Literature DB >> 27878462

Enterovirus A71 and coxsackievirus A16 show different replication kinetics in human neuronal and non-neuronal cell lines.

Thinesshwary Yogarajah1, Kien Chai Ong2, David Perera3, Kum Thong Wong4.   

Abstract

Enterovirus A71 (EV-A71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CV-A16) are closely related enteroviruses that cause hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD) in children. Serious neurological complications almost always occur in EV-A71 infection, but are rare in CV-A16 infection. Based on the hypothesis that this may be because EV-A71 infects neuronal cells more easily than CV-A16, we compared virus infection, replication and spread of EV-A71 and CV-A16 in SK-N-SH cells. We found that CV-A16 invariably showed significantly lower replication and caused less necrotic cell death in SK-N-SH cells, compared with EV-A71. This was not due to a lower proportion of CV-A16-infected cells, since both viruses showed similar proportions of infected cells at all time points analyzed. Furthermore, reduced replication of CV-A16 in SK-N-SH cells does not appear to be due to limited viral receptor availability, which might limit viral entry, because experiments with viral RNA-transfected cells showed the same results as for live virus infections. On the other hand, no differences were observed between EV-A71 and CV-A16 in RD cells and results were generally similar in RD cells for both viruses. Taken together, our findings suggest that the poor growth of CV-A16 and EV-A71in SK-N-SH cells, compared with RD cells, may be due to cell type-specific restrictions on viral replication and spread. Furthermore, the lower viral replication and necrotic cell death in CV-A16-infected SK-N-SH cells, compared with EV-A71-infected SK-N-SH cells, is consistent with the lower prevalence of neurotropism observed in CV-A16-associated HFMD outbreaks. Nonetheless, in vivo data and more extensive comparisons of different viral strains are essential to confirm our findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27878462     DOI: 10.1007/s00705-016-3157-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Virol        ISSN: 0304-8608            Impact factor:   2.574


  5 in total

1.  RSAD2 and AIM2 Modulate Coxsackievirus A16 and Enterovirus A71 Replication in Neuronal Cells in Different Ways That May Be Associated with Their 5' Nontranslated Regions.

Authors:  Thinesshwary Yogarajah; Kien Chai Ong; David Perera; Kum Thong Wong
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 5.103

2.  AIM2 Inflammasome-Mediated Pyroptosis in Enterovirus A71-Infected Neuronal Cells Restricts Viral Replication.

Authors:  Thinesshwary Yogarajah; Kien Chai Ong; David Perera; Kum Thong Wong
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Mediated Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Induced-Neurotoxicity via Epigenetics Regulation in SK-N-SH Cells.

Authors:  Xin-Xin Guo; Qing-Zhi He; Wu Li; Ding-Xin Long; Xiao-Yuan Pan; Cong Chen; Huai-Cai Zeng
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  Contemporary Circulating Enterovirus D68 Strains Have Acquired the Capacity for Viral Entry and Replication in Human Neuronal Cells.

Authors:  David M Brown; Alison M Hixon; Lauren M Oldfield; Yun Zhang; Mark Novotny; Wei Wang; Suman R Das; Reed S Shabman; Kenneth L Tyler; Richard H Scheuermann
Journal:  mBio       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 7.867

Review 5.  Molecular Pathogenicity of Enteroviruses Causing Neurological Disease.

Authors:  Anna Majer; Alan McGreevy; Timothy F Booth
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 5.640

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.