4.7 Article

Location of persisting mycobacteria in a guinea pig model of tuberculosis revealed by R207910

Journal

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 51, Issue 9, Pages 3338-3345

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00276-07

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [U01 AI070456, AI070456, R01 AI054697, N01AI95385, AI054697, N01 AI95385] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The lengthy chemotherapy of tuberculosis reflects the ability of a small subpopulation of Mycobarterium tuberculosis bacteria to persist in infected individuals. To date, the exact location of these persisting bacteria is not known. Lung lesions in guinea pigs infected with M. tuberculosis have striking similarities, such as necrosis, mineralization, and hypoxia, to natural infections in humans. Guinea pigs develop necrotic primary lesions after aerosol infection that differ in their morphology compared to secondary lesions resulting from hematogenous dissemination. In infected guinea pigs conventional therapy for tuberculosis during 6 weeks reduced the bacterial load by 1.7 logs in the lungs and, although this completely reversed lung inflammation associated with secondary lesions, the primary granulomas remained largely unaffected. Treatment of animals with the experimental drug R207910 (TMC207) for 6 weeks was highly effective with almost complete eradication of the bacteria throughout both the primary and the secondary lesions. Most importantly, the few remnants of acid-fast bacilli remaining after R207910 treatment were to be found extracellular, in a microenvironment of residual primary lesion necrosis with incomplete dystrophic calcification. This zone of the primary granuloma is hypoxic and is morphologically similar to what has been described for human lung lesions. These results show that this acellular rim may, therefore, be a primary location of persisting bacilli withstanding drug treatment.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available