4.7 Article

USC-087 protects Syrian hamsters against lethal challenge with human species C adenoviruses

期刊

ANTIVIRAL RESEARCH
卷 153, 期 -, 页码 1-9

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2018.03.001

关键词

-

资金

  1. Federal funds from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services [HHSB272201000021I, HHSN272201100022I, HHSN272201100016I, R44AI100401]
  2. USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human adenoviruses (AdV) cause generally mild infections of the respiratory and GI tracts as well as some other tissues. However, AdV can cause serious infection in severely immunosuppressed individuals, especially pediatric patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, where mortality rates are up to 80% with disseminated disease. Despite the seriousness of AdV disease, there are no drugs approved specifically to treat AdV infections. We report here that USC-087, an N-alkyl tyrosinamide phosphonate ester prodrug of HPMPA, the adenine analog of cidofovir, is highly effective against multiple AdV types in cell culture. USC-087 is also effective against AdV-C6 in our immunosuppressed permissive Syrian hamster model. In this model, hamsters are immunosuppressed by treatment with high dose cyclophosphamide. Injection of AdV-C6 (or AdV-C5) intravenously leads to a disseminated infection that resembles the disease seen in humans, including death. We have tested the efficacy of orally-administered USC-087 against the median lethal dose of intravenously administered AdV-C6. USC-087 completely prevented or significantly decreased mortality when administered up to 4 days post challenge. USC-087 also prevented or significantly decreased liver damage caused by AdV-C6 infection, and suppressed virus replication even when administered 4 days post challenge. These results imply that USC-087 is a promising candidate for drug development against HAdV infections.

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