4.6 Article

Co-circulation of coxsackieviruses A6 and A10 in hand, foot and mouth disease outbreak in Finland

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL VIROLOGY
Volume 48, Issue 1, Pages 49-54

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2010.02.002

Keywords

Enterovirus; Coxsackievirus; CV-A6; CV-A10; Hand, foot and mouth disease; Onychomadesis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: A nationwide outbreak of hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD) occurred in Finland in autumn 2008. The outbreak was untypical since a considerable number of clinically diagnosed patients were adults. Furthermore, many of the patients suffered from onychomadesis several weeks after the acute phase of HFMD. Objectives: Detection, identification and phylogenetic analysis of human enteroviruses (HEV) that caused the outbreak. Study design: A total of 420 clinical specimens were obtained from 317 HFMD cases all over the country. The presence of HEV in the specimens was analysed by virus isolation and/or direct real-time RT-PCR; selected HEV strains were further typed by molecular methods. The genetic similarities of HEV strains were assessed by phylogenetic analyses on partial VP1 sequences. Results: HEV were detected in 212 HFMD cases, including both children and adults, throughout Finland. Two HEV types, coxsackieviruses A6 (CV-A6) and A10 (CV-A10), were identified as the causative agents of the outbreak. One genetic variant of CV-A6 predominated, but, additionally, three other genetically distinct CV-A6 strains were found. All CV-A10 strains segregated into one genetic cluster distinct from previously reported CV-A10 sequences. Conclusions: The Finnish 2008 HFMD outbreak was caused by two infrequently detected, co-circulating, coxsackie A viruses. Our data suggest endemic circulation of both CV-A types in Northern Europe and that the outbreak was due to the emergence of new genetic variants of these viruses. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available