MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1998479133 · doi:10.1111/j.1872-034x.2007.00034.x

Wild boar as an important reservoir of hepatitis E virus in western Japan

2007· article· en· W1998479133 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Koji Yano

Notice bibliographique

RevueHepatology Research · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHepatitis Viruses Studies and Epidemiology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHepatitis E virusHepatitis EOutbreakGenotypeVirologyTransmission (telecommunications)JaundiceHepatitisHepatitis AViral hepatitisBiologyMedicineGeneInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Hepatitis E was classically considered as a waterborne outbreak of acute hepatitis with jaundice in the tropics and subtropics. It was even regarded that most, if not all, hepatitis E cases observed in industrialized countries, including Japan, were most likely “imported.” Over the last few years, however, autochthonous hepatitis E infection has been reported from economically developed countries such as the USA, Japan, Europe and Australia.1–3 The hepatitis E virus (HEV) is the sole member of the genus Hepevirus in the family Hepeviridae, remotely related to Caliciviridae viruses.4 The interstrain sequence diversity of its genome allows four convenient groupings to be made. These include: genotype 1, which is regularly identified in human cases of hepatitis E in hyperendemic areas; genotype 2, characterized from human cases in an outbreak in Mexico and more recently in Nigeria; genotype 3, which is detected in humans with non-imported disease and in pigs of economically developed countries, such as the US and Japan; and genotype 4, found among humans and pigs in east Asia.5,6 In 2001, an HEV strain of genotype 3 was isolated from a Japanese patient with acute hepatitis who had never been abroad.2 Consequent studies revealed that a Japanese indigenous strain might be circulating in the country.7,8 Furthermore, a zoonotic transmission of HEV has been suggested, with both indirect9–11 and direct12,13 evidence provided. However, the extent and impact of zoonotic transmission of acute hepatitis E occurrence has not yet been elucidated. Anti-HEV IgG has been detected among pigs in nonendemic countries such as Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the US and Japan.11,14,15 Other than in pigs, a presence of antibody to HEV and/or HEV-RNA has been proven in mice, rats, cats, monkeys, goats, cows, deer, mongooses and chickens.16–20 The zoonotic infection of HEV was first confirmed between deer and humans.12 The genomic sequence of HEV from patients of hepatitis E was identical to that found in a leftover portion of deer meat which the patients had eaten before the onset of hepatitis. Shortly after the report, two and 11 cases of hepatitis E possibly associated to wild boar ingestion were reported.21,22 Accordingly, pigs, boar and deer have been considered as important reservoirs in Japan and, naturally, pigs are considered to be the likely primary reservoir among these three. Indeed, in Hokkaido, where pig meat consumption is relatively high in comparison to other parts of Japan, a higher incidence of hepatitis E has been noted.7,8,23 On the other hand, sporadic cases or small outbreaks of hepatitis E reported in western Japan are often associated with boar ingestion.13,21,22,24–26 Therefore, information on the prevalence of anti-HEV and HEV-RNA among wild boar in western Japan appears to be of importance. Sonoda et al.27 reported that antibody to HEV was detected in 9% of 35 wild boar and in 2% of 117 wild deer tested, and HEV-RNA was detected in a boar, thus indicating an HEV-RNA prevalence of 1/35 (2.86%) among wild boar. It was not clear from Sonoda’s data whether the prevalence of HEV among boar was higher in (a) particular part(s) of Japan, probably because of limitations in the sample size. In contrast, in this issue of this journal, Michitaka et al.28 report a high prevalence of anti-HEV both in wild-caught (25.5%) and bred boar (71.4%) in the Ehime prefecture of Japan, where a case of hepatitis E in a woman who had cooked and eaten wild boar meat has recently been reported.26 The positive rates of anti-HEV showed a significant difference between wild-caught boar and bred boar (25.5% vs. 71.4%, P < 0.001). Interestingly, despite the high rate of anti-HEV, none of the bred boar was positive for HEV-RNA, and these findings were similar to the reported case of bred swine, in which viremia was recognized only within 6 months of birth.11 Furthermore, in some of the anti-HEV-positive boar, the genotype 3 HEV was detected, suggesting that genotype 3 HEV is prevalent among the boar in Ehime prefecture. Interestingly, most cases of sporadic hepatitis E in western Japan are associated with the HEV of genotype 3. Such accumulated evidence therefore seems to indicate that wild boar are one of the major reservoirs of HEV in western Japan. This assumption may be biased by patients’ memories, for example pork ingestion, which is usual in Japan, is less memorable than boar ingestion, which does not appear to be a usual food item, even for those who like eating wild animals. It is possible, therefore, that the wild boar-borne transmission of HEV is overestimated, while pig-borne transmission remains underrepresented due to such a recall bias. Indeed, it has been shown that over 50% of Japanese hepatitis E patients have an unknown mode of transmission.29 Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the consumption of boar meat puts individuals at a high risk of developing hepatitis E infection in western Japan. As Michitaka et al. concluded, boar should be regarded as an important reservoir of HEV and caution is therefore required in cooking and eating boar meat.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,333
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,845

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,131
Tête enseignante GPT0,458
Écart entre enseignants0,327 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHepatology ResearchMême sujetHepatitis Viruses Studies and EpidemiologyTravaux en français237 207