Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Medical College, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, 70101, Taiwan.
J Biomed Sci. 2013 May 31;20(1):34. doi: 10.1186/1423-0127-20-34.
Serologically defined primary dengue virus infection and/or subsequent homologous serotype infection is known to be associated with less severe disease as compared with secondary subsequent heterologous serotype infection. In geographical locales of high dengue endemicity, almost all individuals in the population are infected at some point in time and should therefore are at high risk of secondary infection. Interestingly, dengue viremia in healthy blood donors whose sera apparently lack detectable levels of specific antibody to dengue viral antigens has been reported. The incidence rate of potential immunologic hypo- or non-responders following natural primary dengue virus infection in dengue endemic regions, who do become immune responders only after repeated exposure, has not been described. These are the patients who may be diagnosed as primary infection in the subsequent infection, but actually are secondary infection. This concept has important implications with regards to the hypothesis of immunological enhancement of dengue pathogenesis, which has largely been advanced based on empirical observations and/or from in vitro experimental assays. The fact that dengue naïve travelers can suffer from severe dengue upon primary exposure while visiting dengue endemic countries underscores one of the major problems in explaining the role of immune enhancement in the pathogenesis of severe dengue virus infection. This evidence suggests that the mechanism(s) leading to severe dengue may not be associated with pre-existing enhancing antibody. Consequently, we propose a new paradigm for dengue virus infection classification. These include a) patients with naïve primary infection, b) those that are serologically defined primary in dengue endemic zones and c) those who are serologically defined secondary dengue virus infection. We submit that clarity with regards to such definitions may help facilitate the delineation of the potential mechanisms of severe dengue virus infection.
血清学定义的原发性登革病毒感染和/或随后的同源血清型感染与二次感染异源血清型相比,已知与疾病严重程度较轻相关。在登革热高度流行的地理区域,人群中的几乎所有人都在某个时间点被感染,因此他们面临二次感染的高风险。有趣的是,据报道,在健康献血者的血清中,登革病毒血症显然缺乏对登革病毒抗原的可检测水平的特异性抗体,但他们的血清中存在登革病毒。在登革热流行地区,自然原发性登革病毒感染后潜在免疫低应答或无应答者的发生率,即在反复暴露后才成为免疫应答者的发生率尚未描述。这些是在随后的感染中被诊断为原发性感染的患者,但实际上是二次感染。这一概念对于登革热发病机制的免疫增强假说具有重要意义,该假说主要基于经验观察和/或体外实验检测提出。事实上,登革热流行地区的初访旅行者在初次接触时可能会患上严重登革热,这突出了一个主要问题,即难以解释免疫增强在严重登革热病毒感染发病机制中的作用。这一证据表明,导致严重登革热的机制可能与预先存在的增强抗体无关。因此,我们提出了一种新的登革病毒感染分类范式。这些包括:a)初次感染的患者,b)在登革热流行地区血清学定义的原发性感染患者,和 c)血清学定义的继发性登革病毒感染患者。我们认为,明确这些定义可能有助于阐明严重登革热病毒感染的潜在机制。