ライフサイエンスコーパス: superinfection

1 es to the initial infection may protect from superinfection.

2 em represents a major barrier to intrastrain superinfection.

3 viduals at the time of and shortly following superinfection.

4 ollected from 7 individuals with evidence of superinfection.

5 gous viruses were evaluated before and after superinfection.

6 when associated with Streptococcus pyogenes superinfection.

7 accinate (NNV) to prevent mortality from HAV superinfection.

8 ssment in models of Streptococcus pneumoniae superinfection.

9 mall animal model of HBV/HDV coinfection and superinfection.

10 accommodate variation in infection length or superinfection.

11 lares of disease, and with acute hepatitis D superinfection.

12 but not a TR5-flanked vector upon adenoviral superinfection.

13 oners, allowing the propagation of bacterial superinfection.

14 specific strains regardless of occurrence of superinfection.

15 e morbidity from viral disease and bacterial superinfection.

16 d appendages, leading to this propensity for superinfection.

17 that a single distinct allele allows strain superinfection.

18 e (n = 7), the latter pattern implying viral superinfection.

19 a new strain to evade immunity and establish superinfection.

20 stablish coexisting infection, termed strain superinfection.

21 mong viral proteins limits influenza A virus superinfection.

22 expression of CLDN1 and occludin, preventing superinfection.

23 in a model of viral infection with bacterial superinfection.

24 etely cleared the virus 7 to 8 days prior to superinfection.

25 the mutants exhibit diminished resistance to superinfection.

26 intermediates in tissues harvested after the superinfection.

27 a samples from the cohort to detect cases of superinfection.

28 or virus-induced susceptibility to bacterial superinfection.

29 ated with a 1.7-fold increase in the odds of superinfection.

30 changes were not necessary for resistance to superinfection.

31 ticipants, 7 were coinfected and 10 acquired superinfection.

32 on, perhaps explaining susceptibility to HIV superinfection.

33 store lung innate immunity against bacterial superinfections.

34 anagement for influenza-associated bacterial superinfections.

35 patients, respectively; 12.5% had bacterial superinfections.

36 ality, antibiotic duration, and frequency of superinfections.

37 was associated with a lower frequency of MDR superinfections.

38 nd consisted of both inter- and intrasubtype superinfections.

39 ty associated with influenza virus-bacterium superinfections.

40 force of infection (FOI) in the presence of superinfections.

41 ease, increasing susceptibility to bacterial superinfections.

42 fection screened at two time points (rate of superinfection, 1.5/100 person-years).

43 ns (22.5% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.008), respiratory superinfections (10.0% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.036), and multid

44 Two female cases of HIV intersubtype superinfection (18.2%) were identified.

45 There were fewer superinfections (22.5% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.008), respirator

46 . 28.6%, p = 0.036), and multidrug resistant superinfections (7.5% vs. 35.7%, p = 0.003), in early di

47 To determine the mortality risk of HAV superinfection, a meta-analysis including studies report

48 g viral replication and dissemination during superinfection, a process that complicates the developme

49 We analyzed host range and superinfection ability, mapped their genomes, and charac

50 Strain superinfection affects the dynamics of epidemiological s

51 mmation and were less sensitive to bacterial superinfection after infection with influenza virus.

52 The ability to replicate in the context of superinfection also did not differ between the genotypes

53 This control is often lost after superinfection, although the mechanism behind this remai

54 the clinical consequences of coinfection and superinfection, although these phenomena have important

55 high-risk individuals; however, the rate of superinfection among HIV-infected individuals within a g

56 ce of and factors associated with recent HDV superinfection among individuals coinfected with human i

57 between 10 participants with intrasubtype B superinfection and 19 monoinfected controls, matched to

58 weak statistical trend toward occurrence of superinfection and acquiring X4 usage.

59 Bacterial superinfection and associated lung immunopathology are m

60 woodchuck hepatitis virus, (i) hepadnavirus superinfection and cell-to-cell spread likely continue t

61 f resistance that is used by EIAV to prevent superinfection and explored the means by which EIAV(vMA-

62 lizing antibody (NAb) response impacts HIV-1 superinfection and how superinfection subsequently modul

63 cted cells from cytotoxicity associated with superinfection and may also serve as an immune evasion s

64 A and B vaccines are effective in preventing superinfection and sequelae in patients with chronic hep

65 cell, the genes are rI (which seems to sense superinfection and signal the holin to delay lysis), rII

66 y was to determine the mortality risk of HAV superinfection and the consequences of routine vaccinati

67 een the HIV-positive individuals at risk for superinfection and the HIV-negative population at baseli

68 d from 12 h to 7 days, and both frequency of superinfection and viral replication levels were examine

69 ir interhost transmission and probability of superinfection) and the structure of the network can inf

70 hat drive strain divergence, which underlies superinfection, and allow penetration of a new strain in

71 onia, requirement for ventilation, bacterial superinfection, and elevated urea level and white blood

72 enetically diverse parasite clones, frequent superinfection, and highly variable infection lengths, a

73 ted lymphoid compartments, susceptibility to superinfection, and/or immune evasion.

74 t infection and the biologic consequences of superinfection are not well understood.

75 nfluenza viruses in the setting of bacterial superinfection, are broadly associated with enhanced pat

76 nsmission and provide support for the use of superinfection as a model to address correlates of prote

77 The relevance of superinfection as a model to identify correlates of prot

78 es were then tested by this method to detect superinfection between 2002 and 2005.

79 cle (HCVpp) entry, demonstrating a postentry superinfection block downstream of primary translation.

80 2 TR (TR2)-flanked transgene in trans during superinfection by a helper virus, leading to "mobilizati

81 Superinfection by a second human immunodeficiency virus

82 tant-infected squid were more prone to later superinfection by a second V. fischeri strain.

83 GI or GGII primary acquisition did not block superinfection by a secondary agent.

84 , were examined for their ability to prevent superinfection by another isolate of the virus.

85 Coliphage HK022 Nun blocks superinfection by coliphage lambda by stalling RNA polym

86 Superinfection by heterologous B. burgdorferi strains ha

87 ild-type clones was examined and compared to superinfection by heterologous strains.

88 K2 proteins in the cell membrane can prevent superinfection by interacting with the entry-fusion comp

89 or in lysogenic D23580, and thereby prevents superinfection by itself and other phage that uses the s

90 ggesting that wild-type EIAV interferes with superinfection by masking ELR1.

91 We have observed previously that superinfection by MCF13 MLV of certain cell types, such

92 he trial were screened for the occurrence of superinfection by next-generation sequencing of the vira

93 on sequencing (NGS) protocol to identify HIV superinfection by targeting two regions of the HIV viral

94 iminated the ability of the virus to exclude superinfection by the same or a closely related virus.

95 ility of resulting hybrid viruses to exclude superinfection by those donor strains.

96 Ia-Pro to a lesser extent, likewise excluded superinfection by TriMV-GFP.

97 We showed that superinfection by vaccinia virus was prevented at the me

98 NIa-VPg, or NIb cistrons permitted efficient superinfection by WSMV expressing green fluorescent prot

99 or coat protein (CP) substantially excluded superinfection by WSMV-GFP, suggesting that both of thes

100 Reinfection and superinfection can occur during treatment of recent HCV

101 following superinfection in a limited set of superinfection cases.

102 subject that loss of viral control after HIV superinfection coincides with rapid recombination events

103 the virus, the extent of protection against superinfection conferred by the first infection and the

104 A better understanding of the rate of HIV superinfection could have important implications for ong

105 Induction of resistance to superinfection depended on viral RNA and protein synthes

106 ory PB1-F2 phenotype that supports bacterial superinfection during adaptation of H3N2 viruses to huma

107 ficient hepadnavirus cell-to-cell spread and superinfection during chronic infection and suggest that

108 of the study was to evaluate reinfection and superinfection during treatment for recent hepatitis C v

109 hreatening pneumonia in hospitals and deadly superinfection during viral influenza.

110 vivo superinfection fitness assay to examine superinfection dynamics and the role of virulence in sup

111 viously infected cell, a phenomenon known as superinfection exclusion (SE) or Homologous Interference

112 Superinfection exclusion (SIE) is an antagonistic virus-

113 Superinfection exclusion (SIE) is an antagonistic virus-

114 Many viruses exhibit superinfection exclusion (SIE), the ability of an establ

115 Superinfection exclusion (SIE), the ability of an establ

116 Thus, HCV establishes superinfection exclusion at a postentry step, and this e

117 In this study, I show that superinfection exclusion by CTV requires production of a

118 Superinfection exclusion is a widespread phenomenon that

119 Superinfection exclusion is the ability of an establishe

120 Superinfection exclusion may be beneficial to vaccinia v

121 the evolution of segmented viruses, because superinfection exclusion may limit the frequency of reas

122 to be determined, the early establishment of superinfection exclusion may provide a "winner-take-all"

123 acutely infected cells, Junin virus lacks a superinfection exclusion mechanism.

124 We show that superinfection exclusion occurred only between isolates

125 Recently, it was demonstrated that superinfection exclusion of Citrus tristeza virus (CTV),

126 In this study we examined superinfection exclusion of Citrus tristeza virus (CTV),

127 Superinfection exclusion or homologous interference, a p

128 ented, suggesting a mechanism reminiscent of superinfection exclusion systems normally encoded on pro

129 In the medical and veterinary fields, superinfection exclusion was found to interfere with rep

130 Superinfection exclusion was previously shown for duck H

131 iruses have evolved strategies of so-called "superinfection exclusion" to prevent re-infection of a c

132 Superinfection exclusion, a phenomenon in which a preexi

133 The latter phenomenon, known as superinfection exclusion, can occur by a variety of mech

134 This process, termed superinfection exclusion, does not involve downregulatio

135 ndings suggest dual mechanisms of pestivirus superinfection exclusion, one at the level of viral entr

136 wn-regulation of its viral receptor and thus superinfection exclusion, whether New World arenaviruses

137 e whereas basal expression of WhiBTM4 led to superinfection exclusion.

138 t this may not be a general mechanism of HCV superinfection exclusion.

139 the transferrin receptor and did not induce superinfection exclusion.

140 feron-inducible proteins are not involved in superinfection exclusion.

141 Superinfection experiments demonstrated that the WE stra

142 Time-course superinfection experiments provided insights into SE dyn

143 We have developed a novel in vivo superinfection fitness assay to examine superinfection d

144 of virulence of an RNA virus in determining superinfection fitness dynamics within a natural vertebr

145 t correlate with a significant difference in superinfection fitness.

146 ection dynamics and the role of virulence in superinfection fitness.

147 1.3 Env correlated with the failure to block superinfection following acute and chronic infection by

148 ntinuous but limited hepadnavirus spread and superinfection for the maintenance of the chronic state

149 ences in disease outcomes in a comparison of superinfections from a highly pathogenic strain with tho

150 Superinfections from Staphylococcus aureus following inf

151 qual and unequal virulence, we observed that superinfection generally occurred with decreasing freque

152 infection is acquired, and that even during superinfection genetic exchange among distinct strains i

153 osition: (i) animals with naturally acquired superinfection had a statistically significantly greater

154 age of influenza infection, even though MRSA superinfection had no significant effect on viral burden

155 Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) superinfection has been documented in high-risk individu

156 Superinfection has been reported throughout the world, a

157 practices for HIV-infected patients because superinfection has detrimental effects on clinical outco

158 The occurrence of superinfection has implications for vaccine research, si

159 Superinfection has recently been shown to occur for two

160 dentify and may explain why the detection of superinfection has typically been associated with low au

161 Moreover, several cases of HCV superinfection have been reported recently.

162 Previous methods to detect superinfection have involved a combination of labor-inte

163 in meaningful outcomes such as opportunistic superinfections, HCV recurrence rates, rejection, and su

164 o cases (one in each trial arm) of subtype C superinfection identified from the 76 women with primary

165 imals during weeks one through six after the superinfection, (ii) detecting replication-derived WHVNY

166 al temperate phage in which establishment of superinfection immunity is dependent on chromosomal inte

167 1 subtype B viruses are more susceptible to superinfection.IMPORTANCE Our findings suggest that with

168 mosaic-like pattern due to limitation to the superinfection imposed by resident viral clones.

169 This suggests that the rate of HIV superinfection in a general population is substantial, w

170 ue was utilized to determine the rate of HIV superinfection in a heterosexual population by examining

171 uld modulate viral dynamics in env following superinfection in a limited set of superinfection cases.

172 the development of NAb and the occurrence of superinfection in a well-characterized, antiretroviral t

173 Worldwide, 16 cases of HIV-1 superinfection in humans have been reported since 2002.

174 molecules may not be sufficient to establish superinfection in LTNPs.

175 l-virulence genotype pairs, the frequency of superinfection in most cases was the same regardless of

176 n some patients while protecting against HIV superinfection in most patients.

177 Hepatitis A virus (HAV) superinfection in persons with hepatitis C virus (HCV) i

178 ensitive viruses increases susceptibility to superinfection in the face of repeated exposures.

179 Following strain superinfection in the reservoir host, we tested whether

180 P<0.001), which may have lowered the risk of superinfection in this population.

181 Here we describe a mouse model of bacterial superinfection in which a mild, self-limiting influenza

182 nd discover novel modes to prevent bacterial superinfections in the lungs of persons with influenza.

183 Superinfection incidence rate was 4.96 per 100 person-ye

184 An additional finding was differential superinfection inhibition between the two phages that co

185 ery inefficient (if it occurs at all), virus superinfection is an unlikely event, and chronic hepadna

186 Our conclusion that strain superinfection is associated with a significant increase

187 gating the incidence and prevalence of HIV-1 superinfection is challenging due to the complex dynamic

188 ing ligand [TRAIL] receptors) and with viral superinfection leading to unintegrated viral DNA (UVD) a

189 Notably, HDV superinfection led to a median 0.6log reduction of HBV v

190 In one of these cases, superinfection led to the temporary masking of a resista

191 Patients were excluded if they had HDV superinfection, liver infections other than HBV and HDV,

192 The rate of superinfection may be reflective of the underlying HIV r

193 Superinfection may occur in this cohort but reinfection

194 Superinfection might have incidence rates comparable to

195 bout by pyroptosis, or to a lesser extent by superinfection, might be key mechanisms to account for t

196 wild-type EBV in a recently developed B-cell superinfection model but ultimately was able to transiti

197 orferi surface antigens were monitored via a superinfection model over the course of 70 days.

198 In the mouse bacterial superinfection model, both peptide and virus with the I6

199 Here we describe two B-cell superinfection models with which to address these proble

200 This extensive recombination made superinfection more difficult to identify and may explai

201 us infection result from secondary bacterial superinfection, most commonly caused by Streptococcus pn

202 itations of hepadnavirus cell-to-cell spread/superinfection (observed recently in the woodchuck model

203 In adjusted analysis, reinfection/superinfection occurred more often in participants with

204 ncrease in viral load during the window when superinfection occurred.

205 studies and support the hypothesis that HIV superinfection occurs at a relatively high rate.

206 Strain superinfection occurs when a second pathogen strain infe

207 Strain superinfection occurs when a second pathogen strain infe

208 Superinfection occurs when a second, genetically distinc

209 HIV superinfection occurs when an individual with HIV is inf

210 Anaplasma marginale superinfection occurs when the second strain carries a v

211 fusion, whereas in cells where no detectable superinfection occurs, EIAV(vMA-1c) entry that is low-pH

212 syncytium formation and possibly "fuse-back" superinfection of cells.

213 EIAV(vMA-1c) superinfection of ED cells results in a buildup of unint

214 k encephalopathy (TME) agent DY TME prior to superinfection of hamsters with the short-incubation-per

215 ed odds ratio (OR) for mortality risk in HAV superinfection of HCV-infected persons was 7.23 (95% con

216 Superinfection of HIV-1-infected individuals' lymph node

217 AAV2 superinfection of HPV type 31b (HPV31b)-positive cells a

218 Superinfection of latently infected cells by productive

219 quine infectious anemia virus (EIAV) prevent superinfection of previously infected cells.

220 rus-G pseudotyped virus replication, whereas superinfection of R5-infected cells with X4 HIV-1 (or vi

221 We have demonstrated that superinfection of rhesus CMV-infected rhesus macaques (R

222 ent died of related causes and 10% presented superinfection of the CSF temporary drainage/externalize

223 We found that superinfection of toxigenic El Tor strains with RS1varph

224 ctively, single-strain infections and strain superinfections of the tick-borne pathogen Anaplasma mar

225 HIV-1 coinfection; 6 patients acquired HIV-1 superinfection, on average 8.5 months from their primary

226 This could represent superinfection or a limitation of the sensitivity of pyr

227 ommon and possibly can be acquired by either superinfection or coinfection.

228 cy that do not take into account pyroptosis, superinfection, or other potential complexities cannot a

229 emerged in 4 of 41 monoinfections vs 2 of 5 superinfections (P = .12), suggesting a weak statistical

230 fluenza-related deaths result from bacterial superinfections, particularly secondary pneumococcal pne

231 At least some of these Stx phages display superinfection phenotypes, which differ significantly fr

232 In all 3 cases, superinfection produced a spike in viral load and could

233 ction rates among MSM in San Diego; however, superinfection rates declined over time.

234 Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) superinfection refers to the acquisition of another stra

235 divergent viruses, but the barriers to such superinfection remain unclear.

236 te-specific mutagenesis and transfection and superinfection reporter assays.

237 and lung immunopathology caused by bacterial superinfection requires the control of both bacterial in

238 ds to promotion of viral replication through superinfection resistance and other mechanisms.

239 Although superinfection resistance correlated with virus-induced

240 s was necessary and sufficient to induce the superinfection-resistant state.

241 e, for the two genotype pairs examined, that superinfection restriction does occur for IHNV and that

242 S. pneumoniae superinfection results in rapid dissemination of the bac

243 ial virus (RSV) bronchiolitis with bacterial superinfection secondary to administration of Lactobacil

244 HIV-1 superinfection (SI) occurs when an infected individual a

245 including complex virus-virus interactions, superinfections, specific virus saturation limits in cel

246 es, we compared 20 women from Tanzania's HIV Superinfection Study (HISIS) cohort, who were infected m

247 esponse impacts HIV-1 superinfection and how superinfection subsequently modulates the NAb response c

248 Soon after superinfection, the NAb response remained lower, but bet

249 Six weeks after the superinfection, the woodchucks were sacrificed and tissu

250 modest decline in CD4(+) T-cell counts after superinfection, there was no evidence of disease acceler

251 was responsible for the lack of immunity to superinfection through inactivation of CI has been revis

252 case-control study of women at risk of HIV-1 superinfection to understand the relationship between im

253 detailed characterization of host range and superinfection, together with results of genomic, proteo

254 m nonprogressors' (LTNPs') susceptibility to superinfection using Indian rhesus macaques that express

255 The rate of superinfection was 1.44 per 100 person years (PYs) (95%

256 The WHVNY superinfection was demonstrated by using WHV strain-spec

257 Coinfection was defined as DI at baseline; superinfection was monoinfection at baseline and DI at a

258 The relative susceptibility to superinfection was not correlated with CD4(+) T-cell cou

259 Among 37 with persistence, superinfection was observed in 16% (3 of 19) of those tr

260 The rate of superinfection was significantly lower than the overall

261 lymphocytes mediate protection against acute superinfection, we depleted >99% of CD8+ lymphocytes in

262 using a model of influenza and pneumococcal superinfection, we found that dual-infected animals expe

263 Reinfection and superinfection were defined by detection of infection wi

264 Both HA-mediated entry and viral superinfection were rescued by the neuraminidase inhibit

265 Unlike most phages, T4 can sense superinfection (which signals the depletion of uninfecte

266 eration sequencing has improved detection of superinfection, which can be transmitted by injecting dr

267 HIV superinfection, which occurs when a previously infected

268 secondary virus was significantly reduced in superinfection while primary virus replication was unaff

269 y refractory to HA-mediated infection and to superinfection with a second influenza A virus.

270 The incidence of superinfection with acute HBV and HAV was low, but it wa

271 on cause of severe influenza pathogenesis is superinfection with bacterial pathogens, namely, Staphyl

272 ion, and related immune activation, prevents superinfection with both EBV types and keeps EBV viremia

273 ction of IFN-I via RIG-I/MAVS in response to superinfection with cytopathic RNA viruses, virus-induce

274 med cell death, or apoptosis, in response to superinfection with cytopathic RNA viruses.

275 Upon superinfection with EBV deleted for the BHLF1 locus, how

276 Clearance occurred without inflammation or superinfection with hepatitis B virus, human cytomegalov

277 Superinfection with hepatitis D virus (HDV) may increase

278 th high levels of histones was stimulated by superinfection with HSV-2 without altering histone occup

279 Superinfection with ICP0-null HSV-1 mutants at a low mul

280 s type 1 (HIV-1) gene expression occurs upon superinfection with Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvi

281 in local immunosuppression that facilitates superinfection with less-pathogenic bacteria.

282 infected (PI) cells exhibited resistance to superinfection with NDV and established an antiviral sta

283 Upon superinfection with PVL-expressing S. aureus, the recrui

284 infection is followed by mild, self-limiting superinfection with S. pneumoniae serotype 3.

285 rong selective pressure for emergence of and superinfection with strains that differ in their Msp2 va

286 ble mink encephalopathy (TME) agent prior to superinfection with the hyper (HY) strain of TME can com

287 long-incubation-period strain 139H prior to superinfection with the short-incubation-period hyper (H

288 riants in PB1-F2 and evaluated outcomes from superinfection with three distinct Gram-positive respira

289 xpress immediate-early proteins, followed by superinfection with various viral mutants to quantify th

290 t resistant to translation inhibition during superinfection with VSV, indicating that transcription i

291 adjacent ORF62 and ORF63 promoters following superinfection with VZV.

292 vaccinees were protected against detectable superinfection with wild-type SIVmacJ5.

293 Superinfection with wild-type virus resulted in a 400-fo

294 uasispecies changes probably due to repeated superinfections with new HCV strains.

295 uld be used to predict increased severity of superinfections with specific Gram-positive respiratory

296 only patients with AD suffer from bacterial superinfections with this pathogen, which implicates imm

297 equences within each baboon, no evidence for superinfection within each baboon, and a ready ability o

298 te that NGS can be used for detection of HIV superinfection within large cohorts, which could assist

299 Thus, successful superinfection would require that the secondary strain e

300 at human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co- or superinfection would result in increased fitness of the