BACKGROUND The use of high-throughput technologies has enabled rapid advancement in the knowledge of host immune responses to pathogens. Our objective was to compare the repertoire, protection, and maternal factors associated with human milk antibodies to infectious pathogens in different economic and geographic locations.METHODS Using multipathogen protein microarrays, 878 milk and 94 paired serum samples collected from 695 women in 5 high and low-to-middle income countries (Bangladesh, Finland, Peru, Pakistan, and the United States) were assessed for specific IgA and IgG antibodies to 1,607 proteins from 30 enteric, respiratory, and bloodborne pathogens.RESULTS The antibody coverage across enteric and respiratory pathogens was highest in Bangladeshi and Pakistani cohorts and lowest in the U.S. and Finland. While some pathogens induced a dominant IgA response (Campylobacter, Klebsiella, Acinetobacter, Cryptosporidium, and pertussis), others elicited both IgA and IgG antibodies in milk and serum, possibly related to the invasiveness of the infection (Shigella, enteropathogenic E. coli “EPEC”, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Group B Streptococcus). Besides the differences between economic regions and decreases in concentrations over time, human milk IgA and IgG antibody concentrations were lower in mothers with high BMI and higher parity, respectively. In Bangladeshi infants, a higher specific IgA concentration in human milk was associated with delayed time to rotavirus infection, implying protective properties of antirotavirus antibodies, whereas a higher IgA antibody concentration was associated with greater incidence of Campylobacter infection.CONCLUSION This comprehensive assessment of human milk antibody profiles may be used to guide the development of passive protection strategies against infant morbidity and mortality.FUNDING Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grant OPP1172222 (to KMJ); Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grant OPP1066764 funded the MDIG trial (to DER); University of Rochester CTSI and Environmental Health Sciences Center funded the Rochester Lifestyle study (to RJL); and R01 AI043596 funded PROVIDE (to WAP).
Joseph J. Campo, Antti E. Seppo, Arlo Z. Randall, Jozelyn Pablo, Chris Hung, Andy Teng, Adam D. Shandling, Johnathon Truong, Amit Oberai, James Miller, Najeeha Talat Iqbal, Pablo Peñataro Yori, Anna Kaarina Kukkonen, Mikael Kuitunen, L. Beryl Guterman, Shaun K. Morris, Lisa G. Pell, Abdullah Al Mahmud, Girija Ramakrishan, Eva Heinz, Beth D. Kirkpatrick, Abu S.G. Faruque, Rashidul Haque, R. John Looney, Margaret N. Kosek, Erkki Savilahti, Saad B. Omer, Daniel E. Roth, William A. Petri Jr., Kirsi M. Järvinen
Usage data is cumulative from August 2024 through April 2025.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 4,737 | 342 |
654 | 122 | |
Figure | 1,054 | 4 |
Table | 217 | 0 |
Supplemental data | 518 | 16 |
Citation downloads | 151 | 0 |
Totals | 7,331 | 484 |
Total Views | 7,815 |
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.