4.7 Article

Suspected Exposure to Filoviruses Among People Contacting Wildlife in Southwestern Uganda

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 218, 期 -, 页码 S277-S286

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiy251

关键词

Filovirus; Ebola virus; Marburg virus; zoonoses; bushmeat; wildlife; Uganda

资金

  1. William J. Fulbright Foundation
  2. US Agency for International Development (USAID) Emerging Pandemic Threats PREDICT project [GHNA-009-00010-00]
  3. Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Human and filovirus host interactions remain poorly understood in areas where Ebola hemorrhagic fever outbreaks are likely to occur. In the Bwindi region of Uganda, a hot spot of mammalian biodiversity in Africa, human livelihoods are intimately connected with wildlife, creating potential for exposure to filoviruses. Methods We tested samples from 331 febrile patients presenting to healthcare facilities near Bwindi Impenetrable Forest, Uganda, by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis and Western blot, using recombinant glycoprotein antigens for Ebola virus (EBOV), Sudan virus (SUDV), Bundibugyo virus (BDBV), and Marburg virus. Behavioral data on contact with wildlife were collected to examine risk factors for filovirus seropositivity. Results All patients were negative for active filovirus infection, by PCR analysis. However, patients were seroreactive to SUDV (4.7%), EBOV (5.3%), and BDBV (8.9%), indicating previous exposure. Touching duikers was the most significant risk factor associated with EBOV seropositivity, while hunting primates and touching and/or eating cane rats were significant risk factors for SUDV seropositivity. Conclusions People in southwestern Uganda have suspected previous exposure to filoviruses, particularly those with a history of wildlife contact. Circulation of filoviruses in wild animals and subsequent spillover into humans could be more common than previously reported.

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