Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2007, p. 3685-3691, Vol. 45, No. 11
0095-1137/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JCM.01178-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
,
,
Jutta Marfurt,1,
Kefas Mugittu,2
Nicolas Maire,1
Attila Regös,1,¶
Jean Yves Coppee,3
Odile Sismeiro,3
Richard Burki,1,||
Eric Huber,1,
Daniel Laubscher,1,
Odile Puijalon,4
Blaise Genton,1,
Ingrid Felger,1 and
Hans-Peter Beck1*
Swiss Tropical Institute, Socinstrasse 57 Basel, Switzerland,1 Ifakara Health Research and Development Centre, P.O. Box 53, Ifakara, Tanzania,2 Plate-forme puces a ADN, Genopole/Institut Pasteur, 28 rue du Docteur Roux, 75724 Paris Cedex 15, France,3 Unité d'Immunologie Moléculaire des Parasites, CNRS URA 2581, Institut Pasteur, 28 rue du Docteur Roux, 75724 Paris Cedex 15, France4
Received 12 June 2007/ Returned for modification 8 August 2007/ Accepted 23 August 2007
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Resistance of the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum to antimalarial drugs often is conferred by single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or gene duplications. Resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine is conferred by point mutations in the dihydrofolate reductase (dhfr) gene at codons A16V, N51I, C59R, S108N/T, and I164L. Resistance is further augmented by mutations in the dihydropteroate synthase (dhps) gene (436Phe, 437Gly, 540Glu, 581Gly, and 613Ser/Thr) (7). SNPs in genes encoding putative transporter molecules, such as multidrug resistance gene 1 (mdr1) or the chloroquine resistance transporter (crt), have been implicated in resistance to 4-aminoquinolines (4, 20) as well as in gene amplification of mdr1 (18, 21). Recently, mutations in the plasmodial ATPase6 gene have been associated with decreased susceptibility to artemisinins (11).
The monitoring of parasite drug resistance has the potential to become a tool for long-term surveillance and for developing predictive models of malaria drug resistance (5, 17). For this purpose, a technique is required that facilitates parallel analysis of multiple SNPs that is affordable and applicable on an epidemiological scale. A number of standard methods exist for SNP analysis, mostly based on PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) of selected loci or on sequence-specific amplification or hybridization (19). Unfortunately, most of these techniques do not allow the analysis of many SNPs on an epidemiological scale, and consequently many previous studies have analyzed only a few SNPs deemed primary predictors of resistance. Little attention has been paid to mutations that are not directly associated with resistance but that are considered to have modulating or compensatory effects.
Here, we present a microarray-based system to determine all known SNPs in drug-resistance-associated P. falciparum genes. In relation to previously used techniques, costs are significantly lower, and large numbers of samples can be analyzed in a reasonably short period of time. We have shown that this technique can be transferred and run in laboratories with minimal infrastructure (J. Marfurt, unpublished data, and K. Mugittu, unpublished data). The system also is flexible and amenable to many other applications requiring SNP analyses.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (30K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Flow diagram of the analytical procedure, starting from blood samples collected in the field. DNA is prepared from blood samples and is amplified by nested PCR; subsequently all amplicons are combined, and nucleotides are eliminated by SAP. Primer extension is performed in two aliquots of 20 µl from each sample, and the mixtures are combined for hybridization on the microarray. After being washed, the array is air dried, scanned in a microarray scanner, and subsequently analyzed using GenePix Pro and dedicated analysis software.
|
Blood samples and DNA preparation. Blood samples were collected either in EDTA Microtainer tubes (BD Biosciences, Allschwil, Switzerland) or on Isocode sticks (Schleicher and Schuell, Dassel, Germany). Plasma was separated from blood samples in EDTA by centrifugation, and red blood cell pellets were stored frozen until use. DNA from cultures and field samples was extracted from 50- to 100-µl blood pellets using QIAamp DNA blood kits (QIAGEN, Hombrechtikon, Switzerland) according to the manufacturer's instructions. DNA was eluted from Isocode sticks according to the manufacturer's recommendations.
DNA amplification. We analyzed the following 36 polymorphisms in five genes at 32 SNP sites: pfmdr1 codons N86Y, Y184F, S1034C, N1042D, and D1246Y; pfcrt codons C72S, K76T, H97Q, T152A, S163R, A220S, Q271E, N326D/S, I356L/T, and R371I; pfdhfr codons A16V, N51I, C59R, S108N/T, and I164L; pfdhps codons S436A, A437G, K540E, A581G, A613T/S, I640F, and H645P; and pfATPase6 codons S538R, Q574P, A623E, N683K, and S769N. Oligonucleotides for amplification, extension, and arraying are shown in Table S1 in the supplemental material. To cover all SNP sites, we performed 10 PCRs with the amplification primers listed in Table S1 in the supplemental material. The amplification reaction mixture contained 1x PCR buffer with MgCl2 in a final concentration of 3 mM, 0.2 mM deoxynucleoside triphosphates, and 0.2 µM of each primer. Reactions were carried out in 50 µl containing 2.5 µl DNA and 2.5 U Taq polymerase (Firepol; Solis BioDyne, Tartu, Estonia). Cycling conditions were 96°C for 3 min followed by 20 cycles of 96°C for 30 s, 52°C for 90 s, and 72°C for 90 s.
As our aim also was to identify SNPs in asymptomatic samples from community-based surveys, we performed nested PCR for the highest sensitivity. Nested PCRs were carried out in 100 µl with 5 µl primary PCR product and 5 U Taq polymerase. The buffer and cycling conditions were identical to those described above, but nested PCR primers were used (see Table S1 in the supplemental material).
Primer extension. To eliminate nonincorporated nucleotides, all nested PCR products of one blood sample were pooled, and 5 µl of a 1:10 dilution of the pooled PCR product was digested with 2 U shrimp alkaline phosphatase (SAP) (Amersham Biosciences, Freiburg, Germany) in a reaction volume of 12 µl for 1 h at 37°C. SAP was inactivated by incubating samples for 15 min at 90°C.
Since most microarray scanners support only dual-fluorescence measures simultaneously, a strategy of two parallel reactions had to be applied. Two primer extension reactions were carried out per sample. The reaction mixes differed in their combinations of Cy3- and Cy5-labeled ddNTPs (Perkin Elmer, Schwerzenbach, Switzerland), and extension primers were added as shown in Table S2 in the supplemental material. Thus, it was possible to detect all possible SNP permutations by using only two fluorochromes. All primer extension reactions for one sample were carried out in two aliquots of 20 µl containing 1x Sequenase buffer, extension primer mix 1 or 2, ddNTP mix 1 or 2 (see Table S2 in the supplemental material), and 2 U Thermo Sequenase (Termipol; Solis). The concentration of ddNTPs in both mixes was 0.25 µM, and primers were diluted to a concentration of 6.25 nM each. The extension reaction was cycled 35 times at 94°C for 30 s and at 50°C for 10 s, with an initial cycle of 1 min at 94°C. After the extension reaction was performed, both mixtures were pooled and 6 µl denaturing solution (3% sodium dodecyl sulfate [SDS] in 40 mM EDTA, pH 8.0) was added. The sample was denatured at 95°C for 60 s and subsequently was kept on ice until hybridization onto the microarray.
Chip production. Microarrays carried short oligonucleotides (20 to 35 bp) corresponding to the antisense DNA of the extension primers (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). All oligonucleotides possessed a C7-aminolinker and were spotted onto aldehyde-activated glass slides (Genetix, Munich, Germany). Prior to the spotting of oligonucleotides, a mask with 12 circular wells (diameter, 8 mm) was applied to the surface of each slide (MaProline GmbH, Starrkirch-Wil, Switzerland). Oligonucleotides were spotted in triplicate, and anchor oligonucleotides prelabeled with Cy3 and Cy5 as well as four oligonucleotides with a random sequence were added as positive and negative controls, respectively.
Slides were spotted using a VersArray ChipWriterPro system (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA). Oligonucleotides were dissolved in 180 mM phosphate buffer, pH 8.0, and 0.5 nl of a 50 µM solution was spotted onto the slides. Slides were stored desiccated and in the dark until used for hybridization.
Chip hybridization. Twenty-three microliters of the pooled and denatured primer extension reaction mixture was transferred to a well of a microarray glass slide, and 6 µl 20x SSC (1x SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus 0.015 M sodium citrate) was added. Hybridization was carried out in a humid chamber at 50°C for 60 to 90 min. After hybridization, the slide was washed at room temperature in 2x SSC plus 2% SDS for 20 min, followed by another wash with 2x SSC for 20 min, and then a final wash with 2x SSC plus 2% ethanol for 2 min. The slides were dried with compressed air and stored in the dark until scanned.
Data acquisition. Hybridized slides were scanned at 635 and 532 nm using an Axon 4100A fluorescence scanner (Bucher Biotec AG, Basel, Switzerland). Cy3 and Cy5 images were acquired and analyzed using the Axon GenePix Pro (version 6.0) software. This software generates data points using pixel intensity after background subtraction. We developed software for further analysis of raw data that produces an output determining whether an infection is wild type, mutant, or mixed, and it also determines the dominant genotype in the latter case. Each signal was classified either as wild type, mutant, or mixed based on the expression intensities of the scanned image. The grouping was done according to the following algorithm: fluorescence intensities below 9,000 (Cy3) or 10,000 (Cy5) U (mean intensities minus background) were regarded as negative. For measures above these cutoff values, we considered the ratio of Cy5 intensity to Cy3 intensity to discriminate between wild-type, mutant, or mixed infection.
To determine an optimal algorithm to translate the output of the GenePix Pro software into predictions about the genotypes present in analyzed samples, we used two singly infected blood samples that previously were sequenced at 29 SNP sites. Sequence data showed that the samples from 3 of 29 SNP sites differed (C59R, S108N, and A437G). Either single or mixed samples were analyzed with the chip in various proportions (1:2, 1:4, 1:8, and 1:16). With this approach, we could empirically determine the following threshold values: for Cy5/Cy3 ratios below 0.7, the sample was classified according to whether the wild type or mutant was labeled with Cy3. Ratios between 0.7 and 2.4 were assigned to mixed genotypes, and ratios above 2.4 were assigned to the Cy5-labeled genotype.
To estimate the above-mentioned threshold parameters and to determine the predictive accuracy of our method, we used three of four identical but independently processed microarrays to estimate the threshold value to distinguish positive from negative signals so that the results would match the sequence data as closely as possible. The fourth microarray then was used to apply this algorithm to determine the predictive accuracy of the method. This procedure was repeated four times in all possible combinations. Finally, we applied this algorithm to samples that were genotyped by sequencing and PCR-RFLP to determine the sensitivity and specificity of our method.
Sequencing. PCR products were purified by size-selective polyethylene glycol precipitation (12) and directly sequenced using one of the respective nested PCR primers. Cycle sequencing (25 cycles of 96°C for 30 s, 50°C for 15 s, and 60°C for 4 min) was performed using the ABI PRISM Dye Terminator cycle sequencing ready reaction kit (Perkin Elmer), and sequences were analyzed using an ABI PRISM 310 genetic analyzer and the ABI PRISM software.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (25K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Sensitivity curves for SNP analysis of parasite samples diluted in uninfected blood. All data represent the percentages of fluorescence of the undiluted sample containing the genomic equivalent of 100,000 parasites per reaction. The upper panel represents values obtained for SNPs within the dhfr and dhps loci. The lower panel represents the values for mdr and crt loci.
|
![]() View larger version (27K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Detection of SNPs in mixed parasite infections. The upper panel depicts arbitrary fluorescence values obtained when strain K1 was mixed with various dilutions of the 3D7 strain. K1 and 3D7 differ at codons 59 and 108 in the dhfr gene. The lower panel shows arbitrary fluorescence values obtained when strain 3D7 was mixed with various dilutions of the K1 strain.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. SNP analysis of 36 field samples from Papua New Guinea and agreement between data obtained by microarray and PCR-RFLP methodsa
|
Costs. Because we developed this microarray system to monitor parasite drug resistance to antimalarial drugs in resource-constrained countries, it was essential to keep costs as low as possible so that the system can be used routinely for drug resistance monitoring. The cost calculation included plastic material for DNA preparation, PCRs, primer extension with fluorochromes, and microarray production. However, it does not take into account acquisition, maintenance, and amortization of equipment, nor does it take into account labor costs. We calculated a price of 0.27 euros (US$0.33) per SNP for determining 32 SNP sites per sample and simultaneously analyzing 12 samples on one slide.
|
|
|---|
In order to circumvent these problems, systematic molecular monitoring of parasite-resistance-associated SNPs has been widely promoted and used to complement in vivo efficacy studies (3, 24). While current systems work well with small sample sets, unfortunately they are limited in the number of samples and SNPs that can be analyzed simultaneously. Furthermore, for epidemiological monitoring they become expensive, both in terms of equipment and running costs.
Therefore, large studies analyzing multiple SNPs of multiple genes in parallel have never been performed because of high costs and labor intensiveness. Here, we report a novel method that permits the simultaneous analysis of many SNPs in hundreds of samples in a very short time period (approximately 15 h for four 96-well plates) with significantly reduced costs. The microarray system was shown to be fast and accurate. In particular, the low detection limit of 10 to 100 parasites and the suitability for samples containing multiple infections represent added advantages over many competing systems. The significantly reduced cost per SNP compares favorably to the costs of other systems. In resource-restricted countries such as the Sub-Saharan countries in which parasite resistance to antimalarial drugs is a major concern (2), only a low-cost system permits molecular monitoring of drug resistance.
The most critical factors influencing this technique seem to be the quality of DNA and the need for a large enough amount of template for low-density cases. Although only small amounts are needed (less than 50 µl of blood), it is crucial that the material is of good quality; otherwise, some PCRs might fail.
In contrast to the analysis of diploid organisms, the analysis of P. falciparum infections poses an additional challenge because multiple infections commonly are found, leading to a highly skewed distribution of different templates within a blood sample (9). In addition, PCR amplification might favor the dominant templates. Therefore, it was important to ensure that minor template populations can be detected. We therefore designed an elaborate algorithm to determine the detection threshold for genotype calling. Evidently, however, some low-density infections may be missed for some individuals, whatever the threshold used. Whether this is important in the epidemiological assessments of resistance remains to be seen, because it is not clear to what degree these low-density infections contribute to disease and transmission.
It has been shown that a synergistic action of transmembrane transporters is involved in parasite resistance to antimalarial drugs. In addition to pfcrt, another transporter involved in chloroquine resistance (pfmdr1), the homologue to the human P-glycoprotein, seems to contribute to resistance against chloroquine, the most commonly used drug against malaria (13). pfmdr1 also has been shown to modulate resistance to mefloquine and related drugs (22). To date, however, no clear association has been shown between individual SNPs and parasitological failure of a given drug. Hence, it is possible that the parallel analysis of all SNPs in several genes might identify certain haplotypes suspected to be involved in drug resistance. With the prospect of analyzing all known drug-resistance-associated SNPs at once, elucidation of the genetic background of drug failure becomes feasible. This underscores the need for linking individual SNPs to haplotypes, because interactions between SNPs from different loci are likely to account for the phenotypic effect. However, current algorithms and techniques are not yet able to generate true haplotypes of unlinked loci in samples containing multiple infections of P. falciparum. In Tanzania, for instance, the mean multiplicity of infection for children is five concurrent infections per child (1), considerably complicating or preventing the determination of haplotypes of individual P. falciparum clones. Although we use a nested PCR strategy, in most cases we were able to determine the most dominant haplotype with our array in a semiquantitative manner. Since parasite density is a correlate of malaria symptoms, the most dominant haplotype within a multiple-clone infection is likely to represent the clone actually causing clinical malaria.
We have now used our microarray system successfully for drug resistance monitoring in several sites for more than 3 years in Tanzania (K. Mugittu, unpublished), Papua New Guinea (J. Marfurt, unpublished), and the Solomon Islands (B. Genton, unpublished data). This demonstrates that standardized and comparable data can be produced at an affordable price. The flexibility of the system facilitates prompt inclusion of newly identified point mutations associated with parasite resistance. However, it needs to be emphasized that this technique allows only the analysis of already validated SNP, as does any other technology. The development of compatible assays for the detection of gene duplication or amplification on microarrays is necessary, as it has been shown that amplification of pfmdr might play an important role in modulating resistance against chloroquine and probably also against artemisinin derivatives (6, 21).
In conclusion, this method offers an unmatched capacity to provide evidence-based data on the dynamics of parasite resistance to antimalarial drugs in a cost-effective way. This platform also can be widely applied and adapted with ease to other genotyping tasks requiring highly parallel multiple-SNP analyses.
This project received financial support from the Roche Research Foundation, Freie Akademische Gesellschaft Basel, the European Community project ResMalChip (grant number QLK2-CT-2002-01503), and the Swiss National Foundation (grant number 3100-A0-103968).
None of the funding agencies were involved in study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the paper; and the decision to submit it for publication.
Published ahead of print on 5 September 2007. ![]()
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://jcm.asm.org/. ![]()
These authors contributed equally to the study. ![]()
Present address: Amunix, 500 Ellis Street, Mountain View, CA 94043. ![]()
¶ Present address: Plant Cell Biology Research Centre, School of Botany, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia. ![]()
|| Present address: Centre for Fish and Wildlife Health, University of Bern, Langgassstrasse 122, CH-3001 Bern, Switzerland. ![]()

Present address: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Grenzacherstrasse 124, CH-4070 Basel, Switzerland. ![]()

Present address: Ifakara Health Research & Development Centre, P.O. Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. ![]()
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»