4.7 Article

Streptococcus pneumoniae exposure is associated with human metapneumovirus seroconversion and increased susceptibility to in vitro HMPV infection

期刊

CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 17, 期 12, 页码 1840-1844

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03480.x

关键词

Bacterial and viral interaction; human metapneumovirus (HMPV); pathogenesis; respiratory infection; Streptococcus pneumoniae

资金

  1. Erasmus MC, Rotterdam
  2. Erasmus University Rotterdam
  3. Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw)
  4. VIRGO consortium
  5. Dutch Government [BSIK03012]
  6. TI-Pharma [T4-214]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It remains largely unknown which factors determine the clinical outcome of human metapneumovirus (HMPV) infections. The aim of the present study was to analyse whether exposure to bacterial pathogens can influence HMPV infections. From 57 children, serum samples and colonization data for Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae were collected at 1.5, 6, 14 and 24 months of age. Seroconversion rates to HMPV were determined and related to bacterial carriage. Frequent nasopharyngeal carriage (=2 times in the first 2 years of life) of S. pneumoniae, but not of the other three pathogens, was associated with increased seroconversion rates of infants to HMPV at the age of 2 years (frequently vs. less exposed, 93% vs. 59%; p <0.05). Subsequently, the susceptibility of well-differentiated normal human bronchial epithelial cells (wd-NHBE) pre-incubated with bacterial pathogens to in vitro HMPV infection was evaluated. Pre-incubation of wd-NHBE with S. pneumoniae resulted in increased susceptibility to infection with HMPV-enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP), as determined by enumeration of EGFP-positive cells. This was not the case for cells pre-incubated with H. influenzae, M. catarrhalis on S. aureus. We conclude that exposure to S. pneumoniae can modulate HMPV infection.

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