Comparison of immunohistochemical and qPCR methods from granulomatous dermatitis lesions for detection of leishmania in dogs living in endemic areas: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND: In canine leishmaniosis (CanL) endemic areas, pathologists often receive skin biopsies for testing with histopathologic findings suggestive-but not conclusive for a definitive diagnosis-of CanL lesions. I the absence of data on the infective status of animals, the diagnosis can therefore be challenging. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the ability of immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative PCR (qPCR) methods to detect Leishmania infection in skin biopsies with a histopathologic diagnosis of lymphoplasmacytic/histiocytic and/or granulomatous dermatitis and to correlate the pattern, depth and severity of the histopathologic lesions with the parasite load detected by qPCR and IHC. METHODS: Thirty formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded skin samples were evaluated by hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) staining, IHC, conventional PCR (cPCR) and qPCR. The severity, pattern and depth of the dermal inflammation and parasite load were graded. RESULTS: Leishmania was detected by H&E staining in 8/30 sections (26.66%) and by IHC in 14/30 samples (46.66%). Parasite DNA was detected in 14/30 samples (46.66%) by cPCR and in 21/30 samples (70%) by qPCR, with an extremely variable parasite load (1.32-62.700 copies). The level of agreement was fair between H&E staining and cPCR (κ = 0.32), and moderate between H&E staining and IHC (κ = 0.58). The level of agreement between IHC and cPCR was good (κ = 0.65); between IHC and qPCR, moderate (κ = 0.41); and between cPCR and qPCR, fair (κ = 0.28). A significant association was found between the severity of dermal inflammation and the parasitic skin load by IHC, although with weak linear correlation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study underlines the difficulty of obtaining a definitive diagnosis of CanL cutaneous lesions, even with the most accurate diagnostic tests currently available. Based on our results, no single test is suitable on its own for the diagnosis of cutaneous lesions caused by Leishmania. However, in the presence of a moderate/severe lymphoplasmacytic/histiocytic and/or granulomatous dermatitis, we suggest performing IHC, as in our study this technique proved to be the method with the highest discriminatory power to estimate the role of the parasite in skin lesions. In mild lesions, IHC loses its discriminatory power and should be effectively combined with techniques such as qPCR.

Authors: I. Porcellato, G. Morganti, M. T. Antognoni, K. M. Walczak, S. De Arcangeli, T. Furlanello, C. B. Quattrone, F. Veronesi and C. Brachelente Title: Comparison of immunohistochemical and qPCR methods from granulomatous dermatitis lesions for detection of leishmania in dogs living in endemic areas: a preliminary study Full source: Parasit Vectors, 2022,Vol 15, Iss 1, pp 104
Résumé, analyse et commentaires
Aucun.
Photo
Aucune.
Analysis
None.
Abstract	Source
BACKGROUND: In canine leishmaniosis (CanL) endemic areas, pathologists often receive skin biopsies for testing with histopathologic findings suggestive-but not conclusive for a definitive diagnosis-of CanL lesions. I the absence of data on the infective status of animals, the diagnosis can therefore be challenging. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the ability of immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative PCR (qPCR) methods to detect Leishmania infection in skin biopsies with a histopathologic diagnosis of lymphoplasmacytic/histiocytic and/or granulomatous dermatitis and to correlate the pattern, depth and severity of the histopathologic lesions with the parasite load detected by qPCR and IHC. METHODS: Thirty formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded skin samples were evaluated by hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) staining, IHC, conventional PCR (cPCR) and qPCR. The severity, pattern and depth of the dermal inflammation and parasite load were graded. RESULTS: Leishmania was detected by H&E staining in 8/30 sections (26.66%) and by IHC in 14/30 samples (46.66%). Parasite DNA was detected in 14/30 samples (46.66%) by cPCR and in 21/30 samples (70%) by qPCR, with an extremely variable parasite load (1.32-62.700 copies). The level of agreement was fair between H&E staining and cPCR (κ = 0.32), and moderate between H&E staining and IHC (κ = 0.58). The level of agreement between IHC and cPCR was good (κ = 0.65); between IHC and qPCR, moderate (κ = 0.41); and between cPCR and qPCR, fair (κ = 0.28). A significant association was found between the severity of dermal inflammation and the parasitic skin load by IHC, although with weak linear correlation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study underlines the difficulty of obtaining a definitive diagnosis of CanL cutaneous lesions, even with the most accurate diagnostic tests currently available. Based on our results, no single test is suitable on its own for the diagnosis of cutaneous lesions caused by Leishmania. However, in the presence of a moderate/severe lymphoplasmacytic/histiocytic and/or granulomatous dermatitis, we suggest performing IHC, as in our study this technique proved to be the method with the highest discriminatory power to estimate the role of the parasite in skin lesions. In mild lesions, IHC loses its discriminatory power and should be effectively combined with techniques such as qPCR.