Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Biochemical, Cellular, and Immunologic Aspects during Early Interaction between Trypanosoma cruzi and Host Cell

Written By

Rosa Lidia Solís-Oviedo, Víctor Monteon, Ruth López and Ángel de la Cruz Pech-Canul

Submitted: October 12th, 2017 Reviewed: April 13th, 2018 Published: November 5th, 2018

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.77236

Chapter metrics overview

886 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

The close parasite-host relationship involves different aspects such as the biochemical, physiological, morphological, and immunological adaptations. Studies on parasite-host interaction have provided a myriad of information about its biology and have established the building blocks for the development of new drug therapies to control the parasite. Several mechanisms for the parasite invasion have been proposed through in vivo or in vitro experimental data. Since the first histological studies until the studies on the function/structure of the involved molecules, this complex interaction has been roughly depicted. However, new recent strategies as genetic and proteomic approaches have tuned knowledge on how the host reacts to the parasite and how the parasite avoids these host’s reactions in order to survive.

Keywords

  • Trypanosoma cruzi
  • immune system
  • parasite interactions
  • animal model studies
  • in vitro models
  • phagocytic
  • non-phagocytic

1. Introduction

The life cycle of Trypanosoma cruzicomprises several morphological transformations involving both mammalian and vector hosts, where three different major developmental stages are identified: epimastigotes, trypomastigotes, and amastigotes (Figure 1). The developmental stages of T. cruzialternate between non-infective and infective forms. Epimastigote and amastigote are non-infective but replicative stages in the gut of the triatomine vector and inside the mammalian cell, respectively. Trypomastigote stage is infective but non-replicative and can also be considered as two different developmental stages: the bloodstream trypomastigotes, found in the blood of the mammalian host, and the metacyclic trypomastigotes, found in the rectum of the triatomine vector .

Figure 1.

The different stages ofTrypanosoma cruzi. The image depicted the amastigote, epimastigote, and trypomastigote stages fromT. cruziand their membrane domains: Nucleus (N), Kinetoplast (K), Flagellum (F), Flagellar Pocket (FP), and Cell Body (CB). Reprinted with permission from Ángel de la Cruz Pech-Canul et al. [1], Copyright © 2017.

T. cruziis internalized by phagocytic and non-phagocytic nucleated host cells via multiple pathways. The first general steps through the interaction process of the T. cruziand its mammalian host cell can be divided into three stages: (1) adhesion/recognition, (2) signalling, and (3) invasion [2, 3]. During the adhesion/recognition stage, diverse molecules with cell-adhesion properties are expressed on the membrane surface of the metacyclic trypomastigotes from of the parasite ; these molecules bind to receptors of the target host cells and are able to trigger signals pathway, toward the parasite invasion [4]. That invasive process allows T. cruziinternalization and involves the engulfment of the parasite, the formation of a T. cruziparasitophorous vacuole (TcPV) [5], as well as the late disruption and the dispersion of the TcPV, thereby the parasite is released to the host cytoplasm where its replication and differentiation starts until the infective stage [6, 7]. The aim of this chapter is to discuss and to outline the interaction models during the early interaction between T. cruziand its mammalian host cells.

Advertisement

2. An overview of parasite interaction

One of the first barriers faced by T. cruziduring host cell invasion is the complexity of the host defence system. The skin and mucous membranes act as physical barriers which prevent penetration by microbes. Undoubtedly, they are the site for multiple and diverse types of chemical, physical, and biological contacts. Lipids and proteins are among the main components of the innate immune system in these tissues. Lipids comprise linoleic acid, oleic acid, squalene, ceramides, and sphingolipids, whereas proteins are more diverse, such as keratin on the surface of the skin or the cationic peptides alpha- and beta-defensins produced by neutrophils and mucosa tissue, respectively [8]. Furthermore, saliva produced by salivary glands of the vector contains a sort of proline-rich proteins and histidine-rich proteins both with antibiotic properties, lysozyme, peroxidase, lactoferrin, cystatins, and mucins [9]. Due to the rich protein content, both pH and salt concentration play a significant role as inhibitory factors during the parasite/host interaction.

The cellular composition of skin and mucous membranes is a fundamental barrier for permissive or refractory colonization/infection. In the skin, the epidermis is composed by 95% of keratinocytes and other cells present at low concentration, such as melanocytes, Langerhans cells, intra-epithelial lymphocyte, and Merkel cells. Keratinocytes express Toll-like receptors (TLRs) 1–6, 9, and 10 which are able to recognize basically all pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) with exception of flagenin; as a consequence, they can secrete an array of mediators such as nitric oxide, leukotrienes, cyclooxygenase, metalloprotease 1 and 9, classical cytokines IL-1, IL-6, IL-8, TNF-alpha, and chemokines CXCL1 and CXCL8. Keratinocytes also express receptors for different cytokines (IL-1, IL-3, TNF-alpha, IL-17, IL-21, IL-22) and chemokines (CXCL9, CXCL10, CXCL11, and CCL20). Other skin cells present at low concentration have also a broad array of receptors that are able to respond to physical and chemical stimulus. In addition, a dense protein layer is found between epidermis and dermis which is composed by collagen type IV, laminin fibronectin, iodogen, and heparan sulfate; together, they structure the basement membrane [10]. The cellular composition of dermis is more complex and diverse. Fibroblast, myofibroblasts, macrophages, adipocytes, dendritic cells, mast cells, and mesenchymal stem cells are found among resident cells in the dermis (Figure 2), whereas transitory cells include lymphocytes, polymorphonuclear cells and monocytes. In addition, dermis presents an intricate network of nerves, lymph, and blood system. As skin, mucosal tissue has the property to react with a complex array of mediators required for immune surveillance and inflammatory response to tissue injury and infection. A remarkable differential feature between skin and mucosa tissue is the bias to immune tolerance and anti-inflammatory response in mucosal compartments [11, 12].

Figure 2.

Skin cells of mouse and metacyclic trypomastigote parasite. Host cells were stained with hematoxylin-eosin. AT. cruzitrypomastigote is depicted inside the image. Common types of skin cells and some of the mediators for the inflammatory response are listed inside the image: pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), natural killer (NK), polymorphonuclear (PMN), mononuclear (MN), and Toll-like receptors (TLRs).

In natural conditions, T. cruziinfection is established when metacyclic trypomastigotes are deposited on injured skin or mucosa host tissue by blood feeding triatomine. Thus, metacyclic trypomastigotes has to face the above innate immune responses at the portal entry in order to survive (Figure 2). Since the pioneer work published by Romaña [13], where a histology description was done, limited information on this area of concern exists. It is very critical to take into account different factors in the relationship between parasite and host. For example, factors as specie of vector are involved in the transmission, inoculum size, T. cruziphase, portal of entry, T. cruzistrain, host immune responses, and microbiota presented in the vector.

Advertisement

3. Specie of vector and Trypanosoma cruzi

Firstly, there are many triatomine vector species that transmit the Chagas disease. Some of them have a wide geographical distribution and others are confined to restricted geographical areas. However, all of them can transmit T. cruziinfection with different efficacy, a feature that relies on biological behaviour and physiological condition itself. For example, metacyclogenesis involves the process of parasite transformation into the vector; this step is fundamental in order to accomplish the life cycle. The basic transformation that takes place inside the vector is from bloodstream trypomastigote phase to epimastigote and to metacyclic trypomastigotes. This last phase is essential for mammalian infection in as much as epimastigotes are vulnerable to innate immune mechanism. Thus, the metacyclogenesis that takes place into the vector is fundamental in order to switch to mammalian host. Perlowagora-Szumlewicks and Carvalhio-Moreira [14] described triatomine vector species influencing metacyclogenesis with remarkable observation. They pointed out higher metacyclogenesis rates in Rhodnius neglectusand R. prolixus(50 and 37%, respectively), whereas in some Triatomaspecies, metacyclogenesis rates were dramatically lower in comparison (5% in Triatoma sordida, 7% in T. brasiliensis, and 1% in T. pseudomaculata). However T. infestanscan reach up to 42%, in T. rubrovaria27%, in T. dimidiata26%, and Panstrongylus megistusmetacyclogenesis rates can reach 27%. Other remarkable observation is that metacyclic trypomastigotes rate is not continuous along vector life span. In some cases, it can reach a plateau, but in other cases, it can reach several peaks before metacyclogenesis drops. In natural conditions, T. barberican reach up 76%, in T. pallidipennis15%, whereas in T. dimidiata26% [15].

The metacyclogenesis of T. dimidiatain laboratory conditions is similar to natural conditions; in addition, metacyclogenesis is also influenced by the T. cruzistrain and the rate of metacyclic parasites change along the age of triatomine vectors [16]. Furthermore, T. cruzistrains can moderately influence the rate of metacyclogenesis that take place inside the same triatomine specie but have less impact when compared across triatomine specie [16, 17]. Altogether, the above data highlight the importance of triatomine species and T. cruzistrains in the development of metacyclic trypomastigotes: the natural parasite phase that will face mammalian host to complete its life cycle. Due to its importance, this variable should be taken into account for experimental design. Besides, the parasite strains show different virulence relying on virulence factors such as trans-sialidase activity, complement resistance, and cysteine protease cruzipain (TCC) [18]. Trans-sialidase removes and transfers sialic acid from host cells to parasite mucin-like glycoprotein. It is known that trans-sialidase activity is a virulence factor which allows parasite to invade and to escape from parasitophorous vacuole. This enzyme is more expressed in bloodstream and tissue-culture trypomastigotes than in metacyclic trypomastigotes. Trans-sialidase activity also depends on T. cruzilineage and consequently its virulence [19].

Once metacyclic trypomastigotes have overcome the first nonspecific immune mechanical barrier (skin/mucosal tissues), they need to swing into the extracellular matrix proteins in order to find cells to invade for replication and then accomplish their life cycle. GP82, a surface glycoprotein found in both bloodstream and tissue-culture trypomastigotes, has the ability to bind to matrix extracellular proteins such as fibronectin, heparan sulfate, and laminin, serving as bridges for parasite-target cell association and leading to enhanced infection. However, this interaction inhibits cell invasion. The presence of the major cysteine proteinase cruzipain (TCC) helps to degrade these extracellular matrix proteins enabling cell invasion [20]. These surface glycoproteins are very polymorphic among T. cruzistrains resulting in different grades of virulence .

The complement system, another unspecific immune mechanism that is essential for inflammation and cellular lysis, can be activated by three pathways. The lectin triggered by mannose-binding lectins (mannose-binding proteins, ficolins, and CL-K1 proteins) that binds to pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMPs) rich in D-mannose, L-fucose, glucose, and N-acetyl-glucosamine, O-acetylated, and glycan compounds containing sialic acid which activate MASP-1 and MASP-2. The alternative pathway is triggered when the complex C3 (H2O)-B factor is stabilized on a surface allowing the formation of C3 convertase (C3 (H2O)Bb). Whereas the classical pathway activation depends on C1 complex interaction with antibodies or LPS and porins present in Gram-negative bacteria, but also with phosphatidylserine on apoptotic cells or via C-reactive proteins synthetized in liver as stress proteins [21].

The four phases of T. cruzi(amastigote, epimastigote, metacyclic, and bloodstream trypomastigote) can activate the complement system, but only epimastigotes are susceptible to lysis. However, some strains on metacyclic trypomastigote phase are more vulnerable [22, 23]. Some T. cruzisurface molecules enable parasite to evade innate and adaptive immune responses. There are other mechanisms to circumvent the action of complement system such as the presence of calreticulin (TcCRT), the complement regulatory protein (Gp160/TcCRP), the complement C2 receptor inhibitor trispanning (TcCRIT), and the presence of GP58/68 protein and T-DAF. For a comprehensive review, see [21].

Finally, it has been observed that in animal models, metacyclic trypomastigotes induce an inflammatory response at the site of inoculation, as early as 1 h, and it is composed basically of neutrophils while mononuclear infiltrate begins at 24 h with a maximum infiltration at day 15. Nonetheless, poor cytokine expression such as IL-2, Il-4, IL-10, IL-12, and IFN-gammapersists over a 2-week post-inoculation, whereas at the regional lymph node to the site of inoculation, it was evident as early as 1 h. The induced pattern of cytokine at the inoculation site is permissive to establishing infection, despite the appropriate immune response in other lymph secondary organs [24, 25, 26]. Our group recently reported that pre-exposure to faeces of triatomine decreases parasitemia in mice challenged with metacyclic trypomastigotes. This finding suggests that inflammatory reaction to bacteria faeces in immune individuals helps to control parasite load in vivo[27].

Advertisement

4. In vitromodels

Diverse in vitrostudies on the T. cruzi/host cell interaction process have been described through the years [28]. These studies have included a wide variety of eukaryotic cell lines and parasite strains, as well as the different parasite phases able to infect cells: amastigotes, metacyclic trypomastigotes, or both, bloodstream and tissue-culture trypomastigotes [2, 29]. T. cruziis capable to invade phagocytic or non-phagocytic cells via endocytic mechanisms. Currently, three models for T. cruziinvasion have been proposed: lysosomal-dependent, lysosomal-independent, and actin-dependent [3, 6, 30].

Cortez and co-workers [30] recently showed that the participation of lysosomes in the parasite entry site depends on the source of the trypomastigote. They found that the metacyclic trypomastigotes invasion occurs mainly by the lysosome-dependent mechanism, whereas the tissue-culture trypomastigote invasion takes place mostly by the lysosome-independent mechanism. Interestingly, it has been reported that amastigotes are capable of invading host cells by the actin-dependent phagocytic mechanism probably due to their motionless nature [29, 31].

4.1. Lysosomal-dependent

The lysosomal-dependent model is also known as the lysosome exocytosis pathway. Tardieux et al. visualized the recruitment of lysosomes at the parasite entry site during the early event of internalization of tissue-culture trypomastigotes into their mammalian host cells, and they proposed that this process is required for parasite internalization [32]. PGTF is a soluble factor proteolytically generated from trypomastigote which is capable to induce Ca2+ signaling in mammalian cells. The addition of PGTF during the host cell invasion of tissue-culture trypomastigotes showed that Ca2+ signalling plays a role in the parasite invasion through the reorganization of host cell microfilaments as well as in the migration and fusion of lysosomes [15, 33]. In addition, the increase of Ca2+ is required to trigger a form of endocytosis to repair the mechanically injured host cell membrane due to T. cruziinvasion [17]. The elevation of intracellular Ca2+ concentration triggers the exocytosis of lysosomes. The lysosomal enzyme acid sphingomyelinase (ASM) is released to the host plasma membrane where ASM converts sphingomyelin into ceramide: a lipid capable of forming ceramide-enriched endosomes [34, 35]. Ceramides are also capable to coalesce and to accumulate into the parasitophorous vacuoles, which suggest that this lipid plays an important role in the membrane deformation process required to allow the large trypomastigotes entry into the host cells [32, 36].

4.2. Lysosomal-independent

The lysosomal-independent mechanism depends on phosphatidylinositol-3 (PI 3)-kinase (PI3K) which is activated in the presence of T. cruzibloodstream trypomastigotes. This mechanism is correlated to an efficient parasite invasion of non-phagocytes and phagocytic cells. In vitroanalysis during T. cruziinfection of phagocytic cells has shown the presence of vacuoles enriched with lipids derived from the PI 3-kinase activities: phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate (PI3P), phosphatidylinositol 3,4-bisphosphate (PI(3,4)P2), and phosphatidylinositol PI 3,4,5-triphosphate (PI(3,4,5)P3) [37, 38, 39].

The inhibition of the class I and III PI 3-kinase activities abolishes the parasite entry into macrophages which suggests a prominent role of the host PI 3-kinase activities during the T. cruziinfection process [37]. A class III PI 3-kinase located in T. cruzi(TcVps34) is able to produce phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate, and it has been shown that it plays an important role in vital processes for the parasite survival such as osmoregulation, acidification, and vesicular trafficking [40].

4.3. Actin-dependent

Amastigotes are also capable to penetrate host cell through its plasma membrane via the actin-dependent mechanism. This mechanism contrasts notably from the two models described previously in which trypomastigotes are involved [41, 42]. The invasion capability of amastigotes depends on the T. cruzilinage. Amastigotes from the T. cruziI lineage (G strain) have a remarkable ability to invade non-phagocytic cells [29, 43], while the less-infective amastigotes belonging to T. cruziII linage (such as the Y strain) are largely engulfed by phagocytic cells (macrophages) and occasionally by other cell types [43, 44].

Once inside the host cell, amastigotes show the same ability as trypomastigotes to disrupt the parasitophorous vacuole, to replicate in the cytosol, and to differentiate into the infective trypomastigote form. There is also evidence that trypomastigotes are able to differentiate into amastigotes extracellularly while circulating in the bloodstream [45]. This remarkable observation has unravelled an additional mechanism through which the parasite can move among intracellular compartments, elude the host immune system, and sustain the infection.

Advertisement

5. Conclusions

Chagas disease is a potentially life-threatening illness caused by T. cruzi. Currently, there are no vaccines which prevent the parasite infection; hence, vector control is still the most useful method to prevent such illness. Although the mammalian host has developed a fine battery of physical and biochemical defences, the parasite has adapted its metabolism to overcome the host defences. T. cruziexhibits multiple strategies to evade the host defenses in order to survive, as summarized here; diverse studies have been conducted trying to unravel the basics of T. cruziinfection during the early interaction with its mammalian host. The different in vivoand in vitroexperimental approaches showed a complex interaction depending on both, the parasite and the host characteristics. For example, the amastigote form was relatively recently described as a potentially infective form for host cells. Despite the fact that amastigote form is generally known as a replicative form in the mammalian host, it is capable to infect host cells within the host system in a completely different manner than the one described for the typical infective trypomastigote form. Despite the amount of studies on this topic, the comprehensive understanding of the parasite invasion mechanisms is still incomplete. More efforts should be followed for the elucidation of the early steps of parasite–host interaction as they are crucial for the development of future drugs to prevent the Chagas disease.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the National Council of Science and Technology from Mexico (CONACyT). Rosa Lidia Solis-Oviedo was supported by CONACyT. Victor Monteon was financial supported by CONACyT (Project CB-2010-2101 153764). Angel de la Cruz Pech-Canul was supported by CONACyT through the “Cátedras CONACyT para Jóvenes Investigadores” Programme.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1. de la Cruz Pech-Canul Á, Monteón V, Solís-Oviedo R-L. A brief view of the surface membrane proteins fromTrypanosoma cruzi. Journal of Parasitology Research. vol. 2017, Article ID 3751403, 13 pages, 2017. DOI: 10.1155/2017/3751403
  2. 2. Barrias ES, de Carvalho TMU, De Souza W.Trypanosoma cruzi: Entry into mammalian host cells and Parasitophorous vacuole formation. Frontiers in Immunology. 2013;4:186
  3. 3. de Souza W, de Carvalho TMU, Barrias ES. Review onTrypanosoma cruzi: Host cell interaction. International Journal of Cell Biology. 2010;2010:295394
  4. 4. Maeda F, Cortez C, Yoshida N. Cell signaling duringTrypanosoma cruziinvasion. Frontiers in Immunology. 2012;3(361):1-7
  5. 5. Epting CL, Coates BM, Engman DM. Molecular mechanisms of host cell invasion byTrypanosoma cruzi. Experimental Parasitology. 2010;126(3):283-291
  6. 6. Romano PS, Cueto JA, Casassa AF, Vanrell MC, Gottlieb RA, Colombo MI. Molecular and cellular mechanisms involved in theTrypanosoma cruzi/host cell interplay. IUBMB Life. 2012;64(5):387-396
  7. 7. Sibley LD, Andrews NW. Cell invasion by un-palatable parasites. Traffic (Copenhagen, Denmark). 2000;1(2):100-106
  8. 8. De Smet K, Contreras R. Human antimicrobial peptides: Defensins, cathelicidins and histatins. Biotechnology Letters. 2005;27(18):1337-1347
  9. 9. Fábián TK, Hermann P, Beck A, Fejérdy P, Fábián G. Salivary defense proteins: Their network and role in innate and acquired oral immunity. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2012;13(4):4295-4320
  10. 10. Nestle FO, Di Meglio P, Qin J-Z, Nickoloff BJ. Skin immune sentinels in health and disease. Nature Reviews Immunology. 2009;9(10):679-691
  11. 11. McGettrick HM, Smith E, Filer A, Kissane S, Salmon M, Buckley CD, et al. Fibroblasts from different sites may promote or inhibit recruitment of flowing lymphocytes by endothelial cells. European Journal of Immunology. 2009;39(1):113-125
  12. 12. McGettrick HM, Butler LM, Buckley CD, Ed Rainger G, Nash GB. Tissue stroma as a regulator of leukocyte recruitment in inflammation. Journal of Leukocyte Biology. 2012;91(3):385-400
  13. 13. Romaña C. Contribuição ao conhecimento da patogenia da Tripanosomose Americana: (período inicial da infecção). Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 1943;39:253-264
  14. 14. Perlowagora-Szumlewicz A, Moreira CJ. In vivo differentiation ofTrypanosoma cruzi –1. Experimental evidence of the influence of vector species on metacyclogenesis. Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 1994;89(4):603-618
  15. 15. Rodriguez A, Rioult MG, Ora A, Andrews NW. A trypanosome-soluble factor induces IP3 formation, intracellular Ca2+ mobilization and microfilament rearrangement in host cells. Journal of Cell Biology. 1995;129(5):1263-1273
  16. 16. Monteon VGS, Cruz-Zetina G, Balmes J, López R, Hernández O. Caracterización biológica de aislados mexicanos deTrypanosoma cruzi: metaciclogénesis, parasitemia y resistencia contra benznidazol. Revista Biomédica. 2009;20:206-214
  17. 17. Idone V, Tam C, Goss JW, Toomre D, Pypaert M, Andrews NW. Repair of injured plasma membrane by rapid Ca(2+)-dependent endocytosis. Journal of Cell Biology. 2008;180(5):905-914
  18. 18. San Francisco J, Barria I, Gutierrez B, Neira I, Munoz C, Sagua H, et al. Decreased cruzipain and gp85/trans-sialidase family protein expression contributes to loss ofTrypanosoma cruzitrypomastigote virulence. Journal of Cell Biology. 2017;19(1):55-61
  19. 19. Risso MG, Garbarino GB, Mocetti E, Campetella O, Gonzalez Cappa SM, Buscaglia CA, et al. Differential expression of a virulence factor, the trans-sialidase, by the mainTrypanosoma cruziphylogenetic lineages. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2004;189(12):2250-2259
  20. 20. Maeda FY, Cortez C, Izidoro MA, Juliano L, Yoshida N. Fibronectin-degrading activity ofTrypanosoma cruzicysteine proteinase plays a role in host cell invasion. Infection and Immunity. 2014;82(12):5166-5174
  21. 21. Lidani KCF, Bavia L, Ambrosio AR, de Messias-Reason IJ. The complement system: A prey ofTrypanosoma cruzi. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2017;8:607
  22. 22. Cestari I, Ramirez MI. Inefficient complement system clearance ofTrypanosoma cruzimetacyclic trypomastigotes enables resistant strains to invade eukaryotic cells. PLoS One. 2010;5(3):e9721
  23. 23. Leon-Perez F, Gomez-Garcia L, Alejandre-Aguilar R, Lopez R, Monteon VM. MexicanTrypanosoma cruziisolates: In vitro susceptibility of epimastigotes to anti-trypanosoma cruzi drugs and metacyclic forms to complement-mediated lysis. Vector Borne and Zoonotic Diseases. 2007;7(3):330-336
  24. 24. Monteon VM, Furuzawa-Carballeda J, Alejandre-Aguilar R, Aranda-Fraustro A, Rosales-Encina JL, Reyes PA. American trypanosomosis:in situand generalized features of parasitism and inflammation kinetics in a murine model. Experimental Parasitology. 1996;83(3):267-274
  25. 25. Gomez-Garcia L, Alejandre-Aguilar R, Aranda-Fraustro A, Lopez R, Monteon VM. Description of inflammation and cytokine profile at the inoculation site and in heart tissue of mice re-infected withTrypanosoma cruzivector derived-metacyclic trypomastigotes. Parasitology. 2005;130(Pt 5):511-522
  26. 26. Monteon VHO, Lopez R, Reyes PA. Cytokine expression at the inoculation site and nearby tissues in an animal model infected with Metacyclic Trypomastigotes ofTrypanosoma cruzi. Tropical Medicine and Health. 2009;37(4):141-147
  27. 27. Monteon V, Quen-Ramirez E, Macedo-Reyes V, Lopez R, Acosta-Viana K, Pennigton P, et al. Pre-exposure to faeces or saliva ofTriatoma dimidiatadecreases parasitemia in mice challenged withTrypanosoma cruzi: A description of the inflammatory reaction at the inoculation site. Annals of Parasitology. 2016;62(3):209-219
  28. 28. Duran-Rehbein GA, Vargas-Zambrano JC, Cuéllar A, Puerta CJ, Gonzalez JM. Mammalian cellular culture models ofTrypanosoma cruziinfection: A review of the published literature. Parasite. 2014;21:38
  29. 29. Mortara RA, Andreoli WK, Fernandes MC, da Silva CV, Fernandes AB, L’Abbate C, et al. Host cell actin remodeling in response toTrypanosoma cruzi: Trypomastigote versus amastigote entry. Subcellular Biochemistry. 2008;47:101-109
  30. 30. Cortez C, Real FY. N. Lysosome biogenesis/scattering increases host cell susceptibility to invasion byTrypanosoma cruzimetacyclic forms and resistance to tissue culture trypomastigotes. Cellular Microbiology. 2016;18(5):748-760
  31. 31. Procopio DO, da Silva S, Cunningham CC, Mortara RA.Trypanosoma cruzi: Effect of protein kinase inhibitors and cytoskeletal protein organization and expression on host cell invasion by amastigotes and metacyclic trypomastigotes. Experimental Parasitology. 1998;90(1):1-13
  32. 32. Tardieux I, Webster P, Ravesloot J, Boron W, Lunn JA, Heuser JE, et al. Lysosome recruitment and fusion are early events required for trypanosome invasion of mammalian cells. Cell. 1992;71(7):1117-1130
  33. 33. Burleigh BA. Host cell signaling andTrypanosoma cruziinvasion: Do all roads lead to lysosomes? Science’s STKE: Signal Transduction Knowledge Environment. 2005;2005(293):pe36
  34. 34. Tam C, Idone V, Devlin C, Fernandes MC, Flannery A, He X, et al. Exocytosis of acid sphingomyelinase by wounded cells promotes endocytosis and plasma membrane repair. Journal of Cell Biology. 2010;189(6):1027-1038
  35. 35. Trajkovic K, Hsu C, Chiantia S, Rajendran L, Wenzel D, Wieland F, et al. Ceramide triggers budding of exosome vesicles into multivesicular endosomes. Science (New York, N.Y.). 2008;319(5867):1244-1247
  36. 36. Fernandes MC, Cortez M, Flannery AR, Tam C, Mortara RA, Andrews NW.Trypanosoma cruzisubverts the sphingomyelinase-mediated plasma membrane repair pathway for cell invasion. The Journal of Experimental Medicine. 2011;208(5):909-921
  37. 37. Todorov AG, Einicker-Lamas M, de Castro SL, Oliveira MM, Guilherme A. Activation of host cell phosphatidylinositol 3-kinases byTrypanosoma cruziinfection. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2000;275(41):32182-32186
  38. 38. Woolsey AM, Sunwoo L, Petersen CA, Brachmann SM, Cantley LC, Burleigh BA. Novel PI 3-kinase-dependent mechanisms of trypanosome invasion and vacuole maturation. Journal of Cell Science. 2003;116(17):3611-3622
  39. 39. Wilkowsky SE, Barbieri MA, Stahl P, Isola ELD.Trypanosoma cruzi: Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and protein kinase B activation is associated with parasite invasion. Experimental Cell Research. 2001;264(2):211-218
  40. 40. Schoijet AC, Miranda K, Girard-Dias W, de Souza W, Flawia MM, Torres HN, et al. ATrypanosoma cruziphosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (TcVps34) is involved in osmoregulation and receptor-mediated endocytosis. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2008;283(46):31541-31550
  41. 41. Fernandes MC, Andrews NW. Host cell invasion byTrypanosoma cruzi: A unique strategy that promotes persistence. FEMS Microbiology Reviews. 2012;36(3):734-747
  42. 42. Fernandes MC, Flannery AR, Andrews N, Mortara RA. Extracellular amastigotes ofTrypanosoma cruziare potent inducers of phagocytosis in mammalian cells. Cellular Microbiology. 2013;15(6):977-991
  43. 43. Mortara RA, Andreoli WK, Taniwaki NN, Fernandes AB, Silva CV, Fernandes MC, et al. Mammalian cell invasion and intracellular trafficking byTrypanosoma cruziinfective forms. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias. 2005;77(1):77-94
  44. 44. Ley V, Andrews NW, Robbins ES, Nussenzweig V. Amastigotes ofTrypanosoma cruzisustain an infective cycle in mammalian cells. The Journal of Experimental Medicine. 1988;168(2):649-659
  45. 45. Andrews NW, Hong KS, Robbins ES, Nussenzweig V. Stage-specific surface antigens expressed during the morphogenesis of vertebrate forms ofTrypanosoma cruzi. Experimental Parasitology. 1987;64(3):474-484

Written By

Rosa Lidia Solís-Oviedo, Víctor Monteon, Ruth López and Ángel de la Cruz Pech-Canul

Submitted: October 12th, 2017 Reviewed: April 13th, 2018 Published: November 5th, 2018