4.7 Article

Identification of hepatitis C virus (HCV) subtype 1b strains that are highly, or only weakly, associated with hepatocellular carcinoma on the basis of the secondary structure of an amino-terminal portion of the HCVNS3 protein

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 41, 期 7, 页码 2835-2841

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.7.2835-2841.2003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The NS3 protein of hepatitis C virus subtype 1b (HCV-1b) isolates obtained from 89 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 78 patients without HCC were analyzed. On the basis of the secondary structure of the amino-terminal 120 residues of NS3, HCV-1b isolates were classified into group A, group B, and an indeterminate group, each of which was further divided into a number of subgroups, such as A1-1, A1-2, A2-1, A2-2, B1-1, B1-2, B2-1, B2-2, C-1, C-2, and C-3. HCV-1b isolates of subgroup B1-1 were found in 53 (59.6%) of 89 patients with HCC and 19 (24.4%) of 78 patients without HCC, with the difference between the two patient groups being statistically significant (P < 0.00001). Although the number of isolates was small, subgroup B2-1 was also highly associated with HCC, with all five isolates in that subgroup being found in patients with HCC (P < 0.05). On the other hand, HCV-1b isolates of subgroup A1-1 were associated only weakly with HCC; they were found in 6 (6.7%) of 89 patients with HCC and in 25 (32.1%) of 78 patients without HCC, with the difference between the two patient groups being statistically significant (P < 0.0001). The other subgroups, such as A1-2, A2-1, B1-2, C-1, C-2, and C-3, were moderately associated with HCC; their distribution patterns among patients with HCC did not differ significantly from those among patients without HCC. Taken together, our results suggest that HCV-1b isolates of subgroups B1-1 and B2-1 are highly associated with HCC and that this secondary structure analysis may be useful for predicting the relative risk of developing HCC.

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