| Literature DB >> 28586397 |
Francielle Tramontini Gomes de Sousa Cardozo1, Gyulnar Baimukanova2, Marion Christine Lanteri2,3, Sheila Marie Keating2,3, Frederico Moraes Ferreira4,5, John Heitman2, Cláudio Sérgio Pannuti1, Shibani Pati2, Camila Malta Romano1, Ester Cerdeira Sabino1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although most of cases of dengue infections are asymptomatic or mild symptomatic some individuals present warning signs progressing to severe dengue in which plasma leakage is a hallmark. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28586397 PMCID: PMC5460851 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178820
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Clinical and laboratory data of study participants.
| Control (n = 31) | No leakage (n = 29) | Leakage (n = 28) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 43 (22–56) | 36 (18–77) | 14 (1–62) | ||
| 0 | 0 | 2 | - | |
| 0 | 0 | 13 | - | |
| 4 | 5 | 1 | - | |
| 27 | 22 | 11 | - | |
| 0 | 2 | 1 | - | |
| 19 (61.29%) | 11 (37.93%) | 13 (46.43%) | ns | |
| nd | 156 (26–271) | 36 (10–167) | ||
| - | 3 (3–4) | 4 (2–7) | ns | |
| Distribution of days of symptoms | ||||
| 2 | - | 0 | 1 | - |
| 3 | - | 11 | 11 | - |
| 4 | - | 18 | 8 | - |
| 5 | - | 0 | 5 | - |
| 6 | - | 0 | 2 | - |
| 7 | - | 0 | 1 | - |
| - | 1.06 x 103(81–2.22 x 107) | 1.82 x 102(73–9.24 x 106) | ns | |
| - | 18 (62.07%) secondary | 27 (96.43%) secondary | ns | |
| 12 (37.93%) not detected | 1 (3.57%) not detected | |||
| - | 3 | 4 | - | |
| - | 10 | 1 | - | |
| - | 1 | 0 | - | |
| - | 9 | 2 | - | |
| 3 | 15 | - | ||
| 3 | 6 | - | ||
| - | - | 8 (28.57%) Peritoneal | - | |
| 4 (14.28%) Pleural | ||||
| 9 (32.14%) Pleural and Peritoneal | ||||
| 3 (10.71%) Peritoneal/Shock | ||||
| 4 (14.28%) Pleural/Shock | ||||
| - | 0 (0%) | 7 (25.00%) | ||
| - | 0 (0%) | 2 (7.14%) | ns | |
| - | 0 (0%) | 16 (57.14%) |
Abbreviations: nd, not determined; ns, not significant.
Values are given in number of patients (percentage of total).
a Age, platelet number, days of symptoms, and viral load are given in median (minimum-maximum).
b median age values were significantly different between control and leakage groups (p = 0.0009). No statistical differences were found between control and no leakage groups.
c Distribution of age groups.
d No statistical differences were found for gender between control and no leakage groups or between control and leakage groups.
e Distribution of days of symptoms: All the samples were collected upon hospital entrance and the day after symptom onset was calculated based on symptomatology described by the patient during the anamnesis. Only samples which were collected at days 2–7 after first symptom were selected to the current study.
f Hemorrhagic manifestations included petechiae, epistaxis, gingival bleeding, menorrhagia, hematuria, gastrointestinal, and/or pulmonary bleeding.
*Indicates statistical significance with p<0.05.
Fig 1Effect of serum from DENV-positive patients on TEER of endothelial cells.
Confluent monolayers of HUVECs cultured in ECIS arrays were treated or not with 10% serum from three different groups: Healthy blood donors (control, n = 13), DENV infected patients without leakage (no leakage, n = 13), or DENV infected patients with leakage (leakage, n = 13). (*) Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences (ANOVA/ Tukey’s test) between groups with p<0.05. TEER values were obtained at 30 (A) and 120 (B) min after treatment.
Fig 2Real-time impedance measurement throughout 5 h after treatment.
Confluent monolayers of HUVECs cultured in ECIS arrays were treated or not with 10% serum from three different groups: Healthy blood donors (control, n = 13), DENV infected patients without leakage (no leakage, n = 13), or DENV infected patients with leakage (leakage, n = 13). Graph A shows results from the first experiment and graph B from the second experiment.
Fig 3Serum albumin levels.
Albumin levels of serum from the three different groups: Healthy blood donors (control, n = 13), DENV infected patients without leakage (no leakage, n = 13), or DENV infected patients with leakage (leakage, n = 13) were quantified by the bromocresol purple method. Groups were compared by the ANOVA/Tukey’s test. *Statistically significant difference (p<0.05).
Fig 4Principal component analysis plot of immunomediators levels.
Serum samples from the following groups: healthy blood donors (control, n = 31), DENV infected patients without signs of plasma leakage (no leakage, n = 29), and DENV infected patients with signs of plasma leakage (leakage, n = 28) were assessed for 38 analytes, including cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors. The small square is the geometric center of each distribution and the ellipse represents the groups’ dispersion.
Comparison of immune components levels in serum from control, no leakage, and leakage groups.
| Analyte | No Leakage vs Control | Leakage vs Control | Leakage vs No Leakage | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fold change | adjusted | Fold change | adjusted | Fold change | adjusted | |
| CXCL1 | -5.02 | <0.001 | -11.04 | <0.001 | -2.20 | <0.001 |
| EGF | -3.67 | <0.001 | -13.39 | <0.001 | -3.64 | <0.001 |
| Eotaxin (CCL11) | -1.13 | 0.463 | -1.81 | <0.001 | -1.60 | 0.013 |
| FGF-2 | -1.77 | <0.001 | -1.63 | <0.001 | 1.08 | 0.616 |
| FLT-3L | -2.09 | 0.035 | -1.87 | 0.068 | 1.12 | 0.914 |
| Fractalkine (CX3CL1) | 1.07 | 0.614 | 1.16 | 0.250 | 1.09 | 0.657 |
| GCSF (CSF3) | 1.03 | 0.793 | 1.14 | 0.261 | 1.11 | 0.488 |
| GM-CSF (CSF2) | -1.18 | 0.187 | -1.15 | 0.253 | 1.02 | 0.918 |
| IFN-α2 | -1.07 | 0.614 | -1.04 | 0.799 | 1.04 | 0.918 |
| IFN-γ | 1.50 | 0.017 | -1.15 | 0.433 | -1.74 | 0.003 |
| IL-10 | 15.36 | <0.001 | 51.51 | <0.001 | 3.35 | 0.020 |
| IL-12p40 (IL-12β) | 17.03 | <0.001 | 32.14 | <0.001 | 1.89 | 0.488 |
| IL-12p70 | -1.37 | 0.292 | -1.59 | 0.097 | -1.16 | 0.765 |
| IL-13 | -1.11 | 0.786 | 1.01 | 0.977 | 1.12 | 0.916 |
| IL-15 | 1.43 | 0.405 | 2.35 | 0.030 | 1.65 | 0.366 |
| IL-17 | 1.46 | 0.405 | -1.14 | 0.791 | -1.67 | 0.366 |
| IL-1α | 8.26 | <0.001 | 13.38 | <0.001 | 1.62 | 0.059 |
| IL-1β | -1.39 | 0.405 | -1.12 | 0.791 | 1.24 | 0.743 |
| IL-1RA | -1.37 | 0.145 | -1.07 | 0.791 | 1.28 | 0.366 |
| IL-2 | 1.13 | 0.708 | 1.22 | 0.613 | 1.07 | 0.918 |
| IL-3 | -7.58 | <0.001 | -7.63 | <0.001 | -1.01 | 0.991 |
| IL-4 | -2.27 | 0.072 | -5.64 | <0.001 | -2.49 | 0.075 |
| IL-5 | -2.95 | 0.015 | -2.97 | 0.013 | -1.00 | 0.991 |
| IL-6 | 1.36 | 0.463 | 3.69 | 0.001 | 2.71 | 0.032 |
| IL-7 | -2.00 | 0.001 | -2.54 | <0.001 | -1.27 | 0.366 |
| IL-8 (CXCL8) | -1.09 | 0.696 | 1.13 | 0.613 | 1.23 | 0.488 |
| IL-9 | 1.85 | 0.118 | 1.64 | 0.216 | -1.13 | 0.914 |
| IP-10 (CXCL10) | 8.57 | 0.001 | 266.83 | <0.001 | 31.12 | <0.001 |
| MCP-1 (CCL2) | 2.72 | <0.001 | 2.45 | <0.001 | -1.11 | 0.766 |
| MCP-3 (CCL7) | -2.04 | 0.002 | -1.50 | 0.090 | 1.36 | 0.366 |
| MDC (CCL22) | -1.43 | 0.072 | -1.13 | 0.569 | 1.26 | 0.366 |
| MIP-1α (CCL3) | -1.32 | 0.292 | -1.28 | 0.337 | 1.03 | 0.948 |
| MIP-1β (CCL4) | -1.47 | 0.001 | -1.81 | <0.001 | -1.23 | 0.165 |
| sCD40L | -1.67 | 0.463 | -52.74 | <0.001 | -31.62 | <0.001 |
| TGF-α | 2.08 | 0.074 | -1.03 | 0.967 | -2.13 | 0.113 |
| TNF-α | -2.07 | <0.001 | -1.40 | 0.053 | 1.47 | 0.058 |
| TNF-β | -1.91 | 0.072 | -2.03 | 0.044 | -1.06 | 0.918 |
| VEGF (VEGFA) | 1.14 | 0.292 | 1.27 | 0.041 | 1.12 | 0.488 |
Results of quantification of each individual serum sample were used to calculate mean of the three groups. Groups were compared each other by fold change. Results with statistical significant differences (p<0.05) were highlighted in grey.
Fig 5Heat map.
Z-score hierarchical clustering based on squared Euclidean distance measure and Ward's method for linkage analysis. Each row represents one of the 38 cytokines and each column represents one sample. Samples from control (C, n = 13) no leakage (NL, n = 13) or leakage (L, n = 13) groups were arranged from left to right in descending order of TEER values. The color scale means the gene expression standard deviations from the mean, with yellow for low expression and blue for the high expression levels.