Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15220452›Full record

ArticleJournal of virology2004

Comparison of herpes simplex virus reactivation in ganglia in vivo and in explants demonstrates quantitative and qualitative differences.

N M Sawtell, R L Thompson

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. HSV-1 as a Potential Driver of Alzheimer's Disease.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N M SawtellDivision of Infectious Diseases, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH 45229-3039, USA. Sawtn0@CHMCC.org
R L Thompson
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USUniversity of Cincinnati · US

Funding

OCULAR HSV INFECTION-LATENCY AND PATHOGENESISR01EY013168 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI THOMPSON, RICHARD L · 2000 to 2011
$4.4M
MOLECULAR ANALYSIS OF HSV-I REACTIVATION FROM LATENCYR01AI032121 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI SAWTELL, NANCY M. · 1992 to 2007
$2.1M
NEI NIH HHS EY 13168NEI NIH HHS R01 EY013168NIAID NIH HHS AI32121NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI032121
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The in vivo ganglionic environment directs the latent herpes simplex virus transcriptional program. Since stress-driven perturbations in sensory neurons are thought to play a critical role in the transition from latency to reactivation, a primary concern in the selection of a valid model of the molecular interactions leading to reactivation is the faithful recapitulation of these environments. In this study reactivation of latently infected ganglia excised and cultured in vitro (explanted) is compared to reactivation occurring in latently infected ganglia in vivo following hyperthermic stress. Three notable points emerged. (i). Neurons in explanted ganglia exhibited marked morphological changes within 2 to 3 h postexplant. DNA fragmentation in neuronal nuclei was detected at 3 h, and atypical expression of cell cycle- and stress-regulated proteins such as geminin, cdk2, cdk4, and cytochrome c became apparent at 2 to 48 h. These changes were associated with axotomy and explant and not with the initiation or progression of reactivation and were not observed in ganglia following in vivo hyperthermic stress. (ii). Despite these differences, during the first 22 h primary reactivation events were restricted to a very small number of neurons in vivo and in explanted ganglia. This suggests that at any given time only a few latently infected neurons are competent to reactivate or that the probability of reactivation occurring in any particular neuron is very low. Importantly, the marked changes detected in explanted ganglia were not correlated with increased reactivation, demonstrating that these changes were not associated with the reactivation process per se. (iii). Secondary spread of virus was evident in explanted ganglia within 36 h, an event not observed in vivo. We conclude that explant reactivation may provide an ancillary system for selected studies of the early events in reactivation. However, clear signs of neuronal degeneration within 2 to 3 h postexplant indicate that these ganglia are undergoing major physiological changes not associated with the reactivation process. This ongoing neurodegeneration could alter even the early virus-host interactions in reactivation, and thus caution in the extrapolation of results obtained in explants to the in vivo interactions initiating reactivation is warranted.

Indexed as

Virus ActivationAnimalsCulture TechniquesHerpesvirus 1, HumanIn Situ Nick-End LabelingMiceNeuronsTrigeminal GanglionVirus LatencyVirus Replication

Identifiers

PMID15220452
PMCPMC434126
OpenAlexW2151802519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.