4.5 Review

The Interplay of Host Microbiota and Parasitic Protozoans at Mucosal Interfaces: Implications for the Outcomes of Infections and Diseases

期刊

PLOS NEGLECTED TROPICAL DISEASES
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004176

关键词

-

资金

  1. Health Research Council of New Zealand [HRC 11/314]
  2. Faculty Research Development Fund at University of Auckland, New Zealand

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infections by parasitic protozoans are largely neglected, despite threatening millions of people, particularly in developing countries. With descriptions of the microbiota in humans, a new frontier of investigation is developing to decipher the complexity of host-parasite-microbiota relationships, instead of the classic reductionist approach, which considers host-parasite in isolation. Here, we review with specific examples the potential roles that the resident microbiota can play at mucosal interfaces in the transmission of parasitic protozoans and in the progress of infection and disease. Although the mechanisms underlying these relationships remain poorly understood, some examples provide compelling evidence that specific components of the microbiota can potentially alter the outcomes of parasitic infections and diseases in humans. Most findings suggest a protective role of the microbiota, which might lead to exploratory research comprising microbiota-based interventions to prevent and treat protozoal infections in the future. However, these infections are often accompanied by an unbalanced microbiota and, in some specific cases, apparently, these bacteria may contribute synergistically to disease progression. Taken together, these findings provide a different perspective on the ecological nature of protozoal infections. This review focuses attention on the importance of considering polymicrobial associations, i. e., parasitic protozoans and the host microbiota, for understanding these human infections in their natural microbial context.

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

4.5
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