ライフサイエンスコーパス: superinfection

1 ison were used to detect the presence of HIV superinfection.

2 an host susceptible to potentially fatal Bcc superinfection.

3 or virus-induced susceptibility to bacterial superinfection.

4 plays a central role in mortality following superinfection.

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

6 changes were not necessary for resistance to superinfection.

7 ticipants, 7 were coinfected and 10 acquired superinfection.

8 on, perhaps explaining susceptibility to HIV superinfection.

9 es to the initial infection may protect from superinfection.

10 em represents a major barrier to intrastrain superinfection.

11 viduals at the time of and shortly following superinfection.

12 fitness-related role for pneumolysin during superinfection.

13 ollected from 7 individuals with evidence of superinfection.

14 gous viruses were evaluated before and after superinfection.

15 the recipients examined had evidence of HIV superinfection.

16 when associated with Streptococcus pyogenes superinfection.

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

18 ssment in models of Streptococcus pneumoniae superinfection.

19 elates with the excess mortality observed in superinfection.

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

21 for evidence of sustained donor-derived HIV superinfection.

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

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

24 oners, allowing the propagation of bacterial superinfection.

25 specific strains regardless of occurrence of superinfection.

26 which increases the bacterial burden during superinfection.

27 impairs bacterial clearance during influenza superinfection.

28 f superinfecting genomes, thereby preventing superinfection.

29 clinicians have few tools to treat bacterial superinfection.

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

31 accommodate variation in infection length or superinfection.

32 e morbidity from viral disease and bacterial superinfection.

33 in a model of viral infection with bacterial superinfection.

34 increase in CYP450 metabolites during lethal superinfection.

35 intermediates in tissues harvested after the superinfection.

36 ase severity and susceptibility to bacterial superinfections.

37 ease, increasing susceptibility to bacterial superinfections.

38 , causing susceptibility to lethal bacterial superinfections.

39 store lung innate immunity against bacterial superinfections.

40 anagement for influenza-associated bacterial superinfections.

41 patients, respectively; 12.5% had bacterial superinfections.

42 ality, antibiotic duration, and frequency of superinfections.

43 was associated with a lower frequency of MDR superinfections.

44 nd consisted of both inter- and intrasubtype superinfections.

45 ty associated with influenza virus-bacterium superinfections.

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

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

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

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

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

51 . 28.6%, p = 0.036), and multidrug resistant superinfections (7.5% vs. 35.7%, p = 0.003), in early di

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

61 Bacterial superinfection and associated lung immunopathology are m

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

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

64 19) involving an artificial triple Wolbachia superinfection and low-dose irradiation enabled mass pro

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

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

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

68 ze in cell membranes and negatively regulate superinfection and syncytium formation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

78 Prospective studies on COVID-19 superinfections are needed, data from which can inform r

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

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

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

82 ad adequate viral sequences allowing for HIV superinfection assessment.

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

84 Delaying superinfection by 4 days after initial right lip inocula

85 2 TR (TR2)-flanked transgene in trans during superinfection by a helper virus, leading to "mobilizati

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

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

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

89 Superinfection by heterologous B. burgdorferi strains ha

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

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

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

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

94 tend to be closely related, suggesting that superinfection by repeated mosquito bites is rarer than

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

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

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

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

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

100 n, SYNV M deletion mutants failed to exclude superinfection by wild-type SYNV.

101 ed with DeltaORF5 MERS-CoV were resistant to superinfection by wildtype virus, likely due to reduced

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

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

104 Reinfection and superinfection can occur during treatment of recent HCV

105 following superinfection in a limited set of superinfection cases.

106 model in which RI binds to T irrespective of superinfection, causing it to accumulate in a membrane a

107 opism of circulating virus, evidence for HIV superinfection, cellular immune responses to HIV, as wel

108 and latent-phase gene expression in TG after superinfection compared to the control (single inoculati

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

110 Current therapy for influenza/bacterial superinfection consists of treating the underlying influ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

119 rmissive for secondary infections.IMPORTANCE Superinfection exclusion (SIE) is a widespread phenomeno

120 Superinfection exclusion (SIE) is an antagonistic virus-

121 Superinfection exclusion (SIE) is an antagonistic virus-

122 Superinfection exclusion (SIE) or cross-protection pheno

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

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

125 presents a distinct mechanism of heterotypic superinfection exclusion and appears to promote archaeal

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

127 Superinfection exclusion is a widespread phenomenon that

128 Superinfection exclusion may be beneficial to vaccinia v

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

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

131 We show that superinfection exclusion occurred only between isolates

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

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

134 Superinfection exclusion or homologous interference, a p

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

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

137 Superinfection exclusion was previously shown for duck H

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

139 nergistic (CRISPR evasion) and antagonistic (superinfection exclusion) interactions with co-infecting

140 Superinfection exclusion, a phenomenon in which a preexi

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

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

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

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

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

146 the transferrin receptor and did not induce superinfection exclusion.

147 Superinfection experiments demonstrated that the WE stra

148 Time-course superinfection experiments provided insights into SE dyn

149 This bottleneck is not present during IAV superinfection, facilitating identification of pneumococ

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

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

152 t correlate with a significant difference in superinfection fitness.

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

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

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

156 Superinfections from Staphylococcus aureus following inf

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

158 Superinfection, generally bacterial and less commonly fu

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

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

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

162 Superinfection has been reported throughout the world, a

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

170 Here, we report a technique based on superinfection immunity of phages to enrich amber-contai

171 1 subtype B viruses are more susceptible to superinfection.IMPORTANCE Our findings suggest that with

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

179 Hepatitis D virus (HDV) superinfection in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)

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

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

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

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

184 d upon IFN-lambda treatment during influenza superinfection in vivo Together, these data support the

185 size by more than 50% and cause substantial superinfections in a very short time interval after phag

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

187 Superinfection incidence rate was 4.96 per 100 person-ye

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

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

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

191 been thought that a signal derived from the superinfection is required to activate RI.

192 ial infections, but their role in skin wound superinfection is unknown.

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

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

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

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

197 Superinfection may occur in this cohort but reinfection

198 uch as increased susceptibility to bacterial superinfection, may be mitigated in allergic hosts.

199 Superinfection might have incidence rates comparable to

200 of HIV suppression due to donor-derived HIV superinfection might not be a significant clinical conce

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

208 f patients with severe COVID-19 will develop superinfections, most commonly pneumonia due to nosocomi

209 works are functional in an influenza A virus superinfection murine model of pneumonia, paving the way

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

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

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

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

214 Strain superinfection occurs when a second pathogen strain infe

215 Strain superinfection occurs when a second pathogen strain infe

216 Superinfection occurs when a second, genetically distinc

217 HIV superinfection occurs when an individual with HIV is inf

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

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

220 Superinfection of latently infected cells by productive

221 Hepatitis D virus (HDV) superinfection of patients with chronic HBV infection re

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

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

224 to induction of prophage Pf4 and subsequent superinfection of the cell.

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

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

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

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

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

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

231 ve specifically assessed COVID-19-associated superinfections or AMR.

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

233 Success was defined as absence of relapse, superinfection, or surgical failure at the end of treatm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

243 Although superinfection resistance correlated with virus-induced

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

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

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

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

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

249 However, superinfection studies to assess control of innate immun

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

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

252 hat Ppara (-/-) mice are less susceptible to superinfection than wild-type mice.

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

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

255 LIN sets if the infected cell undergoes superinfection, then the lysis is delayed until host/pha

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

265 The rate of superinfection was significantly lower than the overall

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

267 Reinfection and superinfection were defined by detection of infection wi

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

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

270 ommon complication of influenza is bacterial superinfection, which exacerbates morbidity and mortalit

271 HIV superinfection, which occurs when a previously infected

272 logical control because of donor-derived HIV superinfection, which occurs when an HIV-positive indivi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

280 n exhibited increased bacterial burdens upon superinfection with either MRSA or S. pneumoniae Surpris

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

282 Superinfection with hepatitis D virus (HDV) may increase

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

291 adjacent ORF62 and ORF63 promoters following superinfection with VZV.

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

293 In all infants, incident superinfections with distinct strains from breast milk w

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

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

296 as the dominant pathogen found in bacterial superinfection, with Streptococcus pneumoniae a close se

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