Abstract
Background
Herpesviruses and bacteria and their interplay have long been believed to play important roles in the pathogenesis of periodontitis, but other microbial entities in the oral environment might also be involved. Anelloviruses are commonly detected in human, including in oral samples. The aim of the present study was to explore the occurrence and co-occurrence of human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), and human anelloviruses (HTTVs) in gingival tissue samples collected from participants recruited in Shanghai, China.
Methods
Gingival tissues were collected from 159 participants (57 with aggressive periodontitis (AP), 59 with chronic periodontitis (CP) and 43 with healthy periodontal status). The presence of HCMV, EBV, torque teno virus (TTV), torque teno mini virus (TTMV) and torque teno midi virus (TTMDV) DNA was detected by nested-PCR. The virus loads were quantified by real-time PCR.
Results
The detection rates of EBV, TTV, TTMV and TTMDV were significantly higher in the AP and CP groups compared to the healthy group (all P < 0.01). A statistically significant association was found between EBV, TTV and TTMV virus load and periodontitis (all P < 0.05). Participants infected with EBV showed significantly higher infection rates and higher virus loads of TTV and TTMV than the EBV-negative group (all P < 0.05). The coexistence rates of EBV and anelloviruses and the coexistence of three HTTVs were significantly higher in AP and CP groups (all P < 0.01).
Conclusions
Collectively, results obtained in this study suggest that HTTVs and the coexistence of EBV and HTTVs in particular, may be associated with periodontitis. Possible mechanisms of the interaction between herpesviruses and anelloviruses in the context of periodontitis require further investigation.
Keywords: Periodontitis, Epstein–Barr virus, Anelloviruses, Occurrence, Quantification
Background
Periodontitis is a chronic, inflammatory oral disease with a high prevalence in Chinese patients [1, 2]. As a multifactorial disease, periodontitis is believed to be caused by interplay among oral microorganisms, the hosts, and environmental factors [3]. Specific bacteria (Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia and Treponema denticola) were considered to be associated with periodontal disease in the traditional theory of periodontal etiology [4]. However, not all clinical symptoms associated with periodontitis can be readily explained by this theory [4]. As a potential risk factor for periodontitis, viruses have been received increasing attention. Viral sequences belonging to including herpesviruses, papilloma viruses, human T-lymphotropic virus-111, and anelloviruses have been identified in periodontal lesions [5–7]. Complex interaction between herpesviruses and bacteria may underlie the pathogenesis of periodontitis, with herpesviruses promoting bacterial adherence, invasion and upgrowth, while bacterial factors facilitating herpesvirus colonization and reactivation [8].
Infection by herpesviruses has been repeatedly shown to be a potential pathogenic factor for periodontal diseases. Slots [9] summarized the findings of 26 studies on the occurrence of periodontal herpesviruses around the world and found that 49% aggressive periodontitis (AP) sites, 40% chronic periodontitis (CP) sites and 3% healthy periodontal sites contained human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), while 45% AP sites, 32% CP sites and 7% healthy periodontal sites contained Epstein–Barr virus (EBV). A meta-analysis by Botero JE et al. [10] also showed that subgingival HCMV was significantly associated with periodontitis.
Anelloviruses are small, non-enveloped viruses with an icosahedral capsid containing the circular, single-strand DNA genome. The first Anellovirus was discovered in human samples in 1997, and so far nearly 200 species have been identified in human as well as animals. Human anelloviruses (traditionally also called human torque teno viruses, HTTVs) currently include members of three genera: torque teno viruses (TTV), torque teno mini virus (TTMV), and torque teno midi virus (TTMDV) [11]. HTTVs have a high prevalence around the world [12–14] and have been identified in diverse biological samples including serum, bone marrow, lung, liver and lymph node [11]. Multiple studies [11–13, 15, 16] have associated HTTVs with hepatitis, liver cancer, infectious gastroenteritis, lymphoma, transfusion borne diseases, colon cancer and severe pneumonia in children, but whether there is a causal link or what role HTTVs might play in the pathogenesis of these diseases remain unclear. In previous studies, members of this group have identified a novel species of TTMV (TTMV-222) in gingival tissue from periodontitis patients [17] and a new TTMV called TTMV-SH in serum from patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma [18].
Compared to herpesviruses, limited information is available regarding the association between HTTVs and periodontitis. Rotundo et al. [7] reported a higher prevalence of TTV in subjects with chronic periodontitis compared to healthy people in Italy. Considering the high prevalence of HTTVs worldwide, it is both interesting and important to assess possible association between HTTVs and periodontitis in other population groups. In addition, the interplay between herpesviruses and oral bacteria in the pathogenesis of periodontitis also suggests possible interactions between herpesviruses and other oral microorganisms, including HTTVs, which might also be involved in the development of periodontal diseases. For non-oral diseases, Borkosky et al. [19] reported that EBV infections can stimulate TTV replication and the interaction of EBV and TTV might be associated with multiple sclerosis. The aim of the present study is to examine the occurrence and co-occurrence of HTTVs, HCMV and EBV in gingival tissue samples taken from outpatients with aggressive and chronic periodontitis and those with healthy periodontal status in Shanghai, China. The results could not only provide information regarding the gingival occurrence of these viruses in this sampled subpopulation, but might also help reveal possible association of their occurrence or co-occurrence with periodontitis.
Methods
Sample collection
People who attended the Ninth People’s Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China from June 2017 to June 2018 were invited to participate in this investigation. All volunteers were healthy without any systemic disease, with at least 20 teeth present (excluding the third molars). The probing depth (PD), clinical attachment loss (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival index (GI), and plaque index (PLI) of each volunteer were recorded and X-rays was performed at the initial visit and before surgical treatment. Before the implementation of this epidemiological study, ethical approval (No. 2017195) was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the Ninth People’s Hospital and this investigation was carried out according to relevant guidelines. Prior to examination and sample collection, written informed consent was obtained from each volunteer.
Fifty-seven participants who were 18–35 years old with aggressive periodontitis, 59 participants who were 36–65 years old with chronic periodontitis and 43 periodontal healthy volunteers who were 18–65 years old were included in this study. In the AP and CP groups, the inclusion criteria were: over 50% teeth with PD ≥ 6 mm, CAL ≥ 3 mm, BOP positive, and alveolar bone resorption detected by pantomography [20]; and exclusion criteria were: systemic disease, HIV infection, heavy cigarette smoking (over 15 cigarettes per day), pregnancy and antibiotic application (within 6 months). For the AP group, at least 6 incisors or first molars involved was required. In the healthy group, participants who had no obvious clinical symptoms of gingivitis or periodontitis and had no teeth with PD > 4 mm, CAL > 1 mm or BOP positive were included. The other inclusion and exclusion criteria were the same as the periodontitis group.
In AP and CP groups, tissue samples obtained during surgical periodontal therapy were the gingival epithelium and connective tissue from internal wall of periodontal pocket facing the sulcus. All participants had been received basic periodontal treatment before surgical periodontal therapy. In the healthy group, biopsy specimens obtained from the sulcular region when healthy teeth were extracted were the gingival epithelium and connective tissue facing the sulcus from periodontal healthy sites. Healthy teeth were extracted for reasons such as orthodontics. To wash away plaque, saliva, and blood, the biopsy specimens were rinsed with sterile phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at least three times and then immediately put into a clean EP tube (Eppendorf tube) and stored at − 80 °C until further treatment. DNA from weighed samples was extracted by a Takara MiniBEST Viral RNA/DNA Extraction Kit (TaKaRa, Japan) on the basis of the manufacturer’s instructions, and eluted in 100 μL of elution buffer.
Nested-PCR and real-time PCR assay
Nested-PCR was performed to detect the viruses and the primers of these five viruses were determined according to relevant literature [21, 22]. The primers for EBV were directed to the EBNA2 gene according to Parra B et al. [21]. And the primers for HCMV were directed to the MIE gene according to Parra B et al. [21]. The primers for TTV, TTMV and TTMDV were directed to a highly conserved area located just downstream of the TATA box according to Ninomiya M et al. [22]. The primer sequences and PCR conditions are shown in Table S1 in the supplemental material. The 50-μl PCR reaction mixture contained 2 μl of extracted DNA from the biopsy specimens, 10 pmol of corresponding primers, 25 μl of 2 × PrimerSTAR Max Premix (Takara) and ddH2O to reach 50 μl. Positive controls (plasmids containing a targeted fragment of the virus genome), negative controls (DNA extracted from virus negative cells such as Huh7 and 293 T) and blank controls (ddH2O) were set in each run. The nested-PCR products were separated by electrophoresis on 3% agarose gels with TAE buffer. The virus-positive subjects were calculated.
Real-time PCR was performed to detect the five virus load and the primers of these five viruses were determined according to relevant literature [19, 22–24]. The primers for EBV were directed to the BALF5 gene according to Borkosky et al. [19]. The primers for HCMV were directed to the US14 gene according to Kubar, A. et al. [24]. The primers for TTV and TTMV were directed to a distinct conserved region that located just upstream of the ORF 2 in TTMV and located within the ORF 2 in TTV according to Moen EM et al. [23]. The primers of Real-time PCR for TTMDV were the same as the inner primers of nested-PCR [22]. Primer sequences and PCR conditions are shown in Table S1 in the supplemental material. Real-time PCR was performed in Roche LightCycler® 480 Instrument II. The 10-μl PCR system consisted of 0.5 μl of extracted DNA from virus-positive samples in nested-PCR, 0.3 μM of each primer, 5 μl of 2 × SuperReal PreMix Plus SYBR Green (TIANGEN) and ddH2O to reach 10 μl. Each run contained several negative controls (DNA extracted from virus negative cells such as Huh7 and 293 T), blank controls (ddH2O) and positive controls (standard curve). Both controls and samples were assayed in triplicate. Virus DNA could be quantified within a linear range from 102 to 109 copies/μL, as determined by the use of tenfold dilutions of a plasmid standard. The procedures for quantification of copy number and evaluation of intra- and inter- assay precision and reproducibility of the assay have been previously reported [19, 23, 24]. In the authors’ experience, the limit of detection in this study was equivalent to 103 copies per gram of tissue.
Statistical analyses
In some statistical analyses, the AP and the CP groups were combined into one group called the periodontitis group according to the classification of periodontal diseases in 2018 [25]. All statistical analyses were performed by SPSS software ver. 16.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive analysis included mean ± standard deviation, median, minimum, maximum and percentages were conducted for all variables. Chi-squared tests and Fisher’s exact tests were applied to analyze differences in sex, the occurrence of the viruses, and the coexistence in three groups. Mann-Whitney U tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests were applied to analyze differences in age, clinical parameters (PD, GI, PLI, and CAL) and the virus loads of the five viruses. The correlation between EBV, TTV and TTMV virus loads was determined by Spearman correlation analysis. The significance level was set at 0.05.
Results
A total of 159 participants (57 for the aggressive periodontitis group, 59 for the chronic periodontitis group and 43 for the healthy group) were recruited for the study. The age and sex compositions of the three groups are shown in Table 1. There was no significant difference for sex composition, but the age composition was significantly different, with AP and healthy groups consisting of younger subjects compared to CP group. Clinical parameters (PD, GI, PLI, and CAL) were significantly higher in participants with AP or CP than in the healthy group at the initial visit (Table 1).
Table 1.
Compositions of sex, age and periodontal clinical parameters of three groups
| aggressive periodontitis | chronic periodontitis | healthy | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.336* | |||
| male [n (%)] | 31 (54.4) | 29 (49.2) | 17 (39.5) | |
| female [n (%)] | 26 (45.6) | 30 (50.8) | 26 (60.5) | |
| Age (mean ± SD) | 29.74 ± 5.357 | 48.53 ± 8.52 | 28.81 ± 5.337 | < 0.001** |
| PD (mean ± SD) | 6.83 ± 1.78 | 6.17 ± 1.89 | 1.09 ± 0.78 | < 0.001** |
| CAL (mean ± SD) | 4.03 ± 0.73 | 3.98 ± 0.85 | 0.58 ± 0.51 | < 0.001** |
| GI (mean ± SD) | 1.92 ± 0.35 | 2.41 ± 0.28 | 0.34 ± 0.21 | < 0.001** |
| PLI (mean ± SD) | 1.58 ± 0.43 | 2.76 ± 0.31 | 1.05 ± 0.75 | < 0.001** |
*Chi-squared test
**Kruskal-Wallis test
#Abbreviations:n number of participants, SD standard deviation, PD the probing depth, CAL clinical attachment loss, GI gingival index, PLI plaque index
Presence of EBV, HCMV and HTTVs sequences in gingival tissues taken from the participants were analyzes using nested-PCR, and positive samples were further analyzed using quantitative real-time PCR (Table 2). Compared to nested-PCR, real-time PCR provided additional quantitative data, but was not as sensitive, possibly due to viral loads below the detection limit of real-time PCR, which is estimated to be equivalent to about 103 copies/g tissue in this work. For occurrence and co-occurrence analyses, nested-PCR results were used. The detection rates of EBV and HCMV in all participants were 36.5 and 6.9%, respectively. The overall occurrences of three HTTVs were higher: 79.2% for TTV, 84.9% for TTMV and 66.7% for TTMDV (Table 2). The detection rates of herpesviruses and HTTVs in the three groups are shown in Table 2. The occurrence of EBV was significantly higher (P < 0.01) in the AP group (43.9%) and CP group (47.5%) than that in the healthy group (11.6%). Higher positive rates (P < 0.01) of the three HTTVs were also detected in the AP group (TTV 93.0%, TTMV 91.2% and TTMDV 75.4%) and the CP group (TTV 84.7%, TTMV 93.2% and TTMDV 78.0%), compared to the healthy group (TTV 53.5%, TTMV 65.1% and TTMDV 39.5%). Between AP and CP groups, however, detection rates of herpesviruses and anelloviruses were not significantly different (Table S2 in the supplemental material). No statistically significant relationship between detection rate of the studied viruses and sex was identified either (Table S3 in the supplemental material).
Table 2.
Qualitative and quantitative analysis of herpesviruses and anelloviruses presence in three groups
| aggressive periodontitis (n = 57) | chronic periodontitis (n = 59) | healthy (n = 43) | P | Total (n = 159) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EBV | |||||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 25 (43.9) / 32 (56.1) | 28 (47.5) / 31 (52.5) | 5 (11.6) / 38 (88.4) | < 0.001* | 58 (36.5) / 101 (63.5) |
| real-time PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 20 (35.1) / 37 (64.9) | 26 (44.1) / 33 (55.9) | 4 (9.3) / 39 (90.7) | < 0.001* | 50 (31.4) / 109 (68.6) |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 5.38 (4.41–7.01) | 5.89 (5.06–7.31) | 5.07 (4.57–5.21) | 0.009** | 5.65 (4.41–7.31) |
| HCMV | |||||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 3 (5.3) / 54 (94.7) | 7 (11.9) / 52 (88.1) | 1 (2.3) / 42 (97.7) | 0.683*** | 11 (6.9) / 148 (83.1) |
| real-time PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 3 (5.3) / 54 (94.7) | 7 (11.9) / 52 (88.1) | 1 (2.3) / 42 (97.7) | 0.683*** | 11 (6.9) / 148 (83.1) |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 7.34 (7.13–10.14) | 9.88 (5.58–10.33) | 9.11 | 0.518** | 9.33 (5.58–10.33) |
| TTV | |||||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 53 (93.0) / 4 (7.0) | 50 (84.7) / 9 (15.3) | 23 (53.5) / 20 (46.5) | < 0.001* | 126 (79.2) / 33 (20.8) |
| real-time PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 47 (82.5) / 10 (17.5) | 48 (81.4) / 11 (18.6) | 23 (53.5) / 20 (46.5) | < 0.001* | 118 (74.2) / 41 (25.8) |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 6.34 (5.00–9.33) | 6.76 (5.22–9.39) | 6.12 (3.79–8.21) | 0.001** | 6.55 (3.79–9.39) |
| TTMV | |||||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 52 (91.2) / 5 (8.8) | 55 (93.2) / 4 (6.8) | 28 (65.1) / 15 (34.9) | < 0.001* | 135 (84.9) / 24 (15.1) |
| real-time PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 47 (82.5) / 10 (17.5) | 51 (86.4) / 8 (13.6) | 25 (58.1) / 18 (41.2) | < 0.001* | 123 (77.4) / 36 (22.6) |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 6.64 (4.90–8.27) | 7.05 (4.82–10.20) | 6.08 (5.42–8.42) | 0.001** | 6.70 (4.82–10.20) |
| TTMDV | |||||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 43 (75.4) / 14 (24.6) | 46 (78.0) / 13 (22.0) | 17 (39.5) / 26 (60.5) | < 0.001* | 106 (66.7) / 53 (33.3) |
| real-time PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 4 (7.0) / 53 (93.0) | 5 (8.5) / 54 (91.5) | 3 (7.0) / 40 (93.0) | 0.983*** | 12 (7.5) / 147 (92.5) |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 4.79 (4.60–5.41) | 4.81 (4.29–5.46) | 4.69 (4.62–5.28) | 0.851** | 4.79 (4.29–5.46) |
*Chi-squared test
**Kruskal-Wallis test
***Fisher’s exact test
#Abbreviations:PCR polymerase chain reaction, n number of participants, n+ number of positive participants, n− number of negative participants, Md median, Min minimum, Max maximum, HCMV Human cytomegalovirus, EBV Epstein–Barr virus, TTV Torque teno virus, TTMV Torque teno mini virus, TTMDV: Torque teno midi virus
Coexistence of EBV, HCMV and HTTVs in participants was then investigated and the results showed that overall participants infected with EBV had significantly higher infection rates (P < 0.05) of HTTVs (TTV 89.1%, TTMV 93.1% and TTMDV 79.3%) compared to EBV-negative participants (TTV 73.3%, TTMV 80.2% and TTMDV 59.4%) (Table 3). The detection rates of herpesvirus and HTTVs coexistence in the three groups are shown in Table 4 and Table S4 in the supplemental material. When the three groups were compared, coexistence of EBV and any of the three HTTVs were significantly higher (P < 0.01) in AP and CP groups than in the healthy group (Table 4). The coexistence among HTTVs were also significantly higher in the AP and CP groups (P < 0.01) (Table 4). Due to its low occurrence, especially in healthy group, coexistence of HCMV with other viruses showed no significant differences among the three groups (Table 4).
Table 3.
Qualitative and quantitative analysis of anelloviruses presence in EBV positive and negative groups
| EBV positive (n = 58) | EBV negative (n = 101) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TTV | |||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 52 (89.7) / 6 (10.3) | 74 (73.3) / 27 (26.7) | 0.014* |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 6.68 (4.95–9.39) | 6.40 (3.79–8.26) | 0.023** |
| TTMV | |||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 54 (93.1) / 4 (6.9) | 81 (80.2) / 20 (19.8) | 0.029* |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 6.95 (5.05–10.20) | 6.40 (4.82–9.84) | 0.004** |
| TTMDV | |||
| nested-PCR [n + (%)/n-(%)] | 46 (79.3) / 12 (20.7) | 60 (59.4) / 41 (40.6) | 0.01* |
| virus DNA load Md (Min-Max) (Log10 copies/g) | 4.79 (4.29–5.46) | 4.69 (4.62–5.28) | 0.782** |
*Chi-squared test
**Mann-Whitney U test
#Abbreviations:PCR polymerase chain reaction, Md median, Min minimum, Max maximum, n number of participants, n+ number of positive participants, n− number of negative participants, EBV Epstein–Barr virus, TTV Torque teno virus, TTMV Torque teno mini virus, TTMDV Torque teno midi virus
Table 4.
Coexistence of herpesviruses and anelloviruses in three groups
| Coexistence nested-PCR | aggressive periodontitis positive n (%) | chronic periodontitis positive n (%) | healthy positive n (%) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EBV + HCMV | 1 (1.8) | 5 (8.5) | 0 | 0.804** |
| EBV + TTV | 24 (42.1) | 25 (42.4) | 3 (7) | <0.001* |
| EBV + TTMV | 22 (38.6) | 27 (45.8) | 5 (11.6) | 0.001* |
| EBV + TTMDV | 19 (33.3) | 25 (42.4) | 2 (4.7) | <0.001* |
| HCMV+TTV | 3 (5.3) | 6 (10.2) | 1 (2.3) | 0.644** |
| HCMV+TTMV | 3 (5.3) | 7 (11.9) | 1 (2.3) | 0.683** |
| HCMV+TTMDV | 3 (5.3) | 7 (11.9) | 1 (2.3) | 0.683** |
| TTV + TTMV | 50 (87.7) | 48 (81.4) | 17 (39.5) | <0.001* |
| TTV + TTMDV | 42 (73.7) | 41 (69.5) | 14 (32.6) | <0.001* |
| TTMV+TTMDV | 42 (73.7) | 45 (76.3) | 15 (34.9) | <0.001* |
| TTV + TTMV+TTMDV | 41 (71.9) | 41 (69.5) | 13 (30.2) | <0.001* |
*Chi-squared test
**Fisher’s exact test
#Abbreviations:PCR polymerase chain reaction, n number of participants, HCMV Human cytomegalovirus, EBV Epstein–Barr virus, TTV Torque teno virus, TTMV Torque teno mini virus, TTMDV Torque teno midi virus
Quantification results obtained using real-time PCR showed that EBV virus loads ranged from 4.41 to 7.32 log10 copies/g, HCMV loads ranged from 5.58 to 10.33 log10 copies/g, TTV loads ranged from 3.79 to 9.39 log10 copies/g, TTMV loads ranged from 4.81 to 10.20 log10 copies/g and TTMDV loads ranged from 4.29 to 5.46 log10 copies/g (Table 2). Notably, a predominant majority of TTMDV-positive samples had viral loads below the detection limit. The virus loads of EBV, TTV and TTMV showed significant differences among the AP, CP and healthy groups (P < 0.05) (Table 2), while TTV and TTMV virus loads in the CP group were significantly higher than those in the AP group (Table S2 in the supplemental material). In addition, among all participants, EBV-positive participants had higher TTV and TTMV virus loads compared to EBV-negative participants (P < 0.05) (Table 3). A positive correlation between the virus loads of EBV and TTMV and the virus loads of TTV and TTMV was also identified by Spearman correlation analysis (P < 0.05) (Table 5).
Table 5.
Correlation between virus loads of EBV, TTV and TTMV (log10 copies/g)
| spearman correlation coefficient | P | |
|---|---|---|
| EBV-TTV | 0.139 | 0.325* |
| EBV-TTMV | 0.372 | 0.006* |
| TTV-TTMV | 0.484 | < 0.001* |
*Spearman correlation analysis
#Abbreviations:EBV Epstein–Barr virus, TTV Torque teno virus, TTMV Torque teno mini virus
The differences between the periodontitis group and healthy group in the detection rates and the virus loads of herpesvirus and anelloviruses are shown in Table S5 and S6 in the supplemental material. The detection rates and the virus loads of EBV, TTV and TTMV were significantly higher in the periodontitis group. And the periodontitis group showed higher coexistence rates of EBV and HTTVs.
Discussion
Periodontitis was found to have a higher prevalence in Chinese than before and became one of the major reasons for tooth loss [1, 2]. According to the classification of periodontal diseases in 2018 [25], chronic and aggressive periodontitis are now grouped under a single category (“Periodontitis”). But this study was designed and initiated before the publication of the new scheme. Stringent inclusion/exclusion criteria based on the traditional AP/CP classification were implemented in the hope of identifying possible AP- and CP-associated differences. So the classification of periodontal diseases in 1999 [20] was used in this study. According to the new classification in 2018, participants in AP and CP groups could be diagnosed as generalized periodontitis with stage III or stage IV. The results (Table S5 and S6 in the supplemental material) were similar to the outcomes of AP, CP and healthy groups.
Previous reports [6, 9, 26–28] have repeatedly suggested that EBV and HCMV are involved in the pathogenesis of periodontal disease in various population groups. In the current study, it was found that the occurrence of EBV was 43.9% in the AP group, 47.5% in the CP group and significantly higher than the occurrence of 11.6% in the healthy group (P < 0.05). Moreover, the EBV virus loads were significantly higher in the AP and CP groups (P < 0.05). These results are consistent with earlier reports about EBV in periodontitis [6, 9, 26, 29, 30]. However, the occurrence of HCMV was 5.3 and 11.9% in the AP and CP groups in this study, lower than what many previous studies have reported [31–33]. For instance, using the same nested-PCR primers, Parra B et al. reported occurrences of EBV and HCMV in periodontitis patients to be 30 and 60% respectively [21]. In addition, no significant differences were observed between AP and CP groups with regard to detection rates of either EBV or HCMV, whereas previously, Slots [9] reported higher occurrence of herpesviruses in patients with AP compared to patients with CP. These apparent discrepancies could be the result of differences in population studied and/or sampling technique used. Dawson et al. [34] summarized HCMV detection rates in studies that used samples from single site of periodontitis and found that detection rates varied from 0.5 to 59%. These authors suggested that [34] lower detection might be due to the fact that HCMV were in a latent state and would contribute to the progression of periodontitis by reactivation, which might also apply to some AP/CP subjects in this study. Furthermore, HCMV mainly infects periodontal monocytes and macrophages [35] that might be distributed unevenly in gingival tissues [36]. In this study, gingival tissue sample was taken from a single site on each participant, and consequently may not truly represent the HCMV infection status of gingival. Many previous studies [6, 9, 26–28, 34, 37] detected viruses in samples of saliva, subgingival plaque, serum or gingival tissues. Due to the difficulty of sampling, the authors didn’t obtain other samples from the same participants in this study, which was the limitation of this investigation. Clearly, for detection of herpesviruses in the context of periodontitis, low detection rates such as observed for HCMV in this work would necessarily require further testing on additional samples for confirmation.
Many studies have reported that anelloviruses frequently and ubiquitously infect humans [12–14]. Although the detection rates of different types of HTTVs in various areas were quite different, it is generally believed that HTTVs can be detected in more than 50% of the population [11]. The findings of the present study showed overall high detection rates of TTV, TTMV and TTMDV, and the detection rates in the AP and CP groups were significantly higher than the healthy group. Moreover, the CP group had significantly higher TTV and TTMV virus loads than the healthy group (P < 0.05). The high detection rates of all three HTTVs are consistent with prevalence data in the Middle East obtained using the same nested PCR primers as used in this study [12]. Also using the same real-time PCR primers, Garcia-Alvarez M et al. reported that the prevalence and the virus loads of TTV and TTMV were markedly elevated in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients and HIV-monoinfected patients than the control group [16]. The finding of high TTV occurrence and virus loads in gingival tissues agrees with results from the study by Rotundo et al. in periodontitis patients [7]. In addition, this study identified higher TTV and TTMV virus loads in CP group compared to AP group. TTMDV virus loads in most samples that were positive by nested-PCR were apparently too low to be quantified using real-time PCR in this work. Due to the rare reporting on real-time PCR quantification of TTMDV in the literature, it is as yet unclear whether this phenomenon is specific to the studied cohort. Nevertheless, higher detection rates of HTTVs and higher virus loads of TTV and TTMV observed in AP and CP patients, as well as differences in TTV and TTMV virus loads between AP and CP groups, suggest a possible association of HTTVs with periodontitis that warrants further studies.
Coexistence of multiple anelloviruses seems to be a common event [16, 38]. However, most of the reports investigated only one or two of the three HTTVs. Studies that explored all of three viruses are rare. Al-Qahtani et al. [12] found that the detection rates of TTV, TTMV, TTMDV and their coexistence were high in blood samples. In this study, the positive rates of the coexistence of the three HTTVs in the AP and CP groups (71.9 and 69.5%) were significantly higher than in healthy group (30.2%) (Table 4). The TTV and TTMV virus loads also displayed positive correlation (P < 0.05). This suggests potential association between different HTTVs in the context of periodontitis, which also warrants further studies.
Because the oral cavity is an open environment and colonized by a large number of microorganisms, periodontitis is believed to be multifactorial. The relationship between EBV and other microbial entities in the context of periodontitis has been explored by many researchers. Slots et al. [39] summarized the recent studies on the periodontal treatment and found that the use of systemic chemotherapy and inexpensive antiseptics against bacterial pathogens and periodontal herpesviruses may help to arrest active periodontitis. Jakovljevic A et al. [40] hypothesize that EBV infection could stimulate the overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) to induce periapical bone resorption in apical periodontitis. Makino K et al. [41] found that n-butyric acid produced by P. endodontalis could reactivate latent EBV by inducing the expression of BZLF-1 mRNA and ZEBRA protein. However, very few studies have reported about the association between EBV and anelloviruses. Sriraman et al. [42] found that TTV, EBV and HCMV could be detected in cardiac patients with atherosclerosis and coexisting chronic periodontitis but there was no significant association of the three viruses. Borkosky et al. [19] found that EBV infections can stimulate TTV replication and the interaction of EBV and TTV may be associated with multiple sclerosis. In the present study, EBV detection rates and virus loads in AP and CP patients were significantly higher compared to the healthy group (Table 2), echoing previous studies linking EBV to periodontitis. Against this background, this study further identified higher detection rates and virus loads of TTV and TTMV in the EBV positive subjects compared to EBV negative subjects (P < 0.05) (Tables 3), and in addition, higher co-occurrence of EBV with TTV, TTMV and TTMDV in both AP and CP patients compared to healthy participants (Table 4). These results suggest a possible association of EBV with HTTVs, especially in the context of periodontitis. Whether there is an underlying interplay between EBV and HTTVs in such cases, as shown by the findings of Borkosky et al. [22], would be an interesting direction to pursue in future research.
The possible pathogenic mechanism of HTTVs has been a highly controversial question ever since their discovery, due in no small part to the lack of suitable cell lines to culture viruses. Yokoyama et al. [43] used transgenic mouse model to show that TTV ORF1 protein appeared to affect the differentiation of kidney epithelial cells. Galmès et al. [15] found that TTMV-LY could infect lung alveolar epithelial cells and induce the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines to regulate the innate immune response of lung tissue. Results obtained in this study indicate that potential pathogenesis by HTTVs might need to be studied in the presence of commonly found co-infecting viruses such as EBV.
Conclusions
In summary, this study showed the high occurrence of EBV, TTV, TTMV and TTMDV in aggressive and chronic periodontitis patients compared to periodontal healthy controls recruited in Shanghai, China. Quantification by real-time PCR also identified higher EBV, TTV and TTMV virus loads in periodontitis gingival samples. Furthermore, higher co-occurrence of EBV and HTTVs was observed in periodontitis patients. Collectively, these results suggest that HTTVs and coexistence of EBV and HTTVs in particular, may be associated with periodontitis. Possible mechanisms of the interaction between herpesviruses and anelloviruses in the context of periodontitis require further investigation.
Supplementary information
Additional file 1: Table S1. Primer sequences and PCR conditions of herpesviruses and anelloviruses.Table S2. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of herpesviruses and anelloviruses presence in aggressive periodontitis and chronic periodontitis groups. Table S3. Detection rates of herpesviruses and anelloviruses by sex in periodontitis and healthy groups. Table S4. Association between TTV, TTMV, and TTMDV in periodontitis and healthy groups. Table S5. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of herpesviruses and anelloviruses presence in periodontitis and healthy groups. Table S6. Coexistence of herpesviruses and anelloviruses in periodontitis and healthy groups.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
- PCR
Polymerase chain reaction
- n
number of participants
- n+
number of positive participants
- n−
number of negative participants.
- Md
Median
- Min
Minimum
- Max
Maximum
- HCMV
Human cytomegalovirus
- EBV
Epstein–Barr virus
- TTV
Torque teno virus
- TTMV
Torque teno mini virus
- TTMDV
Torque teno midi virus
- HTTVs
Human torque teno viruses
- SD
Standard deviation
- PD
The probing depth
- CAL
Clinical attachment loss
- GI
Gingival index
- PLI
Plaque index
Authors’ contributions
X.P.F. Y.H.X. and J.L designed the study. T.Y. and S.K.P. completed the sample collection, the epidemiological investigation and wrote the manuscript. Y.Z. and P.J. completed the sample collection and the data analysis and statistics. All of the authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 81800967 and 81470737) and National Key R&D Program of China under Grant 2017YFC1200201.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets during and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Shanghai Ninth People’s Hospital (No. 2017195). Written informed consent was obtained from each volunteer.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Tian Yu and Shaokun Pan contributed equally to this work.
Contributor Information
Youhua Xie, Email: yhxie@fudan.edu.cn.
Xiping Feng, Email: shfengxiping@163.com.
Supplementary information
Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12903-020-01188-2.
References
- 1.Sun HY, Jiang H, Du MQ, Wang X, Feng XP, Hu Y, et al. The prevalence and associated factors of periodontal disease among 35 to 44-year-old Chinese adults in the 4th National Oral Health Survey. Chin J Dent Res. 2018;21(4):241–247. doi: 10.3290/j.cjdr.a41082. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Chen X, Ye W, Zhan JY, Wang X, Tai BJ, Hu Y, et al. Periodontal status of Chinese adolescents: findings from the 4th National Oral Health Survey. Chin J Dent Res. 2018;21(3):195–203. doi: 10.3290/j.cjdr.a41075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Pihlstrom BL, Michalowicz BS, Johnson NW. Periodontal diseases. Lancet. 2005;366(9499):1809–1820. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67728-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Feng Z, Weinberg A. Role of bacteria in health and disease of periodontal tissues. Periodontol. 2006;40:50–76. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.2005.00148.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Edlund A, Santiago-Rodriguez TM, Boehm TK, Pride DT. Bacteriophage and their potential roles in the human oral cavity. J Oral Microbiol. 2015;7:27423. doi: 10.3402/jom.v7.27423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Slots J. Herpesvirus periodontitis: infection beyond biofilm. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2011;39(6):393–399. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Rotundo R, Maggi F, Nieri M, Muzzi L, Bendinelli M, Prato GP. TT virus infection of periodontal tissues: a controlled clinical and laboratory pilot study. J Periodontol. 2004;75(9):1216–1220. doi: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.9.1216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Chen C, Feng P, Slots J. Herpesvirus-bacteria synergistic interaction in periodontitis. Periodontol. 2020;82(1):42–64. doi: 10.1111/prd.12311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Slots J. Periodontal herpesviruses: prevalence, pathogenicity, systemic risk. Periodontol. 2015;69(1):28–45. doi: 10.1111/prd.12085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Botero JE, Rodríguez-Medina C, Jaramillo-Echeverry A, Contreras A. Association between human cytomegalovirus and periodontitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontal Res. 2020. 10.1111/jre.12742. [DOI] [PubMed]
- 11.Spandole S, Cimponeriu D, Berca LM, Mihaescu G. Human anelloviruses: an update of molecular, epidemiological and clinical aspects. Arch Virol. 2015;160(4):893–908. doi: 10.1007/s00705-015-2363-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Al-Qahtani AA, Alabsi ES, AbuOdeh R, Thalib L, El Zowalaty ME, Nasrallah GK. Prevalence of anelloviruses (TTV, TTMDV, and TTMV) in healthy blood donors and in patients infected with HBV or HCV in Qatar. Virol J. 2016;13(1):208. doi: 10.1186/s12985-016-0664-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Tokita H, Murai S, Kamitsukasa H, Yagura M, Harada H, Takahashi M, et al. High TT virus load as an independent factor associated with the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma among patients with hepatitis C virus-related chronic liver disease. J Med Virol. 2002;67(4):501–509. doi: 10.1002/jmv.10129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Charlton M, Adjei P, Poterucha J, Zein N, Moore B, Therneau T, et al. TT-virus infection in north American blood donors, patients with fulminant hepatic failure, and cryptogenic cirrhosis. Hepatology. 1998;28(3):839–842. doi: 10.1002/hep.510280335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Galmes J, Li Y, Rajoharison A, Ren L, Dollet S, Richard N, et al. Potential implication of new torque Teno mini viruses in parapneumonic empyema in children. Eur Respir J. 2013;42(2):470–479. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00107212. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Garcia-Alvarez M, Berenguer J, Alvarez E, Guzman-Fulgencio M, Cosin J, Miralles P, et al. Association of torque Teno virus (TTV) and torque Teno mini virus (TTMV) with liver disease among patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013;32(2):289–297. doi: 10.1007/s10096-012-1744-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Zhang Y, Li F, Shan TL, Deng X, Delwart E, Feng XP. A novel species of torque Teno mini virus (TTMV) in gingival tissue from chronic periodontitis patients. Sci Rep. 2016;6:26739. doi: 10.1038/srep26739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Pan S, Yu T, Wang Y, Lu R, Wang H, Xie Y, et al. Identification of a torque Teno mini virus (TTMV) in Hodgkin's lymphoma patients. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:1680. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01680. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Borkosky SS, Whitley C, Kopp-Schneider A, zur Hausen H, de Villiers EM. Epstein-Barr virus stimulates torque Teno virus replication: a possible relationship to multiple sclerosis. PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e32160. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Armitage GC. Development of a classification system for periodontal diseases and conditions. Ann Periodontol. 1999;4(1):1–6. doi: 10.1902/annals.1999.4.1.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Parra B, Slots J. Detection of human viruses in periodontal pockets using polymerase chain reaction. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1996;11(5):289–293. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-302x.1996.tb00183.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Ninomiya M, Takahashi M, Nishizawa T, Shimosegawa T, Okamoto H. Development of PCR assays with nested primers specific for differential detection of three human anelloviruses and early acquisition of dual or triple infection during infancy. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46(2):507–514. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01703-07. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Moen EM, Sleboda J, Grinde B. Real-time PCR methods for independent quantitation of TTV and TLMV. J Virol Methods. 2002;104(1):59–67. doi: 10.1016/s0166-0934(02)00039-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Kubar A, Saygun I, Ozdemir A, Yapar M, Slots J. Real-time polymerase chain reaction quantification of human cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus in periodontal pockets and the adjacent gingiva of periodontitis lesions. J Periodontal Res. 2005;40(2):97–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.2005.00770.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Papapanou PN, Sanz M, Buduneli N, Dietrich T, Feres M, Fine DH, et al. Periodontitis: consensus report of workgroup 2 of the 2017 world workshop on the classification of periodontal and Peri-implant diseases and conditions. J Periodontol. 2018;89:S173–S182. doi: 10.1002/JPER.17-0721. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Contreras A, Nowzari H, Slots J. Herpesviruses in periodontal pocket and gingival tissue specimens. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2000;15(1):15–18. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-302x.2000.150103.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Casarin RC, Duarte PM, Santos VR, Lima JA, Gagnon G, Casati MZ, et al. Influence of glycemic control on Epstein-Bar and cytomegalovirus infection in periodontal pocket of type 2 diabetic subjects. Arch Oral Biol. 2010;55(11):902–906. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2010.07.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Slots J. Focal infection of periodontal origin. Periodontol. 2019;79(1):233–235. doi: 10.1111/prd.12258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Srivastava AK, Shukla S, Srivastava P, Dhole TN, Nayak MT, Nayak A, et al. Real time detection and quantification of Epstein Barr virus in different grades of oral gingivitis and periodontitis patients. J Exp Ther Oncol. 2019;13(1):9–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Khosropanah H, Karandish M, Ziaeyan M, Jamalidoust M. Quantification of Epstein-Barr virus and human cytomegalovirus in chronic periodontal patients. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2015;8(6):e18691. doi: 10.5812/jjm.8(5)2015.18691. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Jankovic S, Aleksic Z, Dimitrijevic B, Lekovic V, Camargo P, Kenney B. Prevalence of human cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus in subgingival plaque at peri-implantitis, mucositis and healthy sites. A pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;40(3):271–276. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2010.11.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Lin YL, Li M. Human cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus inhibit oral bacteria-induced macrophage activation and phagocytosis. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2009;24(3):243–248. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-302X.2009.00504.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.A-A HW. Frequency of salivary human cytomegalovirus in Iraqi patients with chronic periodontitis. J Fac Med Baghdad. 2013;55:162–165. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Dawson DR, Wang C, Danaher RJ, Lin Y, Kryscio RJ, Jacob RJ, et al. Real-time polymerase chain reaction to determine the prevalence and copy number of epstein-barr virus and cytomegalovirus DNA in subgingival plaque at individual healthy and periodontal disease sites. J Periodontol. 2009;80(7):1133–1140. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.080644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Contreras A, Zadeh HH, Nowzari H, Slots J. Herpesvirus infection of inflammatory cells in human periodontitis. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1999;14(4):206–212. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-302x.1999.140402.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Johannessen AC, Nilsen R, Kristoffersen T, Knudsen GE. Variation in the composition of gingival inflammatory cell infiltrates. J Clin Periodontol. 1990;17(5):298–305. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1990.tb01093.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Sahin S, Saygun I, Kubar A, Slots J. Periodontitis lesions are the main source of salivary cytomegalovirus. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2009;24(4):340–342. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-302X.2009.00528.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Luo K, He H, Liu Z, Liu D, Xiao H, Jiang X, et al. Novel variants related to TT virus distributed widely in China. J Med Virol. 2002;67(1):118–126. doi: 10.1002/jmv.2200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Slots J, Slots H. Periodontal herpesvirus morbidity and treatment. Periodontol. 2019;79(1):210–220. doi: 10.1111/prd.12241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Jakovljevic A, Andric M, Miletic M, Beljic-Ivanovic K, Knezevic A, Mojsilovic S, et al. Epstein-Barr virus infection induces bone resorption in apical periodontitis via increased production of reactive oxygen species. Med Hypotheses. 2016;94:40–42. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2016.06.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Makino K, Takeichi O, Imai K, Inoue H, Hatori K, Himi K, et al. Porphyromonas endodontalis reactivates latent Epstein-Barr virus. Int Endod J. 2018;51(12):1410–1419. doi: 10.1111/iej.12959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Priyanka S, Kaarthikeyan G, Nadathur JD, Mohanraj A, Kavarthapu A. Detection of cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, and torque Teno virus in subgingival and atheromatous plaques of cardiac patients with chronic periodontitis. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2017;21(6):456–460. doi: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_205_17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Yokoyama H, Yasuda J, Okamoto H, Iwakura Y. Pathological changes of renal epithelial cells in mice transgenic for the TT virus ORF1 gene. J Gen Virol. 2002;83(Pt 1):141–150. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-83-1-141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Additional file 1: Table S1. Primer sequences and PCR conditions of herpesviruses and anelloviruses.Table S2. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of herpesviruses and anelloviruses presence in aggressive periodontitis and chronic periodontitis groups. Table S3. Detection rates of herpesviruses and anelloviruses by sex in periodontitis and healthy groups. Table S4. Association between TTV, TTMV, and TTMDV in periodontitis and healthy groups. Table S5. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of herpesviruses and anelloviruses presence in periodontitis and healthy groups. Table S6. Coexistence of herpesviruses and anelloviruses in periodontitis and healthy groups.
Data Availability Statement
The datasets during and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.