Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
    • Video Abstracts
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • Complement Biology and Therapeutics (May 2025)
    • Evolving insights into MASLD and MASH pathogenesis and treatment (Apr 2025)
    • Microbiome in Health and Disease (Feb 2025)
    • Substance Use Disorders (Oct 2024)
    • Clonal Hematopoiesis (Oct 2024)
    • Sex Differences in Medicine (Sep 2024)
    • Vascular Malformations (Apr 2024)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Editorials
    • Commentaries
    • Editor's notes
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
    • 100th anniversary
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Video Abstracts
  • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Editorials
  • Commentaries
  • Editor's notes
  • Reviews
  • Viewpoints
  • 100th anniversary
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

Differential recognition of a protective filarial antigen by antibodies from humans with bancroftian filariasis.
J W Kazura, … , H Cicirello, K Forsyth
J W Kazura, … , H Cicirello, K Forsyth
Published June 1, 1986
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 1986;77(6):1985-1992. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI112527.
View: Text | PDF
Research Article

Differential recognition of a protective filarial antigen by antibodies from humans with bancroftian filariasis.

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

The objectives of this study were to identify filarial antigens which induce enhanced clearance of circulating microfilariae and to establish if human antibody reactivity with these molecules correlates with the apparent parasite burdens of residents of an endemic area of Bancroftian filariasis. Mice immunized with an extract of Brugia malayi microfilariae develop IgG antibodies to four major filarial antigens with an apparent molecular weight (Mr) of approximately 112,000, 60,000, 45,000, and 25,000. Animals immunized with gel slices containing the approximately 25,000-Mr antigen are resistant to intravenous challenge with live microfilariae (78-98% reduction in parasitemia vs. controls, P less than 0.01). A group of 22 amicrofilaremic humans had a significantly higher (P less than 0.025) mean antibody titer to the Mr 25,000-Mr antigen (1: 424) than 16 microfilaremic individuals (1:95). There were no significant differences between the two groups in antibody titers to filarial antigens of Mr approximately 112,000, 60,000, and 45,000 Mr. These data suggest that a high degree of reactivity to the 25,000-Mr antigen in humans with lymphatic filariasis correlates with a parasitologic status that is least conducive to transmission of infection.

Authors

J W Kazura, H Cicirello, K Forsyth

×

Usage data is cumulative from June 2024 through June 2025.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 223 0
PDF 145 9
Figure 0 3
Scanned page 604 0
Citation downloads 88 0
Totals 1,060 12
Total Views 1,072
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2025 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts