Affordable Access

deepdyve-link
Publisher Website

Ebola Virus Isolation Using Huh-7 Cells has Methodological Advantages and Similar Sensitivity to Isolation Using Other Cell Types and Suckling BALB/c Laboratory Mice.

Authors
  • Logue, James1
  • Vargas Licona, Walter2
  • Cooper, Timothy K3
  • Reeder, Becky4
  • Byrum, Russel5
  • Qin, Jing6
  • Deiuliis Murphy, Nicole7
  • Cong, Yu8
  • Bonilla, Amanda9
  • Sword, Jennifer10
  • Weaver, Wade11
  • Kocher, Gregory12
  • Olinger, Gene G13
  • Jahrling, Peter B14, 15
  • Hensley, Lisa E16
  • Bennett, Richard S17
  • 1 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 2 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 3 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 4 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 5 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 6 Biostatistics Research Branch, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. [email protected]
  • 7 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 8 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 9 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 10 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 11 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 12 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 13 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 14 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 15 Emerging Viral Pathogens Section, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 21702, USA. [email protected]
  • 16 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
  • 17 Integrated Research Facility, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 8200 Research Plaza, Frederick, MD 27102, USA. [email protected]
Type
Published Article
Journal
Viruses
Publisher
MDPI AG
Publication Date
Feb 16, 2019
Volume
11
Issue
2
Identifiers
DOI: 10.3390/v11020161
PMID: 30781518
Source
Medline
Keywords
Language
English
License
Unknown

Abstract

Following the largest Ebola virus disease outbreak from 2013 to 2016, viral RNA has been detected in survivors from semen and breast milk long after disease recovery. However, as there have been few cases of sexual transmission, it is unclear whether every RNA positive fluid sample contains infectious virus. Virus isolation, typically using cell culture or animal models, can serve as a tool to determine the infectivity of patient samples. However, the sensitivity of these methods has not been assessed for the Ebola virus isolate, Makona. Described here is an efficiency comparison of Ebola virus Makona isolation using Vero E6, Huh-7, monocyte-derived macrophage cells, and suckling laboratory mice. Isolation sensitivity was similar in all methods tested. Laboratory mice and Huh-7 cells were less affected by toxicity from breast milk than Vero E6 and MDM cells. However, the advantages associated with isolation in Huh-7 cells over laboratory mice, including cost effectiveness, sample volume preservation, and a reduction in animal use, make Huh-7 cells the preferred substrate tested for Ebola virus Makona isolation.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times