| Literature DB >> 31088525 |
Tanja Karpstein1,2, Valérian Pasche1,2, Cécile Häberli1,2, Ivan Scandale3, Anna Neodo1,2, Jennifer Keiser4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Helminthiases are very prevalent worldwide, yet their treatment and control rely on a handful of drugs. Emodepside, a marketed broad-spectrum veterinary anthelminthic with a unique mechanism of action, undergoing development for onchocerciasis is an interesting anthelmintic drug candidate. We tested the in vitro and in vivo activity of emodepside on nematode species that serve as models for human soil-transmitted helminth infection as well as on schistosomes.Entities:
Keywords: Drug repurposing; Emodepside; Hookworms; Nematodes; Schistosoma spp.; Soil-transmitted helminthiases (STH); Trematodes; Trichuris spp.
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31088525 PMCID: PMC6515646 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-019-3476-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Workflow for the nematode assays
Mean IC50 values in vitro of emodepside tested on larval and adult stages of different helminths
| Species | Replicates | No. of parasites per wella | 24 hours | 48 hours | 72 hours |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean IC50 ± SD (µM) | Mean IC50 ± SD (µM) | Mean IC50 ± SD (µM) | |||
| 9 | 20–40 | 3.73 ± 6.54 | – | – | |
| 2 | 2–3 | 0.28 ± 0.15 | 0.043 ± 0.0089 | 0.022 ± 0.013 | |
| 2 | 30 | 0.78 ± 0.086 | 0.9 ± 0.034 | 0.48 ± 0.05 | |
| 3 | 3–4 | 0.57 ± 0.42 | 0.21 ± 0.13 | 0.25 ± 0.16 | |
| 2 | 30 | 0.14 ± 0.041 | 0.086 ± 0.08 | 0.25 ± 0.051 | |
| 3 | 2–3 | 0.0044 ± 0.0021 | 0.0015 ± 0.00078 | 0.0024 ± 0.002 | |
| 2 | 30 | 0.77 ± 0.52 | 0.15 ± 0.069 | 0.083 ± 0.033 | |
| 2 | 2–3 | 0.0031 ± 0.0011 | 0.0029 ± 0.0018 | 0.0021 ± 0.0012 | |
| 4 | 30 | 0.73 ± 0.5 | 0.27 ± 0.21 | 0.25 ± 0.14 | |
| 3 | 5–15 | 0.75 ± 0.57 | 0.21 ± 0.29 | 0.36 ± 0.32 | |
| 2 | 100 | 7.79 ± 1.57 | 6.92 ± 0.21 | 2.48 ± 0.78 | |
| 2 | 2–3 | 50.4 ± 3.32 | 37.27 ± 10.47 | 34.1 ± 9.18 | |
| 2 | 2–3 | 40.51 ± 24.96 | 40.25 ± 6.49 | 36.73 ± 6.49 |
aEach assay included 2 to 3 wells per concentration/condition
Notes: The inclusion criteria used in our analysis were different for each stage and parasite. Minimal survival rates (larvae) or viability scores (adults and NTS) and IC50 r-values considered acceptable were as follows: T. muris L1 (survival rate: 60%; R = 0.7), adults (score: 2.5; R = 0.8); H. polygyrus L3 (70%; 0.9), adults (1.9; 0.8); A. ceylanicum L3 (55%; 0.7), adults (2; 0.7); N. americanus L3 (60%; 0.75), adults (2; 0.8); S. ratti L3 (60%; 0.75), adults (2; 0.7); S. mansoni NTS (2; 0.75), adults (1.5; 0.85); S. haematobium adults (2; 0.7)
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation
In vivo dose response relationships of emodepside on A. ceylanicum, N. americanus and T. muris
| Dose (mg/kg) | Mean no. of worms ± SD | Worm expulsion rate (%) | Worm burden reduction (%) | ED50 (mg/kg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Emodepside | 75c | 0 | 100 | 100 | 0.007a | 1.2 |
| 10c | 18.8 ± 20.8 | 62.0 | 85.9 | |||
| 2.5c | 36.5 ± 30.8 | 60.9 | 69.6 | |||
| 1.25d | 133 ± 27.9 | 5.3 | 73.9 | |||
| Control 1c | 120.8 ± 12.0 | 0 | – | |||
| Control 2d | 121.7 ± 4.7 | 0 | – | |||
|
| ||||||
| Emodepside | 2.5 | 0 | 100 | 100 | 0.014a | |
| Control | 21.3 ± 2.6 | 0.6 | – | |||
|
| ||||||
| Emodepside | 10c | 0 | 100 | 100 | 0.060a | 0.5 |
| 5c | 0 | 100 | 100 | |||
| 2.5d | 0.25 ± 0.5 | 87.5 | 93.8 | |||
| 1.25d | 2.25 ± 2.3 | 40.0 | 43.8 | |||
| Control 1c | 5.5 ± 6.1 | 5.6 | – | |||
| Control 2d | 4.0 ± 1.4 | 0 | – | |||
aKruskal-Wallis test was applied to determine statistical significance on worm burden reduction of all doses versus controls
cControl 1 was used for this dose
dControl 2 was used for this dose
Mean IC50 values (µg/ml) after 72 hours drug exposure on L3 and adult stages of A. ceylanicum, N. americanus and T. muris of emodepside compared to the ones of albendazole, levamisole and pyrantel pamoate
| Species | Mean IC50 (µg/ml) after 72 hours of drug incubation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emodepside | Albendazolea | Levamisole-HCla | Pyrantel pamoatea | |
| 4.18 | ||||
| – | ≥ 200 | 33.1 | 95.5 | |
| 0.022 | ≥ 200 | 16.5 | 34.1 | |
| 0.28 | 32.40 | 1.60 | 90.9 | |
| 0.0027 | ≥ 100 | ≥ 100 | ≥ 100 | |
| 0.090 | ≥ 100 | 0.50 | 2.0 | |
| 0.0024 | ≥ 100 | 13.40 | 7.6 | |
aAll values for this drug are taken from the study of Tritten et al. [36]
In vivo dose response relationships of emodepside, albendazole, levamisole and pyrantel pamoate on A. ceylanicum, N. americanus and T. muris
| Drug | Dose (mg/kg) | Worm expulsion rate (%) | Worm burden reduction (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Emodepside | 75 | 100 | 100 |
| 10 | 62.0 | 85.9 | |
| 2.5 | 60.9 | 69.6 | |
| 1.25 | 5.3 | 73.9 | |
| Albendazolea | 600 | 49.4 | 20.2 |
| Levamisole-HCla | 200 | 90.5 | 95.9 |
| Pyrantel pamoatea | 300 | 9.4 | 0 |
|
| |||
| Emodepside | 2.5 | 100 | 100 |
| Albendazolea | 1.25 | 70.5 | 87.8 |
| 2.5 | 100 | 100 | |
| 5 | 100 | 100 | |
| Levamisole-HCla | 10 | 44.3 | 60.2 |
| Pyrantel pamoatea | 10 | 63.4 | 87.2 |
|
| |||
| Emodepside | 10 | 100 | 100 |
| 5 | 100 | 100 | |
| 2.5 | 87.5 | 100 | |
| 1.25 | 40.0 | 62.5 | |
| Albendazolea | 10 | 100 | 100 |
| 5 | 69.6 | 70.8 | |
aAll values for this drug are taken from the study of Tritten et al. [36]