Visceral leishmaniasis and HIV coinfection: current perspectives

José Angelo Lauletta Lindoso,1–3 Carlos Henrique Valente Moreira,1,4 Mirella Alves Cunha,5 Igor Thiago Queiroz6,7 1Instituto de Infectologia Emilio Ribas, São Paulo, Brazil; 2Nucleo de Medicina Tropical, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, Brazil; 3Laboratorio de Soroepidemiologia, Institutode Medicina Tropical, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; 4Laboratorio de Parasitologia, Instituto de Medicina Tropical, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; 5Departamento de Infectologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil; 6Universidade Potiguar (UnP), Laureate International Universities, Natal, Brazil; 7Hospital Giselda Trigueiro (SESAP/RN), Natal, Brazil Abstract: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is caused by Leishmania donovani and Leishmania infantum. The burden of VL is concentrated in tropical and subtropical areas; however, HIV infection has spread VL over a hyperendemic area. Several outcomes are observed as a result of VL–HIV coinfection. Impacts are observed in immunopathogenesis, clinical manifestation, diagnosis, and therapeutic response. Concerning clinical manifestation, typical and unusual manifestation has been observed during active VL in HIV-infected patient, as well as alteration in immunoresponse, inducing greater immunosuppression by low CD4 T-lymphocyte count or even by induction of immunoactivation, with cell senescence. Serological diagnosis of VL in the HIV-infected is poor, due to low humoral response, characterized by antibody production, so parasitological methods are more recommended. Another important and even more challenging point is the definition of the best therapeutic regimen for VL in HIV-coinfected patients, because in this population there is greater failure and consequently higher mortality. The challenge of better understanding immunopathogenesis in order to obtain more effective therapies is one of the crucial points to be developed. The combination of drugs and the use of secondary prophylaxis associated with highly active antiretroviral therapy may be the best tool for treatment of HIV coinfection. Some derivatives from natural sources have action against Leishmania; however, studies have been limited to in vitro evaluation, without clinical trials. Keywords: visceral leishmaniasis, HIV infection, AIDS, diagnosis, therapeutic respons

Leishmaniasis–HIV coinfection: current challenges

José Angelo Lauletta Lindoso,1,2 Mirella Alves Cunha,3 Igor Thiago Queiroz,4 Carlos Henrique Valente Moreira2 1Laboratory of Soroepidemiology (LIM HC-FMUSP), São Paulo University, São Paulo, 2Instituto de Infectologia Emilio Ribas-SES, São Paulo, 3Department of Infectious Disease, Faculty of Medicine, São Paulo University, São Paulo, 4Hospital Giselda Trigueiro - SESAP, Natal, Brazil Abstract: Leishmaniasis – human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection can manifest itself as tegumentary or visceral leishmaniasis. Almost 35 countries have reported autochthonous coinfections. Visceral leishmaniasis is more frequently described. However, usual and unusual manifestations of tegumentary leishmaniasis have been reported mainly in the Americas, but the real prevalence of Leishmania infection in HIV-infected patients is not clear. Regarding the clinical manifestations, there are some reports showing unusual manifestations in visceral leishmaniasis and tegumentary leishmaniasis in HIV-infected patients; yet, the usual manifestations are more frequent. Leishmaniasis diagnosis relies on clinical methods, but serological tests are used to diagnose visceral leishmaniasis despite them having a low sensitivity to tegumentary leishmaniasis. The search for the parasite is used to diagnose both visceral leishmaniasis and tegumentary leishmaniasis. Nevertheless, in HIV-infected patients, the sensitivity of serology is very low. Drugs available to treat leishmaniasis are more restricted and cause severe side effects. Furthermore, in HIV-infected patients, these side effects are more prominent and relapses and lethality are more recurrent. In this article, we discuss the current challenges of tegumentary leishmaniasis and visceral leishmaniasis–HIV infection, focusing mainly on the clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment of leishmaniasis. Keywords: leishmaniasis, HIV infection, coinfection, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatment&nbsp

Volumes de substratos comerciais, solo e composto orgânico afetando a formação de mudas de maracujazeiro-amarelo em diferentes ambientes de cultivo

Este trabalho teve como objetivo avaliar o crescimento de mudas de maracujazeiro- amarelo em três diferentes tamanhos de recipientes, em três condições de cultivo protegido, utilizando seis diferentes substratos. Foram empregados três ambientes de cultivo: (A1) estufa em arco, coberta de filme de polietileno de 150 μm, abertura zenital e tela termorrefletora de 50% sob o filme; (A2) viveiro agrícola de tela de monofilamento, com 50% de sombra; e (A3) viveiro agrícola de tela termorrefletora, com 50% de sombra. Foram testados três volumes (V1 = xx cm³ -sacolas de polietileno de 7,5 x 11,5 cm; V2 = xx cm33 - sacolas de polietileno 10,0 x 16,5 cm; e V3 = xx cm33 -sacolas de polietileno de 15,0 x 21,5 cm) e seis substratos (S1 = solo; S2 = Plantmax®; S3 = vermiculita; S4 = fibra de coco; S5 = fibra de coco chips; e S6 = Organosuper®, composto orgânico comercial). O delineamento experimental foi inteiramente casualizado, em esquema de parcelas subsubdivididas, em que os ambientes foram as parcelas, os recipientes de diferentes volumes as subparcelas e os substratos as subsubparcelas. Aos 50 dias após a semeadura, foram medidos a altura das plantas, o comprimento da raiz, a massa de matéria seca da parte aérea e das raízes. A partir das massas de matéria seca determinaram-se a relação massa de matéria seca de parte aérea e raiz e massa de matéria seca total. A estufa foi o melhor ambiente quando se utilizou o recipiente de XX cm33 o qual proporcionou mudas maiores, com maior biomassa seca aérea, radicular e total. A vermiculita foi o melhor substrato, porém o solo adubado é uma alternativa menos dispendiosa para a região