4.2 Article

Genome-free hepatitis B virion levels in patient sera as a potential marker to monitor response to antiviral therapy

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIRAL HEPATITIS
卷 22, 期 6, 页码 561-570

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jvh.12361

关键词

cccDNA; empty hepatitis B virion; hepatitis B core antigen; hepatitis B e antigen; nucleotide analog

资金

  1. Public Health Service grant from the National Institutes of Health [R01 AI074982]
  2. Gilead Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Complete virions of hepatitis B virus (HBV) contain a DNA genome that is enclosed in a capsid composed of the HBV core antigen (HBcAg), which is in turn surrounded by a lipid envelope studded with viral surface antigens (HBsAg). In addition, HBV-infected cells release subviral particles composed of HBsAg only (HBsAg 'spheres' and 'filaments') or HBsAg enveloping HBcAg but devoid of viral DNA ('empty virions'). The hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg), a soluble antigen related to HBcAg, is also secreted in some HBV-infected patients. The goals of this study were to explore the levels of empty virions in HBV-infected patients before and during therapy with the nucleotide analog tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) that inhibits HBV DNA synthesis and the relationships of empty virions to complete virions, HBsAg and HBeAg. HBV DNA, HBcAg and HBsAg levels were determined in serum samples from 21 patients chronically infected with HBV and enrolled in clinical TDF studies. Serum levels of empty virions were found to exceed levels of DNA-containing virions, often by >= 100-fold. Levels of both empty and complete virions varied and were related to the HBeAg status. When HBV DNA replication was suppressed by TDF, empty virion levels remained unchanged in most but were decreased (to the limit of detection) in some patients who also experienced significant decrease or loss of serum HBsAg. In conclusion, empty virions are present in the serum of chronic hepatitis B patients at high levels and may be useful in monitoring response to antiviral therapy.

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