Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 476

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Cultivation of the Bacillus of Whipple's Disease

Open access
Raoult, Didier, Birg, Marie L., Scola, Bernard La, Fournier, Pierre E., Enea, Maryse, Lepidi, Hubert, Roux, Veronique, Piette, Jean-Charles, Vandenesch, François, Vital-Durand, Denis, Marrie, Tom J.·2000·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Whipple's disease is a systemic bacterial infection, but to date no isolate of the bacterium has been established in subculture, and no strain of this bacterium has been available for study. METHODS: Using specimens from the aortic [corrected] valve of a patient with endocarditis due to Whipple's disease, we isolated and propagated a bacterium by inoculation in a human fibroblast cell line (HEL) with the use of a shell-vial assay. We tested serum samples from our patient, other patients with Whipple's disease, and control subjects for the presence of antibodies to this bacterium. RESULTS: The bacterium of Whipple's disease was grown successfully in HEL cells, and we established subcultures of the isolate. Indirect immunofluorescence assays showed that the patient's serum reacted specifically against the bacterium. Seven of 9 serum samples from patients with Whipple's disease had IgM antibody titers of 1:50 or more, as compared with 3 of 40 samples from the control subjects (P<0.001). Polyclonal antibodies against the bacterium were generated by inoculation of the microorganism into mice and were used to detect bacteria in the excised cardiac tissue from our patient on immunohistochemical analysis. The 16S ribosomal RNA gene of the cultured bacterium was identical to the sequence for Tropheryma whippelii identified previously in tissue samples from patients with Whipple's disease. The strain we have grown is available in the French National Collection. CONCLUSIONS: We cultivated the bacterium of Whipple's disease, detected specific antibodies in tissue from the source patient, and generated specific antibodies in mice to be used in the immunodetection of the microorganism in tissues. The development of a serologic test for Whipple's disease may now be possible.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm200003023420903

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 476

Metadata

Authors
Raoult, D., Birg, M. L., Scola, B. L., Fournier, P. E., Enea, M., Lepidi, H., Roux, V., Piette, J.-C., Vandenesch, F., Vital-Durand, D., & Marrie, T. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2000-03-02
Volume
342
Issue
9
Pages
620-625
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2336422260
Cited by
476
References
0
FWCI
20.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cultivation of the Bacillus of Whipple's Disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm200003023420903
The paper
Raoult, D., Birg, M. L., Scola, B. L., Fournier, P. E., Enea, M., Lepidi, H., Roux, V., Piette, J.-C., Vandenesch, F., Vital-Durand, D., & Marrie, T. J. (2000). Cultivation of the Bacillus of Whipple's Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200003023420903

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.