| Literature DB >> 29061137 |
Darién Ledesma1, Eduardo Berriatua2, M Carmen Thomas1, Luis Jesús Bernal3, María Ortuño4, Celia Benitez1, Adriana Egui1, Kostas Papasouliotis5, Bryn Tennant6, Julia Chambers7, Juan José Infante8, Manuel Carlos López9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Leishmania infantum is a protozoan parasite transmitted by phlebotomine sand flies that causes life-threatening disease in humans and dogs. The dog is the primary reservoir of the parasite and early diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis is crucial at the clinical and epidemiological level. The currently available serological tests for CanL diagnostic show limitations therefore the aim of the present study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of an indirect antibody ELISA based on the Leishmania infantum recombinant antigen PFR1 in asymptomatically infected dogs. One hundred fifty-six dogs including Leishmania-free experimental Beagles and pet dogs from England, Scotland and Leishmania-endemic Murcia in Spain, were tested with the assay. The later were also tested with two commercial L. infantum crude antigen ELISAs (INgezim and Civtest, respectively) and a real-time kinetoplast PCR test.Entities:
Keywords: Canine; Diagnosis; Leishmania; PFR1 recombinant antigen; Serological
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29061137 PMCID: PMC5654103 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-017-1224-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Fig. 1Expression and purification of L. infantum recombinant PFR1 protein. a Analysis by SDS-PAGE and Coomassie blue staining of the protein purification process. The Escherichia coli M15 strain was chosen as the host bacterium for LiPFR1 overexpression (lane 1). An intense band of approximately 70 kDa was observed after IPTG induction (lane 2) and not seen in uninduced cultures (lane 1). Purified LiPFR1 protein after purification by Ni2+ affinity chromatography is shown in lane 3. MW, molecular weight marker (kDa). b Western blot analysis of L. infantum PFR1 recombinant protein by using α-PFR2 antibody against the homologous PFR2 protein from T. cruzi. MW, molecular weight marker (kDa)
PFR1 normalized optical density according to origin, age and gender
| Variable | Level | N° dogs | Mean | Percentiles | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 10% | 25% | 50% | 75% | 90% | 100% | ||||
| Origin | Beagles | 25 | 0.651 | 0.067 | 0.241 | 0.335 | 0.490 | 0.673 | 0.899 | 1.079 |
| Murcia | 45 | 0.706 | 0.247 | 0.563 | 0.653 | 0.746 | 1.160 | 1.245 | 1.760 | |
| England | 36 | 0.844 | 0.014 | 0.301 | 0.546 | 0.645 | 0.720 | 1.021 | 1.346 | |
| Scotland | 50 | 0.532 | 0.091 | 0.322 | 0.443 | 0.734 | 0.957 | 1.057 | 1.509 | |
| All | 156 | 0.705 | 0.014 | 0.319 | 0.510 | 0.680 | 0.892 | 1.076 | 1.760 | |
| Age (years)a | ≤1 | 8 | 0.686 | 0.247 | 0.280 | 0.488 | 0.655 | 0.824 | 1.190 | 1.193 |
| 2 | 15 | 0.757 | 0.426 | 0.500 | 0.625 | 0.746 | 0.814 | 1.066 | 1.239 | |
| 3 | 8 | 0.800 | 0.580 | 0.663 | 0.712 | 0.731 | 0.792 | 1.031 | 1.272 | |
| 4 | 12 | 1.057 | 0.630 | 0.644 | 0.740 | 1.020 | 1.256 | 1.559 | 1.760 | |
| Gendera | Male | 24 | 0.772 | 0.426 | 0.560 | 0.638 | 0.716 | 0.856 | 1.203 | 1.249 |
| Female | 19 | 0.978 | 0.294 | 0.634 | 0.724 | 0.845 | 1.216 | 1.340 | 1.760 | |
aDogs from Murcia only
Estimated PFR1, Ingezym and Civtest ELISA seroprevalence according to dog origin, age and gender
| Variable | Level | N° dogs | PFR1 | Ingezym | Civtest | PCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Origen | Murcia | 45 | 27 (14–40) | 24 (12–37) | 31 (18–45) | 73 (60–86) |
| Beagles | 25 | 0 (0–0) | – | – | 0 (0–0) | |
| Scotland | 50 | 4 (0–9) | – | – | – | |
| England | 36 | 3 (0–8) | – | – | – | |
| Age (years)a | ≤1 | 8 | 25 (0–55) | 0 (0–0) | 13 (0–35) | 75 (45–100) |
| 2 | 15 | 13 (0–31) | 27 (4–49) | 40 (15–65) | 93 (81–100) | |
| 3 | 8 | 13 (0–35) | 38 (4–71) | 25 (0–55) | 50 (15–85) | |
| ≥4 | 12 | 50 (22–78) | 25 (1–50) | 33 (7–60) | 67 (40–93) | |
| Gendera | Male | 24 | 17 (2–32) | 21 (5–37) | 25 (8–42) | 71 (53–89) |
| Female | 19 | 42 (20–64) | 32 (11–52) | 42 (20–64) | 79 (61–97) |
aDogs from Murcia only
Kappa coefficient and degree of agreement between PFR1, INgezim (Ing) and Civtest (Civ) ELISA tests
| Techniques | N° dogs | PFR1 | Ing | Civ | Ing + Civ | PCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PFR1 | 45 | – | Fair | Fair | Fair | Fair |
| Ing | 45 | 0.36 (0.05–0.67) | – | Substantial | Substantial | Slight |
| Civ | 45 | 0.24 (0.00–0.55) | 0.61 (0.36–0.87) | – | Almost perfect | Fair |
| Ing + Civ | 45 | 0.28 (0.00–0.57) | 0.74 (0.53–0.95) | 0.90 (0.77–1.00) | ||
| PCR | 45 | 0.23 (0.08–0.39) | 0.14 (0.00–0.29) | 0.28 (0.11–0.45) | 0.26 (0.06–0.45) | – |
Percentage of positives to one of two ELISA techniques (T1 and T2) including PFR1, INgezim (Ing) and Civtest (Civ) ELISA tests, and their PCR status
| Techniques | T1+; T2- | T1-; T2+ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | % Seropositive | % PCR positive | % Seropositive | % PCR positive |
| PFR1 | Ing | 30 | 100 | 29 | 80 |
| PFR1 | Civ | 35 | 100 | 40 | 100 |
| PFR1 | Ing + Civ | 24 | 100 | 43 | 100 |
| Ing | Civ | 14 | 50 | 31 | 100 |
| Ing | Ing + Civ | 0 | – | 31 | 100 |
| Civ | Ing + Civ | 0 | – | 13 | 50 |