Key result
Among 153 rotavirus-positive samples from Brazilian children, 141 (92.2%) clustered with NSP4 genotype B and 12 (7.8%) clustered with genotype A.
Observational (n=153)
Yes
The study identified NSP4 genotypes A and B in human rotavirus samples from Brazil, highlighting the need for further investigation into NSP4 as a target for epidemiologic surveillance and vaccine development.
Rotavirus NSP4 genotyping in Brazil should not yet change practice; leaves open its role in surveillance and vaccine development.
Nonstructural protein 4 (NSP4), encoded by group A rotavirus genome segment 10, is a multifunctional protein and the first recognized virus-encoded enterotoxin. The NSP4 gene has been sequenced, and five distinct genetic groups have been described: genotypes A-E. NSP4 genotypes A, B, and C have been detected in humans. In this study, the NSP4-encoding gene of human rotavirus strains of different G and P genotypes collected from children between 1987 and 2003 in three cities of West Central region of Brazil was characterized. NSP4 gene of 153 rotavirus-positive fecal samples was amplified by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and then sequenced. For phylogenetic analysis, NSP4 nucleotide sequences of these samples were compared to nucleotide sequences of reference strains available in GenBank. Two distinct NSP4 genotypes could be identified: 141 (92.2%) sequences clustered with NSP4 genotype B, and 12 sequences (7.8%) clustered with NSP4 genotype A. These results reinforce that further investigations are needed to assess the validity of NSP4 as a suitable target for epidemiologic surveillance of rotavirus infections and vaccine development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tavares et al. (2008) conducted an observational in Rotavirus infection (n=153). Rotavirus infection was evaluated on NSP4 genotype distribution. Among 153 rotavirus-positive samples from Brazilian children, 141 (92.2%) clustered with NSP4 genotype B and 12 (7.8%) clustered with genotype A.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: