| Literature DB >> 25830474 |
Rutendo B L Zinyama-Gutsire1, Charles Chasela2, Hans O Madsen3, Simbarashe Rusakaniko4, Per Kallestrup5, Michael Christiansen6, Exnevia Gomo7, Henrik Ullum7, Christian Erikstrup3, Shungu Munyati8, Edith N Kurewa4, Babill Stray-Pedersen9, Peter Garred10, Takafira Mduluza11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Polymorphism in the MBL2 gene lead to MBL deficiency, which has been shown to increase susceptibility to various bacterial, viral and parasitic infections. We assessed role of MBL deficiency in HIV-1 and schistosoma infections in Zimbabwean adults enrolled in the Mupfure Schistosomiasis and HIV Cohort (MUSH Cohort).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25830474 PMCID: PMC4382150 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122659
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Participant Flow diagram.
Flow chart showing the recruitment procedures for the adult cohort. A total of 2281 community dwelling rural adult males and females were screened for HIV and schistosomiasis, 379 males and females who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled and their baseline blood samples used for MBL plasma and MBL2 genotype analysis.
Comparison of median plasma MBL concentrations between groups.
|
|
|
| IQR μg/L | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Males | 76 | 824 | 159–1968 | |
| Females | 302 | 800 | 200–1936 | 0.561 |
|
| ||||
| <25 years old | 82 | 920 | 209–2608 | |
| >25 years old | 297 | 776 | 166–1864 | 0.202 |
|
| ||||
| Positive | 197 | 688 | 147–1904 | |
| Negative | 181 | 912 | 272–1968 | 0.065 |
|
| ||||
| No infection | 89 | 656 | 139–1152 | |
| | 205 | 912 | 213–2320 | |
| | 24 | 1016 | 258–2192 | |
| Coinfected with both species | 37 | 688 | 297–2432 | 0.036 |
|
| ||||
| | 102 | 824 | 151–2160 | |
| | 103 | 944 | 251–2496 | |
| | 44 | 656 | 65–1176 | |
| | 45 | 707 | 163–1152 | 0.037 |
|
| ||||
| | 205 | 912 | 213–2320 | |
| | 89 | 656 | 139–1152 | 0.006 |
|
| ||||
| Above 40pg/ml (CAA positive) | 293 | 848 | 161–2232 | |
| Below 40pg/ml (CAA negative) | 63 | 784 | 346–1152 | 0.308 |
|
| ||||
| 0 (no infection) | 108 | 705 | 145–1264 | |
| <10 (light infection) | 123 | 896 | 230–2112 | |
| 10-<50 (medium infection) | 55 | 1408 | 182–2528 | |
| >50 (heavy infection) | 9 | 295 | 87–2816 | 0.109 |
The concentration of MBL in plasma was measured in μg/L. Differences in median plasma MBL concentration in the different infection status categories were analysed by using non-parametric tests Mann-Whitney for two categories and Kruskal-Wallis for three or more categories.
Distribution of participants between three plasma MBL levels, participants stratified according HIV, S. haematobium and S. mansoni infection and co-infection status.
| HIV status | n | Normal MBL levels | Reduced MBL levels | Deficient MBL levels | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIV positive | 197 | 113 (57%) | 41 (21%) | 43 (22%) | |
| HIV negative | 181 | 121 (67%) | 36 (20%) | 24 (13%) | 0.070 |
|
| |||||
| | 205 | 131 (64%) | 38(19%) | 36 (17%) | |
| | 89 | 51 (57%) | 17(19%) | 21 (24%) | 0.446 |
|
| |||||
| No infection (controls) | 89 | 51(57%) | 17 (195) | 21(24%) | |
| | 205 | 131(64%) | 38(19%) | 36(18%0 | |
| | 24 | 15(63%) | 6(25%) | 3(13%) | |
| Co-infected with both species | 37 | 23(62%) | 11(30%) | 3(8%) | 0.351 |
|
| |||||
| HIV+/ | 102 | 64(63%) | 17(17%) | 21(21%) | |
| HIV+/ | 44 | 23(52%) | 8(18%) | 13(30%) | |
| HIV-/ | 103 | 67(65%) | 21(20%) | 15(15%) | |
| HIV-/ | 45 | 28(62%) | 9(20%) | 8(18%) | 0.546 |
Prevalence of MBL deficiency, plasma MBL concentration was categorised into normal (above 500μg/L), intermediate (100μg/L- 500μg/L) and deficient (below 100μg/L), analysed by the Chi Square or Fisher’s exact tests, n = 378.
Gene, promoter alleles and haplotype frequencies obtained for MBL2 polymorphism among the enrolled Zimbabwean participants.
| N | Frequency% | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
|
| 587 | 80 |
|
| 3 | 0.4 |
|
| 141 | 20 |
|
| 1 | 0.1 |
|
| ||
|
| 38 | 5 |
|
| 694 | 95 |
|
| 134 | 18 |
|
| 598 | 82 |
|
| 343 | 47 |
|
| 389 | 53 |
|
| ||
|
| 233 | 64 |
|
| 3 | 0.8 |
|
| 117 | 32 |
|
| 1 | 0.2 |
| CC | 12 | 3 |
|
| ||
|
| 1 | 0.3 |
|
| 37 | 10.1 |
|
| 328 | 89.6 |
|
| 242 | 66.1 |
|
| 112 | 30.0 |
|
| 12 | 3.2 |
|
| 74 | 20.2 |
|
| 97 | 26.5 |
|
| 195 | 53.3 |
|
| ||
| 1. | 260 | 35.5 |
| 2. | 183 | 25.0 |
| 3. | 108 | 14.6 |
| 4. | 58 | 7.9 |
| 5. | 45 | 6.1 |
| 6. | 41 | 5.6 |
| 7. | 31 | 4.2 |
| 8. | 2 | 0.3 |
| 9. | 2 | 0.3 |
| 10. | 1 | 0.1 |
| 11. | 1 | 0.1 |
MBL2 gene and allele frequencies obtained by direct gene counting, frequencies expressed as percentages.
Distribution of participants between MBL2 genotypes and promoter region haplotypes, participants stratified according to HIV-1 infection status.
|
| n | HIV negative | HIV positive | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 233 | 117 (50%) | 116 (50%) | |
|
| 121 | 55 (45%) | 66 (55%) | |
|
| 12 | 4 (33%) | 8 (67%) | 0.429 |
|
| 223 | 113(51%) | 110(49%) | |
|
| 131 | 59(45%) | 72(55%) | |
|
| 12 | 4(33%) | 8(67%) | 0.347 |
|
| ||||
|
| 1 | 1(100%) | 0(0%) | |
|
| 37 | 22(59%) | 15(41%) | |
|
| 328 | 153(47%) | 175(53%) | 0.141 |
|
| 31 | 19(61%) | 12(39%) | |
|
| 326 | 154(47%) | 172(53%) | |
|
| 9 | 3(33%) | 6(67%) | 0.229 |
|
| 242 | 120(50%) | 122(50%) | |
|
| 112 | 52(46%) | 60(54%) | |
|
| 12 | 4(33%) | 8(67%) | 0.521 |
|
| 38 | 23(61%) | 15(39%) | |
|
| 328 | 153(47%) | 175(53%) | 0.105 |
|
| 74 | 37(50%) | 37(50%) | |
|
| 97 | 55(57%) | 42(43%) | |
|
| 195 | 98(50%) | 97(49%) | 0.545 |
This analysis was done using the Chi Square and Fisher’s exact tests, n = 366
Distribution of participants between MBL2 genotypes and promoter region haplotypes according to schistosoma infection status.
|
| N | No infection (controls) |
|
| Coinfected with both species | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 216 | 51(24%) | 128(59%) | 15(7%) | 22(10%) | |
|
| 117 | 33(28%) | 62(53%) | 9(8%) | 13(11%) | |
|
| 11 | 4(36%) | 6(55%) | 0(0%) | 1(9%) | 0.893 |
|
| 208 | 49(23%) | 123(59%) | 14(7%) | 22(11%) | |
|
| 125 | 35(28%) | 67(54%) | 10(8%) | 13(10%) | |
|
| 11 | 4(36%) | 6(55%) | 0(0%) | 1(9%) | 0.903 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 1 | 0(0%) | 1(100%) | 0(0%) | 0(0%) | |
|
| 34 | 15(44%) | 18(53%) | 0(0%) | 1(3%) | |
|
| 309 | 73(24%) | 177(57%) | 24(8%) | 35(11%) | 0.051 |
|
| 28 | 14(50%) | 13(46%) | 0(0%) | 1(4%) | |
|
| 307 | 72(24%) | 178(58%) | 23(7%) | 34(11%) | |
|
| 9 | 2(22%) | 5(56%) | 1(11%) | 1(11%) | 0.072 |
|
| 228 | 65(29%) | 122(54%) | 14(6%) | 27(12%) | |
|
| 106 | 21(20%) | 68(64%) | 9(8%) | 8(8%) | |
|
| 10 | 2(20%) | 6(60%) | 1(10%) | 1(10%) | 0.351 |
|
| 35 | 15(43%) | 19(54%) | 0(0%) | 1(3%) | |
|
| 309 | 73(24%) | 177(57%) | 24(8%) | 35(11%) | 0.026 |
|
| 69 | 16 (23%) | 43(62%) | 3(4%) | 7(10%) | |
|
| 88 | 17(19%) | 50(57%) | 8(9%) | 13(15%) | |
|
| 187 | 55(29%) | 103(55%) | 13(7%) | 16(9%) | 0.381 |
This analysis was done using the Fisher’s exact tests, n = 344
Distribution of participants between MBL2 genotypes and promoter region haplotypes according to schistosoma infection status.
|
| n |
|
| P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 179 | 51(28%) | 128(72%) | |
|
| 95 | 33(35%) | 62(65%) | |
|
| 10 | 4(40%) | 6(60%) | 0.466 |
|
| 172 | 49(28%) | 123(72%) | |
|
| 102 | 35(34%) | 67(66%) | |
|
| 10 | 4(40%) | 6(60%) | 0.505 |
|
| ||||
|
| 1 | 0(0%) | 1(100%) | |
|
| 33 | 15(45%) | 18(55%) | |
|
| 250 | 73(29%) | 177(71%) | 0.132 |
|
| 27 | 14(52%) | 13(48%) | |
|
| 250 | 72(29%) | 178(71%) | |
|
| 7 | 2(29%) | 5(71%) | 0.048 |
|
| 187 | 65(35%) | 122(65%) | |
|
| 89 | 21(24%) | 68(76%) | |
|
| 8 | 2(25%) | 6(75%) | 0.161 |
|
| 34 | 15(44%) | 19(56%) | |
|
| 250 | 73(29%) | 177(71%) | 0.078 |
|
| 59 | 16(27%) | 43(73%) | |
|
| 67 | 17(25%) | 50(75%) | |
|
| 158 | 55(35%) | 103(65%) | 0.289 |
This analysis was done using the Chi Square or Fisher’s exact tests, n = 284
Distribution of participants between MBL2 promoter region haplotypes according to HIV and S. haematobium co-infection status.
| M | N | HIV-/ | HIV+/ | HIV-/ | HIV+/ | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 179 | 27(15%) | 64(36%) | 64(36%) | 24(13%) | |
|
| 95 | 16(17%) | 30(32%) | 32(34%) | 17(18%) | |
|
| 10 | 1(10%) | 3(30%) | 3(30%) | 330(%) | 0.802 |
|
| 172 | 26(15%) | 61(36%) | 62(36%) | 23(13%) | |
|
| 102 | 17(17%) | 33(32%) | 34(33%) | 18(18%) | |
|
| 10 | 1(10%) | 3(30%) | 3(30%) | 3(30%) | 0.830 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 1 | 0(0%) | 0(0%) | 1(100%) | 0(0%) | |
|
| 33 | 8(24%) | 7(21%) | 11(33%) | 17(21%) | |
|
| 250 | 36(14%) | 90(36%) | 87(35%) | 37(15%) | 0.384 |
|
| 27 | 8(30%) | 5(19%) | 8(30%) | 6(22%) | |
|
| 250 | 35(14%) | 89(36%) | 89(36%) | 37(15%) | |
|
| 7 | 1(14%) | 3(43%) | 2(29%) | 1(14%) | 0.295 |
|
| 187 | 32(17%) | 59(32%) | 64(34%) | 32(17%) | |
|
| 89 | 11(12%) | 34(38%) | 33(37%) | 11(12%) | |
|
| 8 | 1(13%) | 4(50%) | 2(25%) | 1(13%) | 0.729 |
|
| 34 | 8(24%) | 7(21%) | 12(35%) | 7(21%) | |
|
| 250 | 36(14%) | 90(36%) | 87(35%) | 37(15%) | 0.227 |
|
| 59 | 7(12%) | 20(34%) | 23(39%) | 9(15%) | |
|
| 67 | 7(10%) | 26(39%) | 24(36%) | 10(15%) | |
|
| 158 | 30(19%) | 51(32%) | 52(33%) | 25(16%) | 0.685 |
This analysis was done using the Chi Square or Fisher’s exact tests, n = 284