4.5 Article

Mice with type 1 diabetes exhibit increased susceptibility to influenza A virus

期刊

MICROBIAL PATHOGENESIS
卷 113, 期 -, 页码 233-241

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.micpath.2017.10.026

关键词

Influenza A virus; Pancreas; Susceptibility; Type 1 diabetes

资金

  1. National Twelve-five Technological Supported Plan of China [2015BAD12B01]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31572558]
  3. Beijing Nova Program [Z141105001814041]
  4. Chinese Universities Scientific Fund [2017DY003]
  5. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M602243]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a metabolic disease induced by abnormal insulin secretions from damaged islet B cells. Clinical observations have shown that T1D patients are more easily infected by influenza A virus (IAV) and suffer more serious symptoms than non-T1D patients. To investigate the susceptibility of T1D mice to IAV, a T1D mouse model was built by intraperitoneal injection of diluted streptozotocin (STZ) over 5 consecutive days, followed by infection with three subtypes of IAV (H1N1/H5N1/H7N2). The T1D-infected mice showed more serious clinical symptoms and lower survival rates than the non-T1D infected mice. The hematoxylin and eosin (H & E) staining results revealed an increase in serious pathological damage to the lung and pancreas in T1-Dinfected mice. Immunohistochemistry results indicated higher IAV loads and a more extensive distribution of positive signals in the lungs and pancreas of T1D-infected mice than in those of non-T1D infected mice. Furthermore, according to real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results, viral replication appeared to occur more easily in the lungs of T1D-infected mice. Thus, T1D-infected mice exhibited higher susceptibility to IAV than did normal mice. This study contributes a mouse model suitable for T1D research as well as valuable information about the mechanism underlying T1D patients' increased susceptibility to IAV.

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

4.5
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