Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Infection and Immunity, April 2000, p. 2309-2314, Vol. 68, No. 4
Departments of
Medicine,1 Microbiology and
Immunology,2 and Pathology and
Laboratory Medicine,3 Indiana University
School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202
Received 29 October 1999/Returned for modification 15 December
1999/Accepted 29 December 1999
To localize Haemophilus ducreyi in vivo, human subjects
were experimentally infected with H. ducreyi until they
developed a painful pustule or for 14 days. Lesions were biopsied, and
biopsy samples were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, and
cryosectioned. Sections were stained with polyclonal anti-H.
ducreyi antiserum or H. ducreyi-specific
monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) and fluorescently tagged secondary
antibodies and examined by confocal microscopy. We identified H. ducreyi in 16 of 18 pustules but did not detect bacteria in the
one papule examined. H. ducreyi was observed as individual
cells and in clumps or chains. Staining with MAbs 2D8, 5C9, 3B9, 2C7,
and 9D12 demonstrated that H. ducreyi expresses the major
pilus subunit, FtpA, the 28-kDa outer membrane protein Hlp,
the 18-kDa outer membrane protein PAL, and the major outer membrane
protein (MOMP) or OmpA2 in vivo. By dual staining with polyclonal
anti-H. ducreyi antiserum and MAbs that recognize human skin components, we observed bacteria within the neutrophilic infiltrates of all positively staining pustules and in the dermis of 10 of 16 pustules. We were unable to detect bacteria associated with
keratinocytes in the samples examined. The data suggest that H. ducreyi is found primarily in association with neutrophils and in
the dermis at the pustular stage of disease in the human model of infection.
Haemophilus ducreyi is
the causative agent of chancroid, a sexually transmitted genital ulcer
disease that facilitates the transmission of human immunodeficiency
virus (10). H. ducreyi preferentially infects
mucosal epithelial surfaces of the coronal sulcus and foreskin in males
and the fourchette and labia in females but also infects stratified
squamous epithelium (12). The organism enters the host
through microabrasions that occur during intercourse and remains
localized primarily in the skin. At the ulcerative stage of disease,
H. ducreyi may disseminate to regional lymph nodes
(22).
Very little is known about the interactions of H. ducreyi
with components of human skin. Localization of H. ducreyi in
naturally occurring lesions has been hindered by the fact that most
patients do not seek treatment until the ulcerative stage, when the
lesions are usually colonized or superinfected with other bacteria. In tissue samples from patients with suspected but not culture-proven chancroid, gram-negative coccobacilli were seen between the
polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMN) in the superficial zone of the ulcer
(11, 14, 25). Specimens from patients with culture-proven
chancroid contain bacterial structures within the ulcer and in the
superficial dermis (20, 23). The bacteria were primarily
extracellular, as detected by electron microscopy (21);
however, this study did not describe where the bacteria were located in
the tissue. None of these studies confirmed that the bacterial
structures were H. ducreyi, and none examined bacterial
localization at earlier stages of the disease.
H. ducreyi binds to several skin components in vitro,
including keratinocytes, fibroblasts, and epithelial cells (2, 9, 18, 19, 30), as well as to extracellular matrix proteins, including types I and III collagen, fibronectin, and laminin (1, 7). However, the relevance of these findings to human disease is unknown.
To study the initial pathogenesis of chancroid, we developed a human
model of H. ducreyi infection (6, 28, 29). In this model, volunteers are inoculated on the upper arm with
H. ducreyi via puncture wounds made by an allergy-testing
device. Features of the model include a low estimated delivered dose
(EDD) of bacteria, kinetics of papule and pustule formation that
resemble the initial stages of chancroid, and a cutaneous infiltrate of PMN and mononuclear cells that closely mimics the histopathology of
naturally occurring ulcers (3, 24, 28). For subject safety
considerations, infection is terminated when a subject develops a
painful pustule or after 14 days of infection.
In this study, we examined lesions from the human model of infection by
immunofluorescence staining and confocal microscopy. Using antibodies
(Ab) that specifically label the bacteria or components of human skin,
we localized H. ducreyi at the pustular stage of disease.
Tissue specimens.
Tissue specimens were obtained from 14 adult volunteers who participated in several parent/mutant trials (see
Table 1) (5, 29a, 31; R. S. Young, K. Fortney,
E. J. Hansen, and S. M. Spinola, unpublished data).
Volunteers were inoculated on the upper arm using an allergy-testing
device that punctures the skin with nine tines to a depth of 1.9 mm.
Volunteers received EDDs of 30 to 120 CFU of H. ducreyi
35000 or 35000HP and isogenic derivatives of these strains. Sites were
observed until the clinical end point, defined as resolution of
disease, development of a painful pustule, or 14 days of infection. At
the clinical end point, lesions were biopsied with 4- to 6-mm punch
forceps, and the specimens were divided longitudinally. One portion of
each specimen was homogenized and cultured on chocolate agar plates at
33 to 35°C under 5% CO2.
0019-9567/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Localization of Haemophilus ducreyi at
the Pustular Stage of Disease in the Human Model of Infection
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
20°C
until use. We obtained between 150 and 360 sections from each tissue sample.
Antibodies and stains. H. ducreyi was detected with rabbit polyclonal antiserum raised against whole H. ducreyi cells (15) or with murine monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) recognizing specific H. ducreyi surface antigens (see Table 2).
MAbs recognizing eukaryotic antigens included anti-neutrophil elastase MAb NP57 (Dako Corp., Carpinteria, Calif.), anti-neutrophil lactoferrin MAb AHN-9 (PharMingen, San Diego, Calif.), anti-multi-cytokeratin MAbs AE1 and AE3 (Novocastra/Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, Calif.), and anti-vimentin MAb VIM 3B4 (Boehringer Mannheim Biochemicals, Indianapolis, Ind.). Eukaryotic cell membranes were stained with tetramethylrhodamine-6-isothiocyanate (TRITC)-labeled Lens culinaris agglutinin (LCA) (Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, Mo.). Secondary Ab (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, Pa.) included goat anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G and goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin G, which were affinity purified and conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) or indodicarbocyanine (Cy5). For dual labeling experiments, we purchased goat anti-mouse Ab that had been preabsorbed with rabbit serum or immunoglobulins to minimize cross-reactivity with rabbit Ab and goat anti-rabbit Ab that had been preabsorbed with mouse serum or immunoglobulins to minimize cross-reactivity with mouse Ab. Normal goat serum was also obtained from Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories.Staining sections and confocal microscopy. Sections were stained and examined by confocal microscopy as previously described (4). Briefly, sections were permeabilized with 0.2% Triton X-100 in PBS for 15 min, washed three times for 2 min each in PBS, and blocked with 5% normal goat serum in PBS for 30 min. The sections were stained with primary Ab in PBS for 2 h, blocked with 5% normal goat serum in PBS for 30 min, and incubated with fluorescently labeled secondary Ab for 1 h. They were washed three times for 2 min each in PBS after each incubation and for 2 min in H2O after the final incubation. When used, TRITC-LCA was added simultaneously with the secondary Ab. Samples were mounted with Vectashield mounting medium (Vector Laboratories) and examined under a Bio-Rad MRC 1024 confocal laser-scanning microscope. Images were collected separately for FITC, TRITC, and Cy5 signals, and the images were colorized and combined using MetaMorph software (Universal Imaging Corp., West Chester, Pa.).
Negative controls included omitting each primary Ab, omitting each secondary Ab, and staining sections of uninfected upper arm skin obtained from a healthy adult volunteer. No bacterial structures were found when the primary Ab was omitted during staining of infected tissue. When the secondary Ab was omitted, a background of autofluorescence of the tissue was observed in the FITC channel; however, no bacterial structures were seen in any channel used. No bacterial structures were observed when the anti-H. ducreyi primary Ab were used to stain sections of uninfected skin.| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In vivo immunodetection of H. ducreyi.
We examined 19 tissue specimens obtained by biopsy from 14 volunteers who participated
in one of four parent/mutant trials using the human model of H. ducreyi infection (Table 1)
(5, 29a, 31; Young et al., unpublished). The
specimens were obtained from sites inoculated with EDDs of 30 to 120 CFU of H. ducreyi 35000 or 35000HP and their isogenic
derivatives (Table 1). A portion of each specimen was cultured on
nonselective medium. Most were culture positive for H. ducreyi (Table 1). No other bacteria were recovered from any
specimen.
|
|
|
|
Localization of H. ducreyi in lesions. To localize H. ducreyi, we stained sections simultaneously with polyclonal anti-H. ducreyi antiserum and MAbs recognizing eukaryotic components of the lesions followed by Cy5-labeled anti-rabbit and FITC-labeled anti-mouse secondary Ab. The lectin LCA was used as a plasma membrane stain to show the general architecture of the section and the presence of eukaryotic cells in otherwise unstained fields. For these studies, we examined sections from all 16 specimens in which bacteria were found (Table 1). Figure 2D shows a section of a typical tissue specimen stained with anti-PMN lactoferrin and polyclonal anti-H. ducreyi antiserum, in which the bacteria were widely distributed throughout the epidermal pustule, heavily concentrated at its base, and found in the surrounding dermis. Figure 2E shows a serial section stained with hematoxylin and eosin to provide orientation.
Sections doubly stained with anti-PMN elastase and polyclonal anti-H. ducreyi antiserum confirmed that numerous H. ducreyi cells were found in the pustule, mainly associated with the PMN (data not shown). All 16 specimens contained bacteria in the pustule. Vimentin is an intermediate filament present in fibroblasts and leukocytes. An anti-vimentin MAb stained many cells in the dermis and few cells in the epidermis. Dual staining with the anti-vimentin MAb and polyclonal anti-H. ducreyi antiserum demonstrated that H. ducreyi was located in the subpustular dermis in 10 of 16 specimens (Fig. 2F). Only the samples with abundant H. ducreyi in the pustule also contained bacteria in the dermis. While some bacteria appeared to be associated with vimentin-containing structures, they were frequently found in the intercellular, unstained spaces (Fig. 2F). To examine whether H. ducreyi was associated with keratinocytes at the pustular stage of disease, we doubly stained sections with a mixture of two anti-cytokeratin MAbs and with polyclonal anti-H. ducreyi antiserum. The mixture of anti-cytokeratin MAbs stains keratinocytes at all stages of differentiation. No bacteria were found associated with keratinocytes in these samples. Figure 2G shows an area in which the pustule borders keratinocyte layers in the epidermis. Bacteria were numerous within the pustule but were absent from the keratinocyte layers. As seen at higher magnification and stained additionally with TRITC-LCA, the bacteria associated mainly with the cells in the pustule and only rarely neared the edges of the keratinocytes (Fig. 2H). Several specimens that had been inoculated with isogenic mutants from the parent/mutant trials were examined (Table 1). These mutants formed pustules that were clinically and histologically similar to disease caused by their isogenic parents (29a; Young et al., unpublished). The mutants localized to the pustule and dermis in a similar distribution to that of the parent strains.| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this study, we developed an assay to immunodetect H. ducreyi in vivo. We used this technique to localize H. ducreyi within specimens collected from the human model of H. ducreyi infection. The model is advantageous for localization studies in that it provides lesions from sites known to be inoculated with live H. ducreyi and no other ulcer-causing pathogens. Additionally, the lesions do not contain recoverable bacteria other than H. ducreyi. We found H. ducreyi in the pustule and dermis of lesions at the pustular stage of disease. We could not find H. ducreyi associated with keratinocytes in these lesions. To our knowledge, this represents the first localization study of chancroid in which the bacteria were specifically identified as H. ducreyi.
We examined lesions from sites inoculated with H. ducreyi during parent/mutant trials in human subjects. In addition to 10 sites inoculated with the parent strains 35000 or 35000HP, we examined 6 sites inoculated with isogenic mutants of H. ducreyi. These mutants caused disease that was similar to disease caused by the parent strains, and they localized to the same sites as the parents. We therefore considered the parent and mutant sites together in our analysis.
Immunodetection by confocal microscopy provided a sensitive and specific method of detection. The sensitivity was similar to that of culture, with only two discrepancies between the two detection methods in 19 lesions tested. These discrepancies may be explained by the nonuniform distribution of H. ducreyi observed within each specimen. This method also allowed us to immunologically identify bacteria in lesions as H. ducreyi. We concluded that the structures recognized by the polyclonal anti-H. ducreyi antiserum were H. ducreyi because (i) the polyclonal antiserum bound only to bacteria recognized by the H. ducreyi-specific MAb 5C9 and a panel of other MAbs that bind to H. ducreyi; (ii) the polyclonal antiserum did not bind to any structures in uninfected tissue, ruling out the possibility that the structures are part of healthy skin or members of the normal flora; and (iii) no bacteria other than H. ducreyi were recovered in nonselective cultures of the tissues, indicating that few, if any, bacteria other than H. ducreyi were present in these lesions. Additionally, the bacteria were consistent in size and morphology with H. ducreyi.
The dual staining experiments with the panel of MAbs that recognize H. ducreyi surface antigens also demonstrated in vivo expression of these surface proteins. We reported previously that FtpA is expressed in vivo (4); these studies extend those observations to include two outer membrane lipoproteins, PAL and Hlp (Table 2). MAbs recognizing epitopes common to MOMP and OmpA2 gave positive signals, indicating that one or both of these proteins are expressed in vivo. However, 3F12, which binds MOMP but not OmpA2, was nonreactive (Table 2). This could indicate that MOMP is not expressed or may simply mean that the epitope is occluded in vivo or in fixed sections.
H. ducreyi was found in the pustule and the dermis in these samples. In the pustule, bacteria were generally found associated with the surface of PMN, indicating that there may be a specific interaction with these cells. In contrast, bacteria in the dermis did not consistently associate with cellular structures, indicating they may be interacting with other dermal components such as extracellular matrix proteins. We are currently examining the interactions of H. ducreyi with PMN and extracellular matrix proteins in greater detail, including investigating whether the bacteria are intracellular.
One limitation of the model for localization studies is the artificial route of inoculation. The epidermis of upper-arm skin from five uninfected sites or sites inoculated with heat-killed H. ducreyi measured 0.03 to 0.145 mm (data not shown). The allergy-testing device penetrates the skin to a depth of 1.9 mm. The device, therefore, should deliver bacteria along its tines throughout the epidermis and upper dermis and into the deep dermis. The depth of the microabrasions required for H. ducreyi transmission is unknown. Thus, the device may or may not deliver bacteria to deeper sites than are required for normal transmission.
Other limitations of the human model of infection include the facts that we cannot infect volunteers past the pustular stage of disease and that we do not infect mucosal epithelium. However, chancroid readily occurs on stratified squamous epithelial surfaces, including the shaft of the penis, thighs, and buttocks. In a study conducted during a chancroid outbreak in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, 16 of 101 male and 10 of 34 female chancroid patients had lesions on nonmucosal surfaces (12). Additionally, extragenital infection does occur (12, 22). Therefore, localizing H. ducreyi in stratified squamous epithelium is relevant to naturally occurring disease. However, it should be emphasized that our findings are limited to the pustular stage of disease.
Given the number of studies reporting H. ducreyi adherence to keratinocytes in vitro, we were surprised that H. ducreyi did not associate with keratinocytes in vivo in our study. This observation, coupled with detection of the bacteria in the dermis, is consistent with reports that H. ducreyi cannot infect intact skin but requires some abrasion to initiate infection. Alternatively, keratinocyte involvement may occur at earlier or later stages of infection than the pustular stage examined here. These results could also be explained if bacteria are not initially exposed to keratinocytes by the artificial route of inoculation described above. However, preliminary analysis of tissue obtained by biopsy immediately after inoculation suggests that bacteria are being deposited in the epidermis and have access to keratinocytes (data not shown). Possibly, H. ducreyi does not bind to keratinocytes in vivo but binds to dermal targets to initiate infection.
In summary, we have developed a sensitive and specific method to localize H. ducreyi in vivo. Using this method with lesions obtained from the human model of infection, we showed that H. ducreyi localizes to the pustule and dermis at the pustular stage of disease. We do not know the relevance of this work to naturally occurring chancroid; however, the time course of disease and histology of the model resemble naturally occurring infection. We are currently localizing H. ducreyi in naturally occurring chancroidal ulcers and performing a longitudinal study to localize H. ducreyi at earlier stages of disease in the human model of H. ducreyi infection.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Mike Apicella, Meg Ketterer, and Ruben Sandoval for many helpful suggestions and protocols for immunofluorescence staining procedures and for training on the use of the confocal microscope and imaging techniques. We thank Byron Batteiger, Antoinette Hood, and Robert Throm for helpful review of the manuscript.
This work was supported by Public Health Service grants AI27863 and AI31494 from the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). M.E.B. was supported by Public Health Service grant AI09971 from the NIAID. The clinical samples used in this study were obtained from clinical trials supported by the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Clinical Trials Unit, through contract NO1-AI75329 from the NIAID, and by Public Health Service grants AI40263, AI38444, and AI32011 from the NIAID.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Indiana University School of Medicine, Emerson Hall 435, 545 Barnhill Dr., Indianapolis, IN 46202. Phone: (317) 274-8143. Fax: (317) 274-1587. E-mail: mebauer{at}iupui.edu.
Editor: P. E. Orndorff
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Abeck, D., A. P. Johnson, and H. Mensing. 1992. Binding of Haemophilus ducreyi to extracellular matrix proteins. Microb. Pathog. 13:81-84[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 2. |
Alfa, M. J.,
P. Degagne, and T. Hollyer.
1993.
Haemophilus ducreyi adheres to but does not invade cultured human foreskin cells.
Infect. Immun.
61:1735-1742 |
| 3. | Al-Tawfiq, J., J. Harezlak, B. P. Katz, and S. M. Spinola. 2000. Cumulative experience with Haemophilus ducreyi in the human model of experimental infection. Sex. Transm. Dis. 27:111-114[Medline]. |
| 4. | Al-Tawfiq, J. A., M. E. Bauer, K. R. Fortney, B. P. Katz, A. F. Hood, M. Ketterer, M. A. Apicella, and S. M. Spinola. A pilus-deficient mutant of Haemophilus ducreyi is virulent in the human model of experimental infection. J. Infect. Dis., in press. |
| 5. | Al-Tawfiq, J. A., K. R. Fortney, B. P. Katz, C. Elkins, and S. M. Spinola. An isogenic hemoglobin receptor-deficient mutant of Haemophilus ducreyi is attenuated in the human model of experimental infection. J. Infect. Dis., in press. |
| 6. | Al-Tawfiq, J. A., A. C. Thornton, B. P. Katz, K. R. Fortney, K. D. Todd, A. F. Hood, and S. M. Spinola. 1998. Standardization of the experimental model of Haemophilus ducreyi infection in human subjects. J. Infect. Dis. 178:1684-1687[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 7. |
Bauer, M. E., and S. M. Spinola.
1999.
Binding of Haemophilus ducreyi to extracellular matrix proteins.
Infect. Immun.
67:2649-2653 |
| 8. |
Brentjens, R. J.,
M. Ketterer,
M. A. Apicella, and S. M. Spinola.
1996.
Fine tangled pili expressed by Haemophilus ducreyi are a novel class of pili.
J. Bacteriol.
178:808-816 |
| 9. | Brentjens, R. J., S. M. Spinola, and A. A. Campagnari. 1994. Haemophilus ducreyi adheres to human keratinocytes. Microb. Pathog. 16:243-247[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 10. | Fleming, D. T., and J. N. Wasserheit. 1999. From epidemiological synergy to public health policy and practice: the contribution of other sexually transmitted diseases to sexual transmission of HIV infection. Sex. Transm. Infect. 75:3-17[Abstract]. |
| 11. | Freinkel, A. L. 1987. Histological aspects of sexually transmitted genital lesions. Histopathology 11:819-831[Medline]. |
| 12. | Hammond, G. W., M. Slutchuk, J. Scatliff, E. Sherman, J. C. Wilt, and A. R. Ronald. 1980. Epidemiologic, clinical, laboratory, and therapeutic features of an urban outbreak of chancroid in North America. Rev. Infect. Dis. 2:867-879[Medline]. |
| 13. |
Hansen, E. J., and T. A. Loftus.
1984.
Monoclonal antibodies reactive with all strains of Haemophilus ducreyi.
Infect. Immun.
44:196-198 |
| 14. |
Heyman, A.,
P. B. Beeson, and W. H. Sheldon.
1945.
Diagnosis of chancroid.
JAMA
129:935-938 |
| 15. | Hiltke, T. J., M. E. Bauer, J. Klesney-Tait, E. J. Hansen, R. S. Munson, Jr., and S. M. Spinola. 1999. Effect of normal and immune sera on Haemophilus ducreyi 35000HP and its isogenic MOMP and LOS mutants. Microb. Pathog. 26:93-102[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 16. | Hiltke, T. J., A. A. Campagnari, and S. M. Spinola. 1996. Characterization of a novel lipoprotein expressed by Haemophilus ducreyi. Infect. Immun. 64:5047-5052[Abstract]. |
| 17. |
Klesney-Tait, J.,
T. J. Hiltke,
I. Maciver,
S. M. Spinola,
J. D. Radolf, and E. J. Hansen.
1997.
The major outer membrane protein of Haemophilus ducreyi consists of two OmpA homologs.
J. Bacteriol.
179:1764-1773 |
| 18. | Lagergard, T., M. Purven, and A. Frisk. 1993. Evidence of Haemophilus ducreyi adherence to and cytotoxin destruction of human epithelial cells. Microb. Pathog. 14:417-431[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 19. | Lammel, C. J., N. P. Dekker, J. Palefsky, and G. F. Brooks. 1993. In vitro model of Haemophilus ducreyi adherence to and entry into eukaryotic cells of genital origin. J. Infect. Dis. 167:642-650[Medline]. |
| 20. | Magro, C. M., A. N. Crowson, M. Alfa, A. Nath, A. Ronald, J. O. Ndinya-Achola, and J. Nasio. 1996. A morphological study of penile chancroid lesions in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive and -negative African men with a hypothesis concerning the role of chancroid in HIV transmission. Hum. Pathol. 27:1066-1070[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 21. | Marsch, W. C., N. Haas, and G. Stuttgen. 1978. Ultrastructural detection of Haemophilus ducreyi in biopsies of chancroid. Arch. Dermatol. Res. 263:153-157[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 22. |
Morse, S. A.
1989.
Chancroid and Haemophilus ducreyi.
Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
2:137-157 |
| 23. | Ortiz-Zepeda, C., E. Hernandez-Perez, and R. Marroquin-Burgos. 1994. Gross and microscopic features in chancroid: a study in 200 new culture-proven cases in San Salvador. Sex. Transm. Dis. 21:112-117[Medline]. |
| 24. | Palmer, K. L., C. T. Schnizlein-Bick, A. Orazi, K. John, C.-Y. Chen, A. F. Hood, and S. M. Spinola. 1998. The immune response to Haemophilus ducreyi resembles a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction throughout experimental infection of human subjects. J. Infect. Dis. 178:1688-1697[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 25. | Sheldon, W. H., and A. Heyman. 1946. Studies on chancroid. I. Observations on the histology with an evaluation of biopsy as a diagnostic procedure. Am. J. Pathol. 22:415-425. |
| 26. |
Spinola, S. M.,
G. E. Griffiths,
J. A. Bogdan, and M. A. Menegus.
1992.
Characterization of an 18,000-molecular-weight outer membrane protein of Haemophilus ducreyi that contains a conserved surface-exposed epitope.
Infect. Immun.
60:385-391 |
| 27. |
Spinola, S. M.,
G. E. Griffiths,
K. L. Shanks, and M. S. Blake.
1993.
The major outer membrane protein of Haemophilus ducreyi is a member of the OmpA family of proteins.
Infect. Immun.
61:1346-1351 |
| 28. | Spinola, S. M., A. Orazi, J. N. Arno, K. Fortney, P. Kotylo, C.-Y. Chen, A. A. Campagnari, and A. F. Hood. 1996. Haemophilus ducreyi elicits a cutaneous infiltrate of CD4 cells during experimental human infection. J. Infect. Dis. 173:394-402[Medline]. |
| 29. | Spinola, S. M., L. M. Wild, M. A. Apicella, A. A. Gaspari, and A. A. Campagnari. 1994. Experimental human infection with Haemophilus ducreyi. J. Infect. Dis. 169:1146-1150[Medline]. |
| 29a. | Throm, R. E., J. A. Al-Tawfig, K. R. Fortney, B. P. Katz, A. F. Hood, C. A. Slaughter, E. J. Hansen, and S. M. Spinola. Evaluation of an isogenic major outer membrane protein-deficient mutant in the human model of Haemophilus ducreyi infection. Infect. Immun., in press. |
| 30. |
Totten, P. A.,
J. C. Lara,
D. V. Norn, and W. E. Stamm.
1994.
Haemophilus ducreyi attaches to and invades human epithelial cells in vitro.
Infect. Immun.
62:5632-5640 |
| 31. |
Young, R. S.,
K. Fortney,
J. C. Haley,
A. F. Hood,
A. A. Campagnari,
J. Wang,
J. A. Bozue,
R. S. Munson, Jr., and S. M. Spinola.
1999.
Expression of sialylated or paragloboside-like lipooligosaccharides are not required for pustule formation by Haemophilus ducreyi in human volunteers.
Infect. Immun.
67:6335-6340 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»