| Literature DB >> 33011651 |
Elizabeth M Coser1, Bianca A Ferreira1, Nilson Branco1, Edite H Yamashiro-Kanashiro2, José Angelo L Lindoso3, Adriano C Coelho4.
Abstract
Paromomycin is an aminoglycoside antibiotic approved in 2006 for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania donovani in Southeast Asia. Although this drug is not approved for the treatment of visceral and cutaneous leishmaniasis in Brazil, it is urgent and necessary to evaluate the potential of this drug as alternative for the treatment against species responsible for these clinical forms of the disease. In Brazil, Leishmania amazonensis is responsible for cutaneous and diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis. The diffuse cutaneous form of the disease is difficult to treat and frequent relapses are reported, mainly when the treatment is interrupted. Here, we evaluated paromomycin susceptibility in vitro of a L. amazonensis clinical isolate from a patient with cutaneous leishmaniasis and the reference strain L. amazonensis M2269, as well as its in vivo efficacy in a murine experimental model. Although never exposed to paromomycin, a significant differential susceptibility between these two lines was found. Paromomycin was highly active in vitro against the clinical isolate in both forms of the parasite, while its activity against the reference strain was less active. In vivo studies in mice infected with each one of these lines demonstrated that paromomycin reduces lesion size and parasite burden and a direct correlation between the susceptibility in vitro and the effectiveness of this drug in vivo was found. Our findings indicate that paromomycin efficacy in vivo is dependent on intrinsic susceptibility of the parasite. Beyond that, this study contributes for the evaluation of the potential use of paromomycin in chemotherapy of cutaneous leishmaniasis in Brazil caused by L. amazonensis.Entities:
Keywords: Drug susceptibility; Leishmania amazonensis; Leishmaniasis; Paromomycin
Year: 2020 PMID: 33011651 PMCID: PMC7548989 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpddr.2020.08.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Parasitol Drugs Drug Resist ISSN: 2211-3207 Impact factor: 4.077
Activity of PM against promastigotes and intracellular amastigotes of L. amazonensis reference strain M2269 and ER256 clinical isolate.
| Promastigote | Amastigote | SI | Infection (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EC50 | EC90 | EC50 | EC90 | |||
| 145.23 ± 23.04 | 730.4 | 61 ± 9.48 | 111.9 | 8.6 | 66% | |
| 9.98 ± 2.97 | 101.8 | 0.54 ± 0.11 | 4.86 | 993.7 | 59% | |
SI: Selectivity Index, which corresponds to the ratio between the CC50 and EC50 values of intracellular amastigotes. The CC50 value for BMDM was 536.6 ± 27.1 μM.
Three independent experiments carried out in triplicate per strain/isolate.
Three independent experiments carried out in duplicate per strain/isolate.
EC50 ± standard deviation in μM.
Percentage of infected BMDM.
Fig. 1Activity (A) Promastigotes were growth in increasing concentrations of PM and viability of the parasites was determined by the MTT assay after 24 h. (B) BMDM were infected with stationary-phase promastigotes and exposed to increasing concentrations of PM for 72 h. The percentage of infection was determined by counting 100 macrophages per coverslip. (C) PM susceptibility of intracellular amastigotes. Each bar represents the percentage of infected BMDM in different concentrations of PM (1–200 μM). The average ± standard deviation of three independent experiments is shown. (D) Number of amastigotes per infected macrophage treated with different concentrations of PM.
Fig. 2Evaluation of PM efficacy in mice infected with Evolution of lesion size in infected animals with L. amazonensis M2269 or ER256 over the weeks (A and D respectively). Lesion size represents the average difference between infected and contralateral non-infected hind footpads (five mice per group). Animals were treated with 150 and 600 mg/kg/day of PM intraperitoneally after five weeks post-infection for 14 days. Lesion size at the end of the treatment (8th week post-infection) of five animals infected per group with each line of parasite is indicated (M2269 and ER256 lines are indicated by B and E respectively). Parasite burden was determined by quantitative real-time PCR of animals infected with L. amazonensis M2269 strain (C) and L. amazonensis ER256 isolate (F) treated or not with PM. At the end of the treatment (8th week post-infection), animals were euthanized and DNA of the lesion of the infected hind footpad was isolated. Statistical analysis was performed with One Way ANOVA, followed by the Tukey post-test, *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. Untreated, group of infected animals not treated with PM.
Fig. 3Histological analysis of the infected mice with Animals were euthanized at the end of the treatment with PM (8th week post-infection) and then infected hind footpad fragments were isolated, washed with PBS, fixed with formalin and processed with paraffin. Sections were stained with haematoxylin-eosin and then visualized in a light microscope. Images of untreated and treated animals with 150 and 600 mg/kg PM infected with L. amazonensis M2269 strain (A, B and C respectively) or L. amazonensis ER256 clinical isolate (D, E and F respectively). Arrows in the Figure indicate amastigotes inside parasitophorous vacuoles. Bar: 9 μm.