ReviewViruses2022
A Comparison of Pseudorabies Virus Latency to Other α-Herpesvirinae Subfamily Members.
Review in Viruses, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transition of pseudorabies virus from latency to reactivation state selectively triggered by pathogenic bacteria.Science advances · 2025Article
- Expression Profiles of lncRNAs and mRNAs in the Mouse Brain Infected with Pseudorabies Virus: A Bioinformatic Analysis.Viruses · 2025Article
- RACK1 Associates With STING to Promote Type I Interferon Activation and Inhibit Pseudorabies Virus Infection.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Article
- Pseudorabies Virus Glycoproteins E and B Application in Vaccine and Diagnosis Kit Development.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Advances in the immunoescape mechanisms exploited by alphaherpesviruses.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
- Infectivity and Potential Zoonotic Characteristics of Porcine Pseudorabies Virus in Human Cells.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2024Article
- Article
- Genome editing of pseudorabies virus in the CRISPR/Cas9 era: a mini-review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Review
- Progress on innate immune evasion and live attenuated vaccine of pseudorabies virus.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Mutation and Interaction Analysis of the Glycoprotein D and L and Thymidine Kinase of Pseudorabies Virus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pseudorabies virus (PRV), the causative agent of Aujeszky's disease, is one of the most important infectious pathogens threatening the global pig industry. Like other members of alphaherpesviruses, PRV establishes a lifelong latent infection and occasionally reactivates from latency after stress stimulus in infected pigs. Latent infected pigs can then serve as the source of recurrent infection, which is one of the difficulties for PRV eradication. Virus latency refers to the retention of viral complete genomes without production of infectious progeny virus; however, following stress stimulus, the virus can be reactivated into lytic infection, which is known as the latency-reactivation cycle. Recently, several research have indicated that alphaherpesvirus latency and reactivation is regulated by a complex interplay between virus, neurons, and the immune system. However, with those limited reports, the relevant advances in PRV latency are lagging behind. Therefore, in this review we focus on the regulatory mechanisms in PRV latency via summarizing the progress of PRV itself and that of other alphaherpesviruses, which will improve our understanding in the underlying mechanism of PRV latency and help design novel therapeutic strategies to control PRV latency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.