 9 months in areas of low transmission, whereas the responses will mirror a combination of both recent and cumulative exposure in areas of high transmission. By combining both highly and less immunogenic antigens, our panel is able to detect recent exposure in low transmission or pre-elimination settings, providing a suitable tool for population-level surveillance. ## Data Availability All data is available in the main text or the supplementary material. ## Author contributions M.T.W., R.J.L., D.G., and I.M. designed the study. W.M., M.L., J.S., A.LL-C., M.G.G., J.M.V., and D.G. conducted the cohort studies. J.R. performed molecular diagnosis and antibody measurements. J.B. performed antibody measurements. J.R., R.J.L., and M.W. conducted data management and analysis. J.R., M.T.W., and I.M. wrote the manuscript. ## Funding This work has been supported by FIND with funding from the Australian and British governments. This work was made possible through Victorian State Government Operational Infrastructure Support and Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Independent Research Institute Infrastructure Support Scheme. Brazilian team was partly funded by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas-FAPEAM (PAPAC 005/2019 and Pró-Estado). Cohort samples were derived from field studies in Peru originally funded by Amazonian International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research (ICEMR) supported by the National Institutes of Health-National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIH-NIAID) U19AI089681 to J.M.V. ([https://www.niaid.nih.gov](https://www.niaid.nih.gov)); M.G.G is supported by Training Grant 5D43TW007120 ([https://www.fic.nih.gov](https://www.fic.nih.gov)). J.R. is supported by the Pasteur - Paris University (PPU) International PhD Program. R.J.L. received the Page Betheras Award from WEHI to provide funding for technical support for this project during parental leave. R.J.L is supported by a NHMRC Early Career Investigator Fellowship (1173210). M.L. and W.M. are CNPq fellows. I.M. is supported by an NHMRC Senior Research Fellowship (1043345). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Supporting information S1 File. Contains Figures I - VIII and Tables I-IX Fig I. Study design for the retrospective analysis of 13 months of follow-up. Fig II. Distribution of antibody responses to 34 Serological markers of exposure in the Peruvian communities of Cahuide (CAH) and Lupuna (LUP). Fig III. Pearson correlation between antibody responses to 34 Serological markers of exposure in the Peruvian cohort. Fig IV. Association between antibody responses to 34 P. vivax antigens and time since previous P. vivax blood-stage infection. Fig V. Association between antibody responses to 34 P. vivax antigens and number of blood stage infections detected by qPCR. Fig VI. Association between antibody responses to 34 P. vivax antigens and age. Fig VII. Association between antibody responses to top five P. vivax antigens and time since last P. falciparum blood-stage infections. Fig VIII. Association of diagnostic performance of antibody responses in different timeframes with the distribution of time since the previous infection. Table I. Association of antibody responses with current P. vivax infection in the Peruvian cohort. Table II. Multivariate linear regression model explaining the antibody levels in the Peruvian cohort. Table III. Epidemiologic characteristics of the study sites and participants. Table IV. Characteristic of evaluated constructs. Table V. Top antibody responses for classifying recent infections. Table VI. Geometric mean titer of 34 SEM across the study sites. Table VII. Correlation between antibody titers and age. Table VIII. Overall antibody response and time since previous infection. Table IX. Overall antibody response and number of detected blood- stage infections. ## Acknowledgments We acknowledge the field teams that contributed to sample collection and qPCR assays, including Carlos Fernandez-Miñope, Katherine Alcedo, Jhonatan Alarcon-Baldeon, Juan Jose Contreras-Mancilla. We thank Wai-Hong Tham, Eizo Takashima, Takafumi Tsuboi, Matthias Harbers, Chetan Chitnis and Julie Healer for kindly provide the proteins used in this study. We acknowledge Connie Li-Wai-Suen for writing the R script to convert MFI to RAU. * Received July 1, 2020. * Revision received August 25, 2020. * Accepted August 26, 2020. * © 2020, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ## References 1. 1.White NJ, Imwong M. Relapse. Adv Parasitol. 2012;80:113–50. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/B978-0-12-397900-1.00002-5&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23199487&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 2. 2.Mueller I, Galinski MR, Baird JK, Carlton JM, Kochar DK, Alonso PL, et al. Key gaps in the knowledge of Plasmodium vivax, a neglected human malaria parasite. Lancet Infect Dis. 2009;9(9):555–66. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70177-X&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19695492&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000269431700019&link_type=ISI) 3. 3.Robinson LJ, Wampfler R, Betuela I, Karl S, White MT, Li Wai Suen CS, et al. Strategies for understanding and reducing the Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium ovale hypnozoite reservoir in Papua New Guinean children: a randomised placebo-controlled trial and mathematical model. PLoS Med. 2015;12(10):e1001891. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001891&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26505753&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 4. 4.Anstey NM, Douglas NM, Poespoprodjo JR, Price RN. Plasmodium vivax: clinical spectrum, risk factors and pathogenesis. Adv Parasitol. 2012;80:151–201. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/B978-0-12-397900-1.00003-7&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23199488&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 5. 5.Cheng Q, Cunningham J, Gatton ML. Systematic review of sub-microscopic P. vivax infections: prevalence and determining factors. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9(1):e3413. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pntd.0003413&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25569135&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 6. 6.Lin E, Kiniboro B, Gray L, Dobbie S, Robinson L, Laumaea A, et al. Differential patterns of infection and disease with P. falciparum and P. vivax in young Papua New Guinean children. PLoS One. 2010;5(2):e9047. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0009047&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20140220&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 7. 7.Mueller I, Galinski MR, Tsuboi T, Arevalo-Herrera M, Collins WE, King CL. Natural acquisition of immunity to Plasmodium vivax: epidemiological observations and potential targets. Adv Parasitol. 2013;81:77–131. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/B978-0-12-407826-0.00003-5&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23384622&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 8. 8.Wampfler R, Mwingira F, Javati S, Robinson L, Betuela I, Siba P, et al. Strategies for detection of Plasmodium species gametocytes. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e76316. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0076316&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24312682&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 9. 9.Kochayoo P, Changrob S, Wangriatisak K, Lee SK, Chootong P, Han ET. The persistence of naturally acquired antibodies and memory B cells specific to rhoptry proteins of Plasmodium vivax in patients from areas of low malaria transmission. Malar J. 2019;18(1):382. 10. 10.Wipasa J, Suphavilai C, Okell LC, Cook J, Corran PH, Thaikla K, et al. Long-lived antibody and B Cell memory responses to the human malaria parasites, Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax. PLoS Pathog. 2010;6(2):e1000770. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.ppat.1000770&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20174609&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 11. 11.Longley RJ, White MT, Takashima E, Brewster J, Morita M, Harbers M, et al. Development and validation of serological markers for detecting recent Plasmodium vivax infection. Nat Med. 2020;26(5):741–9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41591-020-0841-4&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32405064&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 12. 12.Drakeley CJ, Corran PH, Coleman PG, Tongren JE, McDonald SL, Carneiro I, et al. Estimating medium- and longterm trends in malaria transmission by using serological markers of malaria exposure. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102(14):5108–13. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTAyLzE0LzUxMDgiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wOC8yNi8yMDIwLjA3LjAxLjIwMTQzNTAzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 13. 13.Drakeley C, Cook J. Chapter 5. Potential contribution of sero-epidemiological analysis for monitoring malaria control and elimination: historical and current perspectives. Adv Parasitol. 2009;69:299–352. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0065-308X(09)69005-9&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19622411&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 14. 14.Rosas-Aguirre A, Guzman-Guzman M, Gamboa D, Chuquiyauri R, Ramirez R, Manrique P, et al. Microheterogeneity of malaria transmission in the Peruvian Amazon: a baseline assessment underlying a population-based cohort study. Malar J. 2017;16(1):312. 15. 15.WHO. World Malaria Report 2017. Geneva Switzerland: World Health Organization. 2017. 16. 16.MINSA. Ministerio de Salud del Perú: Boletín epidemiológico del Perú 2016 SE 52. 2016;25(52):1178–86. 17. 17.Rosas-Aguirre A, Gamboa D, Manrique P, Conn JE, Moreno M, Lescano AG, et al. Epidemiology of Plasmodium vivax Malaria in Peru. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016;95(6 Suppl):133–44. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoidHJvcG1lZCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI5NS8xLzEzMyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 18. 18.Carrasco-Escobar G, Miranda-Alban J, Fernandez-Minope C, Brouwer KC, Torres K, Calderon M, et al. High prevalence of very-low Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax parasitaemia carriers in the Peruvian Amazon: insights into local and occupational mobility-related transmission. Malar J. 2017;16(1):415. 19. 19.Longley RJ, Reyes-Sandoval A, Montoya-Diaz E, Dunachie S, Kumpitak C, Nguitragool W, et al. Acquisition and Longevity of Antibodies to Plasmodium vivax Preerythrocytic Antigens in Western Thailand. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2016;23(2):117–24. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY2RsaSI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiIyMy8yLzExNyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 20. 20.Monteiro W, Karl S, et al. Prevalence and force of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum blood stage infection and associated clinical malaria burden in the Brazilian Amazon. PLoS One. 2020;(in press). 21. 21.Rosanas-Urgell A, Mueller D, Betuela I, Barnadas C, Iga J, Zimmerman PA, et al. Comparison of diagnostic methods for the detection and quantification of the four sympatric Plasmodium species in field samples from Papua New Guinea. Malar J. 2010;9:361. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/1475-2875-9-361&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21156052&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 22. 22.Longley RJ, Franca CT, White MT, Kumpitak C, Sa-Angchai P, Gruszczyk J, et al. Asymptomatic Plasmodium vivax infections induce robust IgG responses to multiple blood-stage proteins in a low-transmission region of western Thailand. Malar J. 2017;16(1):178. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s12936-017-1826-8&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28454546&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 23. 23.Fox J, Weisberg S. An {R} Companion to Applied Regression. Second Edition Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. 2011. 24. 24.Grömping U. Relative Importance for Linear Regression in R: The Package relaimpo. Journal of Statistical Software. 2006;17(1):1–27. 25. 25.He WQ, Karl S, White MT, Nguitragool W, Monteiro W, Kuehn A, et al. Antibodies to Plasmodium vivax reticulocyte binding protein 2b are associated with protection against P. vivax malaria in populations living in low malaria transmission regions of Brazil and Thailand. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(8):e0007596. 26. 26.Franca CT, White MT, He WQ, Hostetler JB, Brewster J, Frato G, et al. Identification of highly-protective combinations of Plasmodium vivax recombinant proteins for vaccine development. Elife. 2017;6. 27. 27.King CL, Davies DH, Felgner P, Baum E, Jain A, Randall A, et al. Biosignatures of Exposure/Transmission and Immunity. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015;93(3 Suppl):16–27. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoidHJvcG1lZCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMzoiOTMvM19TdXBwbC8xNiI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 28. 28.Ndungu FM, Olotu A, Mwacharo J, Nyonda M, Apfeld J, Mramba LK, et al. Memory B cells are a more reliable archive for historical antimalarial responses than plasma antibodies in no-longer exposed children. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(21):8247–52. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTA5LzIxLzgyNDciO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wOC8yNi8yMDIwLjA3LjAxLjIwMTQzNTAzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 29. 29.Akpogheneta OJ, Duah NO, Tetteh KK, Dunyo S, Lanar DE, Pinder M, et al. Duration of naturally acquired antibody responses to blood-stage Plasmodium falciparum is age dependent and antigen specific. Infect Immun. 2008;76(4):1748–55. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiaWFpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6Ijc2LzQvMTc0OCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 30. 30.Elliott SR, Fowkes FJ, Richards JS, Reiling L, Drew DR, Beeson JG. Research priorities for the development and implementation of serological tools for malaria surveillance. F1000Prime Rep. 2014;6:100. 31. 31.Longley RJ, White MT, Takashima E, Morita M, Kanoi BN, Li Wai Suen CSN, et al. Naturally acquired antibody responses to more than 300 Plasmodium vivax proteins in three geographic regions. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(9):e0005888. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pntd.0005888&link_type=DOI) 32. 32.Lim KJ, Park JW, Yeom JS, Lee YH, Yoo SB, Oh JH, et al. Humoral responses against the C-terminal region of merozoite surface protein 1 can be remembered for more than 30 years in persons exposed to Plasmodium vivax. Parasitol Res. 2004;92(5):384–9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s00436-003-1009-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=14745545&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000220564200006&link_type=ISI) 33. 33.Good KL, Avery DT, Tangye SG. Resting human memory B cells are intrinsically programmed for enhanced survival and responsiveness to diverse stimuli compared to naive B cells. J Immunol. 2009;182(2):890–901. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiamltbXVub2wiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6OToiMTgyLzIvODkwIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDgvMjYvMjAyMC4wNy4wMS4yMDE0MzUwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 34. 34.Chuquiyauri R, Molina DM, Moss EL, Wang R, Gardner MJ, Brouwer KC, et al. Genome-Scale Protein Microarray Comparison of Human Antibody Responses in Plasmodium vivax Relapse and Reinfection. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015;93(4):801–9. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoidHJvcG1lZCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI5My80LzgwMSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 35. 35.Stewart L, Gosling R, Griffin J, Gesase S, Campo J, Hashim R, et al. Rapid assessment of malaria transmission using age-specific sero-conversion rates. PLoS One. 2009;4(6):e6083. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0006083&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19562032&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 36. 36.Lana R, Nekkab N, Siqueira A, Peterka C, Marchesini P, Lacerda M, et al. The top 1% - quantifying the unequal distribution of malaria: the case of Brazil. 2020:Forthcoming. 37. 37.Rosas-Aguirre A, Guzman-Guzman M, Chuquiyauri R, Moreno M, Manrique P, Ramirez R, et al. Temporal and micro-spatial heterogeneity in transmission dynamics of co-endemic Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum in two rural cohort populations in the Peruvian Amazon. J Infect Dis. 2020. 38. 38.Rosas-Aguirre A, Patra KP, Calderon M, Torres K, Gamboa D, Arocutipa E, et al. Anti-MSP-10 IgG indicates recent exposure to Plasmodium vivax infection in the Peruvian Amazon. JCI Insight. 2020;5(1). 39. 39.Galinski MR, Medina CC, Ingravallo P, Barnwell JW. A reticulocyte-binding protein complex of Plasmodium vivax merozoites. Cell. 1992;69(7):1213–26. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0092-8674(92)90642-P&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=1617731&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1992JA43100015&link_type=ISI) 40. 40.Franca CT, He WQ, Gruszczyk J, Lim NT, Lin E, Kiniboro B, et al. Plasmodium vivax Reticulocyte Binding Proteins Are Key Targets of Naturally Acquired Immunity in Young Papua New Guinean Children. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(9):e0005014. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pntd.0005014&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27677183&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 41. 41.Tran TM, Oliveira-Ferreira J, Moreno A, Santos F, Yazdani SS, Chitnis CE, et al. Comparison of IgG reactivities to Plasmodium vivax merozoite invasion antigens in a Brazilian Amazon population. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2005;73(2):244–55. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoidHJvcG1lZCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI3My8yLzI0NCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 42. 42.Greenhouse B, Daily J, Guinovart C, Goncalves B, Beeson J, Bell D, et al. Priority use cases for antibody-detecting assays of recent malaria exposure as tools to achieve and sustain malaria elimination. Gates Open Res. 2019;3:131. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.12688/gatesopenres.12897.1&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=31172051&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 43. 43.Rosas-Aguirre A, Speybroeck N, Llanos-Cuentas A, Rosanas-Urgell A, Carrasco-Escobar G, Rodriguez H, et al. Hotspots of Malaria Transmission in the Peruvian Amazon: Rapid Assessment through a Parasitological and Serological Survey. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0137458. 44. 44.Surendra H, Supargiyono, Ahmad RA, Kusumasari RA, Rahayujati TB, Damayanti SY, et al. Using health facilitybased serological surveillance to predict receptive areas at risk of malaria outbreaks in elimination areas. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s12916-019-1482-7&link_type=DOI) 45. 45.Tongren JE, Drakeley CJ, McDonald SL, Reyburn HG, Manjurano A, Nkya WM, et al. Target antigen, age, and duration of antigen exposure independently regulate immunoglobulin G subclass switching in malaria. Infect Immun. 2006;74(1):257–64. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiaWFpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6Ijc0LzEvMjU3IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDgvMjYvMjAyMC4wNy4wMS4yMDE0MzUwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 46. 46.Fernandez-Becerra C, Sanz S, Brucet M, Stanisic DI, Alves FP, Camargo EP, et al. Naturally-acquired humoral immune responses against the N- and C-termini of the Plasmodium vivax MSP1 protein in endemic regions of Brazil and Papua New Guinea using a multiplex assay. Malar J. 2010;9:29. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/1475-2875-9-29&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20092651&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F08%2F26%2F2020.07.01.20143503.atom) 47. 47.He WQ, Shakri AR, Bhardwaj R, Franca CT, Stanisic DI, Healer J, et al. Antibody responses to Plasmodium vivax Duffy binding and Erythrocyte binding proteins predict risk of infection and are associated with protection from clinical Malaria. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(2):e0006987. 48. 48.Morais CG, Soares IS, Carvalho LH, Fontes CJ, Krettli AU, Braga EM. Antibodies to Plasmodium vivax apical membrane antigen 1: persistence and correlation with malaria transmission intensity. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2006;75(4):582–7. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoidHJvcG1lZCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI3NS80LzU4MiI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA4LzI2LzIwMjAuMDcuMDEuMjAxNDM1MDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9)