4.7 Article

Seroprevalence and molecular diversity of Human Herpesvirus 8 among people living with HIV in Brazzaville, Congo

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-97070-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Agence Nationale de Recherche sur le SIDA Maladies Infectieuses Emergentes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the seroprevalence and diversity of HHV-8 among people living with HIV in Congo, with a seroprevalence of 19%. Male gender and having multiple sex partners before HIV diagnosis were associated with HHV-8 seropositivity. HHV-8 DNA was detected in saliva and whole-blood with a predominance of subtype A5, supporting the hypothesis of horizontal transmission in this population.
Human herpesvirus 8 (HHV8) is endemic in Africa, although studies of this infection are rare in Congo. We evaluated seroprevalence and HHV-8 diversity among people living with HIV. We included 353 patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy. Antibodies against HHV-8 latency-associated nuclear antigen were detected by indirect immunofluorescence. In HHV-8 positive patients, we performed HHV-8 quantification in blood and saliva by real-time PCR and typing by Sanger sequencing of K1 open reading frame. HHV-8 seroprevalence was 19%, being male (odd ratio [OR] = 1.741, [95% Confidence interval {CI}, 0.97-3.07]; p = 0.0581) and having multiple sex partners before HIV diagnosis (OR = 1.682, [CI 95%, 0.97-2.92]; p = 0.0629) tended to be associated with HHV-8 seropositivity. Of the 64 HHV-8 seropositive patients, HHV-8 DNA was detected in 10 (16%) in saliva, 6 (9%) in whole-blood and in 2 (3%) in both whole-blood and saliva. Three out of 6 HHV-8 strains were subtypes A5, 2 subtype B1 and 1 subtype C. HHV-8 seroprevalence was relatively low with more frequent carriage in men, associated with asymptomatic oral excretion and a predominance of subtype A5. These data tend to support the hypothesis of horizontal transmission in people living with HIV in Brazzaville.

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