Growth, Pathogenesis, and Serological Characteristics of the Japanese Encephalitis Virus Genotype IV Recent Strain 19CxBa-83-Cv.

Genotype IV Japanese encephalitis (JE) virus (GIV JEV) is the least common and most neglected genotype in JEV. We evaluated the growth and pathogenic potential of the GIV strain 19CxBa-83-Cv, which was isolated from a mosquito pool in Bali, Indonesia, in 2019, and serological analyses were also conducted. The growth ability of 19CxBa-83-Cv in Vero cells was intermediate between that of the genotype I (GI) strain Mie/41/2002 and the genotype V (GV) strain Muar, whereas 19CxBa-83-Cv and Mie/41/2002 grew faster than Muar in mouse neuroblastoma cells. The neuroinvasiveness of 19CxBa-83-Cv in mice was higher than that of Mie/41/2002 but lower than that of Muar; however, there were no significant differences in neurovirulence in mice among the three strains. The neutralizing titers of sera from 19CxBa-83-Cv- and Mie/41/2002-inoculated mice against 19CxBa-83-Cv and Mie/41/2002 were similar, whereas the titers against Muar were lower than those of the other two viruses. The neutralizing titers of JE vaccine-inoculated mouse pool serum against 19CxBa-83-Cv and Muar were significantly lower than those against Mie/41/2002. The neutralizing titers against the three viruses were similar in three out of the five serum samples from GI-infected JE patients, although the titers against Mie/41/2002 were higher than those against 19CxBa-83-Cv and Muar in the remaining two sera samples. In summary, we identified the basic characteristics of 19CxBa-83-Cv, but further studies are needed to better understand GIV JEV.

Submicroscopic malaria cases play role in local transmission in Trenggalek district, East Java Province, Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Trenggalek district is a hypoendemic malaria area with mainly imported cases brought by migrant workers from islands outside Java. During malaria surveillance in 2015, no malaria cases were found microscopically, but some cases were positive by PCR. Therefore, a study was conducted to prove that local malaria transmission still occur. METHODS: The adult villagers were invited to the house of the head of this village to be screened for malaria using aseptic venipuncture of 1 mL blood upon informed consent. Thin and thick blood films as well as blood spots on filter paper were made for each subject. The blood films were stained with Giemsa and the blood spots were used to extract DNA for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification to determine the malaria infection. In addition, the history of malaria infection and travel to malaria endemic areas were recorded. Entomologic survey to detect the existence of anopheline vector was also conducted. RESULTS: Of the total 64 subjects that participated in the survey, no malaria parasites were found through microscopic examination of the blood films. The PCR analysis found six positive cases (two Plasmodium falciparum, one Plasmodium vivax and two mixed infection of both species), and two of them had no history of malaria and have never travelled to malaria endemic area. Entomologic survey using human bait trap detected the existence of Anopheles indefinitus that was found to be positive for P. vivax by PCR. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that although we did not find any microscopically slide positive cases, six PCR positive subjects were found. The fact that 2 of the 6 malaria positive subjects have never travelled to malaria endemic area together with the existence of the vector confirm the occurence of local transmission of malaria in the area.