Advertisement

Parasitology Research

, Volume 118, Issue 1, pp 317–324 | Cite as

Biological evaluation of mimetic peptides as active molecules for a new and simple skin test in an animal model

  • Deborah Carbonera Guedes
  • Aline Kuhn Sbruzzi Pasquali
  • João Carlos Minozzo
  • Craig Faulds
  • Ricardo Rasmussen Petterle
  • Carlos Ricardo Soccol
  • Vanete Thomaz SoccolEmail author
Protozoology - Original Paper

Abstract

A skin test is a widely used tool in diagnostic evaluations to investigate cutaneous leishmaniases (CL). The actual antigen (Montenegro skin test [MST] antigen) presents some difficulties that pertain to its manufacturing and validation. To contribute to overcoming this problem, we propose the application of new-generation molecules that are based on skin antigen tests. These antigens were obtained through biotechnology pathways by manufacturing synthetic mimetic peptides. Three peptides, which were selected by phage display, were tested as skin test antigens in an animal model (Cavia porcellus) that was immunized with Leishmania amazonensis or Leishmania braziliensis. The peptide antigens, individually (PA1, PA2, PA3) or in a mix (PAMix), promoted induration reactions at 48 and 72 h after the test was performed. The indurations varied from 0.5 to 0.7 cm. In the animals immunized with L. amazonensis, the PA3 antigen showed better results than the standard MST antigen. In animals immunized with L. braziliensis, two peptide antigens (PA2 and PAMix) promoted induration reactions for a longer period of time than the standard MST antigen. These results validate our hypothesis that peptides could be used as antigens in skin tests and may replace the current antigen for CL diagnosis.

Keywords

Phage display Synthetic peptides Diagnostic Neglected disease 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the Centro de Produção e Pesquisa de Imunobiológicos (CPPI) of SESA, Paraná State, for technical support and for providing the MST antigen for this study.

Funding

This study was funded by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq; Grant Nos. 307387/2011-9 and 480292/2012-4), Fundação Araucária (Grant No. 122/2010 [Protocol 17401]), the Programa Nacional de Pós-Doutorado-Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (PNPD-CAPES; Protocol 2847/2011), and scholarships granted to the two first author.

Compliance with ethical standards

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Parana (Process no. 101328/2015-69). This article does not contain any studies that were performed by any of the authors with human subjects.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Alban SM, de Moura JF, Minozzo JC, Mira MT, Soccol VT (2013) Identification of mimotopes of Mycobacterium leprae as potential diagnostic reagents. BMC Infect Dis 13.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-13-42
  2. Alban SM, De Moura JF, Thomaz-Soccol V et al (2014) Phage display and synthetic peptides as promising biotechnological tools for the serological diagnosis of leprosy. PLoS One 9:e106222.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106222 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bazan J, Całkosiński I, Gamian A (2012) Phage display - a powerful technique for immunotherapy: 2. Vaccine delivery. Hum Vaccin Immunother 8:1829–1835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brigido M, Maranhão A (2002) Bibliotecas apresentadas em fagos. Biotecnologia cienc desenvolv 26:44–51Google Scholar
  5. Capelli-Peixoto J, Chávez-Olórtegui C, Chaves-Moreira D, Minozzo JC, Gabardo J, Teixeira KN, Thomaz-Soccol V, Alvarenga LM, de Moura J (2011) Evaluation of the protective potential of a Taenia solium cysticercus mimotope on murine cysticercosis. Vaccine 29:9473–9479.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.10.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charan J, Kantharia ND (2013) How to calculate sample size in animal studies? J Pharmacol Pharmacother 4:303–306.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.119726 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen X, Scala G, Quinto I, Liu W, Chun TW, Shawn Justement J, Cohen OJ, vanCott TC, Iwanicki M, Lewis MG, Greenhouse J, Barry T, Venzon D, Fauci AS (2001) Protection of Rhesus macaques against disease progression from pathogenic SHIV-89.6PD by vaccination with phage-displayed HIV-1 epitopes. Nat Med 7:1225–1231.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nm1101-1225 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. de Moura J, Alvarenga LM, Thomaz-Soccol V (2016) Biotechnological role of phage-displayed peptides for the diagnosis of neglected tropical diseases. In: Current developments in biotechnology and bioengineering: human and animal health applications. pp 161–180Google Scholar
  9. de Vries HJC, Reedijk SH, Schallig HDFH (2015) Cutaneous leishmaniasis: recent developments in diagnosis and management. Am J Clin Dermatol 16:99–109.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40257-015-0114-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fogaça RL, Capelli-Peixoto J, Yamanaka IB, de Almeida RPM, Muzzi JCD, Borges M, Costa AJ, Chávez-Olortegui C, Thomaz-Soccol V, Alvarenga LM, de Moura J (2014) Phage-displayed peptides as capture antigens in an innovative assay for Taenia saginata-infected cattle. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98:8887–8894.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-014-5968-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guedes DC, Minozzo JC, Pasquali AKS, Faulds C, Soccol CR, Thomaz-Soccol V (2017) New strategy to improve quality control of Montenegro skin test at the production level. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 50:788–794.  https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0131-2017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hancock DC, O’Reilly NJ (2005) Synthetic peptides as antigens for antibody production. In: Immunoch protocols. pp 13–25Google Scholar
  13. Harlow D, Lane E (1988) A laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Jaafari MR, Badiee A, Khamesipour A, Samiei A, Soroush D, Kheiri MT, Barkhordari F, McMaster WR, Mahboudi F (2007) The role of CpG ODN in enhancement of immune response and protection in BALB/c mice immunized with recombinant major surface glycoprotein of Leishmania (rgp63) encapsulated in cationic liposome. Vaccine 25:6107–6117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Khabiri AR, Bagheri F, Alimohammadian MH, Assmar M, Nadaf SR (2005) Leishmanin skin test in guinea pig with a single purified protein of Leishmania major. Exp Parasitol 111:239–243.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exppara.2005.08.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Khabiri AR, Bagheri F, Assmar M (2006) Leishmania major: species specific delayed hypersensitivity reaction induced by exogenous secreted antigen in the guinea pig. Exp Parasitol 112:184–186.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exppara.2005.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kim YJ (2011) Efficiency of recombinant bacille calmette-guérin in inducing humoral and cell mediated immunities against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 third variable domain in immunized mice. Yonsei Med J 52:173–180.  https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2011.52.1.173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kindt T, Goldsby R, Osborne B, Kuby J (2007) Kuby immunology. J Exp Med 206:2925–2935.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 Google Scholar
  19. Komori T, Nakamura T, Matsunaga I, Morita D, Hattori Y, Kuwata H, Fujiwara N, Hiromatsu K, Harashima H, Sugita M (2011) A microbial glycolipid functions as a new class of target antigen for delayed-type hypersensitivity. J Biol Chem 286:16800–16806.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.217224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kukharenko AE, Babaev AA, Shchelchkova NA, Lapshin RD, Vedunova MV, Gravel IV, Mukhina IV, Lovtsova LV (2015) Estimation of general toxicity and immunological safety of a novel therapeutic vaccine against human papillomavirus-associated diseases. Sovrem Technol Med 7:92–96.  https://doi.org/10.17691/stm2015.7.2.12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lateef SS, Gupta S, Jayathilaka LP et al (2007) An improved protocol for coupling synthetic to carrier proteins for antibody production using DMF to solubilize peptides. J Biomol Tech 18:173–176Google Scholar
  22. Link JS, Alban SM, Soccol CR, Pereira GVM, Thomaz Soccol V (2017) Synthetic peptides as potential antigens for cutaneous leishmaniosis diagnosis. J Immunol Res 2017:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5871043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Malaghini M, Thomaz-Soccol V, Probst CM, Krieger MA, Preti H, Kritski A, Soccol CR (2011) Recombinant antigen production for assays of intradermoreaction for diagnosis and surveillance of tuberculosis. J Biotechnol 156:56–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2011.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Merrifield R (1969) Solid-phase peptide synthesis. Adv Enzym 32:221–296Google Scholar
  25. Moradi J, Mosavari N, Ebrahimi M, Arefpajohi R, Tebianian M (2015) Evaluation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis early secreted antigenic target 6 recombinant protein as a diagnostic marker in skin test. Osong Public Health Res Perspect 6:34–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrp.2014.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nagill R, Kaur S (2011) Vaccine candidates for leishmaniasis: a review. Int Immunopharmacol 11:1464–1488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. R Development Core Team R (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Found Stat Comput 1:409Google Scholar
  28. Sadeghian G, Ziaei H, Bidabadi L, Nilforoushzadeh M (2013) Evaluation of leishmanin skin test reaction in different variants of cutaneous leishmaniasis. Indian J Dermatol 58:239.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.110838 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Skraba CM, de Mello TFP, Pedroso RB et al (2015) Evaluation of the reference value for the Montenegro skin test. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 48:437–444.  https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0067-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Szargiki R, Alcântara de Castro E, Luz E et al (2009) Comparison of serological and parasitological methods for cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnosis in the state of Paraná, Brazil. BJID 12:47–52Google Scholar
  31. Teixeira MCA, de Sá Oliveira GG, Santos POM et al (2011) An experimental protocol for the establishment of dogs with long-term cellular immune reactions to Leishmania antigens. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 106:182–189.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0074-02762011000200011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomaz-Soccol V, Alban S, Seger J (2015) Peptídeos miméticos de Leishmania sp. Processo para sua obtenção e aplicações. PatentGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang H, Gao Y, Gong Y, Chen X, Liu C, Zhou X, Blackall PJ, Zhang P, Yang H (2007) Identification and immunogenicity of an immunodominant mimotope of Avibacterium paragallinarum from a phage display peptide library. Vet Microbiol 119:231–239.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2006.08.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. WHO (1997) World Health Organization expert committee on biological standrdization - technical report series 889, pp 1–120Google Scholar
  35. Wu HW, Hu XM, Wang Y, Kurtis JD, Zeng FJ, McGarvey ST, Wu GL, Zhang ZS, Hua ZC (2006) Protective immunity induced by phage displayed mitochondrial related peptides of Schistosoma japonicum. Acta Trop 99:200–207.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2006.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yao C, Donelson JE, Wilson ME (2003) The major surface protease (MSP or GP63) of Leishmania sp. biosynthesis, regulation of expression, and function. Mol Biochem Parasitol 132:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zurlo J, Rudacille D, Goldberg AM (1996) The three Rs: the way forward. Environ Health Perspect 104:878–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deborah Carbonera Guedes
    • 1
  • Aline Kuhn Sbruzzi Pasquali
    • 1
  • João Carlos Minozzo
    • 2
  • Craig Faulds
    • 3
  • Ricardo Rasmussen Petterle
    • 4
  • Carlos Ricardo Soccol
    • 1
  • Vanete Thomaz Soccol
    • 1
    Email author return OK on get
  1. 1.Programa de Pós Graduação Strictu Sensu em Engenharia de Bioprocessos e BiotecnologiaUniversidade Federal do ParanáCuritibaBrazil
  2. 2.Centro de Produção e Pesquisa de ImunobiológicosSecretaria da Saúde do Estado do ParanáPiraquaraBrazil
  3. 3.Department of BiotechnologyUniversité Aix MarseilleMarseilleFrance
  4. 4.Departamento de Saúde ComunitáriaUniversidade Federal do ParanáCuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations