4.8 Review

Pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and Mycobacterium tuberculosis Coinfection

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.909011

关键词

COVID-19; tuberculosis; coinfection; SARS-CoV-2-M; tuberculosis pathogenesis; BCG vaccination

资金

  1. major science and technology special project of Yunnan Province [2019ZF004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article examines the pathogenesis and impact of coinfection between COVID-19 and TB, highlighting the diagnostic challenges associated with this dual infection.
Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, is an infectious disease that poses severe threats to global public health and significant economic losses. The COVID-19 global burden is rapidly increasing, with over 246.53 million COVID-19 cases and 49.97 million deaths reported in the WHO 2021 report. People with compromised immunity, such as tuberculosis (TB) patients, are highly exposed to severe COVID-19. Both COVID-19 and TB diseases spread primarily through respiratory droplets from an infected person to a healthy person, which may cause pneumonia and cytokine storms, leading to severe respiratory disorders. The COVID-19-TB coinfection could be fatal, exacerbating the current COVID-19 pandemic apart from cellular immune deficiency, coagulation activation, myocardial infarction, and other organ dysfunction. This study aimed to assess the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2-Mycobacterium tuberculosis coinfections. We provide a brief overview of COVID19-TB coinfection and discuss SARS-CoV-2 host cellular receptors and pathogenesis. In addition, we discuss M. tuberculosis host cellular receptors and pathogenesis. Moreover, we highlight the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on TB patients and the pathological pathways that connect SARS-CoV-2 and M. tuberculosis infection. Further, we discuss the impact of BCG vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 cases coinfected with M. tuberculosis, as well as the diagnostic challenges associated with the coinfection.

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

4.8
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