4.7 Article

Outbreak of Infections by Hepatitis B Virus Genotype A and Transmission of Genetic Drug Resistance in Patients Coinfected with HIV-1 in Japan

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 1017-1024

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02149-10

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare of Japan [H19-AIDS-007, H21-AIDS-005, H22-AIDS-004]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22790962, 21590525] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The major routes of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in Japan has been mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) and blood transfusion. However, HBV cases transmitted through sexual contact are increasing, especially among HIV-1-seropositive patients. To understand the molecular epidemiology of HBV in HBV/HIV-1 coinfection, we analyzed HBV genotypes and HIV-1 subtypes in HBV/HIV-1-coinfected patients at Nagoya Medical Center from 2003 to 2007. Among 394 HIV-1-infected Japanese men having sex with men (MSM) who were newly diagnosed during the study period, 31 (7.9%) tested positive for the hepatitis B virus surface antigen. HBV sequence analyses were successful in 26 cases, with 21 (80.7%) and 5 (19.3%) cases determined as genotypes A and C, respectively. Our finding that HBV genotype A was dominant in HIV-1-seropositive patients alerts clinicians to an alternative outbreak of HBV genotype A in the HIV-1-infected MSM population and a shift in HBV genotype from C to A in Japan. The narrow genetic diversity in genotype A cases suggests that genotype A has been recently introduced into the MSM population and that sexual contacts among MSM were more active than speculated from HIV-1 tree analyses. In addition, we found a lamivudine resistance mutation in one naive case, suggesting a risk of drug-resistant HBV transmission. As genotype A infection has a higher risk than infection with other genotypes for individuals to become HBV carriers, prevention programs are urgently needed for the target population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据