Publications

Notable Recent Publications

These are some recent publications which give a flavour of the research from the Barclay lab. For a complete list of publications, please see below.

Species difference in ANP32A underlies influenza A virus polymerase host restriction. Nature (2016).
Jason S. Long, Efstathios S. Giotis, Olivier Moncorgé, Rebecca Frise, Bhakti Mistry, Joe James, Mireille Morisson, Munir Iqbal, Alain Vignal, Michael A. Skinner & Wendy S. Barclay

This paper identified a key factor that explained why the polymerases from avian influenza viruses are restricted in humans.  For more, please see the associated New and Views.

See our latest ANP32 papers here: eLIFE, Journal of Virology, Journal of Virology.

The mechanism of resistance to favipiravir in influenza. PNAS (2018).
Daniel H. Goldhill, Aartjan J. W. te Velthuis, Robert A. Fletcher, Pinky Langat, Maria Zambon, Angie Lackenby & Wendy S. Barclay

This paper showed how influenza could evolve resistance to favipiravir, an antiviral that may be used to treat influenza. The residue that mutated to give resistance was highly conserved suggesting that the mechanism of resistance may be applicable to other RNA viruses.

Internal genes of a highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus determine high viral replication in myeloid cells and severe outcome of infection in mice. Plos Path. (2018).
Hui Li*, Konrad C. Bradley*, Jason S. Long, Rebecca Frise, Jonathan W. Ashcroft, Lorian C. Hartgroves, Holly Shelton, Spyridon Makris, Cecilia Johansson, Bin Cao & Wendy S. Barclay

Why do avian influenza viruses like H5N1 cause such severe disease in humans? This paper demonstrated that H5N1 viruses replicate better than human viruses in myeloid cells from mice leading to a cytokine storm and more severe disease.

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Atchison:2020:cid/ciaa1178,
author = {Atchison, C and Pristerà, P and Cooper, E and Papageorgiou, V and Redd, R and Piggin, M and Flower, B and Fontana, G and Satkunarajah, S and Ashrafian, H and Lawrence-Jones, A and Naar, L and Chigwende, J and Gibbard, S and Riley, S and Darzi, A and Elliott, P and Ashby, D and Barclay, W and Cooke, GS and Ward, H},
doi = {cid/ciaa1178},
journal = {Clinical Infectious Diseases},
pages = {1--10},
title = {Usability and acceptability of home-based self-testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies for population surveillance},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1178},
volume = {2020},
year = {2020}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - BACKGROUND: This study assesses acceptability and usability of home-based self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA). METHODS: We carried out public involvement and pilot testing in 315 volunteers to improve usability. Feedback was obtained through online discussions, questionnaires, observations and interviews of people who tried the test at home. This informed the design of a nationally representative survey of adults in England using two LFIAs (LFIA1 and LFIA2) which were sent to 10,600 and 3,800 participants, respectively, who provided further feedback. RESULTS: Public involvement and pilot testing showed high levels of acceptability, but limitations with the usability of kits. Most people reported completing the test; however, they identified difficulties with practical aspects of the kit, particularly the lancet and pipette, a need for clearer instructions and more guidance on interpretation of results. In the national study, 99.3% (8,693/8,754) of LFIA1 and 98.4% (2,911/2,957) of LFIA2 respondents attempted the test and 97.5% and 97.8% of respondents completed it, respectively. Most found the instructions easy to understand, but some reported difficulties using the pipette (LFIA1: 17.7%) and applying the blood drop to the cassette (LFIA2: 31.3%). Most respondents obtained a valid result (LFIA1: 91.5%; LFIA2: 94.4%). Overall there was substantial concordance between participant and clinician interpreted results (kappa: LFIA1 0.72; LFIA2 0.89). CONCLUSION: Impactful public involvement is feasible in a rapid response setting. Home self-testing with LFIAs can be used with a high degree of acceptability and usability by adults, making them a good option for use in seroprevalence surveys.
AU  - Atchison,C
AU  - Pristerà,P
AU  - Cooper,E
AU  - Papageorgiou,V
AU  - Redd,R
AU  - Piggin,M
AU  - Flower,B
AU  - Fontana,G
AU  - Satkunarajah,S
AU  - Ashrafian,H
AU  - Lawrence-Jones,A
AU  - Naar,L
AU  - Chigwende,J
AU  - Gibbard,S
AU  - Riley,S
AU  - Darzi,A
AU  - Elliott,P
AU  - Ashby,D
AU  - Barclay,W
AU  - Cooke,GS
AU  - Ward,H
DO  - cid/ciaa1178
EP  - 10
PY  - 2020///
SN  - 1058-4838
SP  - 1
TI  - Usability and acceptability of home-based self-testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies for population surveillance
T2  - Clinical Infectious Diseases
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1178
UR  - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32785665
UR  - https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1178/5891615
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/81988
VL  - 2020
ER  -
Download