4.7 Article

Comparative sequence analysis of the core protein and its frameshift product, the F protein, of hepatitis C virus subtype 1b strains obtained from patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 40, 期 10, 页码 3625-3630

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.40.10.3625-3630.2002

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The core protein of hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been implicated in hepatocarcinogenesis. In order to determine whether there is a correlation between mutations of the core protein and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the core protein-coding sequence of the viral genome of HCV subtype 1b (HCV-1b) obtained from patients with and without HCC was analyzed. We found that 12 (40.0%) of 30 HCV-1b isolates from patients with HCC but none of 29 isolates from patients without HCC had a point mutation(s) in an N-terminal region of 20 residues. Similarly, 10 (33.3%) of 30 isolates from patients with HCC had mutations in a limited region between residues 141 and 160, whereas only 2 (6.9%) of 29 isolates from patients without HCC did. The differences between the two groups were statistically significant. The mutations were found in isolates from both cancerous and adjacent noncancerous tissues of patients with HCC, suggesting that the mutations were present before the development of HCC. The other regions of the core protein of some isolates also had mutations, but no significant difference was observed between isolates from patients with HCC and those from patients without HCC. The F protein, a frameshift product that is still hypothetical for HCV-1b strains, showed more sequence diversity than the core protein among the isolates analyzed, but there were no significant differences in the mutation rates or positions between isolates from patients with HCC and isolates from patients without HCC, except for a short N-terminal sequence of similar to11 residues that is shared with the core protein.

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