4.1 Article

Virulence Genes of Helicobacter pylori in Gastritis, Peptic Ulcer and Gastric Cancer in Laos

期刊

ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION
卷 15, 期 20, 页码 9027-9031

出版社

ASIAN PACIFIC ORGANIZATION CANCER PREVENTION
DOI: 10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.20.9027

关键词

Helicobacter pylori; cagA gene; vacA gene; Laos

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is an established cause of peptic ulcers and gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to identify H. pylori genotypes and to examine their associations with geographical regions and gastritis, peptic ulcers and gastric cancer in Laos. Materials and Methods: A total of 329 Lao dyspeptic patients who underwent gastroscopy at Mahosot Hospital, Vientiane, Laos during December 2010 - March 2012 were enrolled. Two biopsy specimens (one each from the antrum and corpus) were obtained for CLO testing and only CLO test-positive gastric tissue were used to extract DNA. PCR and sequencing were identified for variants of the cagA and vacA genotypes. Results: Some 119 Laos patients (36.2%) were found to be infected with H. pylori including 83 with gastritis, 13 with gastric ulcers (GU), 20 with duodenal ulcers (DU) and 3 with gastric cancer. cagA was detected in 99.2%. East-Asian-type cagA (62%) and vacA s1c (64.7%) were predominant genotypes in Laos. vacA s1c-m1b was significantly higher in GU than gastritis (53.8% vs. 24.1%; P-value=0.04) whereas vacA s1a-m2 was significantly higher in DU than gastritis (40.0% vs. 16.9%; P-value=0.03). East-Asian-type cagA and vacA s1c were significantly higher in highland than lowland Lao (100% vs. 55.8%; P-value=0.001 and 88.2% vs. 61.5%, P-value=0.03 respectively). Conclusions: H. pylori is a common infection in Laos, as in other countries in Southeast Asia. The cagA gene was demonstrated in nearly all Laos patients, cagA and vacA genotypes being possible important factors in explaining H. pylori infection and disease outcomes in Laos.

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

4.1
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