scholarly journals Clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with acute COVID-19 with Epstein-Barr virus reactivation

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yun Xie ◽  
Song Cao ◽  
Hui Dong ◽  
Hui Lv ◽  
Xiaolei Teng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Epstein Barr Virus ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Virus Reactivation ◽  
Barr Virus ◽  
Ebv Reactivation ◽  
Imaging Characteristics ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Epstein Barr ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus Reactivation

Abstract Background Our goal is to further elucidate the clinical condition and prognosis of patients with severe acute COVID-19 with EBV reactivation. Method This is a retrospective single-center study of COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit of Wuhan No. 3 Hospital (January 31 to March 27, 2020). According to whether Epstein-Barr virus reactivation was detected, the patients were divided into an EBV group and a Non-EBV group. Baseline data were collected including epidemiological, larithmics, clinical and imaging characteristics, and laboratory examination data. Results Of the 128 patients with COVID-19, 17 (13.3%) were infected with Epstein-Barr virus reactivation. In the symptoms,the rate of tachypnoea in the EBV group was apparently higher than that in the Non-EBV group. In lab tests, the lymphocyte and albumin of EBV group decreased more significantly than Non-EBV group, and the D-dimer and serum calcium of EBV group was higher than Non-EBV group. Regarding the infection index, CRP of EBV group was apparently above the Non-EBV group, and no significant difference was found in procalcitonin of the two groups. The incidence of respiratory failure, ARDS, and hypoproteinaemia of EBV group had more incidence than Non-EBV group. The 28-day and 14-day mortality rates of EBV group was significantly higher than that of Non-EBV group. Conclusions In the COVID-19 patients, patients with EBV reactivation had higher 28-day and 14-day mortality rates and received more immuno-supportive treatment than patients of Non-EBV group.

Valganciclovir suppressed Epstein Barr virus reactivation during immunosuppression with alemtuzumab

2014 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 255-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harinder Gill ◽  
Yu-Yan Hwang ◽  
Thomas S.Y. Chan ◽  
Annie W.K. Pang ◽  
Anskar Y.H. Leung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Epstein Barr Virus ◽  
Virus Reactivation ◽  
Barr Virus ◽  
Epstein Barr ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus Reactivation

OR10 Genetic predisposition to interleukin-10 production influences epstein-barr virus reactivation after renal transplantation

2015 ◽  
Vol 76 ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Gaurav Tripathi ◽  
Abdulnaser Abadi ◽  
Poonam Dharmani-Khan ◽  
Lee Anne Tibbles ◽  
Serdar Yilmaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Transplantation ◽  
Genetic Predisposition ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus ◽  
Interleukin 10 ◽  
Virus Reactivation ◽  
Barr Virus ◽  
Epstein Barr ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus Reactivation

scholarly journals Effect of Transforming Growth Factor-β1 on the Cell Growth and Epstein–Barr Virus Reactivation in EBV-Infected Epithelial Cell Lines

Virology ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 288 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Makoto Fukuda ◽  
Kazufumi Ikuta ◽  
Kazuyoshi Yanagihara ◽  
Masako Tajima ◽  
Hirohiko Kuratsune ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus ◽  
Transforming Growth Factor ◽  
Transforming Growth Factor Β1 ◽  
Virus Reactivation ◽  
Barr Virus ◽  
Epithelial Cell Lines ◽  
Epstein Barr ◽  
Infected Epithelial Cell ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus Reactivation

scholarly journals Cytolytic Epstein-Barr Virus Reactivation Therapy for EBV-Associated Gastric Carcinoma

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Jaap M. Middeldorp ◽  
Zlata Novalić ◽  
Sandra A.W.M. Verkuijlen ◽  
Astrid E. Greijer ◽  
Jaap M. Middeldorp
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Carcinoma ◽  
Mouse Model ◽  
Cell Lines ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus ◽  
Drug Combinations ◽  
Model Systems ◽  
Virus Reactivation ◽  
Barr Virus ◽  
Ebv Reactivation ◽  
Epstein Barr

Background: Epstein-Barr virus associated gastric carcinoma (EBVaGC) is considered a distinct GC disease entity, with the virus persisting in a latent phase. Treatment with Epirubicin, Capecitabine and Cisplatin (ECC combination) showed survival benefit in patients with GC in clinical trials (MAGIC study and CRITICS study) when compared to chemotherapy with Capecitabine and Cisplatin (GCb/Cis). Current treatment protocols for GC do not consider virus involvement. Methods: In this study, we tested a CytoLytic Virus Activation (CLVA) strategy consisting of the ECC combination or GCb/Cis together with the HDAC inhibitor Valproic acid (VPA) to define whether EBV reactivation and subsequent antiviral treatment with Ganciclovir (GCV) could be used as virus-targeted therapy for EBVaGC. Drug combinations with VPA and GCV were evaluated in multiple cell lines and in an EBVaGC mouse model based on human naturally EBV-infected SNU-719 cells. Results: EBV reactivation was demonstrated by lytic mRNA transcripts and proteins in treated cells, and the virus-reactivating capacity of different CLVA drug combinations was compared in C666.1, AGS-BX1 and SNU-719 cell lines. In an EBVaGC mouse model, GCb/Cis with VPA and GCV strongly reduced tumor volume and showed the highest potential for EBV-reactivation. Upon a single round of CLVA treatment, EBV DNA levels in circulation decreased, and loss of EBV-positive cells in treated tumors was observed. In vivo EBV-reactivation was revealed by the presence of lytic gene transcripts and proteins in tumor tissues 6 days after treatment. Conclusion: In EBVaGC model systems, CLVA treatment showed a more potent virus reactivation and killing of tumor cells when compared to standard chemotherapy alone, suggesting that addition of VPA plus GCV to the ECC or GCb/Cis combination should be considered in future clinical studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document