↓ Skip to main content

Genetic Polymorphism at CCL5 Is Associated With Protection in Chagas’ Heart Disease: Antagonistic Participation of CCR1+ and CCR5+ Cells in Chronic Chagasic Cardiomyopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genetic Polymorphism at CCL5 Is Associated With Protection in Chagas’ Heart Disease: Antagonistic Participation of CCR1+ and CCR5+ Cells in Chronic Chagasic Cardiomyopathy
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00615
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angelica Martins Batista, Lucia Elena Alvarado-Arnez, Silvia Marinho Alves, Gloria Melo, Isabela Resende Pereira, Leonardo Alexandre de Souza Ruivo, Andrea Alice da Silva, Daniel Gibaldi, Thayse do E. S. Protásio da Silva, Virginia Maria Barros de Lorena, Adriene Siqueira de Melo, Ana Karine de Araújo Soares, Michelle da Silva Barros, Vláudia Maria Assis Costa, Cynthia C. Cardoso, Antonio G. Pacheco, Cristina Carrazzone, Wilson Oliveira, Milton Ozório Moraes, Joseli Lannes-Vieira

Abstract

Chronic cardiomyopathy is the main clinical manifestation of Chagas disease (CD), a disease caused by Trypanosoma cruzi infection. A hallmark of chronic chagasic cardiomyopathy (CCC) is a fibrogenic inflammation mainly composed of CD8+ and CD4+ T cells and macrophages. CC-chemokine ligands and receptors have been proposed to drive cell migration toward the heart tissue of CD patients. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in CC-chemokine ligand and receptor genes may determine protein expression. Herein, we evaluated the association of SNPs in the CC-chemokines CCL2 (rs1024611) and CCL5 (rs2107538, rs2280788) and the CCL5/RANTES receptors CCR1 (rs3181077, rs1491961, rs3136672) and CCR5 (rs1799987) with risk and progression toward CCC. We performed a cross-sectional association study of 406 seropositive patients from endemic areas for CD in the State of Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil. The patients were classified as non-cardiopathic (A, n = 110) or cardiopathic (mild, B1, n = 163; severe, C, n = 133). Serum levels of CCL5 and CCL2/MCP-1 were elevated in CD patients but were neither associated with risk/severity of CCC nor with SNP genotypes. After logistic regression analysis with adjustment for the covariates gender and ethnicity, CCL5 -403 (rs2107538) CT heterozygotes (OR = 0.5, P-value = 0.04) and T carriers (OR = 0.5, P-value = 0.01) were associated with protection against CCC. To gain insight into the participation of the CCL5-CCR5/CCR1 axis in CCC, mice were infected with the Colombian T. cruzi strain. Increased CCL5 concentrations were detected in cardiac tissue. In spleen, frequencies of CCR1+ CD8+ T cells and CD14+ macrophages were decreased, while frequencies of CCR5+ cells were increased. Importantly, CCR1+CD14+ macrophages were mainly IL-10+, while CCR5+ cells were mostly TNF+. CCR5-deficient infected mice presented reduced TNF concentrations and injury in heart tissue. Selective blockade of CCR1 (Met-RANTES therapy) in infected Ccr5-/- mice supported a protective role for CCR1 in CCC. Furthermore, parasite antigen stimulation of CD patient blood cells increased the frequency of CCR1+CD8+ T cells and CCL5 production. Collectively, our data support that a genetic variant of CCL5 and CCR1+ cells confer protection against Chagas heart disease, identifying the CCL5-CCR1 axis as a target for immunostimulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 20%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 17 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 13%
Unspecified 4 6%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 19 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 May 2022.
All research outputs
#21,519,690
of 26,414,132 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#25,834
of 33,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,348
of 347,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#600
of 687 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,414,132 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 687 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.