@article{HornSchellerduPlessisetal.2013,
  author    = {Horn, Anne and Scheller, Carsten and du Plessis, Stefan and Arendt, Gabriele and Nolting, Thorsten and Joska, John and Sopper, Sieghart and Maschke, Matthias and Obermann, Mark and Husstedt, Ingo W. and Hain, Johannes and Maponga, Tongai and Riederer, Peter and Koutsilieri, Eleni},
  title     = {Increases in CSF dopamine in HIV patients are due to the dopamine transporter 10/10-repeat allele which is more frequent in HIV-infected individuals},
  series = {Journal of Neural Transmission},
  volume    = {120},
  journal   = {Journal of Neural Transmission},
  doi       = {10.1007/s00702-013-1086-x},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-132385},
  pages     = {1411-1419},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Dysfunction of dopaminergic neurotransmission has been implicated in HIV infection. We showed previously increased dopamine (DA) levels in CSF of therapy-na{\"i}ve HIV patients and an inverse correlation between CSF DA and CD4 counts in the periphery, suggesting adverse effects of high levels of DA on HIV infection. In the current study including a total of 167 HIV-positive and negative donors from Germany and South Africa (SA), we investigated the mechanistic background for the increase of CSF DA in HIV individuals. Interestingly, we found that the DAT 10/10-repeat allele is present more frequently within HIV individuals than in uninfected subjects. Logistic regression analysis adjusted for gender and ethnicity showed an odds ratio for HIV infection in DAT 10/10 allele carriers of 3.93 (95 \% CI 1.72-8.96; p = 0.001, Fishers exact test). 42.6 \% HIV-infected patients harbored the DAT 10/10 allele compared to only 10.5 \% uninfected DAT 10/10 carriers in SA (odds ratio 6.31), whereas 68.1 versus 40.9 \%, respectively, in Germany (odds ratio 3.08). Subjects homozygous for the 10-repeat allele had higher amounts of CSF DA and reduced DAT mRNA expression but similar disease severity compared with those carrying other DAT genotypes. These intriguing and novel findings show the mutual interaction between DA and HIV, suggesting caution in the interpretation of CNS DA alterations in HIV infection solely as a secondary phenomenon to the virus and open the door for larger studies investigating consequences of the DAT functional polymorphism on HIV epidemiology and progression of disease.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RudelPrustySiegletal.2013,
  author    = {Rudel, Thomas and Prusty, Bhupesh K. and Siegl, Christine and Hauck, Petra and Hain, Johannes and Korhonen, Suvi J. and Hiltunen-Back, Eija and Poulakkainen, Mirja},
  title     = {Chlamydia trachomatis Infection Induces Replication of Latent HHV-6},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0061400},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-96731},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Human herpesvirus-6 (HHV-6) exists in latent form either as a nuclear episome or integrated into human chromosomes in more than 90\% of healthy individuals without causing clinical symptoms. Immunosuppression and stress conditions can reactivate HHV-6 replication, associated with clinical complications and even death. We have previously shown that co-infection of Chlamydia trachomatis and HHV-6 promotes chlamydial persistence and increases viral uptake in an in vitro cell culture model. Here we investigated C. trachomatis-induced HHV-6 activation in cell lines and fresh blood samples from patients having Chromosomally integrated HHV-6 (CiHHV-6). We observed activation of latent HHV-6 DNA replication in CiHHV-6 cell lines and fresh blood cells without formation of viral particles. Interestingly, we detected HHV-6 DNA in blood as well as cervical swabs from C. trachomatis-infected women. Low virus titers correlated with high C. trachomatis load and vice versa, demonstrating a potentially significant interaction of these pathogens in blood cells and in the cervix of infected patients. Our data suggest a thus far underestimated interference of HHV-6 and C. trachomatis with a likely impact on the disease outcome as consequence of co-infection.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{StoevesandtHofmannHainetal.2013,
  author    = {Stoevesandt, Johanna and Hofmann, Bernd and Hain, Johannes and Kerstan, Andreas and Trautmann, Axel},
  title     = {Single venom-based immunotherapy effectively protects patients with double positive tests to honey bee and Vespula venom},
  series = {Allergy, Asthma \& Clinical Immunology},
  journal   = {Allergy, Asthma \& Clinical Immunology},
  doi       = {10.1186/1710-1492-9-33},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-96808},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Background Referring to individuals with reactivity to honey bee and Vespula venom in diagnostic tests, the umbrella terms "double sensitization" or "double positivity" cover patients with true clinical double allergy and those allergic to a single venom with asymptomatic sensitization to the other. There is no international consensus on whether immunotherapy regimens should generally include both venoms in double sensitized patients. Objective We investigated the long-term outcome of single venom-based immunotherapy with regard to potential risk factors for treatment failure and specifically compared the risk of relapse in mono sensitized and double sensitized patients. Methods Re-sting data were obtained from 635 patients who had completed at least 3 years of immunotherapy between 1988 and 2008. The adequate venom for immunotherapy was selected using an algorithm based on clinical details and the results of diagnostic tests. Results Of 635 patients, 351 (55.3\%) were double sensitized to both venoms. The overall re-exposure rate to Hymenoptera stings during and after immunotherapy was 62.4\%; the relapse rate was 7.1\% (6.0\% in mono sensitized, 7.8\% in double sensitized patients). Recurring anaphylaxis was statistically less severe than the index sting reaction (P = 0.004). Double sensitization was not significantly related to relapsing anaphylaxis (P = 0.56), but there was a tendency towards an increased risk of relapse in a subgroup of patients with equal reactivity to both venoms in diagnostic tests (P = 0.15). Conclusions Single venom-based immunotherapy over 3 to 5 years effectively and long-lastingly protects the vast majority of both mono sensitized and double sensitized Hymenoptera venom allergic patients. Double venom immunotherapy is indicated in clinically double allergic patients reporting systemic reactions to stings of both Hymenoptera and in those with equal reactivity to both venoms in diagnostic tests who have not reliably identified the culprit stinging insect.},
  language  = {en}
}