| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Colavita, F, et al.
(author)
-
EBOLA Ag K-SeT rapid test: field evaluation in Sierra Leone
- 2018
-
In: Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. - : Elsevier BV. - 1469-0691. ; 24:6, s. 653-657
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 4. |
- Gruber, CEM, et al.
(author)
-
Geographical Variability Affects CCHFV Detection by RT-PCR: A Tool for In-Silico Evaluation of Molecular Assays
- 2019
-
In: Viruses. - : MDPI AG. - 1999-4915. ; 11:10
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Crimean–Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) is considered to be a major emerging infectious threat, according to the WHO R&D blueprint. A wide range of CCHFV molecular assays have been developed, employing varied primer/probe combinations. The high genetic variability of CCHFV often hampers the efficacy of available molecular tests and can affect their diagnostic potential. Recently, increasing numbers of complete CCHFV genomic sequences have become available, allowing a better appreciation of the genomic evolution of this virus. We summarized the current knowledge on molecular methods and developed a new bioinformatics tool to evaluate the existing assays for CCHFV detection, with a special focus on strains circulating in different geographical areas. Twenty-two molecular methods and 181 sequences of CCHFV were collected, respectively, from PubMed and GenBank databases. Up to 28 mismatches between primers and probes of each assay and CCHFV strains were detected through in-silico PCR analysis. Combinations of up to three molecular methods markedly decreased the number of mismatches within most geographic areas. These results supported the good practice of CCHFV detection of performing more than one assay, aimed for different sequence targets. The choice of the most appropriate tests must take into account patient’s travel history and geographic distribution of the different CCHFV strains.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Sauvat, A, et al.
(author)
-
On-target versus off-target effects of drugs inhibiting the replication of SARS-CoV-2
- 2020
-
In: Cell death & disease. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-4889. ; 11:8, s. 656-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The current epidemic of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) calls for the development of inhibitors of viral replication. Here, we performed a bioinformatic analysis of published and purported SARS-CoV-2 antivirals including imatinib mesylate that we found to suppress SARS-CoV-2 replication on Vero E6 cells and that, according to the published literature on other coronaviruses is likely to act on-target, as a tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We identified a cluster of SARS-CoV-2 antivirals with characteristics of lysosomotropic agents, meaning that they are lipophilic weak bases capable of penetrating into cells. These agents include cepharentine, chloroquine, chlorpromazine, clemastine, cloperastine, emetine, hydroxychloroquine, haloperidol, ML240, PB28, ponatinib, siramesine, and zotatifin (eFT226) all of which are likely to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication by non-specific (off-target) effects, meaning that they probably do not act on their ‘official’ pharmacological targets, but rather interfere with viral replication through non-specific effects on acidophilic organelles including autophagosomes, endosomes, and lysosomes. Imatinib mesylate did not fall into this cluster. In conclusion, we propose a tentative classification of SARS-CoV-2 antivirals into specific (on-target) versus non-specific (off-target) agents based on their physicochemical characteristics.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
