Key result
Molecular characterization of 565 measles viruses isolated in China during 2006-2007 revealed that all wild-type strains belonged to cluster 1 of genotype H1.
Observational (n=565)
Yes
Genotype H1 cluster 1 remained the predominant circulating measles virus in China during 2006-2007, indicating limited genetic diversity despite a resurgence in cases.
Sustained H1 cluster 1 predominance supports ongoing measles surveillance in China; leaves open implications for vaccine matching and elimination strategies.
Molecular characterization of wild-type measles viruses in China during 1995-2004 demonstrated that genotype H1 was endemic and widely distributed throughout the country. H1-associated cases and outbreaks caused a resurgence of measles beginning in 2005. A total of 210,094 measles cases and 101 deaths were reported by National Notifiable Diseases Reporting System (NNDRS) and Chinese Measles Laboratory Network (LabNet) from 2006 to 2007, and the incidences of measles were 6.8/100,000 population and 7.2/100,000 population in 2006 and 2007, respectively. Five hundred and sixty-five wild-type measles viruses were isolated from 24 of 31 provinces in mainland China during 2006 and 2007, and all of the wild type virus isolates belonged to cluster 1 of genotype H1. These results indicated that H1-cluster 1 viruses were the predominant viruses circulating in China from 2006 to 2007. This study contributes to previous efforts to generate critical baseline data about circulating wild-type measles viruses in China that will allow molecular epidemiologic studies to help measure the progress made toward China's goal of measles elimination by 2012.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ji et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Measles (n=565). Wild-type measles virus infection was evaluated on Genotype of isolated measles viruses. Molecular characterization of 565 measles viruses isolated in China during 2006-2007 revealed that all wild-type strains belonged to cluster 1 of genotype H1.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: