Case sample
A total of 57 individuals participated in this study and were divided into the following groups:
Group 1 (asymptomatic, AS): 21 AS HTLV-1 carriers who were positive by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR).
Group 2 (HAM/TSP): 16 HTLV-1 carriers who were by positive ELISA and real-time PCR with a clinically confirmed HAM/TSP diagnosis.
Group 3 (control group, CG): 20 individuals negative for HTLV-1 and HTLV-2 by serological and molecular tests.
The clinical classification of patients was performed by a neurologist at the Tropical Medicine Center (NMT) in Belém, State of Pará, Brazil, following the protocol of De Castro-Costa et al. [23]. The main clinical symptoms diagnosed in the HAM/TSP group were low back pain, constipation, leg weakness, increased deep reflexes, bladder disturbance, cramps and Babinski's sign. Blood samples were collected between August 2015 and May 2017 at the NMT, and laboratory procedures were conducted at the Laboratory of Virology (LabVir) of the Federal University of Pará (UFPA). The groups were matched for age and sex. Blood samples (5 mL) obtained by venipuncture were placed in 2 vacutainers containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as an anticoagulant and were used for flow cytometry, ribonucleic acid (RNA) extraction and plasma AnxA1 measurements. All subjects were seronegative for human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1). HAM/TSP patients were not on anti-inflammatory treatment at the time of the study.
RNA extraction, quantification and reverse transcription
RNA was extracted from whole blood cells using TRIzol® reagent (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) following the manufacturer’s protocol. RNA was quantified in the SpectraMax® i3 Multi-Mode Detection Platform, which uses a 24-well microplate containing 2 µL of elution buffer in one well as a blank and 2 µL of each sample in the other wells. The absorbance of the samples was read at a wavelength of 260 nm. Then, 20 ng of deoxyribonuclease I (DNase I)-treated RNA was used for the reverse transcription of messenger RNA (mRNA) into complementary DNA (cDNA) using the High Capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription kit (Applied Biosystems, USA), following the manufacturer’s technical recommendations. The cDNA was stored at -20 °C prior to use.
ANXA1, FPR1, FPR2 and FPR3 gene expression
cDNA was analyzed using real-time quantitative PCR (relative quantification (RQ) by the ΔΔCT method). The qPCR results for endogenous genes and targets were standardized to calculate the efficiency of the amplification reactions. Different concentrations of cDNA were tested (undiluted and 4 serial dilutions using a factor of 2, from 1:2 to 1:16). Reactions were performed in triplicate wells and analyzed simultaneously using the same cDNA (at different dilutions) with different probes to construct an efficiency curve and validate the 2-ΔΔCT analysis method. All assays showed the expected efficiency (100 ± 10%; Supplementary Fig. 1). The RQ of target gene expression was conducted based on the comparative CT method (ΔΔCT) using the 2-ΔΔCT formula, where ΔΔCT = ΔCTsample-ΔCTreference [24]. ANXA1, FPR1, FPR2 and FPR3 mRNA levels were quantified using GoTaq Green Master Mix (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) with β-actin as the reference gene. The reactions were carried out in the StepOne PLUS Sequence Detector (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). The primer sequences are provided in Table 1. The reactions included 1X GoTaq Green Master Mix [2X], 0.5 pmol/μL primer [10 pmol/μL] and 60 ng of cDNA in a final reaction volume of 20 μL. The temperature conditions were as follows: 95 °C (hold stage) for 20 seconds, followed by 40 cycles of 95 °C (denaturation) for 15 seconds and 60 °C (primer binding and product extension) for 20 seconds. The melting curves for all the samples were evaluated after the reaction ended, and those for the investigated genes are presented in Supplementary Figure 2.
Table 1. Nucleotide sequences of the primers used for real-time PCR to quantify ANXA1, FPR1, FPR2 and FPR3 mRNA levels.
Primer
|
Sequence (5'-3')
|
Direction
|
ANXA1F
|
GATTTTCGGAACGCTTTGCT
|
Forward
|
ANXA1R
|
AGTCCTCAGATCGGTCACCCT
|
Reverse
|
FPR1F
|
ACCCAGAGCAAGACCACAGC
|
Forward
|
FPR1R
|
TCCATCTTGTCTGCTCCTGCA
|
Reverse
|
FPR2F
|
ATTTGCAGCCTTGAGGTCA
|
Forward
|
FPR2R
|
AGCACCTGGTGCATTTTCCT
|
Reverse
|
FPR3F
|
GGATGACACGCACAGTCAACA
|
Forward
|
FPR3R
|
TCAGCTAGGGCCAGGTTCAG
|
Reverse
|
BACTINAF
|
TCCCTGGAGAAGAGCTACG
|
Forward
|
BACTINAR
|
TAGTTTCGTGGATGCCACA
|
Reverse
|
Quantification of plasma AnxA1 levels
Plasma AnxA1 levels were measured by ELISA (Human Annexin A1 ELISA Kit, ab222868, Abcam, Cambridge, UK) with specific polyclonal anti-human AnxA1 antibodies. The assays were conducted according to the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Quantification of HTLV-1 proviral load
Proviral load (PVL) was quantified by qPCR using three target sequences synthesized using the TaqMan® system (Life Technologies, Foster City, CA, USA) according to a previously described protocol [25]. The results were adjusted to obtain the absolute proviral quantification considering the leukocyte count per mm3, and the final results are presented as DNA proviral copies/mm3.
Statistical analysis
Normality analysis of the sample distribution was performed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Target gene expression levels and the percentages of ANXA1-expressing immunoinflammatory cells were compared among groups using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test. Significant results in the Kruskal-Wallis test were subjected to multiple comparisons analysis by Dunn’s post test. Plasma AnxA1 levels and PVL were compared between the HAM/TSP and AS groups by the Mann-Whitney test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were made to investigate diagnostic accuracy in the PVL, AnxA1 and PVL + AnxA1 tests in relation to sensitivity and specificity. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) represents the ability of the test to correctly classify participants with HAM/TSP and progression to disease. The AUC values vary between 1 (diagnosis correctness) and 0 (diagnosis error). The tests were performed using BioEstat 5.3 software [26] and the ROC curve analyzes were performed by the programs GraphPad prism 6.0 and SSP 25.0. The results with p<0.05 were considered significant.