ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2013
Genetic evaluation of Locus of enterocyte effacement pathogenicity island (LEE) in Enteropathogenic Escherichia coli isolates (EPEC).
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial susceptibility, biofilm formation, and virulence genes among atypical enteropathogenicIranian journal of microbiology · 2025Article
- Hybrid Atypical Enteropathogenic and ExtraintestinalPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- An overview of diarrheagenicJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesEnteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC) divided into two groups typical and atypical (aspect). The main virulence genes are located in a pathogenicity island called LEE (Locus of Enterocyte Effacement). LEE frequently inserted in tRNA genes of selC, pheU and pheV in the bacterial chromosome. tEPEC and aEPEC strains have some differences in their pathogenicity. The purpose of this was to investigate the possible differences between tEPEC and aEPEC strains according to the virulence genes encoding by LEE and their relation to insertion sites. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study 130 E. coli isolates confirmed by biochemical analysis from diarrheal patients, were evaluated for EPEC pathotype by PCR. All EPEC strains tested for presence of some LEE encoded virulence genes and sites of LEE insertion by PCR method.
resultsAmong 50 strains of EPEC 28 (56%) and 22 (44%) were typical and atypical strains respectively. 19 strains (30%) showed insertion in selC, 7 (14%) in pheU, 4 (8%) in pheV, 8 (16%) in pheU and pheV, 1 (2%) in selC and pheU, 6 (12%) in pheV, pheU and selC and 5 (10%) had no insertion in these sites. Moreover, spa (n = 8, 16%), espB (n = 16, 32%), espD (n = 18, 36%), espF (n = 8, 16%), espG (n = 13, 26%), espH (n = 12, 24%), map (n = 11, 32%) and tir (n = 4, 8%) were present among the strains.
conclusionResults showed that most of the virulence genes are present in tEPEC isolates. However, aEPEC isolates may acquire other virulence factors. The majority of tEPEC strains showed insertion at selC and aEPEC strains in pheV and pheU.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25848503PMC4385159What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.