Dendritic cells (DCs) are potent initiators of T cell-mediated immunity that undergo maturation during viral infections. However, few reports describing the interactions of DCs with Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV), which remains the most frequent cause of acute and epidemic viral encephalitis, are available. In this study, we investigated the interaction of JEV with DCs and macrophages. JEV replicated its viral RNA in both cells with different efficiency, and JEV infection of macrophages followed the classical activation pathway of up-regulation of tested costimulatory molecules and proinflammatory cytokine production (IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-12). On the contrary, JEV-infected DCs failed to up-regulate costimulatory molecules such as CD40 and MHC class II. Of more interest, along with production of proinflammatory cytokines, DCs infected by JEV released antiinflammatory cytokine IL-10, which was not detected in macrophages. Moreover, signaling through MyD88 molecule, a pan-adaptor molecule of TLRs, and p38 MAPK in JEV-infected DCs was found to play a role in the production of cytokines and subversion of primary CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. We also found that IL-10 released from JEV-infected DCs led to a reduction in the priming of CD8+ T cells, but not CD4+ T cells. Taken together, our data suggest that JEV induces functional impairment of DCs through MyD88-dependent and -independent pathways, which subsequently leads to poor CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses, resulting in boosting viral survival and dissemination in the body.

Material Supplementary 6.DC1http://www.jimmunol.org/content/suppl/2010/06/25/jimmunol.090253

Accurate diagnosis at an early stage of infection is essential for the successful management of any contagious disease. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus is a pandemic that has affected 214 countries affecting more than 37.4 million people causing 1.07 million deaths as of the second week of October 2020. The primary diagnosis of the infection is done either by the molecular technique of RT-qPCR by detecting portions of the RNA of the viral genome or through immunodiagnostic tests by detecting the viral proteins or the antibodies produced by the host. As the demand for the test increased rapidly many naive manufacturers entered the market with novel kits and more and more laboratories also entered the diagnostic arena making the test result more error-prone. There are serious debates globally and regionally on the sensitivity and specificity of these tests and about the overall accuracy and reliability of the tests for decision making on control strategies. The significance of the test is also complexed by the presence of asymptomatic carriers, re-occurrence of infection in cured patients as well as by the varied incubation periods of the infection and shifting of the viral location in the host tissues. In this paper, we review the techniques available for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and probable factors that can reduce the sensitivity and specificity of the different test methods currently in vogue. We also provide a checklist of factors to be considered to avoid fallacious practices to reduce false positive and false negative results by the clinical laboratories.

Accurate diagnosis at an early stage of infection is essential for the successful management of any contagious disease. The COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a pandemic that has affected 214 countries affecting more than 30.8 million people causing 0.957 million deaths as of third week of September, 2020. The primary diagnosis of the infection is done either by the molecular technique of RT-qPCR by detecting portions of the RNA of the viral genome or through immunodiagnostic tests by detecting the viral proteins or the antibodies produced by the host. As the demand for the test increased rapidly many naive manufacturers entered the market with novel kits and more and more laboratories also entered the diagnostic arena making the test result more error-prone. There are serious debates globally and regionally on the sensitivity and specificity of these tests and about the overall accuracy and reliability of the tests for decision making on control strategies. The significance of the test is also complexed by the presence of asymptomatic carriers, re-occurrence of infection in cured patients as well as by the varied incubation periods of the infection and shifting of the viral location in the host tissues. In this paper, we review the techniques available for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and probable factors that can reduce the sensitivity and specificity of the different test methods currently in vogue. We also provide a check-list of factors to be taken care to avoid fallacious practices to reduce false positive and false negative results by the clinical laboratories

Granulocyte/macrophage colony‐stimulatory factor (GM‐CSF) is an attractive adjuvant for a DNA vaccine on account of its ability to recruit antigen‐presenting cells (APCs) to the site of antigen synthesis as well as its ability to stimulate the maturation of dendritic cells (DCs). This study evaluated the utility of GM‐CSF cDNA as a DNA vaccine adjuvant for glycoprotein B (gB) of pseudorabies virus (PrV) in a murine model. The co‐injection of GM‐CSF DNA enhanced the levels of serum PrV‐specific IgG with a 1.5‐ to 2‐fold increase. Moreover, GM‐CSF co‐injection inhibited the production of IgG2a isotype. However, it enhanced production of an IgG1 isotype resulting in humoral responses biased to the Th2‐type against PrV antigen. In contrast, the co‐administration of GM‐CSF DNA enhanced the T cell‐mediated immunity biased to the Th1‐type, as judged by the significantly higher level of cytokine IL‐2 and IFN‐γ production but not IL‐4. When challenged with a lethal dose of PrV, the GM‐CSF co‐injection enhanced the resistance against a PrV infection. This suggests that co‐inoculation with a vector expressing GM‐CSF enhanced the protective immunity against a PrV infection. This immunity was caused by the induction of increased humoral and cellular immunity in response to PrV antigen.