Differential detection of Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, and Entamoeba moshkovskii by a single-round PCR assay

A single-round PCR assay was developed for detection and differential diagnosis of the three Entamoeba species found in humans, Entamoeba moshkovskii, Entamoeba histolytica, and Entamoeba dispar, that are morphologically identical as both cysts and trophozoites. A conserved forward primer was derived from the middle of the small-subunit rRNA gene, and reverse primers were designed from signature sequences specific to each of these three Entamoeba species. PCR generates a 166-bp product with E. histolytica DNA, a 752-bp product with E. dispar DNA, and a 580-bp product with E. moshkovskii DNA. Thirty clinical specimens were examined, and the species present were successfully detected and differentiated using this assay. It was possible to detect as little as 10 pg of E. moshkovskii and E. histolytica DNA, while for E. dispar the sensitivity was about 20 pg of DNA. Testing with DNA from different pathogens, including bacteria and other protozoa, confirmed the high specificity of the assay. We propose the use of this PCR assay as an accurate, rapid, and effective diagnostic method for the detection and discrimination of these three morphologically indistinguishable Entamoeba species in both routine diagnosis of amoebiasis and epidemiological surveys.     

Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar: differentiation methods and implications

Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar are two species morphologically identical (except hematophagous trophozoites) but one of them is pathogenic. Sensitive and specific molecular techniques which are able to distinguish E. histolytica from E. dispar have been developed recently. Detection of antigen in stool using the ELISA method is the diagnostic test method of choice for clinical use in the developing world. It is rapid and simple. Cultures for zymodeme analysis and PCR detection of the parasite remain research tools. Species identification is imperative both for improved clinical diagnosis and treatment and for planning control strategies.     

Molecular epidemiology of Entamoeba spp.: evidence of a bottleneck (Demographic sweep) and transcontinental spread of diploid parasites

Entamoeba histolytica causes amebic colitis and liver abscess in developing countries such as Mexico and India. Entamoeba dispar is morphologically identical but is not associated with disease. Here we determined the ploidy of E. histolytica and developed PCR-based methods for distinguishing field isolates of E. histolytica or E. dispar. Fluorescence in situ hybridization showed that E. histolytica trophozoites are diploid for five "single-copy" probes tested. Intergenic sequences between superoxide dismutase and actin 3 genes of clinical isolates of E. histolytica from the New and Old Worlds were identical, as were those of E. dispar. These results suggest a bottleneck or demographic sweep in entamoebae which infect humans. In contrast, E. histolytica and E. dispar genes encoding repeat antigens on the surface of trophozoites (Ser-rich protein) or encysting parasites (chitinase) were highly polymorphic. chitinase alleles suggested that the early axenized strains of E. histolytica, HM-1 from Mexico City, Mexico, and NIH-200 from Calcutta, India, are still present and that similar E. dispar parasites can be identified in both the New and Old Worlds. Ser-rich protein alleles, which suggested the presence of the HM-1 strain in Mexico City, included some E. histolytica genes that predicted Ser-rich proteins with very few repeats. These results, which suggest diversifying selection at chitinase and Ser-rich protein loci, demonstrate the usefulness of these alleles for distinguishing clinical isolates of E. histolytica and E. dispar.     

Rapid diagnosis of Entamoeba infection by using Entamoeba and Entamoeba histolytica stool antigen detection kits.

Humans are infected by two morphologically identical species of Entamoeba: Entamoeba histolytica causes amebic colitis and liver abscess, and Entamoeba dispar is noninvasive. Several weeks of culture and isoenzyme (zymodeme) analysis are required to differentiate E. histolytica from E. dispar. Here we report a field trial of commercial antigen detection kits designed to rapidly detect and differentiate E. histolytica from E. dispar in stool specimens. Stool specimens from 202 patients with diarrhea were examined for E. histolytica and E. dispar by microscopy, culture, and antigen detection. Compared with culture, microscopic identification of the E. histolytica-E. dispar complex was 60% sensitive and 79% specific, while the screening antigen detection test for the E. histolytica-E. dispar complex was 80% sensitive and 99% specific. Differentiation of E. dispar from E. histolytica by the E. histolytica-specific test was 95% sensitive and 93% specific compared with zymodeme analysis. We conclude that the antigen detection test for the E. histolytica-E. dispar complex is more sensitive and specific than microscopy and that the E. histolytica-specific antigen detection test is as reliable and much more rapid than zymodeme analysis for the differentiation of E. histolytica from E. dispar.     

A DNA sequence corresponding to the gene encoding cysteine proteinase 5 in Entamoeba histolytica is present and positionally conserved but highly degenerated in Entamoeba dispar.

Cysteine proteinases of Entamoeba histolytica are considered to be one of the most important classes of molecules responsible for the parasite's ability to destroy human tissues. Interestingly, one particular cysteine proteinase, located on the surface of E. histolytica trophozoites and designated cysteine proteinase 5 (CP5), is not expressed in the closely related but nonpathogenic species Entamoeba dispar. By comparing the E. histolytica and E. dispar genomic loci containing the gene for CP5 (cp5), it was found that the position of cp5 within the genomic context is conserved between the two organisms, but that the gene is highly degenerated in E. dispar, as it contains numerous nucleotide exchanges, insertions, and deletions, resulting in multiple stop codons within the cp5 reading frame. An alignment of all available orthologous E. histolytica and E. dispar DNA sequences suggested that cp5 started to degenerate in E. dispar coincidently when the two organisms began to diverge from a common ancestor.     

Differences in cap formation between invasive Entamoeba histolytica and non-invasive Entamoeba dispar

The rapid redistribution of surface antigen-antibody complexes in trophozoites of the human protozoan parasite Entamoeba histolytica, in a process known as capping, has been considered as a means of the parasite to evade the host immune response. So far, capping has been documented in the invasive E. histolytica, whereas the mobility of surface components in the non-invasive Entamoeba dispar is not known. E. dispar does not induce liver lesions in rodent experimental models, in contrast to the liver abscesses produced by E. histolytica in the same animal model. We have therefore analyzed the mobility of surface receptors to the lectin concanavalin A and of Rab11, a membrane-associated protein, in both species of Entamoebae by confocal fluorescence microscopy and transmission and scanning electron microscopy. The great majority of E. histolytica trophozoites became morphologically polarized through the formation of well-defined caps at the posterior pole of the parasite. Actin colocalized with the lectin caps. Antibodies against the membrane protein Rab 11 also produced capping. In striking contrast, in E. dispar, the mobility of concanavalin A surface receptors was restricted to the formation of irregular surface patches that did no progress to constitute well-defined caps. Also, anti-Rab 11 antibodies did not result in capping in E. dispar. Whether the failure of E. dispar to efficiently mobilize surface molecules in response to lectin or antibodies as shown in the present results is related to its non-invasive character represents an interesting hypothesis requiring further analysis.     

Diagnostic methods for differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in carriers: performance and clinical implications in a non-endemic setting

Unpreserved faecal samples, suspected to contain Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar cysts or trophozoites on the basis of microscopic examination, and serum samples from 416 patients were collected in a prospective study to determine whether stool antigen assays and detection of antibodies in serum are reliable methods to distinguish between carriers of E. histolytica and E. dispar in comparison to the reference test: real-time PCR. In 283 patients (68%) DNA of E. histolytica or E. dispar was amplified by real-time PCR: 6 patients with amoebic colitis (2%), 19 carriers of E. histolytica (6.7%), and 258 carriers of E. dispar (91.2%). In 133 patients (31%) no DNA of E. histolytica or E. dispar could be amplified in the stool samples. This patient group was used as control for the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Using real-time PCR as a reference test, the sensitivity and specificity of (1) the Entamoeba test for the diagnosis of E. histolytica/E. dispar carrier were 59% and 98%, (2) E. histolytica II for the diagnosis of E. histolytica carrier was 71% and 100%, and (3) serology for the diagnosis of E. histolytica infection was 83.3% and 95.2%, respectively. Applied to carriers that did not originate from an endemic country the sensitivity of serology for E. histolytica infection was 90% and specificity was 98.8%. In comparison to real-time PCR the performances of Entamoeba test and E. histolytica II lacked sensitivity for a reliable diagnosis of E. histolytica/E. dispar infection in a non-endemic setting. In carriers of E. histolytica/E. dispar from non-endemic countries the high specificity of serology can be used to establish the diagnosis of E. histolytica infection if antibodies are present.     

Detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar isolates in clinical samples by PCR and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

Differential diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica (pathogenic) and Entamoeba dispar (nonpathogenic), which are two morphologically identical species of amebae, is essential both for treatment decision and public health knowledge. The study reported here was designed to choose a reference differentiation technique. Stool samples (n = 95) were tested by microscopy, TechLab enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), and an in-house PCR. The target for the PCR amplification was a small region (135 bp) of the SSU rRNA selected to increase the sensitivity of the test. Sixty-eight specimens tested positive by PCR: 2 for E. histolytica and 66 for E. dispar. For detection of E. dispar, ELISA performance was lower than that of microscopy in this reference context, while PCR was much more sensitive than microscopy. Given the low proportion of E. histolytica cases, test performance for this species is difficult to assess. However, for differentiation, PCR performed well on simulated samples, while ELISA gave a discordant result for one of the two samples PCR positive for E. histolytica during the study. This report also confirms that E. dispar infection is significantly higher among travelers and underlines the possibility of acquiring E. histolytica infection in regions that are not areas of endemicity. Because of its lower sensitivity, the interest of ELISA for Entamoeba detection and differentiation in stools seems questionable in nontropical regions. On the other hand, results suggest that PCR should be useful as a reference test for sensitive differentiation of both species and to contribute to physicians' decision in treatment of E. histolytica- or E. dispar-infected patients.     

Simple differential detection of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in fresh stool specimens by sodium acetate-acetic acid-formalin concentration and PCR.

Amoebiasis is caused by two distinct species, a pathogenic form (Entamoeba histolytica) and a nonpathogenic form (Entamoeba dispar), which are morphologically identical. Although the distinction between these two species is of great clinical importance, the methods developed for this purpose either are very time-consuming or involve laborious procedures for isolation of the DNA. We report here a simple PCR method starting with fresh stool specimen that allows for the sensitive and reliable distinction between E. histolytica and E. dispar. After initial concentration by the sodium acetate-acetic acid-formalin (SAF) method and digestion with proteinase K, a 0.88-kb sequence of the multicopy 16S rRNA gene served as a target for PCR amplification. The method starting with unpreserved specimens proved to be very sensitive and was not influenced by the quick exposure to SAF fixative during the initial concentration step. However, storage in SAF fixative prior to testing resulted in a decreased sensitivity within 2 days. The detection limit of the method was as low as one copy of the 16S rRNA gene. No cross-reactivity was observed with other common intestinal protozoa. Mixed infections involving both E. histolytica and E. dispar could easily be detected at a ratio of 1:10,000 by agarose gel electrophoresis or a DNA hybridization immunoassay.     

Epidemiologic and molecular study of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar strains in pacients with diarrhea in Cumana, Sucre state, Venezuela

An epidemiological and molecular study on E. histolytica and E. dispar was carried out in 428 patients with gastrointestinal symptomatology of diarrhea from different health centers in Cumana, Sucre state. The samples were processed through: direct examination with 0.85% physiological saline solution, temporal lugol staining, trichromic staining and the Ritchie method of concentration; a sucrose gradient was used for cyst isolation. The small subunit of the 16S RNA was amplified by nested, multiplex PCR for the molecular detection. The E. histolytica/E. dispar prevalences according to the direct, Ritchie and trichromic staining methods were 20.09, 13.79 and 12.15%, respectively; while prevalences according to PCR for E. histolytica and E. dispar were 6.31% and 4.44%, respectively, also detecting four cases of mixed infection. Sequencing of the amplified fragments of E. histolytica showed 100% homology with the sequences with strains from Merida (Venezuela), USA, Brazil, Mexico and GenBank. The infections by E. histolytica and E. dispar were statistically associated with age but not with sex. The presence of mucus, blood and abdominal pain were only associated to E. histolytica infection. The moderate prevalence of E. histolytica shows the endemic status of this population and warns about the potential problem as a morbidity and mortality in Sucre state. The frequency of E. dispar in this population suggests the existence of an overestimation problem in the diagnosis of amoebiasis with its clinical and epidemiological implications, and shows the poor knowledge about the true prevalences of this protozoan. The PCR allowed for the differential identification of E. histolytica and E. dispar, as well as the presence of mixed infections, making a great tool for epidemiological amoebiasis studies.     

Diagnosis of amebic dysentery by detection of Entamoeba histolytica fecal antigen by an invasive strain-specific, monoclonal antibody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

An invasive strain-specific monoclonal antibody against Entamoeba histolytica has been used in a capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection of invasive E. histolytica fecal antigen in clinical specimens and for the diagnosis of amebic dysentery in patients from Bangladesh. The fecal antigen capture ELISA (FAC-ELISA) did not cross-react with other parasite species in the clinical specimens or with noninvasive E. histolytica present in those specimens and in experimentally seeded stools. The limit of detection of the assay for invasive E. histolytica crude antigen diluted in phosphate-buffered saline or in stools was 0.58 and 3.9 micrograms/ml, respectively, which is the equivalent of approximately 72 and 487 E. histolytica trophozoites per well, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of the FAC-ELISA were 87, 100, and 98%, respectively, for the detection of invasive E. histolytica antigens and 100, 100, and 100%, respectively, for the diagnosis of amebic dysentery. The FAC-ELISA is a potential alternative for the field diagnosis of amebic dysentery and for epidemiological studies to define the distribution of invasive E. histolytica.     

Laboratory diagnostic techniques for Entamoeba species

The genus Entamoeba contains many species, six of which (Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, Entamoeba moshkovskii, Entamoeba polecki, Entamoeba coli, and Entamoeba hartmanni) reside in the human intestinal lumen. Entamoeba histolytica is the causative agent of amebiasis and is considered a leading parasitic cause of death worldwide in humans. Although recent studies highlight the recovery of E. dispar and E. moshkovskii from patients with gastrointestinal symptoms, there is still no convincing evidence of a causal link between the presence of these two species and the symptoms of the host. New approaches to the identification of E. histolytica are based on detection of E. histolytica-specific antigen and DNA in stool and other clinical samples. Several molecular diagnostic tests, including conventional and real-time PCR, have been developed for the detection and differentiation of E. histolytica, E. dispar, and E. moshkovskii in clinical samples. The purpose of this review is to discuss different methods that exist for the identification of E. histolytica, E. dispar, and E. moshkovskii which are available to the clinical diagnostic laboratory. To address the need for a specific diagnostic test for amebiasis, a substantial amount of work has been carried out over the last decade in different parts of the world. The molecular diagnostic tests are increasingly being used for both clinical and research purposes. In order to minimize undue treatment of individuals infected with other species of Entamoeba such as E. dispar and E. moshkovskii, efforts have been made for specific diagnosis of E. histolytica infection and not to treat based simply on the microscopic examination of Entamoeba species in the stool. The incorporation of many new technologies into the diagnostic laboratory will lead to a better understanding of the public health problem and measures to control the disease.     

Simultaneous differentiation and typing of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar

Sequences corresponding to some of the polymorphic loci previously reported from Entamoeba histolytica have been detected in Entamoeba dispar. Comparison of nucleotide sequences of two loci between E. dispar strain SAW760 and E. histolytica strain HM-1:IMSS revealed significant differences in both repeat and flanking regions. The tandem repeat units varied not only in sequence but also in number and arrangement between the two species at both the loci. Using the sequences obtained, primer pairs aimed at amplifying species-specific products were designed and tested on a variety of E. histolytica and E. dispar samples. Amplification results were in complete agreement with the original species classification in all cases, and the PCR products displayed discernible size and pattern variations among the isolates.     

Preparation of a monoclonal antibody specific for Entamoeba dispar and its ability to distinguish E. dispar from E. histolytica.

A monoclonal antibody (MAb), MAb ED17 (immunoglobulin G2a [IgG2a]), prepared against trophozoites of Entamoeba dispar SAW1734RclAR cultured monoxenically with Crithidia fasciculata, reacted with 25 of 26 isolates of E. dispar by an indirect fluorescent-antibody test. In contrast, the MAb failed to react with any of 20 isolates of E. histolytica or other enteric protozoan parasites. Western blot (immunoblot) analysis showed that the molecular mass of the E. dispar antigen recognized by the MAb was 160 kDa under reduced conditions. Immunoelectron microscopy revealed that the antigen was mainly located on digested C. fasciculata, but not on undigested organisms. Double staining with a mixture of MAb ED17 and MAb 4G6 (an IgG1 MAb which reacts exclusively with E. histolytica), followed by incubation with a mixture of fluorescein isothiocyanate-labeled anti-mouse IgG2a and tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate-labeled anti-mouse IgG1 antibodies, simultaneously identified mixed populations of E. dispar and E. histolytica. This method may prove to be useful for the accurate identification of E. dispar and E. histolytica, even in mixed infections.     

Real-time PCR for detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in fecal samples

A closed-tube, real-time PCR assay was developed for sensitive and specific detection and differentiation of the two closely related intestinal protozoan parasites Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar directly from human feces. The assay is performed with the LightCycler system using fluorescence-labeled detection probes and primers amplifying a 310-bp fragment from the high-copy-number, ribosomal DNA-containing ameba episome. The assay was able to detect as little as 0.1 parasite per g of feces. The two pairs of primers used were specific for the respective ameba species, and results were not influenced by the presence of other Entamoeba species even when present in exceeding amounts. PCR was evaluated using several hundred stool samples from areas of amebiasis endemicity in Vietnam and South Africa, and results were compared with those of microscopy and ameba culture. PCR was found to be significantly more sensitive than microscopy or culture, as all samples positive by microscopy and 22 out of 25 (88%) samples positive by culture were also positive by PCR, but PCR revealed a considerable number of additional E. histolytica- or E. dispar-positive samples. Compared to culture and subsequent ameba differentiation by isoenzyme analysis, PCR was 100% specific for each of the two Entamoeba species. Interestingly, the comparison with PCR revealed that culture, in particular, underestimates E. histolytica infections. Given the high sensitivity and specificity of the developed PCR assay, the inability of microscopy to distinguish between the two ameba species, and the time it takes to culture and subsequently differentiate entamoebae by isoenzyme analysis, this assay is more suitable than microscopy or culture to correctly diagnose intestinal E. histolytica or E. dispar infection.     

Evaluation of the Triage Micro Parasite Panel for detection of Giardia lamblia, Entamoeba histolytica/Entamoeba dispar, and Cryptosporidium parvum in patient stool specimens

A study comparing the Triage Micro Parasite Panel (Biosite Diagnostics, Inc., San Diego, Calif.) to conventional O&P examination (O&P) was performed using patient fecal specimens. Five hundred twenty-three stool samples were compared. Nineteen specimens were found to be positive by Triage, and 29 were found to be positive by O&P. Seven specimens were positive for Giardia lamblia, four were positive for Entamoeba histolytica/E. dispar, and three were positive for Cryptosporidium parvum as determined by both methods. There was one false positive by Triage (C. parvum) and four false negatives by O&P (two G. lamblia, one E. histolytica/E. dispar, and one C. parvum). The Triage test accurately detected all 18 specimens that contained one of the three organisms that it was designed to detect. The Triage test is a rapid, easy-to-use enzyme immunoassay for the detection of G. lamblia, E. histolytica/E. dispar, and C. parvum in fresh or fresh-frozen fecal specimens. These data suggest that the Triage test can be used as a screen for the immediate testing of stool specimens for these three pathogenic parasites. If Triage test results are negative, O&P can be performed if parasitic infections other than G. lamblia, E. histolytica/E. dispar, or C. parvum are suspected.     

An unusual surface peroxiredoxin protects invasive Entamoeba histolytica from oxidant attack

Peroxiredoxins are an important class of antioxidant enzymes found from Archaea to humans, which reduce and thereby detoxify peroxides and peroxynitrites. The major thiol-containing surface antigen of the invasive ameba, Entamoeba histolytica, is a peroxiredoxin and is likely to be important during the transition from the anaerobic environment of the large intestine to human tissues. The closely related species, Entamoeba dispar, is incapable of invasion and more sensitive to hydrogen peroxide, yet also has a peroxiredoxin. We cloned and expressed the two active recombinant enzymes and found that their activity was similar by a fluorometric stopped-flow assay, giving a Km of <10 microM for hydrogen peroxide. Three monoclonal antibodies produced to recombinant E. histolytica peroxiredoxin cross-reacted with Entamoeba dispar.E. histolytica contains as much as 50 times more peroxiredoxin than E. dispar as demonstrated by a sensitive capture ELISA. In addition, the peroxiredoxin is present largely on the outer surface of the cell, in contrast to E. dispar. This unusual peroxiredoxin localizes to the site of parasite-host cell contact where it can effectively counteract oxidants generated by host cells, thus facilitating invasion.     

PCR detection of Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, and Entamoeba moshkovskii in stool samples from Sydney, Australia

This study investigated the presence of Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba dispar, and Entamoeba moshkovskii in stool samples from a patient population in Sydney, Australia. Stool samples were tested by microscopy and PCR. Five patients were found with E. histolytica infections, while E. dispar and E. moshkovskii were observed in 63 (70.8%) and 55 (61.8%) patients, respectively, by PCR. This is the first study in Australia using molecular techniques to determine the presence of E. histolytica, E. dispar, and E. moshkovskii.     

Amebiasis and comparison of microscopy to ELISA technique in detection of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar

The analysis of records of amoebal infection in various hospitals in Kilimanjaro indicated frequent occurrence of amebiasis. The population over the age of five years had higher rate of amoebal infection compared to less than that of a five-year-old population; however, both age groups had similar patterns of amebiasis during January 1999 to June 2001. To investigate misdiagnosis of amebiasis, 226 patients (passive cases) in three hospitals and 616 individuals (active cases) from three different localities in Kilimanjaro were examined. In passive cases, the prevalences of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar were 1% and 7.3%, respectively. Among active cases, 1% were infected with E. histolytica, and 15% were infected with E. dispar. There were no significant differences in amoebal infection between the male and female populations. A pool of 842 stool samples was used for diagnosis of E. histolytica and E. dispar by microscopic examination or ELISA kits. The microscopic examination indicated 8.7% amoebal infection; however, using ELISA as the gold standard, the prevalence of histolytica/dispar was 0.8% and 7.4%, respectively. This study indicated that E. dispar infection was 14.5 times more prevalent than E. histolytica infection.