4.7 Article

Effect of remdesivir post-exposure prophylaxis and treatment on pathogenesis of measles in rhesus macaques

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-33572-7

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Measles is a systemic disease caused by the measles virus (MeV) with initial infection in the respiratory tract. Despite its potential for significant mortality, there is no licensed antiviral therapy available. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of post-exposure prophylaxis and treatment with the broad-spectrum antiviral remdesivir using a well-characterized rhesus macaque model of measles.
Measles is a systemic disease initiated in the respiratory tract with widespread measles virus (MeV) infection of lymphoid tissue. Mortality can be substantial, but no licensed antiviral therapy is available. We evaluated both post-exposure prophylaxis and treatment with remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral, using a well-characterized rhesus macaque model of measles. Animals were treated with intravenous remdesivir for 12 days beginning either 3 days after intratracheal infection (post-exposure prophylaxis, PEP) or 11 days after infection at the onset of disease (late treatment, LT). As PEP, remdesivir lowered levels of viral RNA in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, but RNA rebounded at the end of the treatment period and infectious virus was continuously recoverable. MeV RNA was cleared more rapidly from lymphoid tissue, was variably detected in the respiratory tract, and not detected in urine. PEP did not improve clinical disease nor lymphopenia and reduced the antibody response to infection. In contrast, LT had little effect on levels of viral RNA or the antibody response but also did not decrease clinical disease. Therefore, remdesivir transiently suppressed expression of viral RNA and limited dissemination when provided as PEP, but virus was not cleared and resumed replication without improvement in the clinical disease parameters evaluated.

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