| Literature DB >> 34084753 |
Miriam Bobadilla-Del-Valle1, Francisco Leal-Vega1, Pedro Torres-Gonzalez1, Anabel Ordaz-Vazquez1, Maria de Lourdes Garcia-Garcia2, Ma de Los Angeles Tovar-Vargas1, Guadalupe Delgado-Sanchez2, Paola Del Carmen Guerra De Blas1,3, Robert S Wallis4, Alfredo Ponce-De-León1, José Sifuentes-Osornio1.
Abstract
The lack of efficient and cost-effective diagnostic tools contributes to poor control of tuberculosis in endemic countries. Moreover, host biological processes influence susceptibility, and infection resolution. It is well known that comorbidities such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) affect the host immune response, making individuals more susceptible to Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. Currently, there are no laboratory tools that can identify those subjects who have a higher risk of developing the disease. In this study, we used a whole blood mycobacterial growth inhibition assay to assess the immune response capacity to inhibit mycobacterial growth between healthy subjects and those living with DM2 with optimal and poor glycemic control. We also measured cytokine levels in the culture supernatant by cytokine bead arrays. We included 89 patients with DM2: 54 patients with optimal control (mean age 56.2 ± 11.75 years) and 35 patients with poor control (mean age 52.05 ± 9.94 years). We also included 44 healthy subjects as controls (mean age 42.12 ± 11.75 years). We compared the Δlog UFC (a value that represents the difference between mycobacterial growth in the control tube versus the subject's blood) between each group. Our results demonstrate that patients with DM2 had a lower capacity to inhibit M. tuberculosis growth (Δlog UFC DM2 subjects 0.9581 (-0.3897 to 2.495) vs Δlog UFC healthy subjects 0.7190 (-0.2678 to 2.098); p=0.013). Comparing subjects living with DM2 (optimal and poor glycemic control) vs healthy subjects, we found only significant differences between healthy subjects and patients poorly controlled (Δlog UFC optimal control group 0.876 (-0.3897 to 2.495); Δlog UFC poor control group 1.078 (0.068 to 2.33); Δlog UFC healthy subjects 0.7190 (-0.2678 to 2.098); p= 0.022). Therefore, glycemic control assessed by glycosylated hemoglobin values influences the capacity of the host to control the infection. Our results confirm that the whole blood mycobacterial growth inhibition assay has potential utility as an in vitro marker of M. tuberculosis immunological control in vivo in subjects living with DM2. This assay can be used to evaluate the immune response of each individual against M. tuberculosis, allowing clinicians to choose a more specific host-directed therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Mycobacterium tuberculosis; diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2); glycemic control; host-directed diagnostic tool; mycobacterial growth inhibition assay
Year: 2021 PMID: 34084753 PMCID: PMC8167894 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.640707
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol ISSN: 2235-2988 Impact factor: 5.293
Figure 1In vitro growth inhibition of M. tuberculosis H37Rv. Whole blood inhibition assays were carried out in healthy subjects (n=44), subjects with optimal glycemic control (HbA1c<7) (n=54) and subjects with poor glycemic control (Hba1c>8) (n=35). (A) Comparison of the capacity to inhibit mycobacterial growth of whole blood from healthy subjects (n=44) and patients living with DM2 (n=89). (B) Comparison of the capacity to inhibit mycobacterial growth of whole blood from healthy subjects and patients with DM2 with optimal and poor glycemic control.
Association between inhibitory capacity against mycobacterial and DM2.
| Variable | n | Single linear regression | Multiple linear regression | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | 95% Confidence interval | Valor p* | Adjusted Coefficient (n= 132) | 95% Confidence interval | Valor p** | ||||
| Lower limit | Upper limit | Lower limit | Upper limit | ||||||
| Male | 132 | -0.111 | -0.337 | 0.116 | 0.336 | -0.114 | -0.351 | 0.123 | 0.344 |
| Age | 132 | 0.002 | -0.007 | 0.012 | 0.631 | -0.003 | -0.015 | 0.008 | 0.543 |
| BCG | 122 | -0.101 | -3.45 | 0.142 | 0.411 | - | - | - | - |
| Diabetes mellitus | 132 | 0.239 | 0.006 | 0.472 |
| - | - | - | - |
| DM treatment | 132 | 0.204 | -0.015 | 0.424 | 0.068 | - | - | - | - |
| Statin | 132 | 0.055 | -0.177 | 0.288 | 0.637 | - | - | - | - |
|
| |||||||||
| Healthy subject | 43 | Ref. | Ref. | - | - | - | |||
| DM2 with optimal control | 54 | 0.162 | -0.093 | 0.147 | 0.211 | 0.228 | -0.799 | 0.536 | 0.145 |
| DM2 with poor control | 35 | 0.358 | 0.074 | 0.642 |
| 0.381 | 0.077 | 0.687 |
|
*Single linear regression; **Multiple linear regression; Bolded values represent statistically significant results.
Comparison of cytokine production (pg/mL) between studied groups.
| n | Median | IQR |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P25 | P75 | ||||
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 61 | 0.552 | -0.120 | 2.396 |
|
| Male | 34 | 2.047 | 0.112 | 8.301 | |
| Healthy subjects | 30 | 1.419 | 0.336 | 6.478 | 0.088 |
| DM2 with optimal control | 38 | 0.825 | -0.112 | 7.151 | |
| DM2 with poor control | 27 | 0.737 | -0.460 | 1.342 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 61 | -0.054 | -0.703 | 0.405 | 0.547 |
| Male | 34 | -0.027 | -0.400 | 0.602 | |
| Healthy subjects | 30 | -0.027 | -0.478 | 0.638 | 0.642 |
| DM2 with optimal control | 38 | -0.090 | -0.606 | 0.449 | |
| DM2 with poor control | 27 | 0.000 | -0.903 | 0.316 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Female | 61 | 5629.998 | 2476.816 | 10860.98 | 0.889 |
| Male | 34 | 4809.062 | 2432.497 | 10518.08 | |
| Healthy subjects | 30 | 9654.010 | 4038.336 | 12003.25 |
|
| DM2 with optimal control | 38 | 3981.453 | 1760.912 | 1860.98 | |
| DM2 with poor control | 27 | 3789.357 | 1789.196 | 6665.411 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 61 | 0.719 | -0.058 | 4.077 | 0.112 |
| Male | 34 | 2.695 | -0.145 | 11.687 | |
| Healthy subjects | 30 | 2.836 | 0.727 | 11.687 |
|
| DM2 with optimal control | 38 | 1.099 | -0.405 | 6.969 | |
| DM2 with poor control | 27 | 0.230 | -0.811 | 2.921 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Female | 61 | 1.651 | 0.370 | 4.29 | 0.614 |
| Male | 34 | 1.736 | 0.299 | 5.98 | |
| Healthy subjects | 30 | 3.945 | 1.651 | 6.444 |
|
| DM2 with optimal control | 38 | 1.544 | 0.087 | 4.799 | |
| DM2 with poor control | 27 | 0.989 | 0.088 | 1.675 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 61 | -5.738 | -17.130 | 5.043 | 0.592 |
Bolded values represent statistically significant results.
Figure 2Cytokine secretion in response to M. tuberculosis H37Rv. Cytokine levels were assessed by CBA analyses of supernatants from whole blood inhibition assays of healthy subjects (n=44), patients with optimal glycemic control (HbA1c<7) (n=54) and patients with poor glycemic control (HbA1c>8) (n=35). (A) IL-2, (B) IL-4, (C) IL-6, (D) IFN-γ, (E) TNF-α, (F) IL-17A, (G) IL-10. Data are presented as scatter plots, with each symbol representing a single individual. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with a post hoc test. p<0.05 was regarded as significantly different.