4.7 Article

Regulatory T cell response correlates with the severity of human hantavirus infection

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
卷 68, 期 4, 页码 387-394

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2013.11.007

关键词

Hantavirus; T cell response; Regulatory T cell (Treg); Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS)

资金

  1. Helsinki Biomedical Graduate School
  2. Competitive Research Funding of the Tam-pere University Hospital
  3. Helsinki University Hospital
  4. Diagnosis and control of rodent-borne viral zoonoses in Europe [QLK2-CT-2002-01358]
  5. NIH [U19 AI57319]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Hantaviruses are an important group of emerging zoonotic pathogens, with significant mortality rates. Immunopathology is thought to be important in hantaviral disease, but the balance between protective and harmful responses is unknown. We studied Puumala hantavirus (PUUV) infection, which causes hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) with a generally mild but highly variable clinical course. Methods: Clinical data and blood samples were collected from 24 patients with acute PUUV infection, and analyzed by flow cytometry and quantitative PCR. Results: The patients had a significantly increased frequency of CD4 and CD8 cells expressing the cell cycle marker Ki-67, but the magnitude of the effector T cell response did not correlate with disease severity. The frequency of FOXP3(+) regulatory T (Treg) cells expressing Ki-67 was also increased, and likewise did not correlate with disease outcome. In contrast, the level of FOXP3 expression, a surrogate of the suppressive phenotype, had a strong positive correlation with disease severity. This correlation was also found in samples taken 6-12 months after the HFRS. Conclusions: The best predictor of a severe disease course in HFRS was the FOXP3(+) Treg cell response, suggesting that the role of Treg cells in acute human hantaviral infections may be deleterious. (c) 2013 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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