This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, H.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, March 2009, p. 1297, Vol. 53, No. 3
0066-4804/09/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AAC.00967-08
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Sialidase Fusion Protein as Inhibitor of Infection by Influenza Virus


arrow
LETTER
 
Malakhov et al. reported that sialidase fusion protein could be used as a novel broad-spectrum inhibitor of influenza virus infection (2). They showed a 90% effective concentration (nM) of 6.5 ± 86.8 in Table 1 as the concentration of DAS181 that gave rise to 90% cell protection from influenza virus A/Victoria/504/2000 infection (2). However, it is extremely unusual for three positive numbers with an average of 6.5 to have a standard deviation of 86.8, suggesting that the standard deviation may be a typographical error. The authors should explain this oddity.

Malakhov et al. mentioned in the abstract of their paper that "mouse and ferret studies confirmed significant in vivo efficacy of the sialidase fusion in both prophylactic and treatment modes." In my opinion, the ferret studies presented in Table 6 of the paper do not really support that statement. Comparing the mean values of virus titers (log10 50% tissue culture infective dose/ml) between vehicle-treated ferrets and sialidase fusion protein-treated ferrets on day 1 (4.4 versus 2.4), day 2 (4.7 versus 4.6), day 3 (2.7 versus 3.9), day 4 (3.7 versus 3.4), and day 5 (negative value versus 2.6) postinfection, it is hard for readers to understand how Malakhov et al. could make the conclusion that differences between these two groups are significant. Furthermore, Malakhov et al. ignored the fact that in the group treated with the sialidase fusion protein, 7 of 12 ferrets shed virus on days 2 and 3 postchallenge, and 6 of 12 ferrets shed virus on day 4 postchallenge. More importantly, 2 of 12 ferrets in the group treated with the sialidase fusion protein still shed virus on day 5 postchallenge, while none of the 8 ferrets in the vehicle-treated group shed virus. Malakhov et al. also didn't mention that nasal virus titers in the sialidase fusion protein-treated ferrets were about 15 times higher on day 3 and at least 200 times higher on day 5 postchallenge than those in the vehicle-treated ferrets. Malakhov et al. should explain why 2 of 12 sialidase fusion protein-treated ferrets shed virus on day 5 postchallenge while none of the 8 vehicle-treated ferrets did and repeat the ferret studies before making conclusive statements. Nevertheless, Malakhov et al. did realize and describe the limitations of the ferret study in the Discussion section.

Additionally, Malakhov et al. omitted the chapter title, page numbers, and names of the editors for their reference 12, which makes it difficult for readers to find the cited reference. Therefore, I list here the complete information for that reference (1).


arrow
FOOTNOTES
 
Ed. Note: The authors of the published article declined to respond.


arrow
REFERENCES
 
    1
  1. Gottschalk, A. 1959. Chemistry of virus receptors, p. 51-61. In F. M. Burnet and W. M. Stanley (ed.), The viruses: biochemical, biological, and biophysical properties. Academic Press, Inc., New York, NY.
    2. 2
  2. Malakhov, M. P., L. M. Aschenbrenner, D. F. Smee, M. K. Wandersee, R. W. Sidwell, L. V. Gubareva, V. P. Mishin, F. G. Hayden, D. H. Kim, A. Ing, E. R. Campbell, M. Yu, and F. Fang. 2006. Sialidase fusion protein as a novel broad-spectrum inhibitor of influenza virus infection. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50:1470-1479.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Hong Zhang
Z-BioMed, Inc.
Rockville, Maryland 20855

Phone: (301) 258-8968 Fax: (301) 260-0622 E-mail: hzhang{at}zbiomed.com

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, March 2009, p. 1297, Vol. 53, No. 3
0066-4804/09/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AAC.00967-08
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, H.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»