| Literature DB >> 33529233 |
Sara C Johnston1, Keersten M Ricks2, Alexandra Jay3, Jo Lynne Raymond4, Franco Rossi3, Xiankun Zeng4, Jennifer Scruggs4, David Dyer3, Ondraya Frick3, Jeffrey W Koehler2, Paul A Kuehnert2, Tamara L Clements2, Charles J Shoemaker2, Susan R Coyne2, Korey L Delp2, Joshua Moore3, Kerry Berrier3, Heather Esham3, Joshua Shamblin3, Willie Sifford3, Jimmy Fiallos3, Leslie Klosterman3, Stephen Stevens3, Lauren White3, Philip Bowling3, Terrence Garcia3, Christopher Jensen3, Jeanean Ghering3, David Nyakiti3, Stephanie Bellanca3, Brian Kearney5, Wendy Giles3, Nazira Alli3, Fabian Paz3, Kristen Akers5, Denise Danner5, James Barth5, Joshua A Johnson5, Matthew Durant5, Ruth Kim5, Jay W Hooper1, Jeffrey M Smith1, Jeffrey R Kugelman6, Brett F Beitzel6, Kathleen M Gibson5, Margaret L M Pitt7, Timothy D Minogue2, Aysegul Nalca8.
Abstract
Airborne transmission is predicted to be a prevalent route of human exposure with SARS-CoV-2. Aside from African green monkeys, nonhuman primate models that replicate airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 have not been investigated. A comparative evaluation of COVID-19 in African green monkeys, rhesus macaques, and cynomolgus macaques following airborne exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was performed to determine critical disease parameters associated with disease progression, and establish correlations between primate and human COVID-19. Respiratory abnormalities and viral shedding were noted for all animals, indicating successful infection. Cynomolgus macaques developed fever, and thrombocytopenia was measured for African green monkeys and rhesus macaques. Type II pneumocyte hyperplasia and alveolar fibrosis were more frequently observed in lung tissue from cynomolgus macaques and African green monkeys. The data indicate that, in addition to African green monkeys, macaques can be successfully infected by airborne SARS-CoV-2, providing viable macaque natural transmission models for medical countermeasure evaluation.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33529233 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246366
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240