4.7 Article

Nasal microbiome research in ANCA-associated vasculitis: Strengths, limitations, and future directions

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2020.12.031

关键词

GPA; Vasculitis; ANCA; Staphylococcus aureus; Microbiome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The human nasal microbiome exhibits biodiversity and changes in GPA patients. Studies have shown that the nasal microbiome of GPA patients differs from controls, but results vary between studies. Standardizing patient selection, sample preparation, and analytical methodology is crucial for improving comparability.
The human nasal microbiome is characterized by biodiversity and undergoes changes during the span of life. In granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), the persistent nasal colonization by Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) assessed by culture-based detection methods has been associated with increased relapse frequency. Different research groups have characterized the nasal microbiome in patients with GPA and found that patients have a distinct nasal microbiome compared to controls, but the reported results between studies differed. In order to increase comparability, there is a need to standardize patient selection, sample preparation, and analytical methodology; particularly as low biomass samples like those obtained by nasal swabbing are impacted by reagent contamination. Optimization in obtaining a sample and processing with the inclusion of critical controls is needed for consistent comparative studies. Ongoing studies will analyze the nasal microbiome in GPA in a longitudinal way and the results will inform whether or not targeted antimicrobial management in a clinical trial should be pursued or not. This review focuses on the proposed role of S. aureus in GPA, the (healthy) nasal microbiome, findings in the first pilot studies in GPA, and will discuss future strategies. Crown Copyright (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Research Network of Computational and Structural Biotechnology.

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