4.5 Article

Differential distribution of Trypanosoma cruzi clones in human chronic chagasic cardiopathic and non-cardiopathic individuals

Journal

ACTA TROPICA
Volume 109, Issue 3, Pages 187-193

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2008.11.007

Keywords

Chronic Chagas disease; Polymerase chain reaction; Hybridization; Phylogeny; Cardiopathy

Funding

  1. FONDECYT [1040731, 1070837]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PCR and Southern blot hybridization were used to determine the distribution of Trypanosoma cruzi clones in 37 chronic chagasic cardiopathic and non-cardiopathic patients. Parasite DNA amplified from peripheral blood or dejections of Triatoma infestans fed on patient blood was hybridized with probes containing hypervariable minicircle nucleotide sequences capable of detecting three sublineages of T cruzi. Probes Z-I and Z-IIb detect unique sequences in lineages TcI and TcIIb, respectively. Probe Z-hybrid detects sequences of lineages TcIId and TcIIe. T. cruzi clones of the Z-1 sublineage were detected in 62.2% of T infestans dejections and 5.4% of peripheral blood samples. Clones of Z-IIb and Z-hybrid sublineages had similar distribution in blood and dejection samples. Interestingly, clones of the Z-IIb sublineage were significantly lower in cardiopathic than in non-cardiopathic patients (23.5% versus 75%; P=0.0006). Clones of the Z-hybrid sublineage were found in 29.4% of cardiopathic and 75% of non-cardiopathic patients, respectively (P=0.0051). By contrast, clones of sublineage Z-I were similarly distributed in both groups of patients. The low frequency of Z-IIb and Z-hybrid sublineage clones detected in cardiopathic patients suggests that the immunological mechanisms involved in controlling and eliminating these T cruzi parasites may be detrimental to the host, leading to the development of chagasic cardiomyopathy. (c) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available