ライフサイエンスコーパス: intracellulare

1 genes essential for growth in Mycobacterium intracellulare.

2 induce killing of intracellular M. avium-M. intracellulare.

3 es, including M. smegmatis, M. avium, and M. intracellulare.

4 The third case was caused by Mycobacterium intracellulare.

5 nical relapse/reinfection than those with M. intracellulare.

6 bes), and 3 (7%) were M. avium; none were M. intracellulare.

7 cum and M. phocaicum, and M. chimaera and M. intracellulare.

8 confidence interval = 1.25 to 22.73) than M. intracellulare.

9 Most patients (77%) had M. intracellulare.

10 stigate the public health significance of M. intracellulare.

11 ly, 130 divergent ORFs were identified in M. intracellulare.

12 avium could invade more efficiently than M. intracellulare.

13 so observed in patients infected by M. avium-intracellulare.

14 isolates from HIV-negative patients were M. intracellulare.

15 pecies Micobacterium avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare.

16 within the 16S rRNA genes of M. avium and M. intracellulare.

17 echanism of host defense against M. avium-M. intracellulare.

18 ins genetically diverse from M. avium and M. intracellulare.

19 .82 degrees C (57.05 to 58.60 degrees C); M. intracellulare, 54.46 degrees C (53.69 to 55.23 degrees

20 ecies distribution, comprising 54 (81.8%) M. intracellulare, 6 (9.1%) M. avium, 5 (7.6%) M. colombien

21 wever, concentrations of Legionella spp., M. intracellulare, Acanthamoeba spp., and M. avium peaked d

22 A marked age trend for the isolation of M. intracellulare among women was noted: 0.27% (1-fold) for

23 , 2 Mycobacterium avium, and 2 Mycobacterium intracellulare] among pwCF.

24 Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare, an intracellular parasite of mononuclear

25 ing, 49 (90.7%) respiratory isolates were M. intracellulare and 4 (7.4%) were Mycobacterium chimaera.

26 has not been epidemiologically linked to M. intracellulare and appears to be unique to M. avium.

27 a sp., M. nonchromogenicum, M. monacense, M. intracellulare and M. avium subsp.

28 tinguish closely related species (such as M. intracellulare and M. chimaera).

29 larithromycin resistance were detected in M. intracellulare and M. colombiense.

30 Furthermore, transformants of Mycobacterium intracellulare and Mycobacterium bovis BCG carrying the

31 intracellulare and Mycobacterium intracellulare subsp.

32 a single isolate each of both Mycobacterium intracellulare and Mycobacterium smegmatis.

33 evaluate the interaction between M. avium-M. intracellulare and primary human monocytes.

34 cobacterium avium complex (MAC; M. avium, M. intracellulare, and "nonspecific or X" MAC) are emerging

35 s, 61% were M. avium, 37% were Mycobacterium intracellulare, and 2% were species nonspecific MAC.

36 ded patients, 54% were M. avium, 18% were M. intracellulare, and 28% were M. chimaera.

37 HD of M. nonchromogenicum, M. monacense, M. intracellulare, and M. avium subsp.

38 e Culture Confirmation kits for M. avium, M. intracellulare, and MAC species; Gen-Probe).

39 utation and included M. avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, and Mycobacterium chimaera.

40 % confidence interval [CI], 1.33-3.44) or M. intracellulare (AOR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.62-5.99) were more

41 Mycobacterium avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare are closely related organisms and compris

42 Of 5126 genes of M. intracellulare ATCC13950, 506 genes were identified as e

43 ulare complex, and all were identified as M. intracellulare by the PCR-RFLP analysis.

44 Although M. avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare can be identified with expensive, commerc

45 virus type 1-infected patients, M. avium-M. intracellulare can infect almost every tissue and organ.

46 tractive hybridization using M. avium and M. intracellulare chromosomal DNAs.

47 requent NTM species were Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare complex (83.2%), M. kansasii (7.7%), and

48 e identified as belonging to the M. avium-M. intracellulare complex (but not M. paratuberculosis), an

49 he rapid diagnosis of Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare complex (MAC) bacteremia in patients with

50 Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare complex (MAC) is one of the most common o

51 Mycobacterium simiae and Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare complex but which possesses a distinct my

52 te that the currently identified M. avium-M. intracellulare complex includes strains genetically dive

53 rate the diagnosis of Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare complex infections, an immunomagnetic PCR

54 nderstand the role of Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare complex isolates in human disease.

55 The 159 Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare complex isolates were further identified

56 al differentiation of Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare complex strains into M. avium and M. intr

57 26 M. tuberculosis complex, 9 M. avium, 3 M. intracellulare complex, 3 M. kansasii, 4 M. gordonae, an

58 t samples were LiPA positive for M. avium-M. intracellulare complex, and all were identified as M. in

59 rongyloides stercoralis, Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare complex, and Cryptosporidium), distal sma

60 ntiates M. tuberculosis complex, M. avium-M. intracellulare complex, and the following mycobacterial

61 ium tuberculosis complex and the M. avium-M. intracellulare complex, as well as rapid- and slow-growi

62 oupled to magnetic beads with an M. avium-M. intracellulare complex-specific PCR protocol based on 16

63 fied as mycobacteria outside the M. avium-M. intracellulare complex.

64 specimens containing Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare complex.

65 The clinical isolate of M. avium-M. intracellulare did not replicate in freshly explanted mo

66 ulosis than in patients with active M. avium-intracellulare disease or other nontuberculous pulmonary

67 fingerprinting of respiratory isolates of M. intracellulare from patients with underlying bronchiecta

68 trast, 41 of the 65 (63.1%) patients with M. intracellulare had probable to definite infection, a lev

69 determine if this is true for Mycobacterium intracellulare, household water sources for 36 patients

70 h of 10 clinical isolates of M. avium and M. intracellulare identified by conventional methods were a

71 , M triplex in 1 patient (5.3%), and M avium intracellulare in 1 patient (5.3%).

72 lated in 62 (0.83%) of 7,472 patients and M. intracellulare in 65 (0.87%).

73 gral adenylyl cyclase Cya from Mycobacterium intracellulare in a nucleotide-bound state.

74 cellulare was observed only when M. avium-M. intracellulare-infected cells were treated with 10 mM H2

75 h of intracellular mycobacteria, M. avium-M. intracellulare-infected human monocytes were treated wit

76 H2O2-induced apoptotic death of M. avium-M. intracellulare-infected monocytes and its association wi

77 nt study, a long-term culture of M. avium-M. intracellulare-infected monocytes was used to further ev

78 tracellulare isolates, VNTR distinguished M. intracellulare into 42 clonal groups.

79 ts suggest that, among non-AIDS patients, M. intracellulare is more pathogenic and tends to infect wo

80 tic analysis revealed a high diversity of M. intracellulare isolates and their evolutionary relations

81 ates did not contain IS1245 and 7% of the M. intracellulare isolates were found to carry IS1245.

82 ed to characterize 32 Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare isolates, 4 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolat

83 Starting with a collection of 167 M. intracellulare isolates, VNTR distinguished M. intracell

84 and patients, as well as eight Mycobacterium intracellulare isolates.

85 apy, seven of 13 patients with Mycobacterium intracellulare lung disease had an initial microbiologic

86 These results indicate that M. intracellulare lung disease in the United States is acqu

87 line shows potential for the treatment of M. intracellulare lung disease, but optimization of treatme

88 M-PD patients due to Mycobacterium avium, M. intracellulare, M. abscessus, or M. massiliense and thre

89 a sp., M. nonchromogenicum, M. monacense, M. intracellulare, M. avium subsp.

90 HD) of M. nonchromogenicum, M. monacense, M. intracellulare, M. avium subsp.

91 ollowing mycobacterial species: M. avium, M. intracellulare, M. kansasii, M. chelonae group, M. gordo

92 tuberculosis H37Rv (TBkatG) or Mycobacterium intracellulare (MACkatG) genes into M. tuberculosis H37R

93 Isolates of Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare (MAI) form multiple colony types named re

94 cin (CLARI) regimens for Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare (MAI) lung disease were evaluated.

95 Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare (MAI) pulmonary disease causes substantia

96 inhibitory effect on Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare (MAI) when blood collected and processed

97 llulare complex strains into M. avium and M. intracellulare may provide a tool to better understand t

98 IC assay against M. abscessus, Mycobacterium intracellulare, Mycobacterium smegmatis, and Mycobacteri

99 e (n = 57; 35.8%), and mixed M. avium and M. intracellulare (n = 2; 1.3%).

100 MycoID as being M. avium (n = 98; 61.1%), M. intracellulare (n = 57; 35.8%), and mixed M. avium and M

101 -PCR also generated DNA fingerprints from M. intracellulare (n = 8) and MAC(x) (n = 2) strains.

102 d more frequently from sterile sites than M. intracellulare (odds ratio, 4.6; P = 0.0092).

103 In our system, M. avium-M. intracellulare parasitized the human monocytes and appea

104 lulare were found to cross-react with the M. intracellulare probe in the assay.

105 gative with species-specific M. avium and M. intracellulare probes), and 3 (7%) were M. avium; none w

106 umophila, Mycobacterium avium, Mycobacterium intracellulare, Pseudmonas aeruginosa, or Acanthamoeba s

107 ynthesized: MAV and MIN, for M. avium and M. intracellulare, respectively, and MYCOB, for the slowly

108 oas abscess secondary to Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare, septic wrist, bacteremia, and septic tot

109 red in the distinct clades separated from M. intracellulare strains originating from other countries.

110 strains were mig positive, and all of the M. intracellulare strains were mig negative.

111 In addition, M. intracellulare subsp.

112 atients infected with species (Mycobacterium intracellulare subsp.

113 which could be divided into 2 subspecies: M. intracellulare subsp.

114 intracellulare and Mycobacterium intracellulare subsp.

115 sis presented clade-specific proteins for M. intracellulare, such as PE and PPE protein families.

116 de probes that specifically detect either M. intracellulare, the two M. avium subspecies associated w

117 We compared the abilities of M. avium and M. intracellulare to tolerate the acidic conditions of the

118 n of pretreatment and relapse isolates of M. intracellulare uncovered mutations in a previously uncha

119 ntified functions essential for growth of M. intracellulare under conditions relevant to the host env

120 induced apoptosis did not affect M. avium-M. intracellulare viability.

121 M. intracellulare was identified by nonsequencing methods i

122 M. intracellulare was more prevalent in women (1.33% of 3,3

123 duction in CFU) of intracellular M. avium-M. intracellulare was observed only when M. avium-M. intrac

124 One isolate of M. intracellulare was subsequently found to have been misla

125 Mycobacterium intracellulare was the most frequently recovered genotyp

126 nce of Mycobacterium avium and Mycobacterium intracellulare were analyzed in a cohort of 7,472 patien

127 We observed that M. avium and M. intracellulare were both tolerant to the acidic conditio

128 Genotypes of M. intracellulare were confirmed by internal transcribed sp

129 However, when strains of M. avium and M. intracellulare were examined for their ability to enter

130 a clinical isolate of Mycobacterium avium-M. intracellulare were examined.

131 Three MAC strains other than M. intracellulare were found to cross-react with the M. int

132 at were present in M. avium but absent in M. intracellulare were identified, including some that may

133 cterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare, were compared before and after vaccinati