BackgroundSerum lipid profile changes have been observed during malaria infection. The underlying biological mechanisms remain unclear. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview on those serum lipid profile changes, and to discuss possible underlying biological mechanisms and the role of lipids in malaria pathogenesis.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis to determine lipid profile changes during malaria was conducted, following PRISMA guidelines. Without language restrictions, Medline/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, LILACS, Biosis Previews and the African Index Medicus were searched for studies published up to 11 July, 2013, that measured serum lipid parameters in malaria patients. Also, major trial registries were searched. Mean differences in lipid profile parameters were combined in fixed and random effects meta-analysis, with a separate analysis for different groups of controls (healthy, other febrile illnesses or very low parasitaemia). These parameters were also compared between severe malaria and uncomplicated malaria. Funnel plots were used to test for publication bias.ResultsOf 2,518 studies reviewed, 42 met the criteria for inclusion in the qualitative analysis, and of these, 15 reported the necessary data for inclusion in the meta-analysis for cholesterol; nine for high-density lipoprotein (HDL), eight for low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and nine for triglycerides, respectively. Total cholesterol, HDL and LDL concentrations were lower in malaria and other febrile diseases compared to healthy controls. The decline was more pronounced and statistically significant during malaria compared to other febrile diseases. These results were consistent across included studies. Triglycerides were raised compared to healthy controls, but not statistically significant when compared to symptomatic controls.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that the observed lipid profile changes are characteristic for malaria. Although a definite link with the pathogenesis of malaria cannot yet be demonstrated, plausible hypotheses of biological mechanisms involving host lipid alterations and the pathogenesis of malaria exist. An increased research effort to elucidate the precise pathways is warranted, since this could lead to better understanding of malaria pathophysiology and consequently to novel treatment approaches.

IntroductionPrompted by recent amendments of Yellow Fever (YF) vaccination guidelines from boost to single vaccination strategy and the paucity of clinical data to support this adjustment, we used the profile of the YF-specific CD8+ T-cell subset profiles after primary vaccination and neutralizing antibodies as a proxy for potentially longer lasting immunity.Methods and FindingsPBMCs and serum were collected in six individuals on days 0, 3, 5, 12, 28 and 180, and in 99 individuals >10 years after YF-vaccination. Phenotypic characteristics of YF- tetramer+ CD8+ T-cells were determined using class I tetramers. Antibody responses were measured using a standardized plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT). Also, characteristics of YF-tetramer positive CD8+ T-cells were compared between individuals who had received a primary- and a booster vaccination. YF-tetramer+ CD8+ T-cells were detectable on day 12 (median tetramer+ cells as percentage of CD8+ T-cells 0.2%, range 0.07–3.1%). On day 180, these cells were still present (median 0.06%, range 0.02–0.78%). The phenotype of YF-tetramer positive CD8+ T-cells shifted from acute phase effector cells on day 12, to late differentiated or effector memory phenotype (CD45RA-/+CD27-) on day 28. Two subsets of YF-tetramer positive T-cells (CD45RA+CD27- and CD45RA+CD27+) persisted until day 180. Within all phenotypic subsets, the T-bet: Eomes ratio tended to be high on day 28 after vaccination and shifted towards predominant Eomes expression on day 180 (median 6.0 (day 28) vs. 2.2 (day 180) p = 0.0625), suggestive of imprinting compatible with long-lived memory properties. YF-tetramer positive CD8+ T-cells were detectable up to 18 years post vaccination, YF-specific antibodies were detectable up to 40 years after single vaccination. Booster vaccination did not increase titers of YF-specific antibodies (mean 12.5 vs. 13.1, p = 0.583), nor induce frequencies or alter phenotypes of YF-tetramer+ CD8+ T-cells.ConclusionThe presence of a functionally competent YF-specific memory T-cell pool 18 years and sufficient titers of neutralizing antibodies 35–40 years after first vaccination suggest that single vaccination may be sufficient to provide long-term immunity.

BackgroundArtemisinin combination therapy (ACT) is recommended as first-line treatment for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria, whereas chloroquine is still commonly used for the treatment of non-falciparum species (Plasmodium vivax, Plasmodium ovale and Plasmodium malariae). A more simplified, more uniform treatment approach across all malaria species is worthwhile to be considered both in endemic areas and for malaria as an imported condition alike.MethodsA PROSPERO-registered systematic review to determine the efficacy and safety of ACT for the treatment of non-falciparum malaria was conducted, following PRISMA guidelines. Without language restrictions, Medline/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, LILACS, Biosis Previews and the African Index Medicus were searched for studies published up to November 2014.ResultsThe literature search identified 986 reports; 40 publications were found eligible for inclusion, all of them on non-falciparum malaria in endemic areas. Most evidence was available for P. vivax (n = 35). Five clinical trials in total were identified evaluating ACT for P. ovale, P. malariae and Plasmodium knowlesi. Most ACT presentations have high efficacy against P. vivax parasites; artemisinin-based combinations have shorter parasite and fever clearance times compared to chloroquine. ACT is as effective as chloroquine in preventing recurrent parasitaemia before day 28. Artemisinin-based combinations with long half-lives show significantly fewer recurrent parasitaemia up to day 63. The limited evidence available supports both the use of chloroquine and an ACT for P. ovale and P. malariae. ACT seems to be preferable for optimal treatment of P. knowlesi.ConclusionACT is at least equivalent to chloroquine in effectively treating non-falciparum malaria. These findings may facilitate development of simplified protocols for treating all forms of malaria with ACT, including returning travellers. Obtaining comprehensive efficacy and safety data on ACT use for non-falciparum species particularly for P. ovale, P. malariae and P. knowlesi should be a research priority.Trial registrationCRD42014009103Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1475-2875-13-463) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.