Iyer LR, Banyal N, Naik S, Paul J. Antioxidant enzyme profile of two clinical isolates of Entamoeba histolytica varying in sensitivity to antiamoebic drugs. World J Clin Infect Dis 2017; 7(2): 21-31 [DOI: 10.5495/wjcid.v7.i2.21]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Dr. Jaishree Paul, School of Life Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi 110067, India. jpaul33@hotmail.com
Research Domain of This Article
Infectious Diseases
Article-Type of This Article
Basic Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Table 2 Representative minimum inhibitory concentration plate tests of clinical isolates of Entamoeba histolytica to antiamoebic drugs
Concentration
15 h
24 h
48 h
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-1
W-2
W-3
MIC of Entamoeba histolytica clinical isolate 980 to auranofin = 3 μmol/L
Control
+++
++++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
DMSO control
+++
+++
++++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
1 μmol/L
++
+++
++
++
++
++
++
++
++
2 μmol/L
+
++
++
++
++
++
++
+
+
3 μmol/L
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
4 μmol/L
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
MIC of of Entamoeba histolytica clinical isolate 980 to metronidazole = 80 μmol/L
Control
+++
++++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
DMSO control
+++
+++
++++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
50 μmol/L
++
+++
+++
++
++
++
++
++
++
60 μmol/L
++
++
++
++
++
++
++
++
+
70 μmol/L
+
++
++
++
++
++
++
+
+
80 μmol/L
++
+
++
++
+
+
+
+
-
90 μmol/L
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
MIC of Entamoeba histolytica clinical isolate 989 to auranofin = 1 μmol/L (MIC determined to be 2 μmol/L)
Control
+++
++++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
DMSO control
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
1 μmol/L
++
+++
+++
++
+
+
+
+
+
2 μmol/L
++
++
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
3 μmol/L
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
4 μmol/L
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MIC of of Entamoeba histolytica clinical isolate 989 to metronidazole = 30 μmol/L
Control
+++
++++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
DMSO control
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
++
10 μmol/L
++
+++
+++
++
++
++
++
++
++
20 μmol/L
++
+++
++
+
++
++
++
++
+
30 μmol/L
++
++
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
40 μmol/L
+
+
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
Table 3 Minimum inhibitory concentrations for clinical isolates of Entamoeba histolytica to metronidazole and auranofin in drug susceptibity assays
Isolate
MIC metronidazole
Range (µmol/L)
MIC auranofin
Range (µmol/L)
No. of attempts
654
50 μmol/L
50-60
2 μmol/L
2-3
3
812
40 μmol/L
30-40
2 μmol/L
2-3
3
980
80 μmol/L
80-100
3 μmol/L
80-100
5 (auranofin)
10 (metronidazole)
989
30 μmol/L
30-40
1 μmol/L
1-2
5
5132
50 μmol/L
50-60
2 μmol/L
2-3
3
MS-96:3382
24 μmol/L
20-30
5 μmol/L
4-5
4
Table 4 Percent viability of clinical isolate 980 and 989 after treatment with metronidazole and auranofin
15 h
24 h
48 h
Percent viability of clinical isolate 980 after treatment with metronidazole
50 μmol/L metronidazole
61.8 ± 0.13
74.12 ± 14.1
70.23 ± 3.66
70 μmol/L metronidazole
53.06 ± 14.1
69.38 ± 3.13
60.68 ± 6.74
90 μmol/L metronidazole
47.31 ± 6.2
26.39 ± 10.7
24.3 ± 14.75
Percent viability of clinical isolate 980 after treatment with auranofin
1 μmol/L auranofin
91.5 ± 0.26
25.17 ± 5.85
12.88 ± 1.63
2 μmol/L auranofin
56.6 ± 5.81
27.92 ± 5.84
0
3 μmol/L auranofin
47.74 ± 7.67
22.41 ± 4.62
0
Percent viability of clinical isolate 989 after treatment with metronidazole
20 μmol/L
-
92.51 ± 2.79
65.22 ± 18.5
30 μmol/L
-
76.11 ± 17.13
25.39 ± 5.33
40 μmol/L
-
54.81 ± 0.57
0
Percent viability of clinical isolate 989 after treatment with auranofin
0.5 μmol/L
-
45.47 ± 0.26
43.01 ± 2.33
1 μmol/L
-
36.63 ± 3.00
19.4 ± 2.95
2 μmol/L
-
29.16 ± 2.95
0
Citation: Iyer LR, Banyal N, Naik S, Paul J. Antioxidant enzyme profile of two clinical isolates of Entamoeba histolytica varying in sensitivity to antiamoebic drugs. World J Clin Infect Dis 2017; 7(2): 21-31