4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Molecular and bioinformatic evidence of hepatitis C virus evolution in brain

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 197, 期 4, 页码 597-607

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/526519

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01-RR-00071, M01 RR000071] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDA NIH HHS [R01 DA016156-05, R01 DA016156, DA016156] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK066939, R01 DK066939-05, DK066939] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIMH NIH HHS [U24 MH100931, R24MH59724, U01 MH083501-01, U01 MH083545, U01 MH083501, R24 MH059724, R24 MH059724-10] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Neurocognitive deficits in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection prompted a search for HCV in brain. Results. HCV was present in the brains of 7 (54%) of 13 patients with viremia, as determined by 5' UTR and E1 (envelope 1) gene analysis. Brain HCV RNA consensus sequences differed from those in plasma and liver in 4 (57%) of 7 patients. The quality of HCV RNA from postmortem brain and liver was assessed and demonstrated to be suitable for sequence analysis. Quasispecies analysis revealed that several mutations present in clones from >1 brain region were absent in clones from liver and plasma. Brain-specific mutations defined several families of related sequences. The patterns of brain-specific mutations in these families were consistent with the evolution of HCV RNA from a common ancestor. Single-nucleotide-polymorphism analysis confirmed that a prominent brain-specific mutation constituted similar to 10% of HCV RNA in cerebellum and medulla but that this mutation was undetectable in the liver and plasma of the same patient. Conclusions. This study introduces novel methods for assessing RNA from postmortem samples. It increases the reported cases of HCV in the brain, provides the first E1 sequences from the brain, and contributes to the growing evidence that HCV replicates and evolves within the brain.

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