Selected article for: "antiviral protein and host control"

Author: Menachery, Vineet D.; Eisfeld, Amie J.; Schäfer, Alexandra; Josset, Laurence; Sims, Amy C.; Proll, Sean; Fan, Shufang; Li, Chengjun; Neumann, Gabriele; Tilton, Susan C.; Chang, Jean; Gralinski, Lisa E.; Long, Casey; Green, Richard; Williams, Christopher M.; Weiss, Jeffrey; Matzke, Melissa M.; Webb-Robertson, Bobbie-Jo; Schepmoes, Athena A.; Shukla, Anil K.; Metz, Thomas O.; Smith, Richard D.; Waters, Katrina M.; Katze, Michael G.; Kawaoka, Yoshihiro; Baric, Ralph S.
Title: Pathogenic Influenza Viruses and Coronaviruses Utilize Similar and Contrasting Approaches To Control Interferon-Stimulated Gene Responses
  • Document date: 2014_5_20
  • ID: s3zeppze_19
    Snippet: This study demonstrates contrasting, similar, and novel avenues used by virulent respiratory viruses to dampen and impair the global ISG response. HPAI utilizes rapid manipulation resulting in both strong up-and downregulation of ISG subsets rather than a binary ISG response. In contrast, the less virulent H1N1-09 virus fails to modulate either ISG transcripts or protein, producing a robust antiviral state which may impact peak titers. Similarly,.....
    Document: This study demonstrates contrasting, similar, and novel avenues used by virulent respiratory viruses to dampen and impair the global ISG response. HPAI utilizes rapid manipulation resulting in both strong up-and downregulation of ISG subsets rather than a binary ISG response. In contrast, the less virulent H1N1-09 virus fails to modulate either ISG transcripts or protein, producing a robust antiviral state which may impact peak titers. Similarly, SARS-CoV infection stimulates robust ISG transcription and protein production; however, ISGs are delayed 24 to 48 h, permitting SARS-CoV to achieve peak titers prior to ISG production. Finally, MERS-CoV not only delays ISG induction but also manipulates a subset of ISGs, similar to H5N1-VN1203. Together, the data highlight methods that pathogenic viruses utilize to control the host antiviral state. In each case, the strategy contributes to successful infection and may explain differences in virulence seen between viral families and strains.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • antiviral state and global ISG response: 1
    • antiviral state and host antiviral state: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
    • antiviral state and ISG induction: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
    • antiviral state and ISG induction delay: 1
    • antiviral state and ISG production: 1, 2
    • antiviral state and ISG response: 1
    • antiviral state and pathogenic virus: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
    • antiviral state and protein transcription: 1, 2, 3
    • antiviral state and respiratory virus: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
    • antiviral state and SARS cov: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28
    • antiviral state and SARS cov infection: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
    • antiviral state and viral family: 1
    • contrasting demonstrate and global ISG response: 1
    • contrasting demonstrate and ISG induction: 1
    • contrasting demonstrate and ISG response: 1
    • contrasting demonstrate and SARS cov: 1
    • contrasting demonstrate and SARS cov infection: 1