Considering that the Epstein-Barr virus is already known to cause multiple sclerosis and various cancers, there's more than enough justification for a vaccine. Not to mention the possibility of...
Considering that the Epstein-Barr virus is already known to cause multiple sclerosis and various cancers, there's more than enough justification for a vaccine. Not to mention the possibility of severe complications from infection, like spleen rupture, airway obstruction, POTS/CFIDS, hepatitis, meningitis, arthritis, etc. in up to 5% of cases.
Mono is one of the most miserable illnesses you can get as a child or young adult. I was laid up for a month, unable to swallow anything but thin liquids, and on the verge of being hospitalized. I was impossibly tired for another couple of month afterwards, and wound up dropping out of college for a year. And it came back again when I was under stress and sick with another infection.
Even without accounting for costs of labor loss and later EBV-associated diseases, the healthcare economic burden alone has been found to justify the costs of developing and using a vaccine. I'd love to see an EBV eradication campaign.
Layman question: since according to this article EBV integrates itself into DNA and B cells, what kind of vaccine would be helpful for someone who's already been infected? Wouldn't triggering a...
Layman question: since according to this article EBV integrates itself into DNA and B cells, what kind of vaccine would be helpful for someone who's already been infected? Wouldn't triggering a strong immune response via vaccine likely cause the immune system to go haywire and attack itself, just like it's doing with someone who has lupus?
To your point, it would not be terribly helpful, but could provide some benefit. The best use case for vaccines is, as you suggest, to prevent a primary infection from a pathogen. There are some...
To your point, it would not be terribly helpful, but could provide some benefit. The best use case for vaccines is, as you suggest, to prevent a primary infection from a pathogen. There are some indications for secondary exposure vaccines in limited cases. Herpesviruses like EBV do have an example of this in the shingles vaccine, but it is more useful in this case because shingles tends to have very distinct viral reactivation in the context of immunocompromise (typically age and other environmental factors). Does EBV act in this way to cause the secondary pathologies is central to the question of utility of vaccination.
I do feel qualified to speak on this to a degree, I am an immunologist and physician. But I don't do vaccine development or virology in particular, which explains a bit of my hedging!
I guess I would add, just in case anyone was curious, that the latest research I had heard is that lupus may at its core be the result of lysosomal trafficking dysregulation. I've seen some mouse...
I guess I would add, just in case anyone was curious, that the latest research I had heard is that lupus may at its core be the result of lysosomal trafficking dysregulation. I've seen some mouse models of disease that are incredibly similar to lupus (SLE in particular) that are deficient in a lysosomal trafficking gene, but I can't remember which one off the top of my head. Could EBV cause this? Sure, but I wonder if we will eventually subcategorize lupus based on the etiology of this dysfunction
I am 100% not an expert - anything I know is from old public health study and a speedrun of getting up to date on immunology for personal reasons. The answer to your question is, "it's...
I am 100% not an expert - anything I know is from old public health study and a speedrun of getting up to date on immunology for personal reasons.
EBV presents distinct antigenic proteins depending on whether it's infecting epithelial cells, immune B-cells, whether it's actively replicating (lytic phase), or whether it's latent (hiding in DNA). And there are three different types of latency, all with their own immunosuppressive proteins and different cancer and other risks.
The most promising preventative vaccines prime immune T-cells to target proteins from the infection and lytic stages. The most promising anti-tumor vaccines prime immune T-cells to target a cocktail of proteins from all three latent stages, particularly the ones that facilitate transformation of infected cells into "immortalized" cancer cells.
The good news is that EBV's complicated life cycle produces many unique proteins that provide specific immunogenicity targets without risk of triggering autoimmunity. The bad news is that EBV mutates and not everyone has the same vaccine responses. It's hard to cover the whole life cycle and generate enough immune response in people who are already infected, in part because EBV suppresses immune responses that can attack it.
I'm curious too. But chicken pox/shingles hangs out in your body too, and the vaccines seem effective on the latter even if you've had the former. But it's also interesting in having two separate...
I'm curious too. But chicken pox/shingles hangs out in your body too, and the vaccines seem effective on the latter even if you've had the former. But it's also interesting in having two separate diseases coming from a primary vs secondary exposure.
Sometimes I wish I'd followed through on med school because this stuff is so cool and there's so much work to be done. (Or stayed in a bio/chem major after dropping pre-med, but I did hate microbio)
EBV seems to cause so much shit over time, I cannot wait till the vaccine is out. IIRC the Moderna Vaccine was already in the later stages of clinical trials and they were simultaneously...
EBV seems to cause so much shit over time, I cannot wait till the vaccine is out. IIRC the Moderna Vaccine was already in the later stages of clinical trials and they were simultaneously developing a therapeutic vaccine, for usage when one already falls ill, though that one was in early stages.
A common childhood virus appears to be the trigger for the autoimmune disease lupus, according to groundbreaking research.
The study suggests that Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), which for most people is harmless, can cause immune cells to “go rogue” and mistakenly attack the body’s own tissues. The team behind the work said that uncovering the cause of lupus could revolutionise treatments.
“We think it applies to 100% of lupus cases,” said Prof William Robinson, a professor of immunology and rheumatology at Stanford University and the study’s senior author. “I think it really sets the stage for a new generation of therapies that could fundamentally treat and thereby provide benefit to lupus patients.”
…
EBV is typically a mild illness which causes a sore throat, fever and tonsillitis. By adulthood, about 19 out of 20 people become infected and – since the virus deposits its genetic material into DNA – carry the dormant virus in their cells.
…
If confirmed, the findings would add impetus to clinical trials for an EBV vaccine, which are already under way. There are also several teams exploring repurposing cancer treatments designed to wipe out B cells for severe cases of lupus.
Should I take this to mean the study is not yet peer reviewed? I don't easily have the ability to pull the actual paper (without paying for it), while I work in healthcare, my hospital system does...
If confirmed, the findings would add impetus to clinical trials for an EBV vaccine, which are already under way. There are also several teams exploring repurposing cancer treatments designed to wipe out B cells for severe cases of lupus.
Should I take this to mean the study is not yet peer reviewed? I don't easily have the ability to pull the actual paper (without paying for it), while I work in healthcare, my hospital system does not appear to subscribe to this publisher. So I can't read anything but the abstract.
It's published in a legitimate journal, so it is peer reviewed. "Peer reviewed" doesn't mean the findings of the study are confirmed, it just means a few volunteer experts from the field read the...
Should I take this to mean the study is not yet peer reviewed?
It's published in a legitimate journal, so it is peer reviewed. "Peer reviewed" doesn't mean the findings of the study are confirmed, it just means a few volunteer experts from the field read the article, didn't find any obvious mistakes or inconsistencies within it, and think it deserves to be in the journal.
For anyone reading this in over a week when @tauon's link is expired, I've uploaded the article to LibGen, ZLib and Nexus/STC. Should also get mirrored by Anna's Archive in about a day or so. You...
For anyone reading this in over a week when @tauon's link is expired, I've uploaded the article to LibGen, ZLib and Nexus/STC. Should also get mirrored by Anna's Archive in about a day or so. You should be able to download the paper from there.
Considering that the Epstein-Barr virus is already known to cause multiple sclerosis and various cancers, there's more than enough justification for a vaccine. Not to mention the possibility of severe complications from infection, like spleen rupture, airway obstruction, POTS/CFIDS, hepatitis, meningitis, arthritis, etc. in up to 5% of cases.
Mono is one of the most miserable illnesses you can get as a child or young adult. I was laid up for a month, unable to swallow anything but thin liquids, and on the verge of being hospitalized. I was impossibly tired for another couple of month afterwards, and wound up dropping out of college for a year. And it came back again when I was under stress and sick with another infection.
Even without accounting for costs of labor loss and later EBV-associated diseases, the healthcare economic burden alone has been found to justify the costs of developing and using a vaccine. I'd love to see an EBV eradication campaign.
Layman question: since according to this article EBV integrates itself into DNA and B cells, what kind of vaccine would be helpful for someone who's already been infected? Wouldn't triggering a strong immune response via vaccine likely cause the immune system to go haywire and attack itself, just like it's doing with someone who has lupus?
To your point, it would not be terribly helpful, but could provide some benefit. The best use case for vaccines is, as you suggest, to prevent a primary infection from a pathogen. There are some indications for secondary exposure vaccines in limited cases. Herpesviruses like EBV do have an example of this in the shingles vaccine, but it is more useful in this case because shingles tends to have very distinct viral reactivation in the context of immunocompromise (typically age and other environmental factors). Does EBV act in this way to cause the secondary pathologies is central to the question of utility of vaccination.
I do feel qualified to speak on this to a degree, I am an immunologist and physician. But I don't do vaccine development or virology in particular, which explains a bit of my hedging!
I guess I would add, just in case anyone was curious, that the latest research I had heard is that lupus may at its core be the result of lysosomal trafficking dysregulation. I've seen some mouse models of disease that are incredibly similar to lupus (SLE in particular) that are deficient in a lysosomal trafficking gene, but I can't remember which one off the top of my head. Could EBV cause this? Sure, but I wonder if we will eventually subcategorize lupus based on the etiology of this dysfunction
Thanks for your knowledge! I was wondering about the chickenpox/shingles comparison.
I am 100% not an expert - anything I know is from old public health study and a speedrun of getting up to date on immunology for personal reasons.
The answer to your question is, "it's complicated".
EBV presents distinct antigenic proteins depending on whether it's infecting epithelial cells, immune B-cells, whether it's actively replicating (lytic phase), or whether it's latent (hiding in DNA). And there are three different types of latency, all with their own immunosuppressive proteins and different cancer and other risks.
The most promising preventative vaccines prime immune T-cells to target proteins from the infection and lytic stages. The most promising anti-tumor vaccines prime immune T-cells to target a cocktail of proteins from all three latent stages, particularly the ones that facilitate transformation of infected cells into "immortalized" cancer cells.
The good news is that EBV's complicated life cycle produces many unique proteins that provide specific immunogenicity targets without risk of triggering autoimmunity. The bad news is that EBV mutates and not everyone has the same vaccine responses. It's hard to cover the whole life cycle and generate enough immune response in people who are already infected, in part because EBV suppresses immune responses that can attack it.
I'm curious too. But chicken pox/shingles hangs out in your body too, and the vaccines seem effective on the latter even if you've had the former. But it's also interesting in having two separate diseases coming from a primary vs secondary exposure.
Sometimes I wish I'd followed through on med school because this stuff is so cool and there's so much work to be done. (Or stayed in a bio/chem major after dropping pre-med, but I did hate microbio)
EBV seems to cause so much shit over time, I cannot wait till the vaccine is out. IIRC the Moderna Vaccine was already in the later stages of clinical trials and they were simultaneously developing a therapeutic vaccine, for usage when one already falls ill, though that one was in early stages.
From the article:
…
…
Should I take this to mean the study is not yet peer reviewed? I don't easily have the ability to pull the actual paper (without paying for it), while I work in healthcare, my hospital system does not appear to subscribe to this publisher. So I can't read anything but the abstract.
It's published in a legitimate journal, so it is peer reviewed. "Peer reviewed" doesn't mean the findings of the study are confirmed, it just means a few volunteer experts from the field read the article, didn't find any obvious mistakes or inconsistencies within it, and think it deserves to be in the journal.
Yeah I take "confirmed" to mean follow up studies (I do appreciate the apparent focus on addressing the confirmation crisis here too)
Expires in a week
For anyone reading this in over a week when @tauon's link is expired, I've uploaded the article to LibGen, ZLib and Nexus/STC. Should also get mirrored by Anna's Archive in about a day or so. You should be able to download the paper from there.
I thought the Epstein-Barr virus was ending up behind prison bars after using Epstein's child prostitution service.
I would love to not have child sexual assault references in more places than they already are.