Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Sep 8.
Published in final edited form as: Vaccine. 2008 Jul 29;26(38):4880–4884. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.07.017

Table 1.

Protection of mice immunized with CAS or RAS against challenge with wild-type sporozoites

Group Mouse strain Immunizationa RAS/CAS × 103 Challengeb Day of challenge Sterile immunity? Prepatent period (days) No. protected (no. challenged)
Controlc
CASd
RAS
1 BALB/c 50/20/20 (P.y.) 100 (P.y.) 10 yes NAe 0 (8) 4 (4) 4 (4)
2 BALB/c 20 (P.y.) 100 (P.y.) 21 no 1.5f 0 (5) 0 (5) 0 (5)
3 BALB/c 50/20/20 (P.b.) 100 (P.y.) 10 yes NA 0 (8) 4 (4) 4 (4)
4 BALB/c 50/20/20 (P.b.) 100 (P.y.) 21 no <2g 0 (11) 0 (8) 0 (8)
a

Groups of mice were immunized with P. berghei ANKA (P.b.) or P. yoelii 17XNL (P.y.) control (vehicle-treated) sporozoites, CAS, or RAS as indicated, isolated from the same mosquito batches and were immunized at 7 day intervals.

b

Groups of mice were challenged with P. berghei ANKA or P. yoelii 17XNL wild-type sporozoites

c

Naïve, age-matched mice were used at the time of all immunizations and challenges.

d

Statistical analysis using Fisher exact test for comparison of Control and CAS groups gave p<0.002 for groups 1 and 3.

e

NA, not applicable.

f

Naïve, age-matched mice developed patent parasitemia 1.5 days p.i. in both the CAS and RAS groups.

g

All mice showed patent parasitemia 2 days p.i.