Impact of confinement housing on study end-points in the calf model of cryptosporidiosis.

BACKGROUND: Diarrhea is the second leading cause of death in children < 5 years globally and the parasite genus Cryptosporidium is a leading cause of that diarrhea. The global disease burden attributable to cryptosporidiosis is substantial and the only approved chemotherapeutic, nitazoxanide, has poor efficacy in HIV positive children. Chemotherapeutic development is dependent on the calf model of cryptosporidiosis, which is the best approximation of human disease. However, the model is not consistently applied across research studies. Data collection commonly occurs using two different methods: Complete Fecal Collection (CFC), which requires use of confinement housing, and Interval Collection (IC), which permits use of box stalls. CFC mimics human challenge model methodology but it is unknown if confinement housing impacts study end-points and if data gathered via this method is suitable for generalization to human populations. METHODS: Using a modified crossover study design we compared CFC and IC and evaluated the impact of housing on study end-points. At birth, calves were randomly assigned to confinement (n = 14) or box stall housing (n = 9), or were challenged with 5 x 107 C. parvum oocysts, and followed for 10 days. Study end-points included fecal oocyst shedding, severity of diarrhea, degree of dehydration, and plasma cortisol. FINDINGS: Calves in confinement had no significant differences in mean log oocysts enumerated per gram of fecal dry matter between CFC and IC samples (P = 0.6), nor were there diurnal variations in oocyst shedding (P = 0.1). Confinement housed calves shed significantly more oocysts (P = 0.05), had higher plasma cortisol (P = 0.001), and required more supportive care (P = 0.0009) than calves in box stalls. CONCLUSION: Housing method confounds study end-points in the calf model of cryptosporidiosis. Due to increased stress data collected from calves in confinement housing may not accurately estimate the efficacy of chemotherapeutics targeting C. parvum.

A Cryptosporidium PI(4)K inhibitor is a drug candidate for cryptosporidiosis.

Diarrhoeal disease is responsible for 8.6% of global child mortality. Recent epidemiological studies found the protozoan parasite Cryptosporidium to be a leading cause of paediatric diarrhoea, with particularly grave impact on infants and immunocompromised individuals. There is neither a vaccine nor an effective treatment. Here we establish a drug discovery process built on scalable phenotypic assays and mouse models that take advantage of transgenic parasites. Screening a library of compounds with anti-parasitic activity, we identify pyrazolopyridines as inhibitors of Cryptosporidium parvum and Cryptosporidium hominis. Oral treatment with the pyrazolopyridine KDU731 results in a potent reduction in intestinal infection of immunocompromised mice. Treatment also leads to rapid resolution of diarrhoea and dehydration in neonatal calves, a clinical model of cryptosporidiosis that closely resembles human infection. Our results suggest that the Cryptosporidium lipid kinase PI(4)K (phosphatidylinositol-4-OH kinase) is a target for pyrazolopyridines and that KDU731 warrants further preclinical evaluation as a drug candidate for the treatment of cryptosporidiosis.

Effects of LPA2R, LPA3R, or EP4R agonists on luteal or endometrial function in vivo or in vitro and sirtuin or EP1R, EP2R, EP3R or EP4R agonists on endometrial secretion of PGE and PGF2αin vitro.

In previous work, an EP2 prostanoid receptor (EP2R) agonist in vivo increased mRNA expression of luteal LH receptors (LHR), unoccupied and occupied luteal; LHR, and circulating progesterone, while an EP3R or FPR agonist decreased; mRNA expression of luteal LHR, unoccupied and occupied luteal LHR, and; circulating progesterone. An EP4R and lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) LPA2R and LPA3R agonists were reported to inhibit luteal function and sirtuins have been proposed to increase prostaglandin synthesis. The objectives were to determine; whether an EP4R, LPA2R, or LPA3R agonist affect ovine luteal function in vivo or; in vitro. In addition, whether sirtuin (SIRT)-1, 2, or 3; LPA2R or LPA3R; or EP1R, EP2R, EP3R, or EP4R agonists affect caruncular endometrial PGF2α or PGE (PGE1+PGE2) secretion in vitro. Day-10 nonpregnant ewes received a single injection of Vehicle (N = 5); an LPA2R (N = 5); LPA3R (N = 6); or EP4R (N = 5) agonist given into the interstitial tissue of the ovarian vascular pedicle adjacent to the luteal-containing ovary to determine effects on circulating progesterone, mRNA expression of luteal LHR, and luteal unoccupied and occupied LHR. In addition, agonists for LPA2R, LPA3R, EP1R, EP2R, EP3R, or EP4R or SIRT-1, SIRT-2, or SIRT-3 activators were incubated with caruncular endometrial slices in vitro to determine their effect on caruncular endometrial PGF2α, or PGE secretion. LPA2R, LPA3R, or an EP4R agonist in vivo did not affect (P ≥ 0.05) luteal weight, circulating progesterone, or occupied luteal LHR. However, an LPA2R or EP4R agonist, but; not LPA3R agonist, in vivo increased (P ≤ 0.05) mRNA expression of luteal LHR. An; LPA2R, LPA3R, or EP4R agonist increased (P ≤ 0.05) luteal unoccupied LHR, but; not occupied LHR. An LPA2R, LPA3R, or an EP4R agonist did not affect (P ≥ 0.05); luteal progesterone secretion in vitro. An LPA2R or LPA3R agonist did not affect (P ≥ 0.05) luteal PGF2α, or PGE secretion in vitro. However, an EP4R agonist tended to decrease (P < 0.066) luteal PGF2α secretion and increased (P ≤ 0.05) luteal PGE; secretion in vitro. EP1R, EP2R, EP3R, or an EP4R agonist did not affect (P ≥ 0.05); caruncular endometrial PGF2α secretion in vitro. However, EP1R, EP3R, or an EP4R agonist increased caruncular endometrial PGE secretion in vitro, while two different EP2R agonists did not affect (P ≥ 0.05) caruncular endometrial PGE; secretion. A SIRT-1 activator, but not SIRT-2 or SIRT-3 activators, increased (P ≤ 0.05) caruncular endometrial PGE secretion, while sirtuin 1, 2, or 3 activators did not affect (P ≥ 0.05) caruncular endometrial PGF2α secretion. In conclusion, receptors for EP4, LPA2, and LPA3 do not appear to be involved; in luteolysis, but EP4R and LPA2R might participate in preventing luteolysis by maintaining luteal mRNA expression for LHR and preventing loss of unoccupied luteal LHR. In addition, SIRT-1, EP1R, EP3R, and EP4R might be involved in; regulating caruncular endometrial PGE secretion, but not PGF2α secretion.