A comparative study on the detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA in urine samples of leprosy patients using Rlep-PCR with other conventional samples.

Mycobacterium leprae Rlep gene target Conventional PCR DNA extraction DNA sequencing Non-invasive Urine

Journal

Molecular biology reports

ISSN: 1573-4978

Titre abrégé: Mol Biol Rep

Pays: Netherlands

ID NLM: 0403234

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
15 Apr 2024

Historique:

received: 01 02 2024

accepted: 22 03 2024

medline: 15 4 2024

pubmed: 15 4 2024

entrez: 14 4 2024

Statut: epublish

Résumé

Mycobacterium leprae causes leprosy that is highly stigmatized and chronic infectious skin disease. Only some diagnostic tools are being used for the identification M. leprae in clinical samples, such as bacillary detection, and histopathological tests. These methods are invasive and often have low sensitivity. Currently, the PCR technique has been used as an effective tool fordetecting M. leprae DNA across different clinical samples. The current study aims to detect M. leprae DNA in urine samples of untreated and treated leprosy patients using the Rlep gene (129 bp) and compared the detection among Ridley-Jopling Classification. Clinical samples (Blood, Urine, and Slit Skin Smears (SSS)) were collected from leprosy and Non-leprosy patients. DNA extraction was performed using standard laboratory protocol and Conventional PCR was carried out for all samples using Rlep gene target and the amplicons of urine samples were sequenced by Sanger sequencing to confirm the Rlep gene target. The M. leprae DNA was successfully detected in all clinical samples across all types of leprosy among all the study groups using RLEP-PCR. Rlep gene target was able to detect the presence of M. leprae DNA in 79.17% of urine, 58.33% of blood, and 50% of SSS samples of untreated Smear-Negative leprosy patients. The statistical significant difference (p = 0.004) was observed between BI Negative (Slit Skin Smear test) and RLEP PCR positivity in urine samples of untreated leprosy group. The PCR positivity using Rlep gene target (129 bp) was highest in all clinical samples among the study groups, across all types of leprosy. Untreated tuberculoid and PNL leprosy patients showed the highest PCR positivity in urine samples, indicating its potential as a non-invasive diagnostic tool for leprosy and even for contact screening.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND

METHODS METHODS

Clinical samples (Blood, Urine, and Slit Skin Smears (SSS)) were collected from leprosy and Non-leprosy patients. DNA extraction was performed using standard laboratory protocol and Conventional PCR was carried out for all samples using Rlep gene target and the amplicons of urine samples were sequenced by Sanger sequencing to confirm the Rlep gene target.

RESULTS RESULTS

The M. leprae DNA was successfully detected in all clinical samples across all types of leprosy among all the study groups using RLEP-PCR. Rlep gene target was able to detect the presence of M. leprae DNA in 79.17% of urine, 58.33% of blood, and 50% of SSS samples of untreated Smear-Negative leprosy patients. The statistical significant difference (p = 0.004) was observed between BI Negative (Slit Skin Smear test) and RLEP PCR positivity in urine samples of untreated leprosy group.

CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS

The PCR positivity using Rlep gene target (129 bp) was highest in all clinical samples among the study groups, across all types of leprosy. Untreated tuberculoid and PNL leprosy patients showed the highest PCR positivity in urine samples, indicating its potential as a non-invasive diagnostic tool for leprosy and even for contact screening.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1007/s11033-024-09470-0 PMID: 38616219

pubmed: 38616219

doi: 10.1007/s11033-024-09470-0

pii: 10.1007/s11033-024-09470-0

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Pagination

504

Informations de copyright

Références

Bhat RM, Prakash C (2012) Leprosy: an overview of pathophysiology. Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases. Interdiscip Perspect Infect Dis 2012:181089

pubmed: 22988457 pmcid: 3440852

Jacob JT, Franco-Paredes C (2008) The stigmatization of leprosy in India and its impact on future approaches to elimination and control. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2(1):e113

pubmed: 18235845 pmcid: 2217676

Irgens LM (2002) The discovery of the leprosy bacillus. Tidsskrift for den Norske Laegeforening: Tidsskrift for Praktisk Medicin, Ny Raekke 122(7):708–709

pubmed: 11998735

TM Rawson Imperial medicine blog. Leprosy in 2018: an ancient disease that remains a public health problem.

Alemu Belachew W, Naafs B (2019) Position statement: LEPROSY: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 33(7):1205–1213

pubmed: 30945360

World Health Organization. Target product profile for a diagnostic test to confirm leprosy in individuals with clinical signs and symptoms.

Ridéey DS, Jopling WH (1966) Classification of leprosy according to immunity. A five-group system. Int J Lepr 34(3):255–273

Fonseca AB, Simon MD, Cazzaniga RA, de Moura TR, de Almeida RP, Duthie MS, Reed SG, de Jesus AR (2017) The influence of innate and adaptative immune responses on the differential clinical outcomes of leprosy. Infect Dis Poverty 6(1):1–8

Modlin RL (1994) Th1-Th2 paradigm: insights from leprosy. J Investig Dermatol 102(6):828–832

pubmed: 8006444

All India Leprosy Workers Conference (1955) Classification of leprosy adopted by the Indian association of leprologists. Lepr India 1955(27):93–95

Jardim MR, Antunes SL, Santos AR, Nascimento OJ, Nery JA, Sales AM, Illarramendi X, Duppre N, Chimelli L, Sampaio EP, Sarno EP (2003) Criteria for diagnosis of pure neural leprosy. J Neurol 250:806–809

pubmed: 12883921

Rao PN, Suneetha S (2016) Pure neuritic leprosy: current status and relevance. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 1(82):252

Santos DF, Mendonca MR, Antunes DE, Sabino EF, Pereira RC, Goulart LR, Goulart IM (2017) Revisiting primary neural leprosy: clinical, serological, molecular, and neurophysiological aspects. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 11(11):e0006086

pubmed: 29176796 pmcid: 5720806

Mohanty PS, Naaz F, Bansal AK, Kumar D, Sharma S, Arora M, Singh H, Katara P, Soni N, Patil SA, Singh M (2020) Molecular detection of Mycobacterium leprae using RLEP-PCR in post elimination era of leprosy. Molecular biology research communications 9(1):17

pubmed: 32582789 pmcid: 7275826

Wichitwechkarn J, Karnjan S, Shuntawuttisettee S, Sornprasit C, Kampirapap K, Peerapakorn S (1995) Detection of Mycobacterium leprae infection by PCR. J Clin Microbiol 33(1):45–49

pubmed: 7699064 pmcid: 227877

Torres P, Camarena JJ, Gomez JR, Nogueira JM, Gimeno V, Navarro JC, Olmos A (2003) Comparison of PCR mediated amplification of DNA and the classical methods for detection of Mycobacterium leprae in different types of clinical samples in leprosy patients and contacts. Lepr Rev 74(1):18–30

pubmed: 12669929

Chae GT, Kim MJ, Kang TJ, Lee SB, Shin HK, Kim JP, Ko YH, Kim SH, Kim NH (2002) DNA-PCR and RT-PCR for the 18-kDa gene of Mycobacterium leprae to assess the efficacy of multi-drug therapy for leprosy. J Med Microbiol 51(5):417–422

pubmed: 11990494

Martinez AN, Britto CF, Nery JA, Sampaio EP, Jardim MR, Sarno EN, Moraes MO (2006) Evaluation of real-time and conventional PCR targeting complex 85 genes for detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA in skin biopsy samples from patients diagnosed with leprosy. J Clin Microbiol 44(9):3154–3159

pubmed: 16954241 pmcid: 1594745

Martinez AN, Ribeiro-Alves M, Sarno EN, Moraes MO (2011) Evaluation of qPCR-based assays for leprosy diagnosis directly in clinical specimens. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 5(10):e1354

pubmed: 22022631 pmcid: 3191141

Patrocínio LG, Goulart IM, Goulart LR, Patrocínio JA, Ferreira FR, Fleury RN (2005) Detection of Mycobacterium leprae in nasal mucosa biopsies by the polymerase chain reaction. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 44(3):311–316

pubmed: 15907454

Santos AR, Balassiano V, Oliveira ML, Pereira MA, Santos PB, Degrave WM, Suffys PN (2001) Detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA by polymerase chain reaction in the blood of individuals, 8 years after completion of anti-leprosy therapy. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 96:1123–1133

Turankar RP, Pandey S, Lavania M, Singh I, Nigam A, Darlong J, Darlong F, Sengupta U (2015) Comparative evaluation of PCR amplification of RLEP, 16S rRNA, rpoT and sod a gene targets for detection of M. leprae DNA from clinical and environmental samples. International journal of mycobacteriology 4(1):54–59

pubmed: 26655199

Gama RS, Gomides TA, Gama CF, Moreira SJ, de Neves Manta FS, de Oliveira LB, Marçal PH, Sarno EN, Moraes MO, Garcia RM, de Oliveira Fraga LA (2018) High frequency of M. leprae DNA detection in asymptomatic household contacts. BMC Infect Dis 18(1):1–6

Parkash O, Singh HB, Rai S, Pandey A, Katoch VM, Girdhar BK (2004) Detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA for 36kDa protein in urine from leprosy patients: a preliminary report. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo 46:275–277

pubmed: 15517032

Caleffi KR, Hirata RD, Hirata MH, Caleffi ER, Siqueira VL, Cardoso RF (2012) Use of the polymerase chain reaction to detect Mycobacterium leprae in urine. Braz J Med Biol Res 45:153–157

pubmed: 22286535 pmcid: 3854251

Marques LÉ, Frota CC, Quetz JD, Bindá AH, Mota RM, Pontes MA, Goncalves HD, Kendall C, Kerr LR (2018) Evaluation of 16S rRNA qPCR for detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA in nasal secretion and skin biopsy samples from multibacillary and paucibacillary leprosy cases. Pathogens and Global Health 112(2):72–78

pubmed: 29279044

Beissner M, Woestemeier A, Saar M, Badziklou K, Maman I, Amedifou C, Wagner M, Wiedemann FX, Amekuse K, Kobara B, Herbinger KH (2019) Development of a combined RLEP/16S rRNA (RT) qPCR assay for the detection of viable M. leprae from nasal swab samples. BMC Infect Dis 19:1

Roger DB, David CN, Henry K, Christiane AA, Elise KN, Vagamon B, Philippe BA, Mireille D (2020) Comparative assessments of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay of repetitive sequence (RLEP) and proline rich antigen (PRA) gene targets for detection of Mycobacterium leprae DNA from paucibacillary (PB) and multibacillary (MB) patients in Côte d’Ivoire. GSC Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences 11(1):085–092

Plikaytis BB, Gelber RH, Shinnick TM (1990) Rapid and sensitive detection of Mycobacterium leprae using a nested-primer gene amplification assay. J Clin Microbiol 28(9):1913–1917

pubmed: 2229372 pmcid: 268077

Bang PD, Suzuki K, Phuong LT, Chu TM, Ishii N, Khang TH (2009) Evaluation of polymerase chain reaction-based detection of Mycobacterium leprae for the diagnosis of leprosy. J Dermatol 36(5):269–276

pubmed: 19382997

Rudeeaneksin J, Srisungngam S, Sawanpanyalert P, Sittiwakin T, Likanonsakul S, Pasadorn S, Palittapongarnpim P, Brennan PJ, Phetsuksiri B (2008) LightCycler™ real-time PCR for rapid detection and quantitation of Mycobacterium leprae in skin specimens. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 54(2):263–270

pubmed: 18783434

Donoghue HD, Holton J, Spigelman M (2001) PCR primers that can detect low levels of Mycobacterium leprae DNA. J Med Microbiol 50(2):177–182

pubmed: 11211226

Yan W, Xing Y, Yuan LC, De Yang R, Tan FY, Zhang Y, Li HY (2014) Application of RLEP real-time PCR for detection of M. leprae DNA in paraffin-embedded skin biopsy specimens for diagnosis of paucibacillary leprosy. Am J Trop Med Hyg 90(3):524

pubmed: 24493677 pmcid: 3945699

Siwakoti S, Rai K, Bhattarai NR, Agarwal S, Khanal B (2016) Evaluation of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with slit skin smear examination (SSS) to confirm clinical diagnosis of leprosy in eastern Nepal. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 10(12):e0005220

pubmed: 28027305 pmcid: 5189933

Chaitanya VS, Madhusmita D, Tiffany LE, Angela A, Lakshmi R, Ilse H, Mannam E (2016) Mycobacterium leprae specific genomic target in the promoter region of probable 84-alpha-glucanotransferase [ML1545] gene with potential sensitivity for polymerase chain reaction based diagnosis of leprosy. Int J Mycobacteriol 5(2):135–141

Chaitanya VS, Cuello L, Das M, Sudharsan A, Ganesan P, Kanmani K, Rajan L, Ebenezer M (2017) Analysis of a novel multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay as a sensitive tool for the diagnosis of indeterminate and tuberculoid forms of leprosy. The International Journal of Mycobacteriology 6(1):1–8

pubmed: 28317797

Braet S, Vandelannoote K, Meehan CJ, Brum Fontes AN, Hasker E, Rosa PS, Lucena-Silva N, Rigouts L, Suffys PN, De Jong BC (2018) The repetitive element RLEP is a highly specific target for detection of Mycobacterium leprae. J Clin Microbiol 56(3):10–128

Jamil S, Keer JT, Dockrell HM, Stoker NG, Lucas SB, Chiang TJ, Hussain R (1993) Use of polymerase chain reaction to assess efficacy of leprosy chemotherapy. The Lancet 342(8866):264–268

Li Y, Zimmermann B, Rusterholz C, Kang A, Holzgreve W, Hahn S (2004) Size separation of circulatory DNA in maternal plasma permits ready detection of fetal DNA polymorphisms. Clin Chem 50(6):1002–1011

pubmed: 15073090

Green C, Huggett JF, Talbot E, Mwaba P, Reither K, Zumla AI (2009) Rapid diagnosis of tuberculosis through the detection of mycobacterial DNA in urine by nucleic acid amplification methods. Lancet Infect Dis 9(8):505–511

pubmed: 19628175

Elshimali YI, Khaddour H, Sarkissyan M, Wu Y, Vadgama JV (2013) The clinical utilization of circulating cell free DNA (CCFDNA) in blood of cancer patients. Int J Mol Sci 14(9):18925–18958

pubmed: 24065096 pmcid: 3794814

Lichtenstein AV, Melkonyan HS, Tomei LD, Umansky SR (2001) Circulating nucleic acids and apoptosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 945(1):239–249

pubmed: 11708486

Weerakoon KG, McManus DP (2016) Cell-free DNA as a diagnostic tool for human parasitic infections. Trends Parasitol 32(5):378–391

pubmed: 26847654

Gahan PB (2015) Circulating nucleic acids in early diagnosis, prognosis and treatment monitoring. Springer, Netharlands, p 30

Najafabadi ZG, Oormazdi H, Akhlaghi L, Meamar AR, Nateghpour M, Farivar L, Razmjou E (2014) Detection of plasmodium vivax and plasmodium falciparum DNA in human saliva and urine: loop-mediated isothermal amplification for malaria diagnosis. Acta Trop 1(136):44–49

Podgoršek D, Ružić-Sabljić E, Logar M, Pavlović A, Remec T, Baklan Z, Pal E, Cerar T (2020) Evaluation of real-time PCR targeting the lipL32 gene for diagnosis of Leptospira infection. BMC Microbiol 20(1):1–9

Waggoner JJ, Balassiano I, Abeynayake J, Sahoo MK, Mohamed-Hadley A, Liu Y, Vital-Brazil JM, Pinsky BA (2014) Sensitive real-time PCR detection of pathogenic Leptospira spp. and a comparison of nucleic acid amplification methods for the diagnosis of leptospirosis. PLoS ONE 9(11):e112356

pubmed: 25379890 pmcid: 4224423

Pappa SA, Kontou PI, Bagos PG, Braliou GG (2021) Urine-based molecular diagnostic tests for leishmaniasis infection in human and canine populations: a meta-analysis. Pathogens 10(3):269

pubmed: 33673416 pmcid: 7996766

Chemeda A, Abebe T, Ameni G, Worku A, Mihret A (2019) Utility of urine as a clinical specimen for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in people living with HIV in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Journal of Clinical Tuberculosis and Other Mycobacterial Diseases 1(17):100125

Fernández-Carballo BL, Broger T, Wyss R, Banaei N, Denkinger CM (2019) Toward the development of a circulating free DNA-based in vitro diagnostic test for infectious diseases: a review of evidence for tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 57(4):10–128

Turankar RP, Lavania M, Chaitanya VS, Sengupta U, Darlong J, Darlong F, Sai KS, Jadhav RS (2014) Single nucleotide polymorphism-based molecular typing of M. leprae from multicase families of leprosy patients and their surroundings to understand the transmission of leprosy. Clin Microbiol Infect 20(3):O142–O149

pubmed: 24520878

Silva MA, Medeiros Z, Soares CR, Silva ED, Miranda-Filho DB, Melo FL (2014) A comparison of four DNA extraction protocols for the analysis of urine from patients with visceral leishmaniasis. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 47:193–197

pubmed: 24861293