4.7 Article

Human Bocavirus Capsid Messenger RNA Detection in Children With Pneumonia

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 216, 期 6, 页码 688-696

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jix352

关键词

Human bocavirus; pneumonia; asymptomatic shedding; mRNA, detection

资金

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [1KL2TR001065, UL1TR001067]
  2. Primary Children's Hospital Foundation
  3. ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [U181P00030]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. The role of human bocavirus (HBoV) in respiratory illness is uncertain. HBoV genomic DNA is frequently detected in both ill and healthy children. We hypothesized that spliced viral capsid messenger RNA (mRNA) produced during active replication might be a better marker for acute infection. Methods. As part of the Etiology of Pneumonia in the Community (EPIC) study, children aged <18 years who were hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and children asymptomatic at the time of elective outpatient surgery (controls) were enrolled. Nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal specimens were tested for HBoV mRNA and genomic DNA by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Results. HBoV DNA was detected in 10.4% of 1295 patients with CAP and 7.5% of 721 controls (odds ratio [OR], 1.4 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.0-2.0]); HBoV mRNA was detected in 2.1% and 0.4%, respectively (OR, 5.1 [95% CI, 1.6-26]). When adjusted for age, enrollment month, and detection of other respiratory viruses, HBoV mRNA detection (adjusted OR, 7.6 [95% CI, 1.5-38.4]) but not DNA (adjusted OR, 1.2 [95% CI, .6-2.4]) was associated with CAP. Among children with no other pathogens detected, HBoV mRNA (OR, 9.6 [95% CI, 1.9-82]) was strongly associated with CAP. Conclusions. Detection of HBoV mRNA but not DNA was associated with CAP, supporting a pathogenic role for HBoV in CAP. HBoV mRNA could be a useful target for diagnostic testing.

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