| Literature DB >> 28959938 |
Thalita Gagini1, Armando de Oliveira Schubach1, Maria de Fatima Madeira1, Cláudia Maria Valete-Rosalino2, Maria Inês Fernandes Pimentel1, Raquel da Silva Pacheco1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Forty-four strains isolated from a cohort of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) patients who did or did not respond to one course of treatment with meglumine antimoniate were investigated to explore genetic polymorphisms in parasite kinetoplast DNA minicircles. Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis strains isolated from responder (R) and non-responder (NR) patients who acquired infection in Rio de Janeiro or in other Brazilian states were studied using low-stringency single-specific primer polymerase chain reaction (LSSP-PCR) to identify genetic polymorphisms.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28959938 PMCID: PMC5621350 DOI: 10.1051/parasite/2017035
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasite ISSN: 1252-607X Impact factor: 3.000
Data obtained from genetic analyses of all the 44 samples of Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis studied.
| Sample code* | Therapeutic outcome | Origin (state) | Shared bands | Similarity Index | Cluster |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | – | 1, 7, 8, 9 | 0.93 | II | |
| 1071 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 9, 10, 13 | 0.80 | I |
| 983 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 5, 7, 10 | 1 | I |
| 986 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 5, 7, 10 | 1 | I |
| 891 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 5, 7, 9, 10 | 0.93 | I |
| 133 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 5, 7, 9, 10 | 0.89 | I |
| 766 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 | 1 | I |
| 768 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 | 1 | I |
| 1107 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 8, 10 | 0.93 | II |
| 811 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 8, 9, 10 | 0.93 | II |
| 475 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 9 | 0.93 | II |
| 554 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7 | 1 | II |
| 345 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7 | 1 | II |
| 952 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7 | 1 | II |
| 378 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7 | 1 | II |
| 1517 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7 | 1 | II |
| 489 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7 | 1 | II |
| 469 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 4, 7 | 0.93 | II |
| 622 | R | Goiás | 1, 6, 7, 10 | 0.93 | II |
| 530 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 10 | 1 | II |
| 1611 | NR | Bahia | 1, 7, 10 | 1 | II |
| 992 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 4, 7, 10 | 0.93 | II |
| 145 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 4, 7, 9, 10 | 0.93 | II |
| 600 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 11 | 1 | II |
| 789 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 11 | 1 | II |
| 409 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 2, 7, 11 | 0.93 | II |
| 501 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 3, 7, 11 | 0.92 | II |
| 299 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 4, 7, 8, 11 | 0.93 | II |
| 317 | R | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 4, 7, 11 | 0.93 | II |
| 426 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 9, 10, 11 | 0.93 | II |
| 328 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 1, 7, 10, 11 | 0.93 | II |
| 946 | NR | Rondônia | 1, 5, 7, 12 | 0.76 | II |
| 420 | R | Minas Gerais | 7, 10, 12, 14 | 0.93 | III |
| 1300 | NR | Amazonas | 7, 10, 12 | 1 | III |
| 389 | NR | Maranhão | 7, 10, 12 | 1 | III |
| 1453 | R | Bahia | 7, 10 | 1 | III |
| 1450 | R | Bahia | 7, 10 | 1 | III |
| 291 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 4, 7, 10, 12 | 0.89 | III |
| 812 | R | Amazonas | 4, 7, 9, 12 | 0.93 | III |
| 211 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 4, 7, 9, 10, 12 | 0.93 | III |
| 1059 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 7, 9, 10, 12 | 0.91 | III |
| 222 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 4, 7, 10, 11 | 1 | III |
| 96 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 4, 7, 10, 11 | 1 | III |
| 310 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 4, 7, 14 | 0.76 | III |
| 1127 | NR | Rio de Janeiro | 10, 13 | 0.72 | III |
* Code of the Leishmania isolates.
R = responder group, NR = non-responder group (responder or non-responder to one course of treatment with meglumine antimoniate 5 mg Sb5+/kg/day or 20 mg Sb5+/kg/day).
Figure 21.5% agarose gel electrophoresis showing representative LSSP-PCR profiles from parasites belonging to clusters I, II and III.
Figure 1Illustrative flow diagram of treatments administered to groups of 44 cutaneous leishmaniasis patients classified by Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis clusters, by type of therapeutic response to one treatment course and by localization of infection. Circles filled in gray indicate the treatment (one course or additional ones) that promoted patient cure. RJ = Rio de Janeiro; OS = other states; tto = treatment, IL = intralesional; C = cure.
Comparison between clinical and geographic data of the responder and non-responder groups involved in the study.
| Patient data | Responders ( | Non-responders ( |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Female | 11 (47.8%) | 7 (33.3%) |
| Male | 12 (52.2%) | 14 (66.7%) |
| Age (mean) | ||
| Mean ± SD | 36.04 ± 11.13 | 32.29 ± 13.37 |
| Number of skin lesions | ||
| Median (min–max) | 1 (1–7) | 1 (1–15) |
| Lesion location | ||
| Lower extremity | 10 (43.5%) | 13 (61.9%) |
| Upper limbs | 7 (30.4%) | 6 (28.6%) |
| Head and cervical-facial | 1 (4.3%) | 5 (23.8%) |
| Torso | 7 (30.4%) | 2 (9.5%) |
| Lesion-evolution time (days) | ||
| Median (min–max) | 60 (30–150) | 60 (20–270) |
| Number of treatments | ||
| Median (min–max) | 1 (1–1) | 2 (2–4) |
| MST | ||
| Reactor | 22 (100%) | 18 (94.7%) |
| Non-reactor | – | 1 (5.3%) |
| MST values (mm) | ||
| Median (min–max) | 20 (7–60) | 12 (4–27) |
| ELISA | ||
| Reactor | 16 (76.2%) | 17 (89.5%) |
| Non-reactor | 5 (23.8%) | 2 (10.5%) |
| IIF | ||
| Reactor | 9 (42.9%) | 17 (94.4%) |
| Non-reactor | 12 (57.1%) | 1 (5.6%) |
| Region of Infection | ||
| Rio de Janeiro | 18 (78.3%) | 17 (81%) |
| Other states | 5 (21.7%) | 4 (19%) |
MST = Montenegro Skin Test; IIF = Indirect Immunofluorescence; RJ = Rio de Janeiro; OS = other states.
Mean ± SD = Mean and standard deviation.
p < 0.05 values are considered significant.
p < 0.001 (Mann-Whitney U Test).
p = 0.048 (Mann-Whitney U Test).
p = 0.001 (Fisher's Exact Test).
Figure 3Phenetic analysis using the Simple Matching coefficient of similarity and the UPGMA algorithm. Three clusters (I, II and III) were identified. The L. (V.) braziliensis sample indicated in cluster II is the reference strain. R = responders; N = non-responders; RJ = Rio de Janeiro; GO = Goiás; BA = Bahia; RO = Rondônia; MG = Minas Gerais; AM = Amazonas; MA = Maranhão.
Clinical and laboratory data of the 44 patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis studied. Intra- and inter-clusters division (numerical and categorical variables).
| Patient data | Cluster I ( | Cluster II ( | Cluster III ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||
| Female | 3 (42.9%) | 8 (33.3%) | 7 (53.8%) |
| Male | 4 (57.1%) | 16 (66.7%) | 6 (46.2%) |
| Age (mean) | |||
| Mean ± SD | 33.29 ± 9.48 | 37.75 ± 12.16 | 28.31 ± 12.09 |
| Number of skin lesions | |||
| Median (min–max) | 1 (1–1) | 1 (1–15) | 2 (1–7) |
| Lesion location | |||
| Lower extremity | 2 (28.6%) | 15 (62.5%) | 6 (46.2%) |
| Upper limbs | 5 (71.4%) | 3 (12.5%) | 5 (38.5%) |
| Head and cervical-facial | – | 3 (12.5%) | 3 (23.1%) |
| Torso | – | 7 (29.2%) | 2 (15.4%) |
| Lesion-evolution time (days) | |||
| Median (min–max) | 45 (30–90) | 60 (20–180) | 45 (30–270) |
| Number of treatments | |||
| Median (min–max) | 1 (1–1) | 1.50 (1–4) | 2 (1–4) |
| MST | |||
| Reactor | 6 (100%) | 24 (100%) | 10 (90.9%) |
| Non-reactor | – | – | 1 (9.1%) |
| MST values (mm) | |||
| Median (min–max) | 21 (7–60) | 19 (7–57) | 12 (4–27) |
| ELISA | |||
| Reactor | 4 (66.7%) | 20 (90.9%) | 9 (75%) |
| Non-reactor | 2 (33.3%) | 2 (9.1%) | 3 (25%) |
| IIF | |||
| Reactor | 2 (28.6%) | 14 (66.7%) | 10 (90.9%) |
| Non-reactor | 5 (71.4%) | 7 (33.3%) | 1 (9.1%) |
| Response | |||
| Responder | 7 (100%) | 12 (50%) | 4 (30.8%) |
| Non-responder | – | 12 (50%) | 9 (69.2%) |
| Region of Infection | |||
| Rio de Janeiro | 7 (100%) | 21 (87.5%) | 7 (53.8%) |
| Other states | – | 3 (12.5%) | 6 (46.2%) |
MST = Montenegro Skin Test; IIF = Indirect Immunofluorescence; RJ = Rio de Janeiro; OS = other states.
Mean ± SD = Mean and standard deviation.
p < 0.05 values are considered significant.
(Clusters II and III) p = 0.030 (T-Test).
(Clusters I and II) p = 0.006 (Fisher's Exact Test).
(Clusters I and II) p = 0.048 (Mann-Whitney U Test) and (clusters I and III) p = 0.011 (Mann-Whitney U Test).
(clusters I and III) p = 0.013 (Fisher's Exact Test).
(Clusters I and II) p = 0.026 (Fisher's Exact Test) and (clusters I and III) p = 0.005 (Fisher's Exact Test).
(Clusters II and III) p = 0.042 (Fisher's Exact Test).