4.7 Article

Hepatitis D virus-specific cytokine responses in patients with chronic hepatitis delta before and during interferon alfa-treatment

期刊

LIVER INTERNATIONAL
卷 31, 期 9, 页码 1395-1405

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2011.02593.x

关键词

cellular immune responses; Delta hepatitis; HDV; IFN alpha treatment; Interferon-alfa-2a; IP-10

资金

  1. Hep-Net Study House of the German Competence Network on Hepatitis
  2. Hep-Net Project [10.2.2]
  3. HIDIT-1 study group
  4. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research Network [01KI0788]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Hepatitis delta is caused by infection with the hepatitis D virus (HDV) and is considered the most severe form of viral hepatitis. Treatment options for hepatitis delta are limited, with only 25% of patients responding to interferon (IFN)-alfa-based therapies. The role of the adaptive immune system in controlling HDV infection during spontaneous or treatment-induced viral clearance is not well understood. Methods: We studied HDV-specific cytokine production of peripheral blood mononuclear cells stimulated with HDV peptide pools as well as serum cytokine levels in well-characterized patients with chronic HDV infection before and during pegylated-interferonalfa +/- adefovir therapy. Results: Hepatitis D virus-specific interleukin (IL)-2, IFN-gamma-, interferon-inducible protein-10 and IL-10-responses were detectable in 53%, 35%, 65% and 6% of hepatitis delta patients. HDV-specific IFN-gamma responses tended to be more common in patients with low HDV viral loads. HDV-specific cytokine responses declined during pegylated (PEG)-IFNa therapy and patterns of changes were associated with the treatment response. Serum cytokine levels also showed distinct changes during PEG-IFNa treatment. Conclusion: We suggest that cellular HDV-specific immune responses contribute to the control of HDV infection and that cytokine responses may indicate response to type-I-IFN-based antiviral therapy of hepatitis delta.

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