Prior dengue is bad for Zika:
https://www.cell.com/immunity/fulltext/S1074-7613(19)30028-7 …
No, wait, prior dengue is good for Zika:
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6427/607 …
#clearasmud
Deze collectie tonen
My take - ADE appears to be an in vitro / mouse artifact. Most (all?) human and NHP studies have shown prior dengue to be protective (or have no effect) against Zika.
-
-
ADE has been very hard to prove even in the context of denv infection alone. Even nowadays, there’s people against ADE hypothesis. For ZIKV, it is early to say but in my view it is more likely that both protection and enhacement exist.
-
I think Eva’s paper on dengue ADE was very convincing - but yeah, agreed
- Nog 5 antwoorden
Nieuw gesprek -
-
-
I'm with you with all this confusion. Actually just had that discussion in the lab 2 days ago. BUT more confusion, according to Eva Harris' Nicaragua cohort, there is ADE, but it's temporal
-
Another big difference between the studies are the assays used to quantify antibodies. In Salvador, the protective effect was seen with high titers of IgG against the NS1 protein. The Nicaraguan cohort uses different assays and this can also explain some discordant results. 1/2
Einde van gesprek
Nieuw gesprek -
Het laden lijkt wat langer te duren.
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.