Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Huang,L.
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Liu,X., Li,J.L., Chang,J.L., Liu,G.C., Yu,X.F., Zhang,W.Y.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000500420
Resumo: An enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccine for the prevention of hand, foot, and mouth disease (HMFD) is available, but it is not known whether the EV71 vaccine cross-protects against Coxsackievirus (CV) infection. Furthermore, although an inactivated circulating CVA16 Changchun 024 (CC024) strain vaccine candidate is effective in newborn mice, the CC024 strain causes severe lesions in muscle and lung tissues. Therefore, an effective CV vaccine with improved pathogenic safety is needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vivo safety and in vitro replication capability of a noncirculating CVA16 SHZH05 strain. The replication capacity of circulating CVA16 strains CC024, CC045, CC090 and CC163 and the noncirculating SHZH05 strain was evaluated by cytopathic effect in different cell lines. The replication capacity and pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains were also evaluated in a neonatal mouse model. Histopathological and viral load analyses demonstrated that the SHZH05 strain had an in vitro replication capacity comparable to the four CC strains. The CC024, but not the SHZH05 strain, became distributed in a variety of tissues and caused severe lesions and mortality in neonatal mice. The differences in replication capacity and in vivo pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains may result from differences in the nucleotide and amino acid sequences of viral functional polyproteins P1, P2 and P3. Our findings suggest that the noncirculating SHZH05 strain may be a safer CV vaccine candidate than the CC024 strain.
id ABDC-1_d3c8cde2347a04c37a33ccdddbceee9d
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0100-879X2015000500420
network_acronym_str ABDC-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
repository_id_str
spelling Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse modelCoxsackievirus A16PathogenicityCirculating strainNon-circulating strainAn enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccine for the prevention of hand, foot, and mouth disease (HMFD) is available, but it is not known whether the EV71 vaccine cross-protects against Coxsackievirus (CV) infection. Furthermore, although an inactivated circulating CVA16 Changchun 024 (CC024) strain vaccine candidate is effective in newborn mice, the CC024 strain causes severe lesions in muscle and lung tissues. Therefore, an effective CV vaccine with improved pathogenic safety is needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vivo safety and in vitro replication capability of a noncirculating CVA16 SHZH05 strain. The replication capacity of circulating CVA16 strains CC024, CC045, CC090 and CC163 and the noncirculating SHZH05 strain was evaluated by cytopathic effect in different cell lines. The replication capacity and pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains were also evaluated in a neonatal mouse model. Histopathological and viral load analyses demonstrated that the SHZH05 strain had an in vitro replication capacity comparable to the four CC strains. The CC024, but not the SHZH05 strain, became distributed in a variety of tissues and caused severe lesions and mortality in neonatal mice. The differences in replication capacity and in vivo pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains may result from differences in the nucleotide and amino acid sequences of viral functional polyproteins P1, P2 and P3. Our findings suggest that the noncirculating SHZH05 strain may be a safer CV vaccine candidate than the CC024 strain.Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica2015-05-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000500420Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research v.48 n.5 2015reponame:Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Researchinstname:Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica (ABDC)instacron:ABDC10.1590/1414-431x20144298info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessHuang,L.Liu,X.Li,J.L.Chang,J.L.Liu,G.C.Yu,X.F.Zhang,W.Y.eng2019-03-19T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0100-879X2015000500420Revistahttps://www.bjournal.org/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbjournal@terra.com.br||bjournal@terra.com.br1414-431X0100-879Xopendoar:2019-03-19T00:00Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research - Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica (ABDC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
title Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
spellingShingle Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
Huang,L.
Coxsackievirus A16
Pathogenicity
Circulating strain
Non-circulating strain
title_short Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
title_full Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
title_fullStr Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
title_full_unstemmed Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
title_sort Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model
author Huang,L.
author_facet Huang,L.
Liu,X.
Li,J.L.
Chang,J.L.
Liu,G.C.
Yu,X.F.
Zhang,W.Y.
author_role author
author2 Liu,X.
Li,J.L.
Chang,J.L.
Liu,G.C.
Yu,X.F.
Zhang,W.Y.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Huang,L.
Liu,X.
Li,J.L.
Chang,J.L.
Liu,G.C.
Yu,X.F.
Zhang,W.Y.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Coxsackievirus A16
Pathogenicity
Circulating strain
Non-circulating strain
topic Coxsackievirus A16
Pathogenicity
Circulating strain
Non-circulating strain
description An enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccine for the prevention of hand, foot, and mouth disease (HMFD) is available, but it is not known whether the EV71 vaccine cross-protects against Coxsackievirus (CV) infection. Furthermore, although an inactivated circulating CVA16 Changchun 024 (CC024) strain vaccine candidate is effective in newborn mice, the CC024 strain causes severe lesions in muscle and lung tissues. Therefore, an effective CV vaccine with improved pathogenic safety is needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vivo safety and in vitro replication capability of a noncirculating CVA16 SHZH05 strain. The replication capacity of circulating CVA16 strains CC024, CC045, CC090 and CC163 and the noncirculating SHZH05 strain was evaluated by cytopathic effect in different cell lines. The replication capacity and pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains were also evaluated in a neonatal mouse model. Histopathological and viral load analyses demonstrated that the SHZH05 strain had an in vitro replication capacity comparable to the four CC strains. The CC024, but not the SHZH05 strain, became distributed in a variety of tissues and caused severe lesions and mortality in neonatal mice. The differences in replication capacity and in vivo pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains may result from differences in the nucleotide and amino acid sequences of viral functional polyproteins P1, P2 and P3. Our findings suggest that the noncirculating SHZH05 strain may be a safer CV vaccine candidate than the CC024 strain.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-05-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000500420
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2015000500420
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1414-431x20144298
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research v.48 n.5 2015
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
instname:Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica (ABDC)
instacron:ABDC
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica (ABDC)
instacron_str ABDC
institution ABDC
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
collection Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research - Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica (ABDC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bjournal@terra.com.br||bjournal@terra.com.br
_version_ 1754302944530923520