Next Article in Journal
Compost Amendments Based on Vinegar Residue Promote Tomato Growth and Suppress Bacterial Wilt Caused by Ralstonia Solanacearum
Previous Article in Journal
Complex Cell Type-Specific Roles of Autophagy in Liver Fibrosis and Cirrhosis
Review

Recent Advances in Diagnostic Approaches for Epstein–Barr Virus

1
Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan 16150, Malaysia
2
School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Selangor 47500, Malaysia
3
Department of Immunology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan 16150, Malaysia
4
Microbiology Unit, Department of Biological Sciences, College of Natural and Applied Sciences, Summit University Offa, Offa PMB 4412, Kwara State, Nigeria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 4 February 2020 / Revised: 16 March 2020 / Accepted: 17 March 2020 / Published: 18 March 2020
Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) is the causative agent of many diseases including infectious mononucleosis (IM), and it is associated with different subtypes of lymphoma, sarcoma and carcinoma such as Hodgkin’s lymphoma, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, and gastric carcinoma. With the advent of improved laboratory tests for EBV, a timelier and accurate diagnosis could be made to aid better prognosis and effective treatment. For histopathological lesions, the in situ hybridization (ISH) of EBV-encoded RNA (EBER) in biopsy tissues remains the gold standard for detecting EBV. Methods such as the heterophile antibody test, immunofluorescence assays, enzyme immunoassays, Western blot, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) are also employed in the detection of EBV in different types of samples. The determination of EBV viral load using PCR, however, is gaining more prominence in the diagnosis of EBV-associated diseases. Given the challenge of false positive/negative results that are sometimes experienced during the detection of EBV, variability in results from different laboratories, and the impact of factors such as sample type and the immunological status of patients from whom samples are collected, the need to critically examine these present methods is invaluable. This review thus presents current advances in the detection of EBV, detailing the advantages and disadvantages of the various techniques. In addition, fundamental virological concepts are highlighted to enhance the greater understanding, the proper application, and the interpretation of EBV tests. View Full-Text
Keywords: Epstein–Barr virus; laboratory diagnostic techniques; carcinoma; exosome Epstein–Barr virus; laboratory diagnostic techniques; carcinoma; exosome
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Abusalah, M.A.H.; Gan, S.H.; Al-Hatamleh, M.A.I.; Irekeola, A.A.; Shueb, R.H.; Yean Yean, C. Recent Advances in Diagnostic Approaches for Epstein–Barr Virus. Pathogens 2020, 9, 226. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens9030226

AMA Style

Abusalah MAH, Gan SH, Al-Hatamleh MAI, Irekeola AA, Shueb RH, Yean Yean C. Recent Advances in Diagnostic Approaches for Epstein–Barr Virus. Pathogens. 2020; 9(3):226. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens9030226

Chicago/Turabian Style

Abusalah, Mai A.H., Siew H. Gan, Mohammad A.I. Al-Hatamleh, Ahmad A. Irekeola, Rafidah H. Shueb, and Chan Yean Yean. 2020. "Recent Advances in Diagnostic Approaches for Epstein–Barr Virus" Pathogens 9, no. 3: 226. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens9030226

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop