4.2 Article

Mouse models for infectious diseases caused by Staphylococcus aureus

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS
卷 410, 期 -, 页码 88-99

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2014.04.007

关键词

Animal model; Staphylococcus aureus; mouse

资金

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Infectious Diseases Branch [AI038897, AI052474, AI075258]
  2. Region V Great Lakes Regional Center of Excellence in Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases Consortium (NIH Award) [1-U54-AI-057153]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Staphylococcus aureus - a commensal of the human skin, nares and gastrointestinal tract - is also a leading cause of bacterial skin and soft tissue infection (SSTIs), bacteremia, sepsis, peritonitis, pneumonia and endocarditis. Antibiotic-resistant strains, designated MRSA (methicillin-resistant S. aureus), are common and represent a therapeutic challenge. Current research and development efforts seek to address the challenge of MRSA infections through vaccines and immune therapeutics. Mice have been used as experimental models for S. aureus SSTI, bacteremia, sepsis, peritonitis and endocarditis. This work led to the identification of key virulence factors, candidate vaccine antigens or immune-therapeutics that still require human clinical testing to establish efficacy. Past failures of human clinical trials raised skepticism whether the mouse is an appropriate model for S. aureus disease in humans. S. aureus causes chronic-persistent infections that, even with antibiotic or surgical intervention, reoccur in humans and in mice. Determinants of S. aureus evasion from human innate and adaptive immune responses have been identified, however only some of these are relevant in mice. Future research must integrate these insights and refine the experimental mouse models for specific S. aureus diseases to accurately predict the failure or success for candidate vaccines and immune-therapeutics. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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