Next Article in Journal
Genetic Diversity and Spatiotemporal Distribution of SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Guinea: A Meta-Analysis of Sequence Data (2020–2023)
Previous Article in Journal
The Genome Sequences of Baculoviruses from the Tufted Apple Bud Moth, Platynota idaeusalis, Reveal Recombination Between an Alphabaculovirus and a Betabaculovirus from the Same Host
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Viruses and the Brain—A Relationship Prone to Trouble

by
Matylda Barbara Mielcarska
1,* and
Barry T. Rouse
2,*
1
Department of Preclinical Sciences, Institute of Veterinary Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences–SGGW, Jana Ciszewskiego 8, 02-786 Warsaw, Poland
2
College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Viruses 2025, 17(2), 203; https://doi.org/10.3390/v17020203
Submission received: 6 January 2025 / Revised: 23 January 2025 / Accepted: 28 January 2025 / Published: 31 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Human Virology and Viral Diseases)

Abstract

:
Neurological disorders, some of which are associated with viral infections, are growing due to the aging and expanding population. Despite strong defenses of the central nervous system, some viruses have evolved ways to breach them, which often result in dire consequences. In this review, we recount the various ways by which different viruses can enter the CNS, and we describe the consequences of such invasions. Consequences may manifest as acute disease, such as encephalitis, meningitis, or result in long-term effects, such as neuromuscular dysfunction, as occurs in poliomyelitis. We discuss evidence for viral involvement in the causation of well-known chronic neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, as well as vascular dementia in the elderly. We also describe the approaches currently available to control a few of the neural viral infections. These include antivirals that are effective against human immunodeficiency virus and herpes simplex virus, as well as vaccines valuable for controlling rabies virus, poliomyelitis virus, and some flavivirus infections. There is an urgent need to better understand, at a molecular level, how viruses contribute to acute and, especially, chronic neurological diseases and to develop more precise and effective vaccines and therapies.

1. Introduction

Characteristically, the brain of vertebrates is highly protected from invasion by viruses and other factors that could damage its function. Indeed, getting into the brain is no easy task, and few exogenous viral agents can achieve success. There are two highly specialized multicellular obstacles that must be crossed by the virus present in tissues prior its entry to the brain. These are the blood–brain barrier (BBB) and the blood–cerebrospinal fluid (BCSF) barrier. By separating the bloodstream and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from the brain’s own cerebral extracellular fluid, the BBB and BCSF barriers secure the brain from invasion by viruses and other potential hazards such as foreign cells, toxins, and inflammatory factors [1,2]. Nevertheless, some viruses do succeed, and, when this happens, the consequences can be dire.
With some infections, severe damaging consequences rapidly occur, and these are highly disruptive to the brain’s function and are often terminal. Several insect-borne infections within the Flaviviridae family represent examples causing encephalitis [3]. However, some viral infections cause minimal overt damage, and the agents can persist in brain tissues for prolonged periods of time before being associated with lesions. One such example is amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), which is associated with an enterovirus that can invade motor neurons and maintain persistent infection in the central nervous system (CNS) [4]. In some viral infections, chronic sequelae can occur, which sometimes involve the immune system reactivity. Thus, viruses may trigger autoimmune lesions such as multiple sclerosis (MS), although its mechanisms are still unresolved. There is also evidence that viruses can participate in physical and mental decline, although associating these chronic consequences to direct effects of the infection is yet to be substantiated. For example, several viral types that achieve brain access, perhaps accidentally, could act as triggers for the initiation or acceleration of neurodegenerative syndromes such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Furthermore, there is now evidence that endogenous retroviruses, which represent up to 8% of the human genome, sometimes can be precipitated by environmental and perhaps other factors, can get involved in the etiopathogenesis of some inflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases (NDs), which include MS and ALS [5], as well as mental disorders. It is not uncommon to find the footprints of many different viruses in normal as well as diseased brain tissues, but linking the presence of these agents to the cause of either subtle or evident neurological events is highly problematic.
In this review, we describe the numerous mechanisms employed by viruses that permit entrance into the brain and mention the viral properties that can result in neuroinvasive disorders such as encephalitis, meningitis, as well as chronic damage to the brain. We also describe conditions where viruses are not overtly tissue damaging, but can persist in brain tissues and may act as primary or contributary causes of ND. These include AD, Parkinson’s disease (PD), MS, and ALS, together with vascular dementia (VaD), the second most common cause of dementia in the elderly people. During such evaluation, we comment on the value of current diagnostic and therapeutic procedures and suggest improvements that are still needed to clarify this confusing situation. Finally, we deal briefly with the contention that endogenous retroviruses may, in some instances, contribute to degenerative neurological diseases and that retrotransposons may affect motor neuron functioning. We take most of our viral-associated neuro-damaging examples from natural infections of humans and from animal models of infection, the latter of which can often reveal a misleading picture.

2. Getting into the Brain Is Not So Easy

The brain is well protected against invasion, and few viruses have achieved success at gaining entry. Thus, in addition to the hard-to-penetrate bones of the skull, there are two highly specialized multicellular defense walls, the blood–brain barrier (BBB) and the blood–cerebrospinal fluid barrier (BCSF) that must be crossed if a virus or other factor such as a toxin or drug is to pass from a systemic location and enter brain tissue. The BBB is composed of non-fenestrated vessels comprising polarized endothelial cells connected by tight and adherent junctions, the capillary basement membrane, pericytes, and astrocyte endfeet, which provide an effective separation between blood and perivascular spaces [6] (see Figure 1).
The functions of endothelial cells, the central component of the BBB, are dependent on the interactions with pericytes and astrocytes as well as factors circulating in the CNS microenvironment such as cytokines and other soluble molecules [2,7].
One of the most prominent roles of the BBB is the precise regulation of paracellular, and thus vascular, permeability, which is attained with junction complexes that include tight, adherens, and gap junctions connecting endothelial cells [8,9]. Tight junctions (TJs) consist of integral membrane proteins such as occludins and claudins, with claudin-5 being the major constitutive claudin of the BBB. The TJ also comprise additional junctional adhesion molecules, cytoplasmic accessory zonula occludens phosphoproteins, and others [10]. The TJs provide low paracellular permeability to ions and small molecules and are major contributors to BBB properties [11]. The adherens junctions present a similar organization to the TJ and consist of cadherins and supporting catenins, and these regulate signaling processes as well as secure cell–cell adhesion [8]. Gap junctions consist of proteins from the connexin family [12], and play a role in cell proliferation and migration beyond intercellular communication [13]. The cytoskeleton linked to junction scaffolding proteins is also an indispensable component of intercellular connections. The types of junctions between BBB endothelial cells are depicted in Figure 2.
Vascular endothelial cells of the BBB are dynamic, semipermeable, and extremely selective and serve to regulate what can access and pass through the barrier. However, the BBB can be subjected to damage, and its permeability may increase as a person ages, accounting for the onset of age-related syndromes, some of which could be associated with opportunist viral infections, as discussed by Noe and colleagues [14]. Furthermore, some infections may accelerate NDs [15], and some have speculated that this happens in some survivors of COVID-19 [16].
The BCSF barrier is formed by a pair of membranes—one, composed of choroid plexus epithelial cells, and the second, the arachnoid membrane, composed of several layers of fibroblasts [17], that envelops the brain [18]. The choroid plexus-derived membrane consists of a layer of specialized ciliated glial cells that form the ependymal epithelium, which lines the ventricles of the brain and produces CSF on one side and surrounds capillaries on the other side. In comparison to the BBB, the BSCF barrier blood vessels are fenestrated, and astrocytes are not involved in the barrier structure. The BCSF barrier is a critical determinant of brain homeostasis and has several functions. These include secreting and regulating the ionic and nutrient composition of CSF, which provides a route for signal transduction between the choroid plexus and the brain via CSF [19]. This also limits the access of potentially neurotoxic compounds to the CNS [20]. Moreover, the BCSF barrier participates in the recruitment, skewing, and suppression of immune cells from the bloodstream into the CNS [21]. The BCSF likely prevents most viruses from accessing the brain, although how this is accomplished has received minimal investigation in comparison to the BBB. Several BCSF barrier models have now been developed so further understanding of the consequences of virus–BCSF interaction is anticipated [22]. Other recent studies indicate that aging is associated with morphological and molecular changes in the BCSF barrier, as well as altered CSF production and turnover. These changes may contribute to age-related cognitive decline and neurodegenerative disorders and perhaps to susceptibility to viruses that could help cause some of these lesions [21,23].
The protection of the CNS has been suggested to reflect the defense of a medieval castle [24,25]. The castle is surrounded by two walls bordering a moat, located behind a closed gate, hidden, but in plain sight [26,27]. However, despite these protective barriers, castles like the brain were never invincible, and some viruses do achieve neuroinvasion. We next describe the different strategies that viruses employ to achieve this maneuver.

3. What Makes a Virus Capable of Neuroinvasion?

There are basically two main avenues for a virus to enter the undamaged CNS: passage by way of nerve axons that synapse in the CNS or traversing the protective BBB and BCSF barriers. Those human infecting viral pathogens that take the former route include rabies virus (RABV), poliovirus (PV), and alpha herpesviruses. Curiously, with the latter virus infections, when the agent is not a specific pathogen of the species, oftentimes the virus transports to the brain to cause lethal encephalitis, which is an uncommon outcome in the natural host. An example is human infection with Herpes B, an insignificant pathogen in some primate species [28] but often causing lethal encephalitis if humans are infected. Moreover, although, immunologically, normal humans rarely suffer encephalitis following herpes simplex virus (HSV) infection, some primate relatives infected with HSV are highly prone to develop encephalitis [29]. A similar example occurs with alphaviruses in some domestic animals [30]. Thus, Pseudorabies virus (PRV) usually causes a peripheral infection in its natural host, the pig, but it is apt to result in encephalitis if cattle, feline, or canine species are infected [31,32]. The reasons for these differences in viral tropism are not fully understood, but herpesviruses always establish a second lifestyle in animals they infect, referred to as latency. With alpha herpesviruses, latency is established and maintained in the peripheral nervous system but is subject to reversal from time to time. When this occurs, the pathogen commonly passes anterogradely via sensory nerves to peripheral sites where recurrent lesions may occur [33]. During reactivation, the pathogen may also disseminate via neuronal projections from the latency site to the CNS, causing severe encephalitis or raising no symptoms, but the frequency of the latter phenomenon occurrence remains unknown. There is some evidence that HSV can persist in the CNS and perhaps be a cause of neurodegenerative disorders, although this remains an area of controversy [34]. There is also evidence that some of the flaviviruses may access the CNS by infecting olfactory neurons or peripheral nerves and exploit retrograde axonal transport [35,36], although it is not known how often this route occurs compared to crossing the BBB.

3.1. Neuronal Route of Infection

An example of a virus using the axonal transport route to invade the CNS is RABV, and this usually ends in fatal encephalomyelitis [37]. After inoculation by a bite or scratch from an infected animal, the virus enters a motor neuron of the PNS via receptor-mediated endocytosis at the neuromuscular junction [38,39]. RABV retrogradely traverses the neuron by hijacking the microtubule transport machinery [40,41]. After reaching the cell soma, the virus replicates and spreads trans-synaptically to subsequent neurons to ultimately disseminate in the CNS to culminate in death of the host [42]. Once in the CNS, the virus encounters scanty obstacles to its spread since neuronal cells have few, if any, immune defenses, and the virus produces multifunctional proteins that further inhibit the extent of any innate immune reactions, for example, RABV P [43,44]. This occurs by mechanisms that include the production of proteins that arrest interferon signaling, inhibit inflammatory cell infiltration to the CNS, and induce apoptosis in infiltrating T cells [45,46].
Once within neurons, RABV induces major alterations in gene expression [47], in axon and dendrite degeneration [48,49], as well as neurotransmitter dysregulation [37,50]. Interestingly, in some instances, the brain of RABV-infected animals contains a small number of necrotic neurons without evidence of inflammation, yet animals still suffer from lethal consequences [51,52]. This likely happens because the field strain of RABV primarily infects and damages astrocytes, with neuronal dysfunction as a secondary effect of astrocyte infection. In fact, highly virulent field RABV strains exhibit high tropism for non-neuronal cells in the CNS, with astrocytic infection frequencies far exceeding neuron infection [53,54].
Alpha herpesviruses can also invade the CNS via the neuronal route and exploit the nerve axon transport system. In the case of HSV-1, cellular entry requires the use of specific cellular receptors, which is a key factor determining tissue and cell-specific susceptibility to virus infection. Viral nucleocapsids traffic along microtubules to reach the trigeminal ganglia (TG) and the brainstem by afferent inputs from the TG, where latency is established [55]. Occasionally, primary HSV infection or reactivation from latency may turn into severe acute inflammation, resulting in potentially fatal necrotizing meningoencephalitis [56,57]. Although a rare disorder, herpes simplex encephalitis (HSE), is the most common sporadic infectious encephalitis in humans [58]. One of the determinants of HSV neurovirulence includes the extent of the type I IFN response that limits virus replication, spread, and cytopathic effect in the brain [59]. Mutations that reduce the CNS-intrinsic IFN production in response to HSV-1 may predispose to HSE [60,61]. A comparison of two different viruses using retrograde axonal transport to reach the CNS: RABV and HSV-1 is summarized in Table 1.
In the past decades, a frequent cause of neurological lesions was poliomyelitis virus, (PV), now almost eliminated by effective vaccines and the WHO eradication and endgame program. PV infections are mostly asymptomatic, with viral replication largely confined to the tissues of the oropharynx and gastrointestinal tract, typically accompanied with a brief period of viremia [70,71]. However, in some individuals, the circulating virus may access the CNS either via the BBB or be retrogradely transported along the axons of peripheral nerves. In the latter process, virions undergo endocytosis at synapses, and virus-containing endosomes are transported along the axon, from peripheral regions to the neuronal cell body [72]. Once there, viral particles are uncoated and virus replicates. Interestingly, the pathway of PV dissemination depends on the virus strain [73]. CNS invasion by PV can lead to non-paralytic, aseptic meningitis in a small proportion of cases, or to the infectious destruction of alpha motor neurons located in the anterior horns of the spinal cord, as well as cranial nerve nuclei in the medulla oblongata, pons, and midbrain, resulting in characteristic paralytic poliomyelitis [71]. Surprisingly, most sensory neurons and much of the brain, aside from the brainstem, remain unaffected during the disease. The pattern of viral localization may be attributed to the intrinsic differences in the susceptibility of various neuronal cell types, host genetic variants in the innate immune defenses and cell death pathways, as well as and possibly the route of viral spread [73,74]. The relationship between the latter and the disease’s clinical form, severity, and eventual pattern of paralysis awaits to be determined.
Another route of neuroinvasion that bypasses the CNS barrier defenses is anterograde transport through olfactory sensory neurons. Such cells have their cell bodies in the olfactory epithelium, and their axons pass from the nasal to the cranial cavity to terminate in the olfactory bulb (OB). This makes them the only CNS cells exposed directly to the external environment [51,75]. Various DNA and RNA viruses are initially detected within the OB during neuroinvasive infection, which include herpesviruses, some neurotropic flaviviruses, measles virus (MeV), influenza A virus, and others, as reviewed by Durrant et al. [75].
Interestingly, retinal cells of the eye were recently suggested as another entry point for virus neuroinvasion [76]. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can exhibit ocular tropism, permissively infect, and therefore replicate in retinal cells in vitro [77]. However, if and how the virus may spread into adjacent neurons, such as the neighboring optic nerve constituting the extension of the retina, remains to be clarified.

3.2. Hematogenous Route of Infection

The more common route of entry for neurotropic viruses, as well as for most accidental viral invaders, is from the bloodstream and crossing either the BBB or BCSF barriers. As mentioned before, in normal circumstances, these barriers are difficult to transverse as the membrane cells are tightly attached to each other, and the defense of the site is assisted also by innate immune activities. Those viruses that do succeed have developed a number of strategies. Many of these are listed in Table 2, along with examples of viruses that use the specific strategy.
The mechanisms used to cross the barriers vary, with some viruses passing with no or minimal damage to the barrier cells and junctions between them, whereas others pass by, causing notable damage. Some viruses are only able to pass if the barriers are made more permeable, such as by exposure to pro-inflammatory factors and mediators. The increase in barrier permeability can also occur under the sole influence of some proteins derived from viruses themselves. Finally, passage can be achieved by the so-called Trojan horse mechanism, which is a combination process that we further describe in a separate section.

3.2.1. Neuroinvasion from the Blood Stream

The most prevalent agents that can enter and infect brain cells are insect-transmitted members of the Flavivirus and Togavirus families, which initiate the infection at an extraneural site. Many of these viruses achieve passage into the CNS by the binding of a surface viral glycoprotein to a receptor on BBB endothelial cells, after which cell entry occurs by exploiting clathrin-coated or caveolae-mediated endocytosis. The virus is then released into the CNS tissue without causing overt damage to the endothelial layer. Traversing BBB may occur with or without replication [78], and, once in the CNS, flaviviruses primarily target differentiated neurons [79,80] but also can infect neural progenitor cells (NPCs) [81], astrocytes, and microglia [82,83]. Research on WNV, JEV, TBEV, and ZIKV in vitro and ZIKV-infected animal models has also demonstrated that the transcytotic crossing of endothelial cells caused no changes in BBB overall permeability or integrity [84,85,86,87,88]. Similarly, other arboviruses, such as Venezuelan and Western equine encephalitis viruses (VEEV and WEEV, respectively) from the Togaviridae family, transcytose through brain microvascular endothelial cells without damaging the BBB, as shown by in vitro studies with BBB cultures [89]. However, further research is necessary to verify if these findings hold true in vivo in humans.
A different scenario ensues when viruses that encounter the barrier cells infect and damage the barrier function, and this is often followed by wide scale invasion of the CNS. This situation happens with Paramyxoviridae pathogens such as Hendra virus (HeV) and Nipah virus (NiV) infections [90]. The major characteristic of infections by HeV or NiV is an acute, severe respiratory illness and a widespread endothelial infection in the CNS that rapidly progresses to an often fatal encephalitis [90]. With both pathogens, after a respiratory phase, viremia occurs, and the virus in free form, or bound to host leukocytes, makes contact with BBB endothelial cells as well as choroid plexus blood vessels [91,92]. Cell fusion and syncytium formation mediated by viral envelope glycoproteins, e.g., Nipah virus F envelope glycoprotein (NiF) and NiG then occur, and this results in extensive damage and ready access to cells in the CNS [93]. At the same time, an excessive induction of inflammatory cytokines may occur that further facilitates access to brain tissues [94,95].
In some instances, viral proteins alone also have the potential to substantially disrupt the barrier structure. This can occur with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV-1) and some flavivirus infections [96,97,98]. In the case of HIV-1, the Tat, gp120, and Nef proteins can damage the BBB, causing apoptosis and oxidative stress as well as changing the adhesiveness of endothelial cells [99,100,101]. These proteins also hijack membrane trafficking to degrade or displace host antiviral proteins and activate cytokine secretion, all of which can profoundly affect the endothelium and other BBB components [102,103]. In addition, some flavivirus proteins also have been linked to causing increased endothelial permeability, as detected by some in vitro and in vivo studies [104,105]. For example, the nonstructural protein 1 (NS1) from DENV, ZIKV, WNV, and JEV can bind to the endothelial glycocalyx layer, disrupting its integrity and inducing breakdown [106], as well as contributing to endothelial cells’ apoptosis or lysis [107]. When injected into animals, the DENV NS1 alone can induce the production of key inflammatory cytokines, leading to brain endothelium dysfunction [108,109]. Other flavivirus nonstructural proteins, such as NS2A and NS2B, were shown to act as viroporins and alter membrane permeability in different models [110,111]. However, their role in crossing brain barriers in vivo in human systems awaits exploration [112].
Other viruses that infect the brain mediate the changes they cause indirectly by inducing various cytokines, chemokines, and other protein mediators that in turn increase their access to the brain. Such effects have been observed with some flaviviruses, HIV-1, SARS-CoV-2, and a few other infections [113,114,115]. The effects of these mediators set the scene for the disease pattern that follows [116]. In some cases, induced factors, such as interferons, can act to minimize or even terminate the infection. However, other mediators function to increase the permeability of the brain barriers and hence increase the likelihood of spreading infection, and additional mediators may contribute to the severity of damage once the barrier is crossed [83,96,117]. In some conditions, the virus may not enter the CNS, but central neuroinflammatory effects still occur, likely attributed to mediators. This scenario has been advocated to occur occasionally when SARS-CoV-2 infection results in a “cytokine storm”, a state of hyperinflammation that may lead to neurological lesions [118,119,120]. Pro-inflammatory cytokines and other mediators released during this phenomenon activate barrier endothelial cells and astrocytes and further microglia. These effects induce and amplify neuroinflammation and destabilize and damage the BBB [120,121]. Finally, at times, the induction of brain-damaging mediators has been attributed to the effects of viral components inducing them within the CNS rather than the result of actual CNS infection [104,122]. This may be occurring in some cases of neural problems associated with HIV and perhaps DENV infections [123].
Among the pro-inflammatory mediators that may weaken guard barriers, the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and interleukin (IL)-1β are the most prominent. In vitro studies have shown these to alter the organization of junctional complexes and transcellular trafficking [124]. In addition, IL-6 reduces the expression of a variety of intercellular junction proteins [125], and interferon-γ (IFN-γ), secreted by activated leukocytes, can cause the redistribution of TJ and AJ proteins in culture systems. Additionally, high IFN-γ and TNF concentrations may induce endothelial apoptosis [126], and elevated plasma IL-8 and transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) levels have been advocated to be associated with BBB disruption and increased BBB permeability [118,123,127]. All these pro-inflammatory effects may be counterbalanced, to a varying extent, by the inhibitory activity of the type I IFN response that the viruses induce. Thus, the overall outcome of neural infection by virus is hard to predict in individual infections, and far more studies are warranted, especially using human systems.

3.2.2. Trojan Horse Delivery

The intriguing Trojan horse idea that a virus might succeed in entering the brain hidden within cells that can cross barriers was proposed by Ashley Haase and Bill Narayan to explain how the lentivirus Visna achieved brain access [128,129]. This idea was later extended to explain how mouse cytomegalovirus gets into the brain, and it has been advocated too as a major way that HIV-1 and HCMV gain brain access [130,131,132]. The essence of the Trojan horse concept is that the virus can only access the brain within a cell such as a monocyte, dendritic cell, or lymphocyte, which remains unchanged and may be endowed with heightened mobility and other activities to achieve such passage. Another required step may be that the barrier itself usually needs to be made more receptive by exposure to inflammatory cytokines and chemokines such as the TNF and/or IL-1β, and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1. The Trojan horse idea has been pursued largely by in vitro studies that have focused particularly on HIV-1, HCMV, and, more recently, SARS-CoV-2 [133]. However, proving that the mechanism is a major brain access portal in vivo is problematic, and how such knowledge can influence the selection of protective therapies needs be explored.

3.2.3. Hematogenous Route of Neuroinvasion, Conclusions

In summary, from using in vitro models and some animal models of virus infection, numerous routes have been identified by which a virus can pass from the bloodstream to infect the cells of the CNS [134,135]. Well-studied flaviviruses, such as WNV, can penetrate the CNS through multiple mechanisms, and almost certainly there could be several alternative ways for any particular virus to achieve entry. Furthermore, the pathway employed could vary, depending on the circumstances of infection, genetics of the host, and the past disease history [136]. Sorting out what actually occurs could be highly relevant, especially if the therapies available were more effective against one mechanism than against another. Alas at present, successfully preventing and controlling most acute and particularly chronic viral-associated neurological diseases is not usually a practical procedure, but this scenario is likely to be clarified by further studies.

4. Once the Barriers Protecting the CNS Have Been Breached

4.1. The Disease Scenario When Viruses Infect the Human Brain

Should they succeed in gaining entrance to the CNS, several types of viruses cause neural damage. We have already described some examples in the previous sections, and Table 3 lists the main named viruses that, in humans, cause neuropathologies of clinical consequences.
The outcome of neural invasion can occur quickly after infection, as happens with several flaviviruses, or may take a prolonged time period (up to years) to become manifested. In the latter scenarios, the role of the virus infection, especially as a sole cause of the clinical syndromes, is debatable, as will be mentioned in the sections describing those diseases. The CNS infection outcome is closely linked to the extent of cellular damage that it induces. Already during the viral crossing of the CNS barriers, immune and barrier endothelial cells can undergo activation and release pro-inflammatory factors, which in turn can lead to reactive astrogliosis and microglial activation [198]. Inflammatory cytokines, mediators, and neurotransmitters released by activated glial cells may potentiate the neuroinflammatory state and lead to neurotoxicity and ultimate cell death. CNS cell death may occur via apoptosis; for example, viral proteins may disrupt the equilibrium of various Bcl-2 (B-cell lymphoma 2) family members, leading to the execution of this death pathway. Inflammation can elicit cell death by necroptosis or pyroptosis, mediated by the activation of the TNF receptor or receptors and proteins recognizing viral PAMPs, or by different inflammasome pathways, respectively [199]. Necrotic cells or focal necrotic lesions may also be observed, where severe cellular damage was irreparable, and cells died as a result of necrosis [200].
Perhaps the most famous infectious agents that cause damage to the CNS are prions, which lack nucleic acids but are self-replicating proteins. These are chronic, usually lethal infections that primarily damage the CNS. Examples in humans are Kuru, Creutzfeldt–Jakob syndrome, and, occasionally, infections transmitted from prion-infected animals such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, also called “mad cow disease”, chronic wasting disease affecting cervids throughout North America, and scrapie affecting sheep and goats [201]. Finally, there is evidence that, under some circumstances, endogenous retroviruses, which account for up to 8% of the human genome, may become activated and act as, at least, a cofactor in the expression of some neurological syndromes. This issue is briefly discussed in a later section. The descriptions that follow cover the agents that can cause mainly acute damage to the CNS and that were not described in the section on how viruses enter the CNS.

4.1.1. Flavivirus Infections of the CNS

Several members of the insect-transmitted Flavivirus family can invade the CNS in humans and also domestic animals, leading to severe and sometimes long-lasting neurological disorders and even to death. However, most infections caused by these viruses in humans are asymptomatic or result in mild clinical signs often confused with influenza, but some become febrile and develop acute neurological signs that can progress to encephalitis, and some infected patients suffer long-term neurological complications and lasting disabilities. The outcome of infection with four of the most common flavivirus agents that affect humans is summarized in Table 4.
Not all members of the Flaviviridae family are regular causes of neurological problems, with hepatitis C virus (HCV), YFV, and dengue viruses as notable examples. In addition, some, such as ZIKV, are primarily neural pathogens when they infect the fetus or newborn. Additionally, some flavivirus infections have been associated with subsequent chronic syndromes, such as autoimmune-related disorders and systemic or metabolic disturbances, which may contribute to neurological outcomes.
In order to cause neural lesions, flaviviruses must pass from the blood and enter the CNS, which requires passage across the BBB. Once within the CNS, the outcome depends on the cell type, location, and extent of the infection and, in some instances, the ability of the virus to manage the extent of the host response to infection. JEV, WNV, and TBEV are considered to cause some of the most severe neuroinfections and can present as acute and fulminant encephalitic syndromes with a high mortality rate (see Table 3). Among them, JEV causes severe neurological symptoms, and they are followed by a greater loss of disability-adjusted life years than any other virus transmitted by arthropods [208]. Flaviviral acute encephalitis is accompanied by high viral titers within the brain, elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, disruption of the BBB, and other vascular damage, resulting in increased intracranial pressure and significant swelling in the CNS [235]. Additionally, lesions and necrotic areas are observed in various brain regions, with the specific locations depending on the flavivirus involved [236]. Patients may present behavioral and movement abnormalities, spastic paralysis, and cognitive disorders. Many survivors of the acute illness develop post-encephalitic syndrome and/or suffer from a wide array of long-term or permanent neurological sequelae involving the CNS, PNS, or both [237,238]. JEV, in particular, has the potential to recur months after primary acute encephalitis [239].
With flavivirus infections, neurons are the primary target cell type infected, and such cells may be killed directly by the virus or damaged indirectly by immune-mediated mechanisms. Non-neuronal cells susceptible to infection by selected flaviviruses are listed in Table 5.
The question of whether WNV infects microglia remains contentious, as these cells fail to support viral replication [242]. Glial cells, BMECs, and even some inflammatory cells may serve as potential reservoirs for flaviviruses, allowing for prolonged viral persistence within the host [252,253,254,255] and contributing to the nature of the clinical signs. There is evidence that viral RNA and perhaps complete virions can remain in the CNS for extended periods of time [202,256,257]. In fact, the diseases caused by flaviviruses can present with a wide spectrum of consequences. This likely reflects the distinct cellular and tissue tropism of each virus, variations in their ability to evade or counteract host immunity, and the interplay between pathogenic effects of infection and damage resulting from the host response [3,258]. Indeed, we need to fully understand what factors account for the variable outcome of flavivirus infections with a view to provide useful clues to control these troublesome agents that are of increasing relevance in many locations [259,260,261].
Evidence accumulates showing that some flavivirus infections could be involved either as causes or at least cofactors in the outcome of some chronic neurodegenerative disorders. Some of these disorders are considered primarily as autoimmune lesions (see Table 4 and Table 6).
For example, approximately 45% of Japanese encephalitis survivors suffer from Parkinsonism [274], the term encompassing multiple neurodegenerative disorders characterized by motor dysfunction and unstable posture [275]. In addition, chronic tick-borne encephalitis can present with a number of neurological conditions, which include a disease resembling PD [276], and survivors of WNV infection can experience depression, memory loss, as well as motor dysfunction [277]. Systemic DENV infection that affects the neuroaxis is also indicated as a potential risk factor for developing NDs [278]. Notably, within the Flaviviridae family, DENV accounts for the highest number of annual infections, estimated at 100–400 million cases worldwide, with up to 20% of these cases considered to involve the CNS [279,280]. Abundant studies using animal models of flavivirus infections also have revealed similarities between persistent viral lesions and changes observed in AD, PD, Huntington’s disease (HD), or multiple sclerosis (MS) [277,281]. Even if the solid evidence that flaviviruses are the causes of chronic neurodegenerative diseases in humans is not available, their acting as cofactors in some cases would seem a likely event. Moreover, in situations where a flavivirus is implicated as a cause of either acute or chronic neurodegenerative syndrome, there is the possibility of control by using vaccines. Successful vaccines are available for several flaviviruses, especially to control animal diseases.

4.1.2. HIV Infection of the CNS

HIV primarily targets helper T-lymphocytes and macrophages that express the CD4 molecule, the main cellular receptor for this virus [282]. As early as 1–2 weeks after the primary infection, the virus can gain access to the CNS and is transported there mainly by being present within transmigrating cells, such as monocytes, macrophages, and T-lymphocytes, the often-called Trojan horse infection mechanism, or on the surface of DCs [283,284,285]. The early neuroinvasion by HIV triggers inflammation in the brain, but neurological symptoms are scarce, and only 1–4% of patients develop acute neurological disease. The HIV-infected cells accumulate within the brain parenchyma, where the virus replicates and is released, leading to infection of other CNS cells. The virus may persist in the brain throughout the individual’s lifetime [286] and, in the early phase, this occurs mainly in T cell populations. However, over time, the virus targets perivascular macrophages and microglia, which become the primary sites for HIV replication [287,288,289]. The virus also infects astrocytes, of which up to 20% can harbor a DNA copy of the HIV RNA genome, as they often bear latent and nonproductive viruses [290,291]. Interestingly, HIV-infected macrophages, microglia, and astrocytes are unlikely to undergo apoptosis and can maintain viral infection despite antiretroviral therapy (ART) [195,292,293]. This likely contributes to virus persistence in the CNS [294]. The presence of a viral reservoir in the CNS is recognized as a major challenge to eradicating HIV using ART [295].
Although HIV does not directly infect neurons, infected individuals experience neuronal injuries, such as synaptodendritic damage, the dysregulation of myelination, and axonal damage. The ensuing neuronal loss may result in cognitive difficulties [294,296]. However, the actual causes of neuronal damage and loss are multifaceted and can be attributed in part to the production of neurotoxic viral proteins derived from productively infected non-neuronal cells but, in some cases, even from latently infected cells following low-level transcription [297]. The other cause of neuronal damage is a bystander consequence of an immune reaction triggered in response to viral replication or viral persistence in brain cells [298,299].
Over the course of infection in non-neuronal brain cells, various HIV-encoded proteins may be released that can have a range of effects on nearby cells that include the direct toxic damage of neurons (see Table 7).
Several HIV proteins mediate such paracrine effects, with Tat, gp120, and Nef the most prominent. Additionally, these proteins can induce the expression of various pro-inflammatory cytokines in neurons or activate other types of CNS resident cells [122,304,307]. HIV proteins exhibit both proapoptotic and antiapoptotic properties [321,322] and alter intracellular ionic homeostasis, entailing dysregulation, injury, and death of neurons or non-neuronal cells [326,327,328]. These effects may result in excitotoxic damage to neurons, potentially contributing to neurodegenerative processes [346]. Additional changes include inflammatory cytokine induction, changes in cell-to-cell communication [334], migration patterns, and the propagation of toxic signals to neighboring cells [359]. This functional diversity underscores the critical role of HIV proteins in the development of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders.
During CNS invasion, HIV-infected monocytes present in the CNS, along with macrophages, microglia, and astrocytes, release inflammatory mediators such as the TNF, IL-1β, IL-6, IFN-γ, IL-8, CCL2, CCL5, CXCL10, as well as the platelet-activating factor (PAF), nitric oxide, matrix metalloproteases (MMPs), and arachidonic acid [294,360]. These factors disrupt neuronal homeostasis and metabolism, causing neuronal injury and BBB damage, allowing a greater leakage of serum proteins and other substances into the brain. Additionally, the release of pro-inflammatory factors in the brain of patients with neural signs was shown to dysregulate levels of neurogranin, a protein essential for maintaining synaptic integrity and function [361]. Furthermore, the pro-inflammatory cytokines activate uninfected cells and facilitate the recruitment of infected cells from the bloodstream to the CNS [362]. This exacerbates the cascade of neuroinflammation triggered originally by a small number of transmigrated cells [294]. These consequences of HIV brain infection are highly variable both in terms of the damaging events that occur, their location within the CNS, and the time after infection that lesions become clinically significant.
In high-income countries, most patients diagnosed as HIV-infected are treated with antiviral drugs, and these can be extraordinarily effective at controlling acute disease manifestations, but none succeed in removing the virus from the body, especially when the virus is present in the brain. Many patients infected with HIV eventually develop neurological problems, and these are less prevalent in patients treated with ART [363].
The most common neurological outcome is termed HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs), and this has dropped from affecting about 20% prior to ART to around 2–5% today [364]. While treatment reduces neuronal breakdown, patients on therapy continue to experience ongoing direct virus-related damage or aging-like repercussions attributable to HIV infection [365]. Notably, even in the ART era, the virus persists within the brain, and this could contribute, along with other comorbidities such as age, diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia, to the onset of cognitive impairments that often occur in HIV patients [366]. As individuals with HIV age, they face increasing risk of the accelerated onset of other neurodegenerative disorders, particularly AD [367,368,369,370], AD precursor, amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) [371], Parkinsonism [372,373,374,375,376], vascular dementia [297,377], rarely ALS-like symptoms [378,379], and others. The topic of HIV is complex and fascinating but has received some excellent reviews worth consulting for details [380,381,382,383,384].

4.1.3. SARS-CoV-2 Infection of the CNS

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has profoundly affected human health and the public’s opinions about the value of vaccines. The virus can infect many locations, with the occurrence of encephalitis as a complication in severely ill COVID-19 patients, around 7% [385,386]. Many survivors, including those with mild symptoms, continue to suffer from a debilitating post-viral condition known as LC/PASC (long COVID/post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2) [387]. PASC may share features with myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome. It includes cognitive deficits, the loss of smell, muscle pain, and autonomic dysregulation, as reviewed by Pandya [388]. The potential factors contributing to PASC are viral persistence, activation of the immune responses and autoimmune processes [389]. These consequences are potentially involved in long-term neurological disorders that appear after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although SARS-CoV-2 is associated with acute encephalitis and neurological signs in some patients with LC, whether such signs result from a replicating virus present in the brain is uncertain. However, SARS-CoV-2 antigens and RNA were reported post-mortem in the brain parenchyma of some victims [390,391], but the findings have not been widely supported. Suggestive features such as neuroinflammation, gliosis, vascular, and BBB damage were observed in the brains of some COVID-19 patients [392,393], and others reported extensive neuronal degeneration and morphological changes in glial cells, particularly in the hippocampus of affected individuals [394].
It is conceivable that the neurodegenerative consequences of SARS-CoV-2 could be an indirect result of infection, such as the induction of a cytokine storm that occurs in some patients [395]. In fact, the occurrence of cytokines and chemokines in the CSF, as well as in the circulation, has been documented [396]. Currently, we must conclude that evidence linking SARS-CoV-2 infection directly or indirectly to neurodegeneration remains equivocal and whether SARS-CoV-2 infection alone is sufficient to initiate neurodegeneration remains to be firmly established, as should happen with further research.

4.2. Chronic Neurodegenerative Diseases and Viral Infections

The burden of disability and deaths due to neurological disorders is increasingly recognized as a global health challenge [397]. Neurological disorders are the main cause of human physical and cognitive disability worldwide and the second leading cause of death according to a study analyzing data from 195 countries over 30 years [398]. The burden of NDs, a neurological disorder subset, is expected to at least double in the coming twenty years, giving rise to a significant challenge to keep neurological care accessible to everyone [399]. NDs are diverse in pathophysiology, and multiple risk factors underlie their development, such as genetic makeup, environment, infections, as well as age, which appears to be the most consistent determinant [400].
Senescence entails a multitude of changes across the spectrum of body systems [401], and the brain deteriorates with age in parallel with other organs. Aging causes a decline in cognitive functioning, which is related to brain atrophy and significant changes to the brain’s vascular structure and function [402,403] at varying extents in different brain regions. Further, with increasing age, innate and adaptive immune systems undergo senescence, and increasing inflammatory functions entail chronic low-grade inflammation that could contribute to ND [404]. NDs have increased rapidly in incidence in recent years along with the expansion and aging of the human population [405] and are a common cause of cognitive impairment and morbidity in older people [406].
There are numerous chronic neurodegenerative syndromes, many given a name where one of the likely causes could be a virus infection. In this section, we describe many of these focusing on the role that a virus infection might be playing in their cause and expression.

4.2.1. Parkinson’s Disease (PD)

PD is primarily a disease of older people. It affects approximately 1–2% of individuals over 65 and increases to 4–5% in those reaching 85 [407]. While genetic susceptibility factors explain 10–20% of PD cases, the vast majority have no clear underlying cause identified. The disease is marked by the presence of abnormal intracellular aggregates known as Lewy bodies, Lewy neurites, and cytoplasmic inclusions in glial cells that are primarily composed of α-synuclein proteins [408]. Key pathological features of PD include progressive degeneration and the loss of dopaminergic neurons, particularly in the substantia nigra pars compacta of the midbrain, basal ganglia, and other brain regions, along with a corresponding reduction in dopamine in the striatum [409]. The PD clinical signs encompass motor features such as resting tremors, postural instability, bradykinesia and muscle rigidity, along with non-motor symptoms such as cognitive decline and dementia [410]. Disease manifestations arise when approximately 60% of neurons within the nigrostriatal pathway die [411]. Without the Lewy bodies and other PD pathological hallmarks that characterize primary PD, secondary Parkinsonism may appear, which is similar in clinical presentation [412]. An unresolved question is do virus infections either help set off or contribute to the pathogenesis of PD? Several clues suggest this could occur.
For example, following the 1918 H1N1 influenza A pandemic, cases of post-encephalitic Parkinsonism became a more common occurrence [413], but later H1N1 flu pandemics did not find a similar association, and the virus was not detected in brain of the victims. Moreover, the infection of mice with neurogenic strains of influenza mimics PD [414]. By meta-analysis, infections with HSV, MuV, HBV, and HCV have been associated with an increased risk of PD [415,416], and successful HCV drug therapy was associated with a reduced risk of subsequent PD [415,417]. Infections with Saint Louis encephalitis virus, JEV, WNV, Coxsackie virus and HIV can all produce some core motor symptoms characteristic of PD and were associated with postencephalitic Parkinsonism [418]. Other viruses associated with Parkinsonism include Echovirus, PV, MeV, HSV, EBV, CMV, VZV, Borna disease virus, and WEEV [193,418]. However, in the case of PD, there are some data consistent with the notion that exposure to some viruses protects a person against subsequently developing PD [419].
We conclude that the case for any virus causing or contributing to the expression of PD is very weak, but it does not exclude several virus infections acting as cofactors in PD pathogenesis. We can also surmise that exposure to an infected colleague is highly unlikely to cause PD in the exposed person.

4.2.2. Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and Other Major Neurocognitive Disorders (MNDs)

Dementia, now referred to as major neurocognitive disorder (MND), is characterized by a progressive and persistent decline in memory and cognitive functions. It is recognized as the fifth leading global cause of death [420]. The most prevalent forms of MNDs include AD, which affects approximately 25 million individuals worldwide and accounts for 60–80% of all cases and vascular dementia (VaD) constituting around 15% of cases [421,422,423]. Familial cases of AD account for only 1–5% of the total [422]. In the case of VaD, a long list of risk factors has been documented [424], but the underlying causes of MNDs continue to impede the effective prevention of these diseases.
The majority of MNDs, including AD, are proteopathies defined by the accumulation of native proteins within the brain, which are considered key mediators of the disease pathology [425]. Surprisingly, the deposition of amyloid-beta (Aβ), an AD hallmark observed in the brain of patients, may be the brain’s physiological solution to its need to suppress the effects of an invader [426]. VaD is characterized by impaired cerebral blood flow leading to small and microscopic infarcts that collectively contribute to vascular brain damage, a key pathological feature of this syndrome [427]. Notably, this type of pathology also can be observed in other types of dementia. The amyloid and vascular theories are central frameworks that attempt to explain AD and VaD origins [428]. However, aggravating the complexity of causation and diagnosis is the frequent occurrence and coexistence of AD and VaD, making the pathological expression variable and changeable [428].
A feature playing a prominent role in the pathogenesis and progression of almost all MNDs is a persistent inflammatory response in the CNS that represents a reaction of glial cells to injurious signals that need to be repaired [429]. The root cause of chronic neural inflammatory reactions may be a persistent stimulus that eventually results in neurodegeneration [429,430], and such stimuli could include pathogens, notably viruses. In particular, when exposed to infection, microglia become more responsive to stimuli, a phenomenon known as microglial priming. The cells can serve as a major source of inflammatory cytokines, thereby exacerbating brain inflammation [431].
In fact, several named viruses have been implicated as having a potential role in the etiology of MNDs. These include members of the Picornaviridae family [432,433], ZIKV, HIV, MeV, IAV, HCV [434], as well as at least six members of the Herpesviridae family, some of which can be detected in AD patients’ brain [435]. Scrutinous observations have focused on a role for HSV-1 cerebral infection but so far without convincing evidence. The issue is made complicated by the high positive seroprevalence of HSV-1 in the general population, as well as some studies that showed that 65–75% of otherwise healthy, deceased individuals carried HSV-1 in their brain [34]. Similar findings are claimed for HHV-6, with its presence detected in the brain of up to 87.5% of people with no clinical signs of active infection or neurological disease [145]. Curiously, one study showed that around 1% of the population had the HHV-6 genome present in all nucleated cells of the body, attributed to infection and integration into progenitor germinal cells [157].
We must conclude that an abundance of circumstantial but rarely confirmed information implicates herpesviruses as involved in any neurodegenerative syndrome. However, the issue is far from settled. Conceivably, MDNs could be caused by the cumulative impact of multiple infections or exposure to a high virus dose to set off such lesions. The results of ongoing studies examining large cohorts with long follow-up periods and multiple infections might solve the dilemma. For instance, an analysis of exposure to 925 infectious diseases before dementia onset in hundreds of thousands of people concluded that dementia risk was associated with the number of episodes of hospital-treated infections [436]. The greatest risk was seen for CNS infections, but complicating the issue was the observation that extra-CNS infections also made dementia more likely. Another study examining hundreds of thousands of people and 45 viral exposures showed a strong association between viral encephalitis, or viral infections of other organs, with dementia [437]. Interestingly, the greatest likelihood of diagnosing the dementia existed in the first year after encephalitis, but a significantly elevated risk of ND was observed even 15 years after viral exposure.
Other data supporting the possible causality of viruses in dementia include post-vaccination reduceddementia risk. For instance, the nationwide shingles vaccination program against VZV in Wales has been associated with the decreased incidence of dementia in the immunized, particularly VaD and AD [438]. Interestingly, the reduction was linked to improved vascular health rather than a decreased incidence of shingles. Additionally, vaccinations against polio and influenza were associated with a 25–60% reduction in the later development of AD [439]. These findings indicate that vaccines targeting shingles, along with other vaccines for older adults, could play a role in mitigating dementia risk. However, these intriguing observations require independent verification before we rewrite the rulebook.
Assuredly, some viral infections, and particularly those related to the CNS, are linked to a sustained elevation in dementia risk. Notably, this relationship is also valid for infections outside the CNS, which implies their role in influencing brain health. Moreover, the interplay of viral infections with other factors, such as genetics, could be driving the elevated dementia incidence. Conceivably, the increased dementia risk also could be driven more by a generalized inflammatory state than by any specific or multiple infections.

4.2.3. Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and Other Demyelinating Diseases

Among human demyelinating diseases with direct viral involvement, two prominent examples are progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) and subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE). PML is caused by reactivation of the John Cunningham virus from a latent state, particularly in the individuals with immune deficiencies. The productive polyomavirus lytically infects oligodendrocytes, resulting in the formation of demyelinated lesions [440]. Patients experience neurological symptoms, such as cognitive impairment, motor weakness, and paralysis, and the disease generally follows a relentless progression, leading to death within several months [441].
Another virus-caused demyelinating disorder is SSPE, a devastating disease primarily affecting children, generally appearing 7–10 years post-measles infection. SSPE is characterized by progressive cognitive decline, behavioral changes, motor dysfunction, and seizures, ultimately leading to a fatal outcome [442,443].
A third disease where viruses are implicated, so far without solid evidence, is MS. This syndrome is a leading cause of long-term disability in young adults [444]. Usually starting at the age 20 to 40 and occurring more frequently in women, the condition is characterized by the degeneration of myelin sheaths around axons in optic nerves, as well as nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. This leads to diffuse neurodegeneration, as the protective and trophic functions of oligodendrocytes towards neurons cease being produced. The consequence is the production of focal demyelinating plaques associated with varying levels of inflammatory cells within the brain, which in turn lead to progressive, physical and cognitive impairment [445]. The diversity of demyelination patterns observed in MS suggests variability in the mechanisms that contribute to lesion formation [446].
It is hypothesized that the pathogenesis of MS involves an autoimmune process primarily driven by myelin-reactive T cells, but this still remains an unproven concept. Antibodies targeting myelin components also have been observed in MS patients, but their role in causing lesions has not been substantiated. In addition, there is uncertainty as to the role of virus infections as causes or triggers in the development of MS [447]. Many different, named viruses have been suggested to cause MS, particularly by the late flamboyant and clever investigator Hilary Koprowski [448,449], but the strongest case that viruses might cause MS comes from studies in animal models of MS such as EAE. However, the EAE models only partially resemble MS. The most valuable study of such models uses Theiler’s virus in susceptible mouse strains, and these studies have been invaluable to identify how a virus infection could cause demyelinating lesions and set off an autoimmune reaction but also to learn how some viruses might even contribute to controlling such lesions [450]. MS is strongly suspected to represent an autoimmune lesion with myelin components as the antigen source, but the changing disease presentation typical of MS is difficult to comprehend and is not replicated by most EAE models used to study MS. Recently, based on longitudinal studies, a strong case was made that infection with the gamma herpesvirus EBV was correlated with the subsequent development of MS [451]. The study involved over 10 million active military personnel and identified 955 individuals who later or after their service developed MS.
In this comprehensive study, EBV infection was found to increase the risk of MS in the analyzed individuals by 32-fold, and EBV seroconversion occurred in MS patients who were seronegative at the beginning of the study. The effect also happened before elevation of the early marker of preclinical MS in their blood, the serum neurofilament light chain (sNfL). Moreover, the risk of developing MS turned out to be extremely low in those individuals who had not been infected with EBV. These studies were persuasive, but not entirely convincing, and obviously have not been duplicated by an independent study. In addition, and of interest, those who contracted EBV-caused infectious mononucleosis also had an increased risk of developing MS [452], and the presence of antibodies against Epstein–Barr nuclear antigens acted as a strong predictor of MS risk up to 20 years after their appearance [453]. Nevertheless, up to 90% of individuals worldwide are infected with EBV, but only a small minority develop MS, indicating that many other factors are involved in development of the disease. The studies implicating EBV as a cause of MS make a strong case, but the jury is still deliberating. Moreover, were EBV to be a significant causative factor, no way currently exists to prevent the infection or to modulate its infection process.

4.2.4. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)

One tragic, invariably lethal, rare, neurodegenerative disorder of the nervous system that possibly involves viruses is ALS. During ALS progression, the degeneration and rapid loss of motor neurons occur in the motor cortex, brainstem, and anterior horns of the spinal cord [454]. This motor neuron loss results in muscle atrophy with progressive muscle weakness that leads to paralysis, respiratory failure, and, ultimately, death, which typically occurs within 3 to 5 years following onset [455].
Interestingly, up to 50% of ALS patients experience varying levels of cognitive impairment, indicating the additional potential involvement of systems beyond the motor pathways in the disease pathogenesis. ALS can present in either familial or sporadic forms, the latter accounting for about 90–95% of cases [456,457]. The evidence that some virus acts as a cofactor in the cause or expression of ALS remains a debated possibility. The favored candidates for involvement are enteroviruses [4]. These agents are advocated to cause RNA-processing abnormalities, disrupted nucleocytoplasmic transport and consequent protein aggregation, neuroinflammation, deficits in protein quality control mechanisms, as well as the TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) expression observed in motor neurons and glial cells of around 97% ALS patients [458]. The involvement of PV, coxsackievirus, echovirus, enterovirus-A71 (EV-A71), as well as enterovirus-D68, in the development of ALS, also has been hypothesized [457]. However, the causative role of a known virus remains debatable, which is fortunate since it means that ALS patients are not an infectious danger to others. Investigating the possible role of viruses in ALS is also made problematic by the lack of good animal models to study the issue.

4.2.5. Human Endogenous Retroviruses and Their Association with Neurodegenerative Syndromes

Human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs) constitute around 8% of the human genome and are dormant remnants of exogenous retroviruses that incorporated into germline DNA in the distant past and are now vertically transmitted [459]. In addition to their high copy numbers contributing to genomic variation [460,461], the set of HERVs integrated at identified genomic sites can differ among individuals [461,462]. Most open reading frames of HERVs are mutated, rendering them incapable of producing functional proteins or virions, or they are silenced through epigenetic mechanisms [463,464]. Nevertheless, endogenous retroviruses can still influence nearby genes by serving as alternative promoters, or by modifying chromatin structure [465]. Additionally, aging may promote the loss of heterochromatin, and this could result in the transcriptional activation of these normally silenced elements [466]. Moreover, infections with several human viruses, which include HIV-1, HTLV-1, HBV, IAV, and some herpes viruses, can act as triggers of HERV expression [464]. Under favorable physiological or pathological conditions, some endogenous retroviruses may contribute to the onset of neurodegenerative disorders and other syndromes (see Table 8).
However, the mechanistic circumstance that precipitates such events is poorly understood. Nevertheless, evidence continues to accumulate that links endogenous retroviruses to MS, ALS, and other chronic neurodegenerative syndromes [471]. Moreover, endogenous retroviruses are known to influence several aspects of innate immune responsiveness that, in turn, could affect the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders. Furthermore, the increased expression of HERV genes or levels of antibodies against particular HERV peptide fragments could serve as possible biomarkers in patients with MS or ALS [469,473]. In fact, clinical trials have already been initiated in treating diseases where HERVs are implicated [5]. Moreover, in this age where removing or modifying HERVs is becoming feasible, the prospect of the management of chronic neural lesions could become realistic. The topic of how different endogenous retroviruses could play a role in the causation and outcome of various neurological and other chronic diseases, as well as in aging, has been covered in detail in other reviews [5,464,474,475].

5. Conclusions

The brain is the body’s sanctuary. This delicate and essential organ is highly protected against infectious violators since, when this happens, usually a high price must be paid. However, viral invasions do happen, and we describe the circumstances wherein this occurs. We then portray the acute consequences of invasions by several known viruses, after which we discuss the many instances of usually chronic neurodegenerative syndromes where viral involvement is advocated but most often not substantiated. However, with these chronic diseases, which include some common named syndromes such as AD, PD and MS, rarely, if ever, is a single named virus the sole cause of damage to the brain’s function. Instead, viruses are but one of many cofactors that can contribute to the syndromes.
Few viruses have the properties that permit their access to the CNS. To get there from an initial extraneural infection site, they must either transport along nerves that enter the CNS or cross membrane barriers that act as significant obstacles to the passage. Those able to achieve CNS access express several strategies that allow passage, and these activities could be inhibited by therapeutic procedures that strengthen the barrier function. This strategy should be achievable with anti-inflammatory drugs in situations where barrier permeability is increased by inflammatory factors derived from the virus or the host itself. In other circumstances, vaccines against the causative viruses can be effective, but, except for Rabies virus with its often extraordinarily long incubation time after infection before it expresses lesions and perhaps shingles, vaccines must be used prior to infection to be effective against neural consequences. Some prophylactic vaccines have been extraordinarily efficacious, most notable those against polioviruses, but few viral neuropathogens are currently controllable with vaccines. We expect this situation to change when more is known about the molecular events involved during infection and disease along with the application of new developments in vaccine design that can target critical events in viral pathogenesis and are less toxic. Accordingly, effective vaccines would be useful to minimize the impact of Nipah viral infection, as well as some human flavivirus infections that currently lack vaccines. Vaccines are used effectively to control several encephalitides of veterinary relevance; for example, VEE and an attenuated VEE vaccine are used by special groups, such as the US military, and they have side effects that the general public would not accept.
Another control measure to protect the brain would be to use antiviral drugs and perhaps biologicals. Alas, this approach is currently used against very few viruses that infect the brain. Antivirals are valuable to counteract the severe consequences of HSV and HIV infections, although, in most instances, they do not succeed in removing the virus from the brain or some other locations. Other neural infections potentially controllable by antiviral therapy include infections that are caused by some of the flaviviruses and togaviruses, since effective antivirals are used against similar viruses that mainly cause non-neural diseases. Most notable are the highly effective antivirals used against the hepatitis C flavivirus.
While it seems fair to expect that the future will see therapies and vaccines that effectively manage some acute viral neural diseases, controlling chronic ND syndromes by targeting the putative viral involvement will remain far more problematic. Thus, although viruses are advocated to cause, or at least contribute, to the development and course of several major ND diseases, which include AD, MS, PD and several others, controlling them by targeting viruses seems implausible. Moreover, any role for a virus in those major ND diseases is likely to be as a cofactor amongst many others. Thus, targeting viruses to control such diseases will be futile. With some chronic NDs, such as ALS, the evidence for viral involvement is stronger, but controlling ALS by therapies that target a virus are ineffective at present. Nevertheless, the good news with most if not all chronic ND syndromes is that the affected person is unlikely to be an infectious source of danger to others. With some chronic NDs, a case linking them to a named virus, such as EBV with MS, has strong circumstantial support, but, even if substantiated, effective vaccines or antivirals currently are lacking to control the possible viral cause. We can conclude that much has been learned, but more needs to be known before we solve the problems that viruses cause when they access the brain. Stay tuned.

Author Contributions

M.B.M. and B.T.R. wrote, reviewed, and edited the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

The authors extend heartfelt gratitude to Ada Schollenberger for critical suggestions during writing the manuscript and for the valuable inputs of colleagues during discussions on the topic. Considering the vast and dynamic scope of the discussed field, we apologize to authors whose work could not be cited due to space limitations. Figure 1 and Figure 2 were created with Biorender.Com.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Daneman, R.; Prat, A. The Blood-Brain Barrier. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2015, 7, a020412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Alahmari, A. Blood-Brain Barrier Overview: Structural and Functional Correlation. Neural Plast. 2021, 2021, 6564585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Pierson, T.C.; Diamond, M.S. The Continued Threat of Emerging Flaviviruses. Nat. Microbiol. 2020, 5, 796–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Xue, Y.C.; Liu, H.; Mohamud, Y.; Bahreyni, A.; Zhang, J.; Cashman, N.R.; Luo, H. Sublethal Enteroviral Infection Exacerbates Disease Progression in an ALS Mouse Model. J. Neuroinflammation 2022, 19, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Adler, G.L.; Le, K.; Fu, Y.H.; Kim, W.S. Human Endogenous Retroviruses in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Genes 2024, 15, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Dotiwala, A.K.; McCausland, C.; Samra, N.S. Anatomy, Head and Neck: Blood Brain Barrier; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, Z.; Li, G. Immune Response and Blood–Brain Barrier Dysfunction during Viral Neuroinvasion. Innate Immun. 2021, 27, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Stamatovic, S.M.; Johnson, A.M.; Keep, R.F.; Andjelkovic, A.V. Junctional Proteins of the Blood-Brain Barrier: New Insights into Function and Dysfunction. Tissue Barriers 2016, 4, e1154641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Duong, C.N.; Vestweber, D. Mechanisms Ensuring Endothelial Junction Integrity Beyond VE-Cadherin. Front. Physiol. 2020, 11, 519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Liu, W.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, L.; Wei, X.; Li, L. Tight Junction in Blood-Brain Barrier: An Overview of Structure, Regulation, and Regulator Substances. CNS Neurosci. Ther. 2012, 18, 609–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Lochhead, J.J.; Yang, J.; Ronaldson, P.T.; Davis, T.P. Structure, Function, and Regulation of the Blood-Brain Barrier Tight Junction in Central Nervous System Disorders. Front. Physiol. 2020, 11, 914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. De Bock, M.; De Smet, M.; Verwaerde, S.; Tahiri, H.; Schumacher, S.; Van Haver, V.; Witschas, K.; Steinhäuser, C.; Rouach, N.; Vandenbroucke, R.E.; et al. Targeting Gliovascular Connexins Prevents Inflammatory Blood-Brain Barrier Leakage and Astrogliosis. JCI Insight 2022, 7, e135263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Kameritsch, P.; Pogoda, K.; Pohl, U. Channel-Independent Influence of Connexin 43 on Cell Migration. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2012, 1818, 1993–2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Noe, C.R.; Noe-Letschnig, M.; Handschuh, P.; Noe, C.A.; Lanzenberger, R. Dysfunction of the Blood-Brain Barrier—A Key Step in Neurodegeneration and Dementia. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2020, 12, 185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. De Vlieger, L.; Vandenbroucke, R.E.; Van Hoecke, L. Recent Insights into Viral Infections as a Trigger and Accelerator in Alzheimer’s Disease. Drug Discov. Today 2022, 27, 103340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Krey, L.; Huber, M.K.; Höglinger, G.U.; Wegner, F. Can SARS-CoV-2 Infection Lead to Neurodegeneration and Parkinson’s Disease? Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 1654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Saboori, P.; Sadegh, A. Histology and Morphology of the Brain Subarachnoid Trabeculae. Anat. Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 279814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Laterra, J.; Keep, R.; Betz, L.A.; Goldstein, G.W. Blood—Brain—Cerebrospinal Fluid Barriers. In Basic Neurochemistry: Molecular, Cellular and Medical Aspects, 6th ed.; Lippincott-Raven: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kaiser, K.; Bryja, V. Choroid Plexus: The Orchestrator of Long-Range Signalling Within the CNS. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 4760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sanchez-Covarrubias, L.; Slosky, L.M.; Thompson, B.J.; Davis, T.P.; Ronaldson, P.T. Transporters at CNS Barrier Sites: Obstacles or Opportunities for Drug Delivery? Curr. Pharm. Des. 2014, 20, 1422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ayub, M.; Jin, H.K.; Bae, J.-S. The Blood Cerebrospinal Fluid Barrier Orchestrates Immunosurveillance, Immunoprotection, and Immunopathology in the Central Nervous System. BMB Rep. 2021, 54, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Dabbagh, F.; Schroten, H.; Schwerk, C. In Vitro Models of the Blood–Cerebrospinal Fluid Barrier and Their Applications in the Development and Research of (Neuro)Pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceutics 2022, 14, 1729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Chen, R.L.; Kassem, N.A.; Redzic, Z.B.; Chen, C.P.C.; Segal, M.B.; Preston, J.E. Age-Related Changes in Choroid Plexus and Blood-Cerebrospinal Fluid Barrier Function in the Sheep. Exp. Gerontol. 2009, 44, 289–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Proulx, S.T.; Engelhardt, B. Central Nervous System Zoning: How Brain Barriers Establish Subdivisions for CNS Immune Privilege and Immune Surveillance. J. Intern. Med. 2022, 292, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Muldoon, L.L.; Alvarez, J.I.; Begley, D.J.; Boado, R.J.; Del Zoppo, G.J.; Doolittle, N.D.; Engelhardt, B.; Hallenbeck, J.M.; Lonser, R.R.; Ohlfest, J.R.; et al. Immunologic Privilege in the Central Nervous System and the Blood–Brain Barrier. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 2012, 33, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Carson, M.J.; Doose, J.M.; Melchior, B.; Schmid, C.D.; Ploix, C.C. CNS Immune Privilege: Hiding in Plain Sight. Immunol. Rev. 2006, 213, 48–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Daniels, B.P.; Klein, R.S. Knocking on Closed Doors: Host Interferons Dynamically Regulate Blood-Brain Barrier Function during Viral Infections of the Central Nervous System. PLoS Pathog. 2015, 11, e1005096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Lu, J.; Long, Y.; Sun, J.; Gong, L. Towards a Comprehensive View of the Herpes B Virus. Front. Immunol. 2023, 14, 1281384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sakulwira, K.; Theamboonlers, A.; Charoonrut, P.; Ratanakorn, P.; Poovorawan, Y. Serological Evidence of Herpesvirus Infection in Gibbons. BMC Microbiol. 2002, 2, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. de Matos, R.; Russell, D.; Van Alstine, W.; Miller, A. Spontaneous Fatal Human Herpesvirus 1 Encephalitis in Two Domestic Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). J. Vet. Diagn. Investig. 2014, 26, 689–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Liu, A.; Xue, T.; Zhao, X.; Zou, J.; Pu, H.; Hu, X.; Tian, Z. Pseudorabies Virus Associations in Wild Animals: Review of Potential Reservoirs for Cross-Host Transmission. Viruses 2022, 14, 2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Sehl, J.; Teifke, J.P. Comparative Pathology of Pseudorabies in Different Naturally and Experimentally Infected Species-A Review. Pathogens 2020, 9, 633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Wisner, T.W.; Sugimoto, K.; Howard, P.W.; Kawaguchi, Y.; Johnson, D.C. Anterograde Transport of Herpes Simplex Virus Capsids in Neurons by Both Separate and Married Mechanisms. J. Virol. 2011, 85, 5919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Duarte, L.F.; Farías, M.A.; Álvarez, D.M.; Bueno, S.M.; Riedel, C.A.; González, P.A. Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 Infection of the Central Nervous System: Insights into Proposed Interrelationships with Neurodegenerative Disorders. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2019, 13, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bai, F.; Ashley Thompson, E.; Vig, P.J.S.; Arturo Leis, A. Current Understanding of West Nile Virus Clinical Manifestations, Immune Responses, Neuroinvasion, and Immunotherapeutic Implications. Pathogens 2019, 8, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Samuel, M.A.; Wang, H.; Siddharthan, V.; Morrey, J.D.; Diamond, M.S. Axonal Transport Mediates West Nile Virus Entry into the Central Nervous System and Induces Acute Flaccid Paralysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 17140–17145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fooks, A.R.; Cliquet, F.; Finke, S.; Freuling, C.; Hemachudha, T.; Mani, R.S.; Müller, T.; Nadin-Davis, S.; Picard-Meyer, E.; Wilde, H.; et al. Rabies. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers 2017, 3, 17091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Le Blanc, I.; Luyet, P.P.; Pons, V.; Ferguson, C.; Emans, N.; Petiot, A.; Mayran, N.; Demaurex, N.; Fauré, J.; Sadoul, R.; et al. Endosome-to-Cytosol Transport of Viral Nucleocapsids. Nat. Cell Biol. 2005, 7, 653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Piccinotti, S.; Kirchhausen, T.; Whelan, S.P.J. Uptake of Rabies Virus into Epithelial Cells by Clathrin-Mediated Endocytosis Depends upon Actin. J. Virol. 2013, 87, 11637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Tsiang, H.; Ceccaldi, P.E.; Lycke, E. Rabies Virus Infection and Transport in Human Sensory Dorsal Root Ganglia Neurons. J. Gen. Virol. 1991, 72, 1191–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bauer, A.; Nolden, T.; Nemitz, S.; Perlson, E.; Finke, S. A Dynein Light Chain 1 Binding Motif in Rabies Virus Polymerase L Protein Plays a Role in Microtubule Reorganization and Viral Primary Transcription. J. Virol. 2015, 89, 9591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Chailangkarn, T.; Tanwattana, N.; Jaemthaworn, T.; Sriswasdi, S.; Wanasen, N.; Tangphatsornruang, S.; Leetanasaksakul, K.; Jantraphakorn, Y.; Nawae, W.; Chankeeree, P.; et al. Establishment of Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Neurons—A Promising in Vitro Model for a Molecular Study of Rabies Virus and Host Interaction. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 11986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Rieder, M.; Conzelmann, K.K. Interferon in Rabies Virus Infection. Adv. Virus Res. 2011, 79, 91–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Brzózka, K.; Finke, S.; Conzelmann, K.-K. Identification of the Rabies Virus Alpha/Beta Interferon Antagonist: Phosphoprotein P Interferes with Phosphorylation of Interferon Regulatory Factor 3. J. Virol. 2005, 79, 7673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kiflu, A.B. The Immune Escape Strategy of Rabies Virus and Its Pathogenicity Mechanisms. Viruses 2024, 16, 1774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ito, N.; Moseley, G.W.; Sugiyama, M. The Importance of Immune Evasion in the Pathogenesis of Rabies Virus: Veterinary Science Award Winner’s (No.116) Commemorative Review. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2016, 78, 1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Korie, G.C.; Sallau, A.B.; Kanu, B.; Kia, G.S.N.; Kwaga, J.K.P. Rabies Virus Infection Is Associated with Variations in Calbindin D-28K and Calretinin MRNA Expression Levels in Mouse Brain Tissue. Arch. Virol. 2023, 168, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Sundaramoorthy, V.; Green, D.; Locke, K.; O’Brien, C.M.; Dearnley, M.; Bingham, J. Novel Role of SARM1 Mediated Axonal Degeneration in the Pathogenesis of Rabies. PLoS Pathog. 2020, 16, e1008343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Liu, X.; Nawaz, Z.; Guo, C.; Ali, S.; Naeem, M.A.; Jamil, T.; Ahmad, W.; Siddiq, M.U.; Ahmed, S.; Asif Idrees, M.; et al. Rabies Virus Exploits Cytoskeleton Network to Cause Early Disease Progression and Cellular Dysfunction. Front. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 889873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kim, S.; Larrous, F.; Varet, H.; Legendre, R.; Feige, L.; Dumas, G.; Matsas, R.; Kouroupi, G.; Grailhe, R.; Bourhy, H. Early Transcriptional Changes in Rabies Virus-Infected Neurons and Their Impact on Neuronal Functions. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 730892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Davis, B.M.; Rall, G.F.; Schnell, M.J. Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Rabies Virus (but Were Afraid to Ask). Annu. Rev. Virol. 2015, 2, 451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Feige, L.; Zaeck, L.M.; Sehl-Ewert, J.; Finke, S.; Bourhy, H. Innate Immune Signaling and Role of Glial Cells in Herpes Simplex Virus- and Rabies Virus-Induced Encephalitis. Viruses 2021, 13, 2364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Potratz, M.; Zaeck, L.; Christen, M.; Te Kamp, V.; Klein, A.; Nolden, T.; Freuling, C.M.; Müller, T.; Finke, S. Astrocyte Infection during Rabies Encephalitis Depends on the Virus Strain and Infection Route as Demonstrated by Novel Quantitative 3D Analysis of Cell Tropism. Cells 2020, 9, 412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Potratz, M.; Zaeck, L.M.; Weigel, C.; Klein, A.; Freuling, C.M.; Müller, T.; Finke, S. Neuroglia Infection by Rabies Virus after Anterograde Virus Spread in Peripheral Neurons. Acta Neuropathol. Commun. 2020, 8, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Sivasubramanian, M.K.; Monteiro, R.; Harrison, K.S.; Plakkot, B.; Subramanian, M.; Jones, C. Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 Preferentially Enhances Neuro-Inflammation and Senescence in Brainstem of Female Mice. J. Virol. 2022, 96, e0108122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Gnann, J.W.; Whitley, R.J. Herpes Simplex Encephalitis: An Update. Curr. Infect. Dis. Rep. 2017, 19, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Rohani, H.; Arjmand, R.; Mozhgani, S.H.; Shafiee, A.; Javad Amini, M.; Forghani-Ramandi, M.M. The Worldwide Prevalence of Herpes Simplex Virus Encephalitis and Meningitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Turk. Arch. Pediatr. 2023, 58, 580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Quist-Paulsen, E.; Kran, A.M.B.; Lindland, E.S.; Ellefsen, K.; Sandvik, L.; Dunlop, O.; Ormaasen, V. To What Extent Can Clinical Characteristics Be Used to Distinguish Encephalitis from Encephalopathy of Other Causes? Results from a Prospective Observational Study. BMC Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Verzosa, A.L.; McGeever, L.A.; Bhark, S.J.; Delgado, T.; Salazar, N.; Sanchez, E.L. Herpes Simplex Virus 1 Infection of Neuronal and Non-Neuronal Cells Elicits Specific Innate Immune Responses and Immune Evasion Mechanisms. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Lim, H.K.; Seppänen, M.; Hautala, T.; Ciancanelli, M.J.; Itan, Y.; Lafaille, F.G.; Dell, W.; Lorenzo, L.; Byun, M.; Pauwels, E.; et al. TLR3 Deficiency in Herpes Simplex Encephalitis: High Allelic Heterogeneity and Recurrence Risk. Neurology 2014, 83, 1888–1897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Casanova, J.L.; Abel, L. From Rare Disorders of Immunity to Common Determinants of Infection: Following the Mechanistic Thread. Cell 2022, 185, 3086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Schnell, M.J.; McGettigan, J.P.; Wirblich, C.; Papaneri, A. The Cell Biology of Rabies Virus: Using Stealth to Reach the Brain. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2009, 8, 51–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Weed, D.J.; Nicola, A.V. Herpes Simplex Virus Membrane Fusion. Adv. Anat. Embryol. Cell Biol. 2017, 223, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gaudin, Y.; Ruigrok, R.W.H.; Tuffereau, C.; Knossow, M.; Flamand, A. Rabies Virus Glycoprotein Is a Trimer. Virology 2004, 187, 627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Etessami, R.; Conzelmann, K.K.; Fadai-Ghotbi, B.; Natelson, B.; Tsiang, H.; Ceccaldi, P.E. Spread and Pathogenic Characteristics of a G-Deficient Rabies Virus Recombinant: An in Vitro and in Vivo Study. J. Gen. Virol. 2000, 81, 2147–2153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Madavaraju, K.; Koganti, R.; Volety, I.; Yadavalli, T.; Shukla, D. Herpes Simplex Virus Cell Entry Mechanisms: An Update. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 2020, 10, 617578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Xu, J.; Gao, J.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, D.; Duan, M.; Guan, Z.; Guo, Y. Dynein- and Kinesin- Mediated Intracellular Transport on Microtubules Facilitates RABV Infection. Vet. Microbiol. 2021, 262, 109241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Miranda-Saksena, M.; Denes, C.E.; Diefenbach, R.J.; Cunningham, A.L. Infection and Transport of Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 in Neurons: Role of the Cytoskeleton. Viruses 2018, 10, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Piret, J.; Boivin, G. Innate Immune Response during Herpes Simplex Virus Encephalitis and Development of Immunomodulatory Strategies. Rev. Med. Virol. 2015, 25, 300–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Devaux, C.A.; Pontarotti, P.; Levasseur, A.; Colson, P.; Raoult, D. Is It Time to Switch to a Formulation Other than the Live Attenuated Poliovirus Vaccine to Prevent Poliomyelitis? Front. Public Health 2023, 11, 1284337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Wolbert, J.G.; Rajnik, M.; Swinkels, H.M.; Higginbotham, K. Poliomyelitis; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  72. Ohka, S.; Nihei, C.I.; Yamazaki, M.; Nomoto, A. Poliovirus Trafficking toward Central Nervous System via Human Poliovirus Receptor-Dependent and -Independent Pathway. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Nathanson, N. Chapter 1 The Pathogenesis of Poliomyelitis: What We Don’t Know. Adv. Virus Res. 2008, 71, 1–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Andersen, N.S.B.; Larsen, S.M.; Nissen, S.K.; Jørgensen, S.E.; Mardahl, M.; Christiansen, M.; Kay, L.; Mogensen, T.H. Host Genetics, Innate Immune Responses, and Cellular Death Pathways in Poliomyelitis Patients. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 455664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Durrant, D.M.; Ghosh, S.; Klein, R.S. The Olfactory Bulb: An Immunosensory Effector Organ during Neurotropic Viral Infections. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2016, 7, 464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Pacheco-Herrero, M.; Soto-Rojas, L.O.; Harrington, C.R.; Flores-Martinez, Y.M.; Villegas-Rojas, M.M.; León-Aguilar, A.M.; Martínez-Gómez, P.A.; Campa-Córdoba, B.B.; Apátiga-Pérez, R.; Corniel-Taveras, C.N.; et al. Elucidating the Neuropathologic Mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 Infection. Front. Neurol. 2021, 12, 660087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Monu, M.; Ahmad, F.; Olson, R.M.; Balendiran, V.; Singh, P.K. SARS-CoV-2 Infects Cells Lining the Blood-Retinal Barrier and Induces a Hyperinflammatory Immune Response in the Retina via Systemic Exposure. PLoS Pathog. 2024, 20, e1012156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Chiu, C.F.; Chu, L.W.; Liao, I.C.; Simanjuntak, Y.; Lin, Y.L.; Juan, C.C.; Ping, Y.H. The Mechanism of the Zika Virus Crossing the Placental Barrier and the Blood-Brain Barrier. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. van Marle, G.; Antony, J.; Ostermann, H.; Dunham, C.; Hunt, T.; Halliday, W.; Maingat, F.; Urbanowski, M.D.; Hobman, T.; Peeling, J.; et al. West Nile Virus-Induced Neuroinflammation: Glial Infection and Capsid Protein-Mediated Neurovirulence. J. Virol. 2007, 81, 10933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Marinho, P.E.S.; Kroon, E.G. Flaviviruses as Agents of Childhood Central Nervous System Infections in Brazil. New Microbes New Infect. 2019, 31, 100572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Das, S.; Basu, A. Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infects Neural Progenitor Cells and Decreases Their Proliferation. J. Neurochem. 2008, 106, 1624–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Potokar, M.; Jorgačevski, J.; Zorec, R. Astrocytes in Flavivirus Infections. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. de Vries, L.; Harding, A.T. Mechanisms of Neuroinvasion and Neuropathogenesis by Pathologic Flaviviruses. Viruses 2023, 15, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Alimonti, J.B.; Ribecco-Lutkiewicz, M.; Sodja, C.; Jezierski, A.; Stanimirovic, D.B.; Liu, Q.; Haqqani, A.S.; Conlan, W.; Bani-Yaghoub, M. Zika Virus Crosses an in Vitro Human Blood Brain Barrier Model. Fluids Barriers CNS 2018, 15, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Papa, M.P.; Meuren, L.M.; Coelho, S.V.A.; de Oliveira Lucas, C.G.; Mustafá, Y.M.; Matassoli, F.L.; Silveira, P.P.; Frost, P.S.; Pezzuto, P.; Ribeiro, M.R.; et al. Zika Virus Infects, Activates, and Crosses Brain Microvascular Endothelial Cells, without Barrier Disruption. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 2557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Verma, S.; Lo, Y.; Chapagain, M.; Lum, S.; Kumar, M.; Gurjav, U.; Luo, H.; Nakatsuka, A.; Nerurkar, V.R. West Nile Virus Infection Modulates Human Brain Microvascular Endothelial Cells Tight Junction Proteins and Cell Adhesion Molecules: Transmigration across the in Vitro Blood-Brain Barrier. Virology 2009, 385, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Agrawal, T.; Sharvani, V.; Nair, D.; Medigeshi, G.R. Japanese Encephalitis Virus Disrupts Cell-Cell Junctions and Affects the Epithelial Permeability Barrier Functions. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, 69465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Palus, M.; Vancova, M.; Sirmarova, J.; Elsterova, J.; Perner, J.; Ruzek, D. Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus Infects Human Brain Microvascular Endothelial Cells without Compromising Blood-Brain Barrier Integrity. Virology 2017, 507, 110–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Salimi, H.; Cain, M.D.; Jiang, X.; Roth, R.A.; Beatty, W.L.; Sun, C.; Klimstra, W.B.; Hou, J.; Klein, R.S. Encephalitic Alphaviruses Exploit Caveola-Mediated Transcytosis at the Blood-Brain Barrier for Central Nervous System Entry. mBio 2020, 11, 02731-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Alam, A.M. Nipah Virus, an Emerging Zoonotic Disease Causing Fatal Encephalitis. Clin. Med. 2022, 22, 348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Escaffre, O.; Borisevich, V.; Rockx, B. Pathogenesis of Hendra and Nipah Virus Infection in Humans. J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 2013, 7, 308–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Bruno, L.; Nappo, M.A.; Ferrari, L.; Di Lecce, R.; Guarnieri, C.; Cantoni, A.M.; Corradi, A. Nipah Virus Disease: Epidemiological, Clinical, Diagnostic and Legislative Aspects of This Unpredictable Emerging Zoonosis. Animals 2022, 13, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Contreras, E.M.; Johnston, G.P.; Buchholz, D.W.; Ortega, V.; Monreal, I.A.; Zamora, J.L.R.; Cheung, T.; Aguilar, H.C. Roles of Cholesterol in Early and Late Steps of the Nipah Virus Membrane Fusion Cascade. J. Virol. 2021, 95, 2323–2343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Aditi; Shariff, M. Nipah Virus Infection: A Review. Epidemiol. Infect. 2019, 147, e95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Salimi, H.; Klein, R.S.; Salimi, H.; Klein, R.S. Disruption of the Blood-Brain Barrier During Neuroinflammatory and Neuroinfectious Diseases. In Neuroimmune Diseases; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Mustafá, Y.M.; Meuren, L.M.; Coelho, S.V.A.; De Arruda, L.B. Pathways Exploited by Flaviviruses to Counteract the Blood-Brain Barrier and Invade the Central Nervous System. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Lorin, V.; Danckaert, A.; Porrot, F.; Schwartz, O.; Afonso, P.V.; Mouqueta, H. Antibody Neutralization of HIV-1 Crossing the Blood-Brain Barrier. mBio 2020, 11, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Blackhurst, B.M.; Funk, K.E. Molecular and Cellular Mechanisms Underlying Neurologic Manifestations of Mosquito-Borne Flavivirus Infections. Viruses 2023, 15, 2200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Mbita, Z.; Hull, R.; Dlamini, Z. Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1)-Mediated Apoptosis: New Therapeutic Targets. Viruses 2014, 6, 3181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ivanov, A.V.; Valuev-Elliston, V.T.; Ivanova, O.N.; Kochetkov, S.N.; Starodubova, E.S.; Bartosch, B.; Isaguliants, M.G. Oxidative Stress during HIV Infection: Mechanisms and Consequences. Oxid. Med. Cell Longev. 2016, 2016, 8910396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Landi, A.; Iannucci, V.; Van Nuffel, A.; Meuwissen, P.; Verhasselt, B. One Protein to Rule Them All: Modulation of Cell Surface Receptors and Molecules by HIV Nef. Curr. HIV Res. 2011, 9, 496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Anand, A.R.; Rachel, G.; Parthasarathy, D. HIV Proteins and Endothelial Dysfunction: Implications in Cardiovascular Disease. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2018, 5, 425638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Iwamoto, Y.; Ye, A.A.; Shirazinejad, C.; Hurley, J.H.; Drubin, D.G. Kinetic Investigation Reveals an HIV-1 Nef-Dependent Increase in AP-2 Recruitment and Productivity at Endocytic Sites. Mol. Biol. Cell 2024, 35, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Modhiran, N.; Watterson, D.; Muller, D.A.; Panetta, A.K.; Sester, D.P.; Liu, L.; Hume, D.A.; Stacey, K.J.; Young, P.R. Dengue Virus NS1 Protein Activates Cells via Toll-like Receptor 4 and Disrupts Endothelial Cell Monolayer Integrity. Sci. Transl. Med. 2015, 7, 304ra142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Puerta-Guardo, H.; Glasner, D.R.; Espinosa, D.A.; Biering, S.B.; Patana, M.; Ratnasiri, K.; Wang, C.; Beatty, P.R.; Harris, E. Flavivirus NS1 Triggers Tissue-Specific Vascular Endothelial Dysfunction Reflecting Disease Tropism. Cell Rep. 2019, 26, 1598–1613.e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Puerta-Guardo, H.; Glasner, D.R.; Harris, E. Dengue Virus NS1 Disrupts the Endothelial Glycocalyx, Leading to Hyperpermeability. PLoS Pathog. 2016, 12, e1005738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Lin, C.-F.; Lei, H.-Y.; Shiau, A.-L.; Liu, H.-S.; Yeh, T.-M.; Chen, S.-H.; Liu, C.-C.; Chiu, S.-C.; Lin, Y.-S. Endothelial Cell Apoptosis Induced by Antibodies against Dengue Virus Nonstructural Protein 1 via Production of Nitric Oxide. J. Immunol. 2002, 169, 657–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Beatty, P.R.; Puerta-Guardo, H.; Killingbeck, S.S.; Glasner, D.R.; Hopkins, K.; Harris, E. Dengue Virus NS1 Triggers Endothelial Permeability and Vascular Leak That Is Prevented by NS1 Vaccination. Sci. Transl. Med. 2015, 7, 304ra141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Zeng, Q.; Liu, J.; Hao, C.; Zhang, B.; Zhang, H. Making Sense of Flavivirus Non-Strctural Protein 1 in Innate Immune Evasion and Inducing Tissue-Specific Damage. Virus Res. 2023, 336, 199222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Shrivastava, G.; García-Cordero, J.; León-Juárez, M.; Oza, G.; Tapia-Ramírez, J.; Villegas-Sepulveda, N.; Cedillo-Barrón, L. NS2A Comprises a Putative Viroporin of Dengue Virus 2. Virulence 2017, 8, 1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Shrivastava, G.; Visoso-Carvajal, G.; Garcia-Cordero, J.; Leon-Juarez, M.; Chavez-Munguia, B.; Lopez, T.; Nava, P.; Villegas-Sepulveda, N.; Cedillo-Barron, L. Dengue Virus Serotype 2 and Its Non-Structural Proteins 2A and 2B Activate NLRP3 Inflammasome. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 469220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Latanova, A.; Starodubova, E.; Karpov, V. Flaviviridae Nonstructural Proteins: The Role in Molecular Mechanisms of Triggering Inflammation. Viruses 2022, 14, 1808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. de Almeida, S.M.; Rotta, I.; Ribeiro, C.E.; Smith, D.; Wang, R.; Judicello, J.; Potter, M.; Vaida, F.; Letendre, S.; Ellis, R.J. Blood-CSF Barrier and Compartmentalization of CNS Cellular Immune Response in HIV Infection. J. Neuroimmunol. 2016, 301, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Pokorna Formanova, P.; Palus, M.; Salat, J.; Hönig, V.; Stefanik, M.; Svoboda, P.; Ruzek, D. Changes in Cytokine and Chemokine Profiles in Mouse Serum and Brain, and in Human Neural Cells, upon Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus Infection. J. Neuroinflammation 2019, 16, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Costela-Ruiz, V.J.; Illescas-Montes, R.; Puerta-Puerta, J.M.; Ruiz, C.; Melguizo-Rodríguez, L. SARS-CoV-2 Infection: The Role of Cytokines in COVID-19 Disease. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2020, 54, 62–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Zidovec-Lepej, S.; Vilibic-Cavlek, T.; Barbic, L.; Ilic, M.; Savic, V.; Tabain, I.; Ferenc, T.; Grgic, I.; Gorenec, L.; Bogdanic, M.; et al. Antiviral Cytokine Response in Neuroinvasive and Non-Neuroinvasive West Nile Virus Infection. Viruses 2021, 13, 342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Eugenin, E.A.; Berman, J.W. Chemokine-Dependent Mechanisms of Leukocyte Trafficking across a Model of the Blood–Brain Barrier. Methods 2003, 29, 351–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Greene, C.; Connolly, R.; Brennan, D.; Laffan, A.; O’Keeffe, E.; Zaporojan, L.; O’Callaghan, J.; Thomson, B.; Connolly, E.; Argue, R.; et al. Blood–Brain Barrier Disruption and Sustained Systemic Inflammation in Individuals with Long COVID-Associated Cognitive Impairment. Nat. Neurosci. 2024, 27, 421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Rhea, E.M.; Logsdon, A.F.; Hansen, K.M.; Williams, L.M.; Reed, M.J.; Baumann, K.K.; Holden, S.J.; Raber, J.; Banks, W.A.; Erickson, M.A. The S1 Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Crosses the Blood–Brain Barrier in Mice. Nat. Neurosci. 2020, 24, 368–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Hernández-Parra, H.; Reyes-Hernández, O.D.; Figueroa-González, G.; González-Del Carmen, M.; González-Torres, M.; Peña-Corona, S.I.; Florán, B.; Cortés, H.; Leyva-Gómez, G. Alteration of the Blood-Brain Barrier by COVID-19 and Its Implication in the Permeation of Drugs into the Brain. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2023, 17, 1125109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Chen, J.; Tan, R.; Mo, Y.; Zhang, J. The Blood-Brain Barrier in Health, Neurological Diseases, and COVID-19. Fundam. Res. 2022, 2, 817–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Levast, B.; Barblu, L.; Coutu, M.; Prévost, J.; Brassard, N.; Peres, A.; Stegen, C.; Madrenas, J.; Kaufmann, D.E.; Finzi, A. HIV-1 Gp120 Envelope Glycoprotein Determinants for Cytokine Burst in Human Monocytes. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0174550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Pandey, N.; Jain, A.; Garg, R.K.; Kumar, R.; Agrawal, O.P.; Lakshmana Rao, P.V. Serum Levels of IL-8, IFNγ, IL-10, and TGF β and Their Gene Expression Levels in Severe and Non-Severe Cases of Dengue Virus Infection. Arch. Virol. 2015, 160, 1463–1475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Versele, R.; Sevin, E.; Gosselet, F.; Fenart, L.; Candela, P. TNF-α and IL-1β Modulate Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability and Decrease Amyloid-β Peptide Efflux in a Human Blood-Brain Barrier Model. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 10235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Blecharz-Lang, K.G.; Wagner, J.; Fries, A.; Nieminen-Kelhä, M.; Rösner, J.; Schneider, U.C.; Vajkoczy, P. Interleukin 6-Mediated Endothelial Barrier Disturbances Can Be Attenuated by Blockade of the IL6 Receptor Expressed in Brain Microvascular Endothelial Cells. Transl. Stroke Res. 2018, 9, 631–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Lopez-Ramirez, M.A.; Fischer, R.; Torres-Badillo, C.C.; Davies, H.A.; Logan, K.; Pfizenmaier, K.; Male, D.K.; Sharrack, B.; Romero, I.A. Role of Caspases in Cytokine-Induced Barrier Breakdown in Human Brain Endothelial Cells. J. Immunol. 2012, 189, 3130–3139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Veldhuis, W.B.; Floris, S.; Van der Meide, P.H.; Vos, I.M.P.; De Vries, H.E.; Dijkstra, C.D.; Bär, P.R.; Nicolay, K. Interferon-Beta Prevents Cytokine-Induced Neutrophil Infiltration and Attenuates Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 2003, 23, 1060–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Haase, A.T.; Stowring, L.; Narayan, O.; Griffin, D.; Price, D. Slow Persistent Infection Caused by Visna Virus: Role of Host Restriction. Science 1977, 195, 175–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Narayan, O.; Wolinsky, J.S.; Clements, J.E.; Strandberg, J.D.; Griffin, D.E.; Cork, L.C. Slow Virus Replication: The Role of Macrophages in the Persistence and Expression of Visna Viruses of Sheep and Goats. J. Gen. Virol. 1982, 59, 345–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Meltzer, M.S.; Skillman, D.R.; Gomatos, P.J.; Kalter, D.C.; Gendelman, H.E. Role of Mononuclear Phagocytes in the Pathogenesis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 1990, 8, 169–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Pulliam, L. Cytomegalovirus Preferentially Infects a Monocyte Derived Macrophage/Microglial Cell in Human Brain Cultures: Neuropathology Differs between Strains. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 1991, 50, 432–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Daley-Bauer, L.P.; Roback, L.J.; Wynn, G.M.; Mocarski, E.S. Cytomegalovirus Hijacks CX3CR1hi Patrolling Monocytes as Immune-Privileged Vehicles for Dissemination in Mice. Cell Host Microbe 2014, 15, 351–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Percivalle, E.; Sammartino, J.C.; Cassaniti, I.; Arbustini, E.; Urtis, M.; Smirnova, A.; Concardi, M.; Belgiovine, C.; Ferrari, A.; Lilleri, D.; et al. Macrophages and Monocytes: “Trojan Horses” in COVID-19. Viruses 2021, 13, 2178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Koyuncu, O.O.; Hogue, I.B.; Enquist, L.W. Virus Infections in the Nervous System. Cell Host Microbe 2013, 13, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Ayala-Nunez, N.V.; Gaudin, R. A Viral Journey to the Brain: Current Considerations and Future Developments. PLoS Pathog. 2020, 16, e1008434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Rouse, B.T.; Sehrawat, S. Immunity and Immunopathology to Viruses: What Decides the Outcome? Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2010, 10, 514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Bearer, E.L. HSV, Axonal Transport and Alzheimer’s Disease: In Vitro and in Vivo Evidence for Causal Relationships. Future Virol. 2012, 7, 885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Esiri, M.M. Herpes Simplex Encephalitis. An Immunohistological Study of the Distribution of Viral Antigen within the Brain. J. Neurol. Sci. 1982, 54, 209–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. McMahon, A.; Conrick-Martin, I. Commonly Encountered Central Nervous System Infections in the Intensive Care Unit. BJA Educ. 2023, 23, 212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Doll, J.R.; Thompson, R.L.; Sawtell, N.M. Infectious Herpes Simplex Virus in the Brain Stem Is Correlated with Reactivation in the Trigeminal Ganglia. J. Virol. 2019, 93, e02209-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Mielcarska, M.B.; Skowrońska, K.; Wyżewski, Z.; Toka, F.N. Disrupting Neurons and Glial Cells Oneness in the Brain—The Possible Causal Role of Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 (HSV-1) in Alzheimer’s Disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 23, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Pahud, B.A.; Glaser, C.A.; Dekker, C.L.; Arvin, A.M.; Schmid, D.S. Varicella Zoster Disease of the Central Nervous System: Epidemiological, Clinical, and Laboratory Features 10 Years after the Introduction of the Varicella Vaccine. J. Infect. Dis. 2011, 203, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Yakovenko, V.; Ciobotaro, P.; Bardenstein, R.; Zusev, M.; Zimhony, O. The Role of Varicella Zoster Virus (VZV) in Central Nervous System Infectious Syndromes. Can. J. Infect. Dis. Med. Microbiol. 2024, 2024, 6664417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Liedtke, W.; Opalka, B.; Zimmermann, C.W.; Lignitz, E. Age Distribution of Latent Herpes Simplex Virus 1 and Varicella-Zoster Virus Genome in Human Nervous Tissue. J. Neurol. Sci. 1993, 116, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Hemling, N.; Röyttä, M.; Rinne, J.; Pöllänen, P.; Broberg, E.; Tapio, V.; Vahlberg, T.; Hukkanen, V. Herpesviruses in Brains in Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s Diseases. Ann. Neurol. 2003, 54, 267–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Bubak, A.N.; Como, C.N.; Blackmon, A.M.; Jones, D.; Nagel, M.A. Varicella Zoster Virus Differentially Alters Morphology and Suppresses Proinflammatory Cytokines in Primary Human Spinal Cord and Hippocampal Astrocytes. J. Neuroinflammation 2018, 15, 318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Kleinschmidt-DeMasters, B.K.; Gilden, D.H. Varicella-Zoster Virus Infections of the Nervous SystemClinical and Pathologic Correlates. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2001, 125, 770–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Chijioke, O.; Azzi, T.; Nadal, D.; Münz, C. Innate Immune Responses against Epstein Barr Virus Infection. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2013, 94, 1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Soldan, S.S.; Lieberman, P.M. Epstein-Barr Virus Infection in the Development of Neurological Disorders. Drug Discov. Today Dis. Models 2020, 32, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Zhang, N.; Zuo, Y.; Jiang, L.; Peng, Y.; Huang, X.; Zuo, L. Epstein-Barr Virus and Neurological Diseases. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2022, 8, 816098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. Tyler, K.L. The Enigmatic Links between Epstein-Barr Virus Infection and Multiple Sclerosis. J. Clin. Investig. 2022, 132, e160468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Zheng, H.; Savitz, J. Effect of Cytomegalovirus Infection on the Central Nervous System: Implications for Psychiatric Disorders. Curr. Top. Behav. Neurosci. 2023, 61, 215–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Adelman, J.W.; Rosas-Rogers, S.; Schumacher, M.L.; Mokry, R.L.; Terhune, S.S.; Ebert, A.D. Human Cytomegalovirus Induces Significant Structural and Functional Changes in Terminally Differentiated Human Cortical Neurons. mBio 2023, 14, e02251-23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Harberts, E.; Yao, K.; Wohler, J.E.; Maric, D.; Ohayon, J.; Henkin, R.; Jacobson, S. Human Herpesvirus-6 Entry into the Central Nervous System through the Olfactory Pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 13734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Chapenko, S.; Roga, S.; Skuja, S.; Rasa, S.; Cistjakovs, M.; Svirskis, S.; Zaserska, Z.; Groma, V.; Murovska, M. Detection Frequency of Human Herpesviruses-6A, -6B, and -7 Genomic Sequences in Central Nervous System DNA Samples from Post-Mortem Individuals with Unspecified Encephalopathy. J. Neurovirol. 2016, 22, 488–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Skuja, S.; Svirskis, S.; Murovska, M. Human Herpesvirus-6 and -7 in the Brain Microenvironment of Persons with Neurological Pathology and Healthy People. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 2364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Santpere, G.; Telford, M.; Andrés-Benito, P.; Navarro, A.; Ferrer, I. The Presence of Human Herpesvirus 6 in the Brain in Health and Disease. Biomolecules 2020, 10, 1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Bahramian, E.; Furr, M.; Wu, J.T.; Ceballos, R.M. Differential Impacts of HHV-6A versus HHV-6B Infection in Differentiated Human Neural Stem Cells. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 847106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Bortolotti, D.; Gentili, V.; Rotola, A.; Caselli, E.; Rizzo, R. HHV-6A Infection Induces Amyloid-Beta Expression and Activation of Microglial Cells. Alzheimers Res. Ther. 2019, 11, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Grut, V.; Biström, M.; Salzer, J.; Stridh, P.; Jons, D.; Gustafsson, R.; Fogdell-Hahn, A.; Huang, J.; Butt, J.; Lindam, A.; et al. Human Herpesvirus 6A and Axonal Injury before the Clinical Onset of Multiple Sclerosis. Brain 2024, 147, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Poliomyelitis. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/poliomyelitis (accessed on 21 December 2024).
  162. Pavio, N.; Buc-Caron, M.H.; Colbère-Garapin, F. Persistent Poliovirus Infection of Human Fetal Brain Cells. J. Virol. 1996, 70, 6395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Wang, W.; Sun, J.; Wang, N.; Sun, Z.; Ma, Q.; Li, J.; Zhang, M.; Xu, J. Enterovirus A71 Capsid Protein VP1 Increases Blood–Brain Barrier Permeability and Virus Receptor Vimentin on the Brain Endothelial Cells. J. Neurovirol. 2019, 26, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Chang, L.Y.; Lin, H.Y.; Gau, S.S.F.; Lu, C.Y.; Hsia, S.H.; Huang, Y.C.; Huang, L.M.; Lin, T.Y. Enterovirus A71 Neurologic Complications and Long-Term Sequelae. J. Biomed. Sci. 2019, 26, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Chang, L.Y.; Lin, T.Y.; Hsu, K.H.; Huang, Y.C.; Lin, K.L.; Hsueh, C.; Shih, S.R.; Ning, H.C.; Hwang, M.S.; Wang, H.S.; et al. Clinical Features and Risk Factors of Pulmonary Oedema after Enterovirus-71-Related Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease. Lancet 1999, 354, 1682–1686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Tee, H.K.; Zainol, M.I.; Sam, I.C.; Chan, Y.F. Recent Advances in the Understanding of Enterovirus A71 Infection: A Focus on Neuropathogenesis. Expert. Rev. Anti Infect. Ther. 2021, 19, 733–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Feng, M.; Liao, Y.; Gao, Y.; Jiang, G.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Y.; Fan, S.; Xu, X.; Li, Q. Mechanism for the Lethal Effect of Enterovirus A71 Intracerebral Injection in Neonatal Mice. Lab. Investig. 2019, 100, 596–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Zhu, P.; Ji, W.; Li, D.; Wang, F.; Sun, T.; Yang, H.; Chen, S.; Zhang, W.; Jin, Y.; Duan, G. The Activation of Complement C5a-C5aR1 Axis in Astrocytes Facilitates the Neuropathogenesis Due to EV-A71 Infection by Upregulating CXCL1. J. Virol. 2024, e0151424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Majde, J.A.; Bohnet, S.G.; Ellis, G.A.; Churchill, L.; Leyva-Grado, V.; Wu, M.; Szentirmai, E.; Rehman, A.; Krueger, J.M. Detection of Mouse-Adapted Human Influenza Virus in the Olfactory Bulbs of Mice within Hours after Intranasal Infection. J. Neurovirol. 2007, 13, 399–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Shinya, K.; Makino, A.; Hatta, M.; Watanabe, S.; Kim, J.H.; Hatta, Y.; Gao, P.; Ozawa, M.; Le, Q.M.; Kawaoka, Y. Subclinical Brain Injury Caused by H5N1 Influenza Virus Infection. J. Virol. 2011, 85, 5202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Van Riel, D.; Leijten, L.M.; Verdijk, R.M.; GeurtsvanKessel, C.; Van Der Vries, E.; Van Rossum, A.M.C.; Osterhaus, A.D.M.E.; Kuiken, T. Evidence for Influenza Virus CNS Invasion along the Olfactory Route in an Immunocompromised Infant. J. Infect. Dis. 2014, 210, 419–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Siegers, J.Y.; van de Bildt, M.W.G.; Lin, Z.; Leijten, L.M.; Lavrijssen, R.A.M.; Bestebroer, T.; Spronken, M.I.J.; De Zeeuw, C.I.; Gao, Z.; Schrauwen, E.J.A.; et al. Viral Factors Important for Efficient Replication of Influenza A Viruses in Cells of the Central Nervous System. J. Virol. 2019, 93, e02273-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Kimura-Ohba, S.; Kitamura, M.; Tsukamoto, Y.; Kogaki, S.; Sakai, S.; Fushimi, H.; Matsuoka, K.; Takeuchi, M.; Itoh, K.; Ueda, K.; et al. Viral Entry and Translation in Brain Endothelia Provoke Influenza-Associated Encephalopathy. Acta Neuropathol. 2024, 147, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Jang, H.; Boltz, D.; Sturm-Ramirez, K.; Shepherd, K.R.; Jiao, Y.; Webster, R.; Smeyne, R.J. Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus Can Enter the Central Nervous System and Induce Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 14063–14068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Ng, Y.P.; Yip, T.F.; Peiris, J.S.M.; Ip, N.Y.; Lee, S.M.Y. Avian Influenza A H7N9 Virus Infects Human Astrocytes and Neuronal Cells and Induces Inflammatory Immune Responses. J. Neurovirol. 2018, 24, 752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Libbey, J.E.; Fujinami, R.S. Adaptive Immune Response to Viral Infections in the Central Nervous System. Handb. Clin. Neurol. 2014, 123, 225–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  177. Mumps. Available online: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/mumps (accessed on 21 December 2024).
  178. Rubin, S.; Eckhaus, M.; Rennick, L.J.; Bamford, C.G.G.; Duprex, W.P. Molecular Biology, Pathogenesis and Pathology of Mumps Virus. J. Pathol. 2015, 235, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Julkunen, I.; Lehtokoski-Lehtiniemi, E.; Koskiniemi, M.; Vaheri, A. Elevated Mumps Antibody Titers in the Cerebrospinal Fluid Suggesting Chronic Mumps Virus Infection in the Central Nervous System. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. 1985, 4, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  180. Haginoya, K.; Ike, K.; Linuma, K.; Yagi, T.; Kon, K.; Yokoyama, H.; Numazaki, Y. Chronic Progressive Mumps Virus Encephalitis in a Child. Lancet 1995, 346, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Rubin, S.A.; Amexis, G.; Pletnikov, M.; Vanderzanden, J.; Mauldin, J.; Sauder, C.; Malik, T.; Chumakov, K.; Carbone, K.M. Changes in Mumps Virus Gene Sequence Associated with Variability in Neurovirulent Phenotype. J. Virol. 2003, 77, 11616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Esolen, L.M.; Takahashi, K.; Johnson, R.T.; Vaisberg, A.; Moench, T.R.; Wesselingh, S.L.; Griffin, D.E. Brain Endothelial Cell Infection in Children with Acute Fatal Measles. J. Clin. Investig. 1995, 96, 2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Young, V.A.; Rall, G.F. Making It to the Synapse: Measles Virus Spread in and among Neurons. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 2009, 330, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Bonthius, D.J. Measles Virus and the Central Nervous System: An Update. Semin. Pediatr. Neurol. 2023, 47, 101078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  185. Schneider-Schaulies, J.; Niewiesk, S.; Schneider-Schaulies, S.; Ter Meulen, V. Measles Virus in the CNS: The Role of Viral and Host Factors for the Establishment and Maintenance of a Persistent Infection. J. Neurovirol. 1999, 5, 613–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Dando, S.J.; Mackay-Sim, A.; Norton, R.; Currie, B.J.; St. John, J.A.; Ekberg, J.A.K.; Batzloff, M.; Ulett, G.C.; Beacham, I.R. Pathogens Penetrating the Central Nervous System: Infection Pathways and the Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Invasion. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2014, 27, 691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Zacks, M.A.; Paessler, S. Encephalitic alphaviruses. Vet. Microbiol. 2009, 140, 281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Wong, K.T.; Robertson, T.; Ong, B.B.; Chong, J.W.; Yaiw, K.C.; Wang, L.F.; Ansford, A.J.; Tannenberg, A. Human Hendra Virus Infection Causes Acute and Relapsing Encephalitis. Neuropathol. Appl. Neurobiol. 2009, 35, 296–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Meier, K.; Olejnik, J.; Hume, A.J.; Mühlberger, E. A Comparative Assessment of the Pathogenic Potential of Newly Discovered Henipaviruses. Pathogens 2024, 13, 587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  190. Kim, J.; Alejandro, B.; Hetman, M.; Hattab, E.M.; Joiner, J.; Schroten, H.; Ishikawa, H.; Chung, D.H. Zika Virus Infects Pericytes in the Choroid Plexus and Enters the Central Nervous System through the Blood-Cerebrospinal Fluid Barrier. PLoS Pathog. 2020, 16, e1008204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  191. Danes, L.; Kufner, J.; Hrusková, V.; Rychterova, V. The Role of the Olfactory Route on Infection of the Respiratory Tract with Venezuelan Equine Encephalomyelitis Virus in Normal and Operated Macaca Rhesus Monkeys. I. Results of Virological Examination. Available online: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4405396/ (accessed on 21 December 2024).
  192. Ma, H.; Albe, J.R.; Gilliland, T.; McMillen, C.M.; Gardner, C.L.; Boyles, D.A.; Cottle, E.L.; Dunn, M.D.; Lundy, J.D.; Salama, N.; et al. Long-Term Persistence of Viral RNA and Inflammation in the CNS of Macaques Exposed to Aerosolized Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis Virus. PLoS Pathog. 2022, 18, e1009946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  193. Bantle, C.M.; Phillips, A.T.; Smeyne, R.J.; Rocha, S.M.; Olson, K.E.; Tjalkens, R.B. Infection with Mosquito-Borne Alphavirus Induces Selective Loss of Dopaminergic Neurons, Neuroinflammation and Widespread Protein Aggregation. NPJ Park. Dis. 2019, 5, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Singer, E.J.; Valdes-Sueiras, M.; Commins, D.; Levine, A. Neurologic Presentations of AIDS. Neurol. Clin. 2010, 28, 253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  195. Castellano, P.; Prevedel, L.; Eugenin, E.A. HIV-Infected Macrophages and Microglia That Survive Acute Infection Become Viral Reservoirs by a Mechanism Involving Bim. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 12866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Pattanaik, A.; Bhandarkar, B.S.; Lodha, L.; Marate, S. SARS-CoV-2 and the Nervous System: Current Perspectives. Arch. Virol. 2023, 168, 171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Haverty, R.; McCormack, J.; Evans, C.; Purves, K.; O’Reilly, S.; Gautier, V.; Rochfort, K.; Fabre, A.; Fletcher, N.F. SARS-CoV-2 Infects Neurons, Astrocytes, Choroid Plexus Epithelial Cells and Pericytes of the Human Central Nervous System. J. Gen. Virol. 2024, 105, 002009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Steardo, L.; Steardo, L.; Zorec, R.; Verkhratsky, A. Neuroinfection May Contribute to Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations of COVID-19. Acta Physiol. 2020, 229, e13473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  199. Kist, M.; Vucic, D. Cell Death Pathways: Intricate Connections and Disease Implications. EMBO J. 2021, 40, e106700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  200. Said, S.; Kang, M. Viral Encephalitis; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  201. Houston, F.; Andréoletti, O. Animal Prion Diseases: The Risks to Human Health. Brain Pathol. 2019, 29, 248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  202. Bogovic, P.; Strle, F. Tick-Borne Encephalitis: A Review of Epidemiology, Clinical Characteristics, and Management. World J. Clin. Cases WJCC 2015, 3, 430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Counotte, M.J.; Kim, C.R.; Wang, J.; Bernstein, K.; Deal, C.D.; Broutet, N.J.N.; Low, N. Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus and Other Flaviviruses: A Living Systematic Review. PLoS Med. 2018, 15, e1002611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Simon, L.V.; Sandhu, D.S.; Goyal, A.; Kruse, B. Japanese Encephalitis; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  205. Fares, M.; Cochet-Bernoin, M.; Gonzalez, G.; Montero-Menei, C.N.; Blanchet, O.; Benchoua, A.; Boissart, C.; Lecollinet, S.; Richardson, J.; Haddad, N.; et al. Pathological Modeling of TBEV Infection Reveals Differential Innate Immune Responses in Human Neurons and Astrocytes That Correlate with Their Susceptibility to Infection. J. Neuroinflammation 2020, 17, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Blázquez, A.-B.; Saiz, J.-C. Neurological Manifestations of Zika Virus Infection. World J. Virol. 2016, 5, 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Sips, G.J.; Wilschut, J.; Smit, J.M. Neuroinvasive Flavivirus Infections. Rev. Med. Virol. 2012, 22, 69–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  208. Turtle, L.; Solomon, T. Japanese Encephalitis-the Prospects for New Treatments. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 2018, 14, 298–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  209. Petersen, L.R.; Roehrig, J.T.; Hughes, J.M. West Nile Virus Encephalitis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002, 347, 1225–1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  210. Bogovič, P.; Lusa, L.; Korva, M.; Pavletič, M.; Rus, K.R.; Lotrič-Furlan, S.; Avšič-županc, T.; Strle, K.; Strle, F. Inflammatory Immune Responses in the Pathogenesis of Tick-Borne Encephalitis. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  211. Quan, T.M.; Thao, T.T.N.; Duy, N.M.; Nhat, T.M.; Clapham, H.E. Estimates of the Global Burden of Japanese Encephalitis and the Impact of Vaccination from 2000–2015. Elife 2020, 9, e51027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  212. Clark, M.B.; Schaefer, T.J. West Nile Virus; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  213. Chiffi, G.; Grandgirard, D.; Leib, S.L.; Chrdle, A.; Růžek, D. Tick-Borne Encephalitis: A Comprehensive Review of the Epidemiology, Virology, and Clinical Picture. Rev. Med. Virol. 2023, 33, e2470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  214. Muñoz, L.S.; Parra, B.; Pardo, C.A. Neurological Implications of Zika Virus Infection in Adults. J. Infect. Dis. 2017, 216, S897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Fischer, M.; Hills, S.; Staples, E.; Johnson, B.; Yaich, M.; Solomon, T. Japanese Encephalitis Prevention and Control: Advances, Challenges, and New Initiatives. In Emerging Infections 8; Wiley Online Library: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2014; pp. 93–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Clinical Signs and Symptoms of West Nile Virus Disease|West Nile Virus|CDC. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/west-nile-virus/hcp/clinical-signs/index.html (accessed on 21 December 2024).
  217. Gyure, K.A. West Nile Virus Infections. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 2009, 68, 1053–1060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Mandl, C.W. Steps of the Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus Replication Cycle That Affect Neuropathogenesis. Virus Res. 2005, 111, 161–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  219. Gelpi, E.; Preusser, M.; Garzuly, F.; Holzmann, H.; Heinz, F.X.; Budka, H. Visualization of Central European Tick-Borne Encephalitis Infection in Fatal Human Cases. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 2005, 64, 506–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Kuwayama, M.; Ito, M.; Takao, S.; Shimazu, Y.; Fukuda, S.; Miyazaki, K.; Kurane, I.; Takasaki, T. Japanese Encephalitis Virus in Meningitis Patients, Japan. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2005, 11, 471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Solomon, T.; Kneen, R.; Dung, N.M.; Khanh, V.C.; Thuy, T.T.N.; Ha, D.Q.; Day, N.P.J.; Nisalak, A.; Vaughn, D.W.; White, N.J. Poliomyelitis-like Illness Due to Japanese Encephalitis Virus. Lancet 1998, 351, 1094–1097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  222. Solomon, T.; Dung, N.M.; Kneen, R.; Gainsborough, M.; Vaughn, D.W.; Khanh, V.T. Japanese Encephalitis. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2000, 68, 405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Ghosh, D.; Basu, A. Japanese Encephalitis—A Pathological and Clinical Perspective. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2009, 3, e437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  224. Xiang, J.Y.; Zhang, Y.H.; Tan, Z.R.; Huang, J.; Zhao, Y.W. Guillain-Barré Syndrome Associated with Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infection in China. Viral Immunol. 2014, 27, 418–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Liu, S.; Wang, J.; Yang, J.; Wen, Y. The Underlying Mechanism of Guillain-Barré Syndrome in a Young Patient Suffered from Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infection: A Case Report. Virol. J. 2022, 19, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  226. Sejvar, J.J. Clinical Manifestations and Outcomes of West Nile Virus Infection. Viruses 2014, 6, 606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  227. Beshai, R.; Bibawy, D.; Bibawy, J. Guillain–Barré Syndrome Secondary to West Nile Virus in New York City. Case Rep. Infect. Dis. 2020, 2020, 6501658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Sejvar, J.J.; Bode, A.V.; Marfin, A.A.; Campbell, G.L.; Pape, J.; Biggerstaff, B.J.; Petersen, L.R. West Nile Virus–Associated Flaccid Paralysis Outcome. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2006, 12, 514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Klee, A.L.; Maldin, B.; Edwin, B.; Poshni, I.; Mostashari, F.; Fine, A.; Layton, M.; Nash, D. Long-Term Prognosis for Clinical West Nile Virus Infection. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2004, 10, 1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  230. Murray, K.O.; Resnick, M.; Miller, V. Depression after Infection with West Nile Virus. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2007, 13, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Carson, P.J.; Konewko, P.; Wold, K.S.; Mariani, P.; Goli, S.; Bergloff, P.; Crosby, R.D. Long-Term Clinical and Neuropsychological Outcomes of West Nile Virus Infection. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2006, 43, 723–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  232. Heckmann, J.G.; Vachalová, I.; Großkopf, J. Tick-Borne Encephalitis Complicated by Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2019, 119, 649–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Gritsun, T.S.; Lashkevich, V.A.; Gould, E.A. Tick-Borne Encephalitis. Antivir. Res. 2003, 57, 129–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  234. Acosta-Ampudia, Y.; Monsalve, D.M.; Castillo-Medina, L.F.; Rodríguez, Y.; Pacheco, Y.; Halstead, S.; Willison, H.J.; Anaya, J.M.; Ramírez-Santana, C. Autoimmune Neurological Conditions Associated with Zika Virus Infection. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2018, 11, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Kumar, S.; Verma, A.; Yadav, P.; Dubey, S.K.; Azhar, E.I.; Maitra, S.S.; Dwivedi, V.D. Molecular Pathogenesis of Japanese Encephalitis and Possible Therapeutic Strategies. Arch. Virol. 2022, 167, 1739–1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Yadav, P.; Chakraborty, P.; Jha, N.K.; Dewanjee, S.; Jha, A.K.; Panda, S.P.; Mishra, P.C.; Dey, A.; Jha, S.K. Molecular Mechanism and Role of Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infection in Central Nervous System-Mediated Diseases. Viruses 2022, 14, 2686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  237. Trivedi, S.; Chakravarty, A. Neurological Complications of Dengue Fever. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2022, 22, 515–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Pustijanac, E.; Buršić, M.; Talapko, J.; Škrlec, I.; Meštrović, T.; Lišnjić, D. Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus: A Comprehensive Review of Transmission, Pathogenesis, Epidemiology, Clinical Manifestations, Diagnosis, and Prevention. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Sharma, S.; Mathur, A.; Prakash, V.; Kulshreshtha, R.; Kumar, R.; Chaturvedi, U.C. Japanese Encephalitis Virus Latency in Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes and Recurrence of Infection in Children. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 1991, 85, 85–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  240. Patabendige, A.; Michael, B.D.; Craig, A.G.; Solomon, T. Brain Microvascular Endothelial-Astrocyte Cell Responses Following Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infection in an in Vitro Human Blood-Brain Barrier Model. Mol. Cell Neurosci. 2018, 89, 60–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Filgueira, L.; Lannes, N. Review of Emerging Japanese Encephalitis Virus: New Aspects and Concepts about Entry into the Brain and Inter-Cellular Spreading. Pathogens 2019, 8, 111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Cheeran, M.C.J.; Hu, S.; Sheng, W.S.; Rashid, A.; Peterson, P.K.; Lokensgard, J.R. Differential Responses of Human Brain Cells to West Nile Virus Infection. J. Neurovirol. 2005, 11, 512–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  243. Shrestha, B.; Gottlieb, D.; Diamond, M.S. Infection and Injury of Neurons by West Nile Encephalitis Virus. J. Virol. 2003, 77, 13203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  244. Verma, S.; Kumar, M.; Gurjav, U.; Lum, S.; Nerurkar, V.R. Reversal of West Nile Virus-Induced Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption and Tight Junction Proteins Degradation by Matrix Metalloproteinases Inhibitor. Virology 2010, 397, 130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  245. Constant, O.; Maarifi, G.; Barthelemy, J.; Martin, M.F.; Tinto, B.; Savini, G.; Van de Perre, P.; Nisole, S.; Simonin, Y.; Salinas, S. Differential Effects of Usutu and West Nile Viruses on Neuroinflammation, Immune Cell Recruitment and Blood–Brain Barrier Integrity. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 2023, 12, 2156815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Ghita, L.; Breitkopf, V.; Mulenge, F.; Pavlou, A.; Gern, O.L.; Durán, V.; Prajeeth, C.K.; Kohls, M.; Jung, K.; Stangel, M.; et al. Sequential MAVS and MyD88/TRIF Signaling Triggers Anti-Viral Responses of Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus-Infected Murine Astrocytes. J. Neurosci. Res. 2021, 99, 2478–2492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Pranclova, V.; Nedvedova, L.; Kotounova, E.; Vaclav, H.; Dvorakova, M.; Davidkova, M.; Bily, T.; Vancova, M.; Ruzek, D.; Palus, M. Unraveling the Role of Human Microglia in Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus Infection: Insights into Neuroinflammation and Viral Pathogenesis. Microbes Infect. 2024, 26, 105383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Schultz, V.; Barrie, J.A.; Donald, C.L.; Crawford, C.L.; Mullin, M.; Anderson, T.J.; Solomon, T.; Barnett, S.C.; Linington, C.; Kohl, A.; et al. Oligodendrocytes Are Susceptible to Zika Virus Infection in a Mouse Model of Perinatal Exposure: Implications for CNS Complications. Glia 2021, 69, 2023–2036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Mutso, M.; John, J.A.S.; Ling, Z.L.; Burt, F.J.; Poo, Y.S.; Liu, X.; Žusinaite, E.; Grau, G.E.; Hueston, L.; Merits, A.; et al. Basic Insights into Zika Virus Infection of Neuroglial and Brain Endothelial Cells. J. Gen. Virol. 2020, 101, 622–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Ferraris, P.; Cochet, M.; Hamel, R.; Gladwyn-Ng, I.; Alfano, C.; Diop, F.; Garcia, D.; Talignani, L.; Montero-Menei, C.N.; Nougairède, A.; et al. Zika Virus Differentially Infects Human Neural Progenitor Cells According to Their State of Differentiation and Dysregulates Neurogenesis through the Notch Pathway. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 2019, 8, 1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Garcez, P.P.; Nascimento, J.M.; De Vasconcelos, J.M.; Madeiro Da Costa, R.; Delvecchio, R.; Trindade, P.; Loiola, E.C.; Higa, L.M.; Cassoli, J.S.; Vitória, G.; et al. Zika Virus Disrupts Molecular Fingerprinting of Human Neurospheres. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, srep40780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  252. Thongtan, T.; Thepparit, C.; Smith, D.R. The Involvement of Microglial Cells in Japanese Encephalitis Infections. J. Immunol. Res. 2012, 2012, 890586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  253. Thongtan, T.; Cheepsunthorn, P.; Chaiworakul, V.; Rattanarungsan, C.; Wikan, N.; Smith, D.R. Highly Permissive Infection of Microglial Cells by Japanese Encephalitis Virus: A Possible Role as a Viral Reservoir. Microbes Infect. 2010, 12, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Bai, F.; Kong, K.F.; Dai, J.; Qian, F.; Zhang, L.; Brown, C.R.; Fikrig, E.; Montgomery, R.R. A Paradoxical Role for Neutrophils in the Pathogenesis of West Nile Virus. J. Infect. Dis. 2010, 202, 1804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  255. Mladinich, M.C.; Schwedes, J.; Mackow, E.R. Zika Virus Persistently Infects and Is Basolaterally Released from Primary Human Brain Microvascular Endothelial Cells. mBio 2017, 8, e00952-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Ravi, V.; Desai, A.S.; Shenoy, P.K.; Satishchandra, P.; Chandramuki, A.; Gourie-Devi, M. Persistence of Japanese Encephalitis Virus in the Human Nervous System. J. Med. Virol. 1993, 40, 326–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Murray, K.; Walker, C.; Herrington, E.; Lewis, J.A.; McCormick, J.; Beasley, D.W.C.; Tesh, R.B.; Fisher-Hoch, S. Persistent Infection with West Nile Virus Years after Initial Infection. J. Infect. Dis. 2010, 201, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Nicholls, C.M.R.; Sevvana, M.; Kuhn, R.J. Structure-Guided Paradigm Shifts in Flavivirus Assembly and Maturation Mechanisms. Adv. Virus Res. 2020, 108, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Chowdhury, P.; Khan, S.A. Global Emergence of West Nile Virus: Threat & Preparedness in Special Perspective to India. Indian J. Med. Res. 2021, 154, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  260. Liang, Y.; Dai, X. The Global Incidence and Trends of Three Common Flavivirus Infections (Dengue, Yellow Fever, and Zika) from 2011 to 2021. Front. Microbiol. 2024, 15, 1458166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Wang, H.; Liang, G. Epidemiology of Japanese Encephalitis: Past, Present, and Future Prospects. Ther. Clin. Risk Manag. 2015, 11, 435–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Gole, S.; Anand, A. Autoimmune Encephalitis; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  263. Lancaster, E. Autoantibody Encephalitis: Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management. J. Clin. Neurol. 2022, 18, 373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  264. Zang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Guo, J.; Long, L.; Zhang, S.; Cui, C.; Song, D.; Yu, B.; Tang, F.; Teng, J.; et al. Treatment of Severe Japanese Encephalitis Complicated with Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis and Guillain-Barré Syndrome with Protein A Immunoadsorption: A Case Report. Front. Immunol. 2022, 12, 807937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  265. Karagianni, P.; Alexopoulos, H.; Sourdi, A.; Papadimitriou, D.; Dimitrakopoulos, A.N.; Moutsopoulos, H.M. West Nile Virus Infection Triggering Autoimmune Encephalitis: Pathophysiological and Therapeutic Implications. Clin. Immunol. 2019, 207, 97–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  266. Anilkumar, A.C.; Foris, L.A.; Tadi, P. Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  267. Kamel, M.G.; Nam, N.T.; Han, N.H.B.; El-Shabouny, A.E.; Makram, A.E.R.M.; Abd-Elhay, F.A.E.; Dang, T.N.; Hieu, N.L.T.; Huong, V.T.Q.; Tung, T.H.; et al. Post-Dengue Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis: A Case Report and Meta-Analysis. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2017, 11, e0005715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Karoli, R.; Siddiqi, Z.; Fatima, J.; Maini, S. Was It a Case of Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis? A Rare Association Following Dengue Fever. J. Neurosci. Rural. Pract. 2013, 4, 318–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Alves-Leon, S.V.; Lima, M.D.R.; Nunes, P.C.G.; Chimelli, L.M.C.; Rabelo, K.; Nogueira, R.M.R.; De Bruycker-Nogueira, F.; De Azeredo, E.L.; Bahia, P.R.; Rueda Lopes, F.C.; et al. Zika Virus Found in Brain Tissue of a Multiple Sclerosis Patient Undergoing an Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis-like Episode. Mult. Scler. 2019, 25, 427–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Ohtaki, E.; Matsuishi, T.; Hirano, Y.; Maekawa, K.; Ohtaki, J.E.; Matsuishi, T.; Hirano, Y. Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis after Treatment with Japanese B Encephalitis Vaccine (Nakayama-Yoken and Beijing Strains). J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 1995, 59, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  271. Nguyen, T.P.; Taylor, R.S. Guillain-Barre Syndrome; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  272. Lim, C.S.; Kaisbain, N.; Lim, W.J. A Rare Combination: Dengue Fever Complicated with Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Cureus 2023, 15, e40957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Barbi, L.; Coelho, A.V.C.; de Alencar, L.C.A.; Crovella, S. Prevalence of Guillain-Barré Syndrome among Zika Virus Infected Cases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Braz. J. Infect. Dis. 2018, 22, 137–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Basumatary, L.J.; Raja, D.; Bhuyan, D.; Das, M.; Goswami, M.; Kayal, A.K. Clinical and Radiological Spectrum of Japanese Encephalitis. J. Neurol. Sci. 2013, 325, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Shrimanker, I.; Tadi, P.; Schoo, C.; Sánchez-Manso, J.C. Parkinsonism. In Encyclopedia of the Neurological Sciences; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2024; pp. 820–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Poponnikova, T.V. The Clinical Picture of Chronic Tick-Borne Encephalitis in Children. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2008, 298, 351–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Fulton, C.D.M.; Beasley, D.W.C.; Bente, D.A.; Dineley, K.T. Long-Term, West Nile Virus-Induced Neurological Changes: A Comparison of Patients and Rodent Models. Brain Behav. Immun. Health 2020, 7, 100105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  278. Lin, H.C.; Chou, H.P.; Chiang, Y.C.; Chang, R.; Chen, Y.S.; Juan, Y.C. Neurological or Psychiatric Disorders After Dengue Fever. JAMA Netw. Open 2024, 7, E2410075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  279. Rico-Hesse, R. Microevolution and Virulence of Dengue Viruses. Adv. Virus Res. 2003, 59, 315–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  280. Kakde, U.; Khatib, M.N. Neurological Complications in Dengue Among Males of the Adult Age Group. Cureus 2024, 16, e51586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Ireland, D.D.C.; Manangeeswaran, M.; Lewkowicz, A.P.; Engel, K.; Clark, S.M.; Laniyan, A.; Sykes, J.; Lee, H.N.; McWilliams, I.L.; Kelley-Baker, L.; et al. Long-Term Persistence of Infectious Zika Virus: Inflammation and Behavioral Sequela in Mice. PLoS Pathog. 2020, 16, e1008689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Swinkels, H.M.; Vaillant, A.A.J.; Nguyen, A.D.; Gulick, P.G. HIV and AIDS. In Geriatric Gastroenterology; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024; pp. 659–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Campbell, J.H.; Hearps, A.C.; Martin, G.E.; Williams, K.C.; Crowe, S.M. The Importance of Monocytes and Macrophages in HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment, and Cure. AIDS 2014, 28, 2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Subra, C.; Trautmann, L. Role of T Lymphocytes in HIV Neuropathogenesis. Curr. HIV/AIDS Rep. 2019, 16, 236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Kincer, L.P.; Schnell, G.; Swanstrom, R.; Miller, M.B.; Spudich, S.; Eron, J.J.; Price, R.W.; Joseph, S.B. HIV-1 Is Transported into the Central Nervous System by Trafficking Infected Cells. Pathog. Immun. 2023, 7, 131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Gras, G.; Kaul, M. Molecular Mechanisms of Neuroinvasion by Monocytes-Macrophages in HIV-1 Infection. Retrovirology 2010, 7, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  287. Burdo, T.H.; Lackner, A.; Williams, K.C. Monocyte/Macrophages and Their Role in HIV Neuropathogenesis. Immunol. Rev. 2013, 254, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  288. Cenker, J.J.; Stultz, R.D.; McDonald, D. Brain Microglial Cells Are Highly Susceptible to HIV-1 Infection and Spread. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 2017, 33, 1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Schnell, G.; Joseph, S.; Spudich, S.; Price, R.W.; Swanstrom, R. HIV-1 Replication in the Central Nervous System Occurs in Two Distinct Cell Types. PLoS Pathog. 2011, 7, e1002286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  290. Churchill, M.J.; Wesselingh, S.L.; Cowley, D.; Pardo, C.A.; McArthur, J.C.; Brew, B.J.; Gorry, P.R. Extensive Astrocyte Infection Is Prominent in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Associated Dementia. Ann. Neurol. 2009, 66, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  291. Kaalund, S.S.; Johansen, A.; Fabricius, K.; Pakkenberg, B. Untreated Patients Dying with AIDS Have Loss of Neocortical Neurons and Glia Cells. Front. Neurosci. 2020, 13, 507164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  292. Eugenin, E.A.; Berman, J.W. Cytochrome c Dysregulation Induced by HIV Infection of Astrocytes Results in Bystander Apoptosis of Uninfected Astrocytes by an IP3 and Calcium-Dependent Mechanism. J. Neurochem. 2013, 127, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  293. Ash, M.K.; Al-Harthi, L.; Schneider, J.R. HIV in the Brain: Identifying Viral Reservoirs and Addressing the Challenges of an HIV Cure. Vaccines 2021, 9, 867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Malik, S.; Eugenin, E.A. Mechanisms of HIV Neuropathogenesis: Role of Cellular Communication Systems. Curr. HIV Res. 2016, 14, 400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  295. Mohammadzadeh, N.; Chomont, N.; Estaquier, J.; Cohen, E.A.; Power, C. Is the Central Nervous System Reservoir a Hurdle for an HIV Cure? Viruses 2023, 15, 2385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  296. Elendu, C.; Aguocha, C.M.; Okeke, C.V.; Okoro, C.B.; Peterson, J.C. HIV-Related Neurocognitive Disorders: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Mental Health Implications: A Review. Medicine 2023, 102, E35652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Chan, P.; Valcour, V. Neurocognition and the Aging Brain in People with HIV: Implications for Screening. Top. Antivir. Med. 2021, 29, 423. [Google Scholar]
  298. Marquine, M.J.; Umlauf, A.; Rooney, A.S.; Fazeli, P.L.; Gouaux, B.D.; Woods, S.P.; Letendre, S.L.; Ellis, R.J.; Grant, I.; Moore, D.J. The Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS) Index Is Associated with Concurrent Risk for Neurocognitive Impairment. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 2014, 65, 190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  299. Daliparty, V.M.; Balasubramanya, R. HIV Encephalitis. In Neuroinfections, 1st ed.; Gilden, D., Ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2022; pp. 23–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Kaul, M.; Lipton, S.A. Chemokines and Activated Macrophages in HIV Gp120-Induced Neuronal Apoptosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999, 96, 8212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  301. Kovalevich, J.; Langford, D. Neuronal Toxicity in HIV CNS Disease. Future Virol. 2012, 7, 687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  302. Liu, J.; Xie, J.; Dutta, D.; Xiong, H. HIV-1 Envelope Protein Gp120 Modulation of Glutamate Effects on Cortical Neuronal Synapses: Implications for HIV-1-Associated Neuropathogenesis. Int. J. Physiol. Pathophysiol. Pharmacol. 2023, 15, 75. [Google Scholar]
  303. Zhou, L.; Saksena, N.K. HIV Associated Neurocognitive Disorders. Infect. Dis. Rep. 2013, 5, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Ben Haij, N.; Planès, R.; Leghmari, K.; Serrero, M.; Delobel, P.; Izopet, J.; BenMohamed, L.; Bahraoui, E. HIV-1 Tat Protein Induces Production of Proinflammatory Cytokines by Human Dendritic Cells and Monocytes/Macrophages through Engagement of TLR4-MD2-CD14 Complex and Activation of NF-ΚB Pathway. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, 129425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  305. Periyasamy, P.; Thangaraj, A.; Bendi, V.S.; Buch, S. HIV-1 Tat-Mediated Microglial Inflammation Involves a Novel MiRNA-34a-NLRC5-NFκB Signaling Axis. Brain Behav. Immun. 2019, 80, 227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Ru, W.; Liu, X.; Bae, C.; Shi, Y.; Walikonis, R.; Chung, J.M.; Tang, S.J. Microglia Mediate HIV-1 Gp120-Induced Synaptic Degeneration in Spinal Pain Neural Circuits. J. Neurosci. 2019, 39, 8408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. Mangino, G.; Percario, Z.A.; Fiorucci, G.; Vaccari, G.; Acconcia, F.; Chiarabelli, C.; Leone, S.; Noto, A.; Horenkamp, F.A.; Manrique, S.; et al. HIV-1 Nef Induces Proinflammatory State in Macrophages through Its Acidic Cluster Domain: Involvement of TNF Alpha Receptor Associated Factor 2. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e22982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  308. Wilson, K.M.; He, J.J. HIV Nef Expression Down-Modulated GFAP Expression and Altered Glutamate Uptake and Release and Proliferation in Astrocytes. Aging Dis. 2023, 14, 152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  309. Li, G.; Makar, T.; Gerzanich, V.; Kalakonda, S.; Ivanova, S.; Pereira, E.F.R.; Andharvarapu, S.; Zhang, J.; Marc Simard, J.; Zhao, R.Y. HIV-1 Vpr-Induced Proinflammatory Response and Apoptosis Are Mediated through the Sur1-Trpm4 Channel in Astrocytes. mBio 2020, 11, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  310. Thangaraj, A.; Periyasamy, P.; Liao, K.; Bendi, V.S.; Callen, S.; Pendyala, G.; Buch, S. HIV-1 TAT-Mediated Microglial Activation: Role of Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Defective Mitophagy. Autophagy 2018, 14, 1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  311. Dubrovsky, L.; Brichacek, B.; Prashant, N.M.; Pushkarsky, T.; Mukhamedova, N.; Fleetwood, A.J.; Xu, Y.; Dragoljevic, D.; Fitzgerald, M.; Horvath, A.; et al. Extracellular Vesicles Carrying HIV-1 Nef Induce Long-Term Hyperreactivity of Myeloid Cells. Cell Rep. 2022, 41, 111674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  312. Lv, L.; Wang, Q.; Xu, Y.; Tsao, L.C.; Nakagawa, T.; Guo, H.; Su, L.; Xiong, Y. Vpr Targets TET2 for Degradation by CRL4VprBP E3 Ligase to Sustain IL-6 Expression and Enhance HIV-1 Replication. Mol. Cell 2018, 70, 961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  313. Langer, S.; Hammer, C.; Hopfensperger, K.; Klein, L.; Hotter, D.; Jesus, P.D.D.; Herbert, K.M.; Pache, L.; Smith, N.; van der Merwe, J.A.; et al. HIV-1 Vpu Is a Potent Transcriptional Suppressor of NF-ΚB-Elicited Antiviral Immune Responses. Elife 2019, 8, e41930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Zhang, R.Z.; Kane, M. Insights into the Role of HIV-1 Vpu in Modulation of NF-ĸB Signaling Pathways. mBio 2023, 14, e0092023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Shrikant, P.; Benos, D.J.; Tang, L.P.; Benveniste, E.N. HIV Glycoprotein 120 Enhances Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1 Gene Expression in Glial Cells. Involvement of Janus Kinase/Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription and Protein Kinase C Signaling Pathways. J. Immunol. 1950, 156, 1307–1314. Available online: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8558011/ (accessed on 23 December 2024). [CrossRef]
  316. Pu, H.; Tian, J.; Flora, G.; Lee, Y.W.; Nath, A.; Hennig, B.; Toborek, M. HIV-1 Tat Protein Upregulates Inflammatory Mediators and Induces Monocyte Invasion into the Brain. Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 2003, 24, 224–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  317. Duan, M.; Yao, H.; Hu, G.; Chen, X.M.; Lund, A.K.; Buch, S. HIV Tat Induces Expression of ICAM-1 in HUVECs: Implications for MiR-221/-222 in HIV-Associated Cardiomyopathy. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e60170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  318. Swingler, S.; Brichacek, B.; Jacque, J.M.; Ulich, C.; Zhou, J.; Stevenson, M. HIV-1 Nef Intersects the Macrophage CD40L Signalling Pathway to Promote Resting-Cell Infection. Nature 2003, 424, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  319. Fabryova, H.; Strebel, K. Vpr and Its Cellular Interaction Partners: R We There Yet? Cells 2019, 8, 1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  320. Ghaly, M.; Proulx, J.; Borgmann, K.; Park, I.W. Novel Role of HIV-1 Nef in Regulating the Ubiquitination of Cellular Proteins. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 2023, 13, 1106591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Badley, A.D.; Pilon, A.A.; Landay, A.; Lynch, D.H. Mechanisms of HIV-Associated Lymphocyte Apoptosis. Blood 2000, 96, 2951–2964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  322. Jabea Ekabe, C.; Asaba Clinton, N.; Agyei, E.K.; Kehbila, J. Role of Apoptosis in HIV Pathogenesis. Adv. Virol. 2022, 2022, 8148119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. Cummins, N.W.; Badley, A.D. Anti-Apoptotic Mechanisms of HIV: Lessons and Novel Approaches to Curing HIV. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 2012, 70, 3355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  324. Wang, J.; Shackelford, J.M.; Selliah, N.; Shivers, D.K.; O’Neill, E.; Garcia, J.V.; Muthumani, K.; Weiner, D.; Yu, X.F.; Gabuzda, D.; et al. The HIV-1 Vif Protein Mediates Degradation of Vpr and Reduces Vpr-Induced Cell Cycle Arrest. DNA Cell Biol. 2008, 27, 267–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  325. Liu, Q.H.; Williams, D.A.; McManus, C.; Baribaud, F.; Doms, R.W.; Schols, D.; De Clercq, E.; Kotlikoff, M.I.; Collman, R.G.; Freedman, B.D. HIV-1 Gp120 and Chemokines Activate Ion Channels in Primary Macrophages through CCR5 and CXCR4 Stimulation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97, 4832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  326. Hu, X.-T. HIV-1 Tat-Mediated Calcium Dysregulation and Neuronal Dysfunction in Vulnerable Brain Regions. Curr. Drug Targets 2016, 17, 4–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  327. Shrestha, J.; Santerre, M.; Allen, C.N.; Arjona, S.P.; Hooper, R.; Mukerjee, R.; Kaul, M.; Shcherbik, N.; Soboloff, J.; Sawaya, B.E. HIV-1 Gp120 Protein Promotes HAND through the Calcineurin Pathway Activation. Mitochondrion 2023, 70, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  328. Dubey, R.C.; Mishra, N.; Gaur, R. G Protein-Coupled and ATP-Sensitive Inwardly Rectifying Potassium Ion Channels Are Essential for HIV Entry. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 4113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  329. Ferrucci, A.; Nonnemacher, M.R.; Wigdahl, B. Human Immunodeficiency Virus Viral Protein R as an Extracellular Protein in Neuropathogenesis. Adv. Virus Res. 2011, 81, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  330. Ewart, G.D.; Sutherland, T.; Gage, P.W.; Cox, G.B. The Vpu Protein of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Forms Cation-Selective Ion Channels. J. Virol. 1996, 70, 7108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  331. Ebenbichler, C.F.; Stoiber, H.; Schneider, R.; Patsch, J.R.; Dierich, M.P. The Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Transmembrane Gp41 Protein Is a Calcium-Binding Protein and Interacts with the Putative Second-Receptor Molecules in a Calcium-Dependent Manner. J. Virol. 1996, 70, 1723–1728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  332. Majeed, S.; Dang, L.; Islam, M.M.; Ishola, O.; Borbat, P.P.; Ludtke, S.J.; Georgieva, E.R. HIV-1 Vpu Protein Forms Stable Oligomers in Aqueous Solution via Its Transmembrane Domain Self-Association. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 14691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  333. Clark, E.; Nava, B.; Caputi, M. Tat Is a Multifunctional Viral Protein That Modulates Cellular Gene Expression and Functions. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 27569–27581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  334. Liu, X.; Bae, C.; Gelman, B.B.; Chung, J.M.; Tang, S.J. A Neuron-to-Astrocyte Wnt5a Signal Governs Astrogliosis during HIV-Associated Pain Pathogenesis. Brain 2022, 145, 4108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  335. Mukerji, J.; Olivieri, K.C.; Misra, V.; Agopian, K.A.; Gabuzda, D. Proteomic Analysis of HIV-1 Nef Cellular Binding Partners Reveals a Role for Exocyst Complex Proteins in Mediating Enhancement of Intercellular Nanotube Formation. Retrovirology 2012, 9, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  336. Buffalo, C.Z.; Iwamoto, Y.; Hurley, J.H.; Ren, X. How HIV Nef Proteins Hijack Membrane Traffic To Promote Infection. J. Virol. 2019, 93, e01322-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  337. Goes, L.R.; Sajani, A.; Sivro, A.; Olowojesiku, R.; Ray, J.C.; Perrone, I.; Yolitz, J.; Girard, A.; Leyre, L.; Wibmer, C.K.; et al. The V2 Loop of HIV Gp120 Delivers Costimulatory Signals to CD4+ T Cells through Integrin A4β7 and Promotes Cellular Activation and Infection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 32566–32573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  338. Valentín-Guillama, G.; López, S.; Kucheryavykh, Y.V.; Chorna, N.E.; Pérez, J.; Ortiz-Rivera, J.; Inyushin, M.; Makarov, V.; Valentín-Acevedo, A.; Quinones-Hinojosa, A.; et al. HIV-1 Envelope Protein Gp120 Promotes Proliferation and the Activation of Glycolysis in Glioma Cell. Cancers 2018, 10, 301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  339. Vignoli, A.L.; Martini, I.; Haglid, K.H.; Silvestroni, L.; Augusti-Tocco, G.; Biagioni, S. Neuronal Glycolytic Pathway Impairment Induced by HIV Envelope Glycoprotein Gp120. Mol. Cell Biochem. 2000, 215, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  340. Kang, S.; Tang, H. HIV-1 Infection and Glucose Metabolism Reprogramming of T Cells: Another Approach Toward Functional Cure and Reservoir Eradication. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 572677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  341. Barrero, C.A.; Datta, P.K.; Sen, S.; Deshmane, S.; Amini, S.; Khalili, K.; Merali, S. HIV-1 Vpr Modulates Macrophage Metabolic Pathways: A SILAC-Based Quantitative Analysis. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e68376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  342. Sivalingam, K.; Cirino, T.J.; McLaughlin, J.P.; Samikkannu, T. HIV-Tat and Cocaine Impact Brain Energy Metabolism: Redox Modification and Mitochondrial Biogenesis Influence NRF Transcription-Mediated Neurodegeneration. Mol. Neurobiol. 2021, 58, 490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  343. Yan, J.; Shun, M.C.; Hao, C.; Zhang, Y.; Qian, J.; Hrecka, K.; Delucia, M.; Monnie, C.; Ahn, J.; Skowronski, J. HIV-1 Vpr Reprograms CLR4DCAF1 E3 Ubiquitin Ligase to Antagonize Exonuclease 1-Mediated Restriction of HIV-1 Infection. mBio 2018, 9, 10-1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  344. Wen, X.; Klockow, L.; Nekorchuk, M.; Sharifi, H.J.; de Noronha, C.M.C. The HIV1 Protein Vpr Acts to Enhance Constitutive DCAF1-Dependent UNG2 Turnover. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e30939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  345. Zhou, X.; Delucia, M.; Hao, C.; Hrecka, K.; Monnie, C.; Skowronski, J.; Ahn, J. HIV-1 Vpr Protein Directly Loads Helicase-like Transcription Factor (HLTF) onto the CRL4-DCAF1 E3 Ubiquitin Ligase. J. Biol. Chem. 2017, 292, 21117–21127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  346. Erdmann, N.B.; Whitney, N.P.; Zheng, J. Potentiation of Excitotoxicity in HIV-1 Associated Dementia and the Significance of Glutaminase. Clin. Neurosci. Res. 2006, 6, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  347. El-Amine, R.; Germini, D.; Zakharova, V.V.; Tsfasman, T.; Sheval, E.V.; Louzada, R.A.N.; Dupuy, C.; Bilhou-Nabera, C.; Hamade, A.; Najjar, F.; et al. HIV-1 Tat Protein Induces DNA Damage in Human Peripheral Blood B-Lymphocytes via Mitochondrial ROS Production. Redox Biol. 2018, 15, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  348. Hu, S.; Sheng, W.S.; Lokensgard, J.R.; Peterson, P.K.; Rock, R.B. Preferential Sensitivity of Human Dopaminergic Neurons to Gp120-Induced Oxidative Damage. J. Neurovirol. 2009, 15, 401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  349. Mangino, G.; Famiglietti, M.; Capone, C.; Veroni, C.; Percario, Z.A.; Leone, S.; Fiorucci, G.; Lülf, S.; Romeo, G.; Agresti, C.; et al. HIV-1 Myristoylated Nef Treatment of Murine Microglial Cells Activates Inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase, NO2 Production and Neurotoxic Activity. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0130189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  350. Borrajo, A.; Spuch, C.; Penedo, M.A.; Olivares, J.M.; Agís-Balboa, R.C. Important Role of Microglia in HIV-1 Associated Neurocognitive Disorders and the Molecular Pathways Implicated in Its Pathogenesis. Ann. Med. 2021, 53, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  351. Hategan, A.; Bianchet, M.A.; Steiner, J.; Karnaukhova, E.; Masliah, E.; Fields, A.; Lee, M.H.; Dickens, A.M.; Haughey, N.; Dimitriadis, E.K.; et al. HIV-Tat Protein and Amyloid β Peptide Form Multifibrillar Structures That Cause Neurotoxicity. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2017, 24, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  352. Naghavi, M.H. “APP”reciating the Complexity of HIV-Induced Neurodegenerative Diseases. PLoS Pathog. 2018, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  353. Raulin, A.C.; Doss, S.V.; Trottier, Z.A.; Ikezu, T.C.; Bu, G.; Liu, C.C. ApoE in Alzheimer’s Disease: Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Strategies. Mol. Neurodegener. 2022, 17, e1007309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  354. Kwon, H.S.; Brent, M.M.; Getachew, R.; Jayakumar, P.; Chen, L.F.; Schnolzer, M.; McBurney, M.W.; Marmorstein, R.; Greene, W.C.; Ott, M. Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Tat Protein Inhibits the SIRT1 Deacetylase and Induces T-Cell Hyperactivation. Cell Host Microbe 2008, 3, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  355. Abraham, L.; Fackler, O.T. HIV-1 Nef: A Multifaceted Modulator of T Cell Receptor Signaling. Cell Commun. Signal 2012, 10, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  356. Abbas, W.; Herbein, G. T-Cell Signaling in HIV-1 Infection. Open Virol. J. 2013, 7, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  357. Reuschl, A.K.; Mesner, D.; Shivkumar, M.; Whelan, M.V.X.; Pallett, L.J.; Guerra-Assunção, J.A.; Madansein, R.; Dullabh, K.J.; Sigal, A.; Thornhill, J.P.; et al. HIV-1 Vpr Drives a Tissue Residency-like Phenotype during Selective Infection of Resting Memory T Cells. Cell Rep. 2022, 39, 110650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  358. Bauby, H.; Ward, C.C.; Hugh-White, R.; Swanson, C.M.; Schulz, R.; Goujon, C.; Malima, M.H. HIV-1 Vpr Induces Widespread Transcriptomic Changes in CD4+ T Cells Early Postinfection. mBio 2021, 12, e0136921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  359. Berman, J.W.; Carvallo, L.; Buckner, C.M.; Luers, A.; Prevedel, L.; Bennett, M.V.; Eugenin, E.A. HIV-Tat Alters Connexin43 Expression and Trafficking in Human Astrocytes: Role in NeuroAIDS. J. Neuroinflammation 2016, 13, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  360. Kaul, M.; Zheng, J.; Okamoto, S.; Gendelman, H.E.; Lipton, S.A. HIV-1 Infection and AIDS: Consequences for the Central Nervous System. Cell Death Differ. 2005, 12 (Suppl. 1), 878–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  361. Guha, D.; Wagner, M.C.E.; Ayyavoo, V. Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-1)-Mediated Neuroinflammation Dysregulates Neurogranin and Induces Synaptodendritic Injury. J. Neuroinflammation 2018, 15, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  362. Dahm, T.; Rudolph, H.; Schwerk, C.; Schroten, H.; Tenenbaum, T. Neuroinvasion and Inflammation in Viral Central Nervous System Infections. Mediat. Inflamm. 2016, 2016, 8562805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  363. Bryant, A.K.; Ellis, R.J.; Umlauf, A.; Gouaux, B.; Soontornniyomkij, V.; Letendre, S.L.; Achim, C.L.; Masliah, E.; Grant, I.; Moore, D.J. Antiretroviral Therapy Reduces Neurodegeneration in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection. AIDS 2015, 29, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  364. Heaton, R.K.; Clifford, D.B.; Franklin, D.R.; Woods, S.P.; Ake, C.; Vaida, F.; Ellis, R.J.; Letendre, S.L.; Marcotte, T.D.; Atkinson, J.H.; et al. HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorders Persist in the Era of Potent Antiretroviral Therapy: CHARTER Study. Neurology 2010, 75, 2087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  365. Krut, J.J.; Mellberg, T.; Price, R.W.; Hagberg, L.; Fuchs, D.; Rosengren, L.; Nilsson, S.; Zetterberg, H.; Gisslén, M. Biomarker Evidence of Axonal Injury in Neuroasymptomatic HIV-1 Patients. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e88591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  366. Sacktor, N. Changing Clinical Phenotypes of HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorders. J. Neurovirol. 2018, 24, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  367. Clifford, D.B.; Fagan, A.M.; Holtzman, D.M.; Morris, J.C.; Teshome, M.; Shah, A.R.; Kauwe, J.S.K. CSF Biomarkers of Alzheimer Disease in HIV-Associated Neurologic Disease. Neurology 2009, 73, 1982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  368. Rubin, L.H.; Sundermann, E.E.; Moore, D.J. The Current Understanding of Overlap between Characteristics of HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorders and Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Neurovirol. 2019, 25, 661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  369. Ortega, M.; Ances, B.M. Role of HIV in Amyloid Metabolism. J. Neuroimmune Pharmacol. 2014, 9, 483–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  370. Howdle, G.C.; Quidé, Y.; Kassem, M.S.; Johnson, K.; Rae, C.D.; Brew, B.J.; Cysique, L.A. Brain Amyloid in Virally Suppressed HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder. Neurol. Neuroimmunol. Neuroinflamm 2020, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  371. Sundermann, E.E.; Bondi, M.W.; Campbell, L.M.; Gouaux, B.; Moore, R.C.; Soontornniyomkij, V.; Moore, D.J. Distinguishing Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment From HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorders. J. Infect. Dis. 2021, 224, 435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  372. Mirsattari, S.M.; Power, C.; Nath, A. Parkinsonism with HIV Infection. Mov. Disord. 1998, 13, 684–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  373. Koutsilieri, E.; Sopper, S.; Scheller, C.; Ter Meulen, V.; Riederer, P. Parkinsonism in HIV Dementia. J. Neural Transm. 2002, 109, 767–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  374. DeVaughn, S.; Müller-Oehring, E.M.; Markey, B.; Brontë-Stewart, H.M.; Schulte, T. Aging with HIV-1 Infection: Motor Functions, Cognition, and Attention—A Comparison with Parkinson’s Disease. Neuropsychol. Rev. 2015, 25, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  375. Dehner, L.F.; Spitz, M.; Pereira, J.S. Parkinsonism in HIV Infected Patients during Antiretroviral Therapy—Data from a Brazilian Tertiary Hospital. Braz. J. Infect. Dis. 2016, 20, 499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  376. Amod, F.; Holla, V.V.; Ojha, R.; Pandey, S.; Yadav, R.; Pal, P.K. A Review of Movement Disorders in Persons Living with HIV. Park. Relat. Disord. 2023, 114, 105774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  377. Cysique, L.A.; Brew, B.J. Vascular Cognitive Impairment and HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder: A New Paradigm. J. Neurovirol. 2019, 25, 710–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  378. Moulignier, A.; Moulonguet, A.; Pialoux, G.; Rozenbaum, W. Reversible ALS-like Disorder in HIV Infection. Neurology 2001, 57, 995–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  379. Bowen, L.N.; Tyagi, R.; Li, W.; Alfahad, T.; Smith, B.; Wright, M.; Singer, E.J.; Nath, A. HIV-Associated Motor Neuron Disease: HERV-K Activation and Response to Antiretroviral Therapy. Neurology 2016, 87, 1756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  380. Spudich, S.; González-Scarano, F. HIV-1-Related Central Nervous System Disease: Current Issues in Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2012, 2, a007120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  381. Saylor, D.; Dickens, A.M.; Sacktor, N.; Haughey, N.; Slusher, B.; Pletnikov, M.; Mankowski, J.L.; Brown, A.; Volsky, D.J.; McArthur, J.C. HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder—Pathogenesis and Prospects for Treatment. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 2016, 12, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  382. Clifford, D.B. HIV Associated Neurocognitive Disorder. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2017, 30, 117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  383. Thakur, K.T.; Boubour, A.; Saylor, D.; Das, M.; Bearden, D.R.; Birbeck, G.L. Global HIV Neurology: A Comprehensive Review. AIDS 2019, 33, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  384. Kaul, M. HIV-1 Associated Dementia: Update on Pathological Mechanisms and Therapeutic Approaches. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 2009, 22, 315–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  385. Lingor, P.; Demleitner, A.F.; Wolff, A.W.; Feneberg, E. SARS-CoV-2 and Neurodegenerative Diseases: What We Know and What We Don’t. J. Neural Transm. 2022, 129, 1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  386. Siow, I.; Lee, K.S.; Zhang, J.J.Y.; Saffari, S.E.; Ng, A. Encephalitis as a Neurological Complication of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Incidence, Outcomes, and Predictors. Eur. J. Neurol. 2021, 28, 3491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  387. Krahel, W.D.; Bartak, M.; Cymerys, J. Acute and Long-Term SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Neurodegeneration Processes—Circulus Vitiosus. Acta Virol. 2024, 68, 12765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  388. Pandya, D.; Johnson, T.P. Chronic and Delayed Neurological Manifestations of Persistent Infections. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 2023, 36, 198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  389. Choutka, J.; Jansari, V.; Hornig, M.; Iwasaki, A. Unexplained Post-Acute Infection Syndromes. Nat. Med. 2022, 28, 911–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  390. Meinhardt, J.; Radke, J.; Dittmayer, C.; Franz, J.; Thomas, C.; Mothes, R.; Laue, M.; Schneider, J.; Brünink, S.; Greuel, S.; et al. Olfactory Transmucosal SARS-CoV-2 Invasion as a Port of Central Nervous System Entry in Individuals with COVID-19. Nat. Neurosci. 2020, 24, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  391. Song, E.; Zhang, C.; Israelow, B.; Lu-Culligan, A.; Prado, A.V.; Skriabine, S.; Lu, P.; Weizman, O.E.; Liu, F.; Dai, Y.; et al. Neuroinvasion of SARS-CoV-2 in Human and Mouse Brain. J. Exp. Med. 2021, 218, e20202135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  392. Yang, A.C.; Kern, F.; Losada, P.M.; Agam, M.R.; Maat, C.A.; Schmartz, G.P.; Fehlmann, T.; Stein, J.A.; Schaum, N.; Lee, D.P.; et al. Dysregulation of Brain and Choroid Plexus Cell Types in Severe COVID-19. Nature 2021, 595, 565–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  393. Lee, M.H.; Perl, D.P.; Steiner, J.; Pasternack, N.; Li, W.; Maric, D.; Safavi, F.; Horkayne-Szakaly, I.; Jones, R.; Stram, M.N.; et al. Neurovascular Injury with Complement Activation and Inflammation in COVID-19. Brain 2022, 145, 2555–2568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  394. Bayat, A.H.; Azimi, H.; Hassani Moghaddam, M.; Ebrahimi, V.; Fathi, M.; Vakili, K.; Mahmoudiasl, G.R.; Forouzesh, M.; Boroujeni, M.E.; Nariman, Z.; et al. COVID-19 Causes Neuronal Degeneration and Reduces Neurogenesis in Human Hippocampus. Apoptosis 2022, 27, 852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  395. Kryńska, K.; Kuliś, K.; Mazurek, W.; Gudowska-Sawczuk, M.; Zajkowska, M.; Mroczko, B. The Influence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on the Development of Selected Neurological Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 8715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  396. Jarczak, D.; Nierhaus, A. Cytokine Storm—Definition, Causes, and Implications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 11740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  397. Ningrum, D.N.A.; Kung, W.M. Challenges and Perspectives of Neurological Disorders. Brain Sci. 2023, 13, 676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  398. Feigin, V.L.; Vos, T.; Nichols, E.; Owolabi, M.O.; Carroll, W.M.; Dichgans, M.; Deuschl, G.; Parmar, P.; Brainin, M.; Murray, C. The Global Burden of Neurological Disorders: Translating Evidence into Policy. Lancet Neurol. 2020, 19, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  399. Van Schependom, J.; D’haeseleer, M. Advances in Neurodegenerative Diseases. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  400. Dehhaghi, M.; Kazemi Shariat Panahi, H.; Guillemin, G.J. Microorganisms’ Footprint in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2018, 12, 466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  401. Flint, B.; Tadi, P. Physiology, Aging; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  402. Ramanoël, S.; Hoyau, E.; Kauffmann, L.; Renard, F.; Pichat, C.; Boudiaf, N.; Krainik, A.; Jaillard, A.; Baciu, M. Gray Matter Volume and Cognitive Performance during Normal Aging. A Voxel-Based Morphometry Study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2018, 10, 350276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  403. Li, Y.; Choi, W.J.; Wei, W.; Song, S.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, J.; Wang, R.K. Aging-Associated Changes in Cerebral Vasculature and Blood Flow as Determined by Quantitative Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography. Neurobiol. Aging 2018, 70, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  404. Costantini, E.; D’Angelo, C.; Reale, M. The Role of Immunosenescence in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Mediat. Inflamm. 2018, 2018, 6039171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  405. Gitler, A.D.; Dhillon, P.; Shorter, J. Neurodegenerative Disease: Models, Mechanisms, and a New Hope. Dis. Model. Mech. 2017, 10, 499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  406. Erkkinen, M.G.; Kim, M.O.; Geschwind, M.D. Clinical Neurology and Epidemiology of the Major Neurodegenerative Diseases. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2018, 10, a033118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  407. Maiti, P.; Manna, J.; Dunbar, G.L.; Maiti, P.; Dunbar, G.L. Current Understanding of the Molecular Mechanisms in Parkinson’s Disease: Targets for Potential Treatments. Transl. Neurodegener. 2017, 6, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  408. Abdelmoaty, M.M.; Lu, E.; Kadry, R.; Foster, E.G.; Bhattarai, S.; Mosley, R.L.; Gendelman, H.E. Clinical Biomarkers for Lewy Body Diseases. Cell Biosci. 2023, 13, 209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  409. Baizabal-Carvallo, J.; Alonso-Juarez, M. The Role of Viruses in the Pathogenesis of Parkinson’s Disease. Neural Regen. Res. 2021, 16, 1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  410. Olsen, L.K.; Dowd, E.; McKernan, D.P. A Role for Viral Infections in Parkinson’s Etiology? Neuronal Signal 2018, 2, 20170166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  411. German, D.C.; Manaye, K.; Smith, W.K.; Woodward, D.J.; Saper, C.B. Midbrain Dopaminergic Cell Loss in Parkinson’s Disease: Computer Visualization. Ann. Neurol. 1989, 26, 507–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  412. Arai, H.; Furuya, T.; Mizuno, Y.; Mochizuki, H. Inflammation and Infection in Parkinson’s Disease. Histol. Histopathol. 2006, 21, 673–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  413. Henry, J.; Smeyne, R.J.; Jang, H.; Miller, B.; Okun, M.S. Parkinsonism and Neurological Manifestations of Influenza Throughout the 20th and 21st Centuries. Park. Relat. Disord. 2010, 16, 566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  414. Takahashi, M.; Yamada, T.; Nakajima, S.; Nakajima, K.; Yamamoto, T.; Okada, H. The Substantia Nigra Is a Major Target for Neurovirulent Influenza A Virus. J. Exp. Med. 1995, 181, 2161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  415. Wang, H.; Liu, X.; Tan, C.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, J.; Peng, W.; Zhou, X.; Mo, L.; Chen, L. Bacterial, Viral, and Fungal Infection-related Risk of Parkinson’s Disease: Meta-analysis of Cohort and Case–Control Studies. Brain Behav. 2020, 10, e01549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  416. Vlajinac, H.; Dzoljic, E.; Maksimovic, J.; Marinkovic, J.; Sipetic, S.; Kostic, V. Infections as a Risk Factor for Parkinson’s Disease: A Case-Control Study. Int. J. Neurosci. 2013, 123, 329–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  417. Lin, W.Y.; Lin, M.S.; Weng, Y.H.; Yeh, T.H.; Lin, Y.S.; Fong, P.Y.; Wu, Y.R.; Lu, C.S.; Chen, R.S.; Huang, Y.Z. Association of Antiviral Therapy with Risk of Parkinson Disease in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection. JAMA Neurol. 2019, 76, 1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  418. Jang, H.; Boltz, D.A.; Webster, R.G.; Smeyne, R.J. Viral Parkinsonism. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2009, 1792, 714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  419. Sasco, A.J.; Paffenbarger, R.S. Measles Infection and Parkinson’s Disease. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1985, 122, 1017–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  420. The Lancet: Global Burden of Disease. Available online: https://www.thelancet.com/gbd (accessed on 22 December 2024).
  421. Qiu, C.; Kivipelto, M.; Von Strauss, E. Epidemiology of Alzheimer’s Disease: Occurrence, Determinants, and Strategies toward Intervention. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. 2009, 11, 111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  422. Andrade-Guerrero, J.; Santiago-Balmaseda, A.; Jeronimo-Aguilar, P.; Vargas-Rodríguez, I.; Cadena-Suárez, A.R.; Sánchez-Garibay, C.; Pozo-Molina, G.; Méndez-Catalá, C.F.; Cardenas-Aguayo, M.D.C.; Diaz-Cintra, S.; et al. Alzheimer’s Disease: An Updated Overview of Its Genetics. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 3754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  423. O’Brien, J.T.; Thomas, A. Vascular Dementia. Lancet 2015, 386, 1698–1706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  424. Román, G.C. Vascular Dementia Prevention: A Risk Factor Analysis. Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2005, 20 (Suppl. 2), 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  425. Emmady, P.D.; Schoo, C.; Tadi, P. Major Neurocognitive Disorder (Dementia); StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  426. Soscia, S.J.; Kirby, J.E.; Washicosky, K.J.; Tucker, S.M.; Ingelsson, M.; Hyman, B.; Burton, M.A.; Goldstein, L.E.; Duong, S.; Tanzi, R.E.; et al. The Alzheimer’s Disease-Associated Amyloid β-Protein Is an Antimicrobial Peptide. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e9505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  427. Morris, J.C.; Chang Wong, E.; Chang Chui, H. Vascular Cognitive Impairment and Dementia. CONTINUUM Lifelong Learn. Neurol. 2022, 28, 750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  428. Custodio, N.; Montesinos, R.; Lira, D.; Herrera-Pérez, E.; Bardales, Y.; Valeriano-Lorenzo, L. Mixed Dementia: A Review of the Evidence. Dement. Neuropsychol. 2017, 11, 364–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  429. Morales, I.; Guzmán-Martínez, L.; Cerda-Troncoso, C.; Farías, G.A.; Maccioni, R.B. Neuroinflammation in the Pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s Disease. A Rational Framework for the Search of Novel Therapeutic Approaches. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2014, 8, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  430. Streit, W.J.; Mrak, R.E.; Griffin, W.S.T. Microglia and Neuroinflammation: A Pathological Perspective. J. Neuroinflammation 2004, 1, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  431. Lima, M.N.; Barbosa-Silva, M.C.; Maron-Gutierrez, T. Microglial Priming in Infections and Its Risk to Neurodegenerative Diseases. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2022, 16, 878987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  432. Wang, H.; Yuan, M.; Yang, E.; Chen, D.; Su, A.; Wu, Z. Enterovirus 71 Infection Induced Aquaporin-4 Depolarization by Increasing Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 Activity. Neurosci. Lett. 2021, 759, 136049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  433. Sousa Junior, I.P.; Vieira, T.C.R.G. Enterovirus Infection and Its Relationship with Neurodegenerative Diseases. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz 2023, 118, e220252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  434. Rippee-Brooks, M.D.; Wu, W.; Dong, J.; Pappolla, M.; Fang, X.; Bao, X. Viral Infections, Are They a Trigger and Risk Factor of Alzheimer’s Disease? Pathogens 2024, 13, 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  435. Sait, A.; Angeli, C.; Doig, A.J.; Day, P.J.R. Viral Involvement in Alzheimer’s Disease. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2021, 12, 1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  436. Sipilä, P.N.; Heikkilä, N.; Lindbohm, J.V.; Hakulinen, C.; Vahtera, J.; Elovainio, M.; Suominen, S.; Väänänen, A.; Koskinen, A.; Nyberg, S.T.; et al. Hospital-Treated Infectious Diseases and the Risk of Dementia: A Large, Multicohort, Observational Study with a Replication Cohort. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2021, 21, 1557–1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  437. Levine, K.S.; Leonard, H.L.; Blauwendraat, C.; Iwaki, H.; Johnson, N.; Bandres-Ciga, S.; Ferrucci, L.; Faghri, F.; Singleton, A.B.; Nalls, M.A. Virus Exposure and Neurodegenerative Disease Risk across National Biobanks. Neuron 2023, 111, 1086–1093.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  438. Schnier, C.; Janbek, J.; Lathe, R.; Haas, J. Reduced Dementia Incidence after Varicella Zoster Vaccination in Wales 2013–2020. Alzheimer’s Dement. Transl. Res. Clin. Interv. 2022, 8, e12293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  439. Verreault, R.; Laurin, D.; Lindsay, J.; De Serres, G. Past Exposure to Vaccines and Subsequent Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2001, 165, 1495. [Google Scholar]
  440. Wollebo, H.S.; White, M.K.; Gordon, J.; Berger, J.R.; Khalili, K. Persistence and Pathogenesis of the Neurotropic Polyomavirus JC. Ann. Neurol. 2015, 77, 560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  441. Pietropaolo, V.; Prezioso, C.; Bagnato, F.; Antonelli, G. John Cunningham Virus: An Overview on Biology and Disease of the Etiological Agent of the Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy. Rev. New Microbiol. 2018, 41, 1121–7138. [Google Scholar]
  442. Garg, M.; Arora, A.; Kulkarni, S.D.; Hegde, A.U.; Shah, K.N. Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis (SSPE): Experience from a Tertiary-Care Pediatric Center. J. Neurosci. Rural Pract. 2022, 13, 315–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  443. Jafri, S.K.; Kumar, R.; Ibrahim, S. Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis–Current Perspectives. Pediatr. Health Med. Ther. 2018, 9, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  444. Poli, S.; Donisi, V.; Mazzi, M.A.; Gobbin, F.; Giusto, G.; Orlandi, R.; Schena, F.; Del Piccolo, L.; das Nair, R.; Gajofatto, A.; et al. Fostering Quality of Life in Young Adults Living with Multiple Sclerosis: A Pilot Study of a Co-Created Integrated Intervention. Front. Psychol. 2024, 15, 1342166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  445. Lassmann, H. Pathogenic Mechanisms Associated with Different Clinical Courses of Multiple Sclerosis. Front. Immunol. 2019, 9, 3116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  446. Miljković, D.; Spasojević, I. Multiple Sclerosis: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Opportunities. Antioxid. Redox Signal 2013, 19, 2286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  447. Virtanen, J.O.; Jacobson, S. Viruses and Multiple Sclerosis. CNS Neurol. Disord. Drug Targets 2012, 11, 528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  448. Koprowski, H.; Defreitas, E.C.; Harper, M.E.; Sandberg-Wollheim, M.; Sheremata, W.A.; Robert-Guroff, M.; Saxinger, C.W.; Feinberg, M.B.; Wong-Staal, F.; Gallo, R.C. Multiple Sclerosis and Human T-Cell Lymphotropic Retroviruses. Nature 1985, 318, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  449. Koprowski, H. Search for Viruses in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 1976, 26, 80–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  450. Tsunoda, I.; Fujinami, R.S. Neuropathogenesis of Theiler’s Murine Encephalomyelitis Virus Infection, An Animal Model for Multiple Sclerosis. J. Neuroimmune Pharmacol. 2009, 5, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  451. Bjornevik, K.; Cortese, M.; Healy, B.C.; Kuhle, J.; Mina, M.J.; Leng, Y.; Elledge, S.J.; Niebuhr, D.W.; Scher, A.I.; Munger, K.L.; et al. Longitudinal Analysis Reveals High Prevalence of Epstein-Barr Virus Associated with Multiple Sclerosis. Science 2022, 375, 296–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  452. Thacker, E.L.; Mirzaei, F.; Ascherio, A. Infectious Mononucleosis and Risk for Multiple Sclerosis: A Meta-Analysis. Ann. Neurol. 2006, 59, 499–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  453. DeLorenze, G.N.; Munger, K.L.; Lennette, E.T.; Orentreich, N.; Vogelman, J.H.; Ascherio, A. Epstein-Barr Virus and Multiple Sclerosis: Evidence of Association from a Prospective Study with Long-Term Follow-Up. Arch. Neurol. 2006, 63, 839–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  454. Brotman, R.G.; Moreno-Escobar, M.C.; Joseph, J.; Munakomi, S.; Pawar, G. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  455. Hardiman, O.; Al-Chalabi, A.; Chio, A.; Corr, E.M.; Logroscino, G.; Robberecht, W.; Shaw, P.J.; Simmons, Z.; Van Den Berg, L.H. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers 2017, 3, 17071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  456. Yu, B.; Pamphlett, R. Environmental Insults: Critical Triggers for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Transl. Neurodegener. 2017, 6, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  457. Xue, Y.C.; Feuer, R.; Cashman, N.; Luo, H. Enteroviral Infection: The Forgotten Link to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis? Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2018, 11, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  458. Wang, X.; Hu, Y.; Xu, R. The Pathogenic Mechanism of TAR DNA-Binding Protein 43 (TDP-43) in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Neural Regen. Res. 2023, 19, 800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  459. Tyagi, R.; Li, W.; Parades, D.; Bianchet, M.A.; Nath, A. Inhibition of Human Endogenous Retrovirus-K by Antiretroviral Drugs. Retrovirology 2017, 14, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  460. Belshaw, R.; Katzourakis, A.; Pačes, J.; Burt, A.; Tristem, M. High Copy Number in Human Endogenous Retrovirus Families Is Associated with Copying Mechanisms in Addition to Reinfection. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2005, 22, 814–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  461. Shin, W.; Lee, J.; Son, S.Y.; Ahn, K.; Kim, H.S.; Han, K. Human-Specific HERV-K Insertion Causes Genomic Variations in the Human Genome. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e60605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  462. Wildschutte, J.H.; Williams, Z.H.; Montesion, M.; Subramanian, R.P.; Kidd, J.M.; Coffin, J.M. Discovery of Unfixed Endogenous Retrovirus Insertions in Diverse Human Populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, E2326–E2334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  463. Villesen, P.; Aagaard, L.; Wiuf, C.; Pedersen, F.S. Identification of Endogenous Retroviral Reading Frames in the Human Genome. Retrovirology 2004, 1, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  464. Gröger, V.; Emmer, A.; Staege, M.S.; Cynis, H. Endogenous Retroviruses in Nervous System Disorders. Pharmaceuticals 2021, 14, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  465. Mao, J.; Zhang, Q.; Cong, Y.S. Human Endogenous Retroviruses in Development and Disease. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 2021, 19, 5978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  466. Pal, S.; Tyler, J.K. Epigenetics and Aging. Sci. Adv. 2016, 2, e1600584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  467. Latifi, T.; Zebardast, A.; Marashi, S.M. The Role of Human Endogenous Retroviruses (HERVs) in Multiple Sclerosis and the Plausible Interplay between HERVs, Epstein–Barr Virus Infection, and Vitamin D. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2022, 57, 103318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  468. Bhetariya, P.; Kriesel, J.; Fischer, K. Analysis of Human Endogenous Retrovirus Expression in Multiple Sclerosis Plaques. J. Emerg. Dis. Virol. 2017, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  469. Arru, G.; Mameli, G.; Deiana, G.A.; Rassu, A.L.; Piredda, R.; Sechi, E.; Caggiu, E.; Bo, M.; Nako, E.; Urso, D.; et al. Humoral Immunity Response to Human Endogenous Retroviruses K/W Differentiates between Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Other Neurological Diseases. Eur. J. Neurol. 2018, 25, 1076-e84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  470. Sun, W.; Samimi, H.; Gamez, M.; Zare, H.; Frost, B. Pathogenic Tau-Induced PiRNA Depletion Promotes Neuronal Death through Transposable Element Dysregulation in Neurodegenerative Tauopathies. Nat. Neurosci. 2018, 21, 1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  471. Phan, K.; He, Y.; Fu, Y.H.; Dzamko, N.; Bhatia, S.; Gold, J.; Rowe, D.; Ke, Y.D.; Ittner, L.M.; Hodges, J.R.; et al. Pathological Manifestation of Human Endogenous Retrovirus K in Frontotemporal Dementia. Commun. Med. 2021, 1, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  472. Wallace, A.D.; Wendt, G.A.; Barcellos, L.F.; de Smith, A.J.; Walsh, K.M.; Metayer, C.; Costello, J.F.; Wiemels, J.L.; Francis, S.S. To ERV Is Human: A Phenotype-Wide Scan Linking Polymorphic Human Endogenous Retrovirus-K Insertions to Complex Phenotypes. Front. Genet. 2018, 9, 298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  473. Dolei, A.; Ibba, G.; Piu, C.; Serra, C. Expression of HERV Genes as Possible Biomarker and Target in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 3706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  474. Christensen, T. Human Endogenous Retroviruses in Neurologic Disease. APMIS 2016, 124, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  475. Küry, P.; Nath, A.; Créange, A.; Dolei, A.; Marche, P.; Gold, J.; Giovannoni, G.; Hartung, H.P.; Perron, H. Human Endogenous Retroviruses in Neurological Diseases. Trends Mol. Med. 2018, 24, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Mechanisms of virus entry into the central nervous system (CNS) through the blood–brain barrier (BBB). Viruses present in the systemic circulatory system can infiltrate the CNS by breaching the brain endothelial cells through various mechanisms. These include the following: transcellular trafficking without causing cellular damage; endothelial infection with damage; paracellular migration with the direct disruption of cellular junctions by viral proteins and with the participation of pro-inflammatory cytokines produced by activated barrier cells; disruption of the BBB with the involvement of pro-inflammatory cytokines and bioactive mediators that disrupt cell homeostasis, destabilize cellular junctions, and lead to the damage of cells composing the BBB; Trojan horse delivery within infected cells. For each of these mechanisms, viruses that exploit the pathway to infect the CNS are mentioned.
Figure 1. Mechanisms of virus entry into the central nervous system (CNS) through the blood–brain barrier (BBB). Viruses present in the systemic circulatory system can infiltrate the CNS by breaching the brain endothelial cells through various mechanisms. These include the following: transcellular trafficking without causing cellular damage; endothelial infection with damage; paracellular migration with the direct disruption of cellular junctions by viral proteins and with the participation of pro-inflammatory cytokines produced by activated barrier cells; disruption of the BBB with the involvement of pro-inflammatory cytokines and bioactive mediators that disrupt cell homeostasis, destabilize cellular junctions, and lead to the damage of cells composing the BBB; Trojan horse delivery within infected cells. For each of these mechanisms, viruses that exploit the pathway to infect the CNS are mentioned.
Viruses 17 00203 g001
Figure 2. Intercellular junctions connecting the capillary endothelial cells of the blood–brain barrier. Tight junctions are formed by transmembrane proteins such as claudins, occludins, and junctional adhesion molecules, which are linked to cytoplasmic scaffolding zonula occludens (ZO) proteins that interact directly with actin filaments of the cytoskeleton. Adherens junctions are primarily composed of E-cadherins and β-catenins, the latter of which anchor the junctions to the actin cytoskeleton. Gap junctions are formed by two hemichannels in the plasma membranes of adjacent cells, which are composed of protein subunits called connexins.
Figure 2. Intercellular junctions connecting the capillary endothelial cells of the blood–brain barrier. Tight junctions are formed by transmembrane proteins such as claudins, occludins, and junctional adhesion molecules, which are linked to cytoplasmic scaffolding zonula occludens (ZO) proteins that interact directly with actin filaments of the cytoskeleton. Adherens junctions are primarily composed of E-cadherins and β-catenins, the latter of which anchor the junctions to the actin cytoskeleton. Gap junctions are formed by two hemichannels in the plasma membranes of adjacent cells, which are composed of protein subunits called connexins.
Viruses 17 00203 g002
Table 1. Neuronal pathways to CNS invasion used by RABV and HSV-1.
Table 1. Neuronal pathways to CNS invasion used by RABV and HSV-1.
RABVHSV-1
Cells through which the virus enters the host’s bodyMuscle cellsEpithelial cells
Method of entry into the peripheral neuronReceptor-dependent clathrin-mediated endocytosis [39,62]Fusion of virus lipid envelope with host cell membrane [63]
Viral proteins responsible for neuron entryRABV G—the only protein exposed on the surface of the viral envelope that can bind to various receptors [64,65]At least 12 different surface glycoproteins bind to more than one receptor [66]
Type of neuron used on the way to the CNSMotor neuronSensory neuron
Mechanism of virus transport in a neuronFast dynein- and kinesin-mediated transport on microtubules in endosomes [67]Dynein, dynactin, and kinesin-1-mediated transport on microtubules of the non-enveloped capsid [68]
Reaching the brain and the fate of the hostThe virus always reaches the brain cells, ultimately causing the host’s deathIf the virus reaches the brain cells, it may cause severe acute, potentially fatal encephalomyelitis, but this rarely happens
Ability to persist in the brain without causing the host’s deathNoYes, in a latent form in the brainstem, as well as in other brain regions until the host’s natural death (not explained how it reaches them)
Main factor(s) determining tissue and cell tropismMultiple—high level of receptors on the host cell surface, lower protective immune response of neurons, low immune surveillance over cells, othersThe occurrence of specific receptors on host cells’ surface
Inflammatory response in the brain during acute infectionSpecific suppression of the host immunity through diverse mechanisms [46]Brain parenchyma inflammation is accompanied by an inflammatory response that may become exaggerated and further increases brain injury [69]
Table 2. Viral pathways of neuroinvasion.
Table 2. Viral pathways of neuroinvasion.
Possible Hematogenous Neuroinvasion Through Brain BarriersViruses
1. Transcellular pathway with none or minimal barrier damageFlaviviridae: WNV, JEV, TBEV, ZIKV; Togaviridae: VEEV, WEEV; Retroviridae: HIV-1
2.1. Infection with general damage to barrier cellsFlaviviridae,
Paramyxoviridae: HeV, NiV
2.2. Paracellular pathway with direct impairment of intercellular junctions of barrier cells Flaviviridae: WNV, JEV, DENV
Picornaviridae: Enterovirus A71
2.3. Barrier damage by inflammatory mediators Coronaviridae: SARS-CoV-2
3. Trojan horse mechanismFlaviviridae: JEV, WNV, ZIKV
Retroviridae: HIV-1, Visna virus
Table 3. Viruses responsible for neuropathology and clinical outcomes in humans.
Table 3. Viruses responsible for neuropathology and clinical outcomes in humans.
VirusCommon Way of Entry to the CNS Frequent Clinical PresentationOutcome and Viral PersistenceInfected CNS Cells
Family:
Herpesviridae
HSV-1, HSV-2Anterograde transport from TG (HSV-1) or sacral dorsal ganglion (HSV-2) by sensory neuron projections [137], via olfactory pathway [138].Severe acute necrotizing encephalitis (HSV-1), meningitis (HSV-2) [139], or asymptomatic presence—accumulating data from the autopsy of people deceased without neurological illnesses (2–100%) [140].Encephalitis often leads to lifelong brain damage or death.
Virus undergoes latency and persists permanently within neural tissue.
Neurons, astrocytes, microglia, oligodendrocytes [141].
VZVAnterograde transport by neuron projections from dorsal root ganglia and cranial nerve ganglia.Meningitis or encephalitis often without concurrent zoster rash [142,143]
or asymptomatic presence—data from the autopsy of people with no evidence of neurological disease (1–27.5%) [144,145].
Resolution of symptoms with or without neurologic sequelae, encephalitis can result in fatal outcome.
Virus is suspected to persist in the CNS, as it establishes latency in neurons.
Neurons, astrocytes [146],
oligodendrocytes [147].
EBVVia infected lymphocytes.Meningitis, encephalitis, and CNS-lymphoma.Resolution of symptoms without or with long-term consequences (depending on the host immune status and other factors [148]), may end with death.
Establishes lifelong infection of the PNS and/or CNS, EBV-infected cells, free virus, and gene products can be found in the CNS [149].
Neurons [150],
astrocytes, microglia [151].
CMVPresumably via infected monocytes [132].Meningitis, encephalitis (particularly in immunosuppressed individuals).In immune-naïve and immunocompromised persons can cause CNS complications or result in fatal outcome [152].
Routinely establishes lifelong infection of the PNS and/or CNS [149].
Neurons (debated), astrocytes, microglia, oligodendrocytes, neural progenitor cells [153].
HHV-6A, HHV-6BVia olfactory pathway [154], infected lymphocytes, or optic tract [155].Encephalitis or asymptomatic presence—data from autopsies of individuals who passed away without neurological disorders (19–87.5%) [145,155,156].Encephalitis often has devastating sequelae or may cause death [157].
Viruses establish the lifelong infection of the PNS and/or CNS [149].
Neurons, astrocytes [158],
microglia [159],
oligodendrocytes [160].
Family:
Picornaviridae
PoliovirusVia the BBB and motor neurons [72].Paralytic poliomyelitis.Severe and irreversible damage of motor neurons, among those paralyzed, 5–10% die [161].
It is suggested that the virus may persist in surviving patients [162].
Neurons [72].
Enterovirus-A71Hematogenous way—transcellular pathway and/or infection of endothelial cells [163].Meningitis, encephalitis, polio-like syndrome, encephalomyelitis (the risk may be associated with younger age) [164].CNS involvement may entail severe sequelae, death is rarely reported [165].
The mechanisms and extent of EV-A71 persistence in the human CNS is unknown [166].
Neurons,
astrocytes [167],
microglia [168].
Family:
Orthomyxoviridae
Subtypes of influenza A virusPresumably via olfactory nerve pathway [169,170,171], cranial nerves [172], via BBB endothelial cells [173].Acute encephalitis or influenza-associated encephalopathy.Severe onset, often resulting in significant morbidity and high mortality within a matter of days [173].Neurons [174], astrocytes [175].
Family:
Paramyxoviridae
Mumps virus (MuV)Through the choroid plexus—virus infects choroidal and ependymal epithelial cells [176], on mononuclear cells transiting the BBB during viremia.Meningitis.Usually mild or asymptomatic disease with often complete recovery [177]. Symptomatic CNS infection is less common and rarely fatal [178].
In rare instances, the virus is believed to persist in the CNS [179,180].
Neurons [181].
Measles virusHematogenous way—infection of brain endothelial cells [182], in infected CNS infiltrating macrophages [183].Primary encephalitis, postinfectious encephalomyelitis, SSPE.All diseases can lead to severe and permanent brain injury [184], SSPE is invariably fatal.
Virus may persist in neurons [185].
Neurons, astrocytes, oligodendrocytes [183].
Henipaviruses (HeV, NiV)Directly from the nasal mucosa and in a hematogenous way [186].Febrile illness or encephalitis.The disease may be fatal, survivors may experience severe neurological sequelae [187].Endothelial cells of the CNS microvasculature,
neurons [188],
astrocytes, oligodendrocytes [189].
Family:
Rhabdoviridae
RABVRetrograde axonal transport.Progressive rabies encephalitis.Invariably fatal outcome.Neurons, astrocytes (field strains) [53].
Family:
Flaviviridae
Encephalitic flavivirusesAlong the peripheral nervous system and axonal transport,
hematogenous route—the infection of choroid plexus cells [190], the infection of BBB cells without cytopathic effect, with the downregulation of junction proteins, or crossing the BBB
in leukocytes [83].
Severe encephalitides and other neurologic syndromes.Encephalitides are often fatal or may lead to transient or permanent neurological deficits [96].
Viruses may persist in the CNS.
Neurons, astrocytes,
microglia, oligodendrocytes (please ref. to Table 5).
Family:
Togaviridae
VEEV, WEEV, EEEVAnterograde transport along peripheral nerves,
olfactory route [191],
hematogenous route—transcytosis across intact BBB [89].
Mild, febrile illness to severe encephalitis.Encephalitides have 1–75% fatality rate, depending on the virus strain [89].
Virus replication and/or genomic RNA may persist in the CNS [192].
Neurons, astrocytes, microglia [193].
Family:
Retroviridae
HIVIn HIV-infected monocytes.HAND.Cognitive, motor and behavioral abnormalities [194].
Virus persists in the CNS.
Microglia, astrocytes [195].
Family:
Coronaviridae
SARS-CoV-2Via olfactory epithelium, via optic nerve,
hematogenous pathway—by infection of brain endothelial cells [196].
Encephalopathy (in most critically ill COVID-19 patients), PASC.With serious or long-term neurological dysfunctions and deficits.Neurons, astrocytes, choroid plexus epithelial cells [197].
Table 4. Encephalitis and other neurological syndromes associated with selected neurotropic flavivirus infections.
Table 4. Encephalitis and other neurological syndromes associated with selected neurotropic flavivirus infections.
JEVWNVTBEVZIKV
Disease transmission Mosquito biteMosquito biteTick bite, consumption of unpasteurized milk from infected ruminants (1% of infections) [202]Mosquito bite, placental transmission, sexual transmission [203]
Geographical regions of most encephalitis cases Asia, Australia, Western Pacific [204]Europe and North America [82]Central/Northern Europe and North-Eastern Asia [205]Africa, South-East Asia, Micronesia, French Polynesia, both Americas [206]
Most frequently encephalitis-bearing patients ChildrenElderly or inmunocompromised individuals [207]AdultsNewborns
Vaccines available YesNoYesNo
% of people infected with
the virus
who develop encephalitis
0.1–1% [208]0.67% [209]2–25% [210]Unknown
Number of encephalitis cases annually ~100,000 [211]Few thousand [212]10,000–15,000 [213]Unknown in newborns, very few cases of adult people [214]
Encephalitis mortality rate 20–30% [215]Over 10% [216],
10–20% for WNV meningitis [217]
1–40% [218]—
in severe infections, TBE manifests as meningoencephalitis with significant mortality rate [219]
Unknown
Other neurological syndromes associated with infection Meningitis [220],
poliomyelitis-like flaccid paralysis [221],
Parkinsonian syndrome [222], neuropsychiatric sequelae,
cognitive and language impairment [223],
GBS [224,225]
Meningitis,
poliomyelitis [226],
GBS [227],
acute flaccid paralysis [228],
movement disorders, cognitive difficulties [229],
neuropsychiatric sequelae [230,231]
Meningitis,
GBS [232],
permanent paresis,
postencephalitic syndrome [210],
epilepsy,
lateral sclerosis,
dispersed sclerosis,
Parkinson-like disease,
mental deterioration leading to severe dementia and/or death [233]
Microcephaly and other congenital malformations in newborns,
GBS—predominate presentaion in adults [234],
encephalopathy,
meningitis,
myelitis,
seizures [214]
Table 5. Non-neuronal cells infected by flaviviruses in the human CNS.
Table 5. Non-neuronal cells infected by flaviviruses in the human CNS.
FlavivirusNon-neuronal CNS cells that can be infected
JEVastrocytes [82], microglia, BMECs [240], pericytes [241], neural progenitor stem cells [81]
WNVastrocytes [242], oligodendrocytes [243], BMECs [244], pericytes [245]
TBEVastrocytes, oligodendrocytes [205], microglia [246], BMECs, pericytes [247]
ZIKVastrocytes, oligodendrocytes [248], microglia, BMECs [249], pericytes [190], neural progenitor cells [250], glial progenitor cells [251]
Table 6. Autoimmune conditions and related flavivirus infections.
Table 6. Autoimmune conditions and related flavivirus infections.
Autoimmune
Condition
DefinitionOnset TimeFlaviviral Infections Associated with
Autoimmune Condition
Autoimmune encephalitis, AIEAcute to subacute progressive inflammation of the brain, associated with the presence of antibodies against self-antigens expressed in the CNS, often neuronal proteins [262].Can develop early or during onset of encephalitis, usually during recovery from viral infection or several weeks later [263].JEV, WNV [264,265]
Acute disseminated encephalomy-elitis, ADEMAcute post-infectious progressive inflammatory disorder characterized by brain and spinal cord demyelination and other types of neural damage [266] can also occur post-vaccination.Develops during or within days to weeks after CNS infections or after illnesses with CNS involvement.DENV, ZIKV [237,267,268,269].
Immunization against JEV [270].
Guillain–Barre Syndrome, GBSPost-infectious neuropathy resulting from the autoimmune destruction of nerves in the PNS [271].Typically begins within a few days to several weeks after a viral infection.DENV, WNV, JEV, and ZIKV [224,227,272,273].
Table 7. Neurotoxic effects of HIV proteins in the brain.
Table 7. Neurotoxic effects of HIV proteins in the brain.
Direct injury of neuronsgp120, gp41, Tat, Vpr [300,301,302,303]
Induction of pro-inflammatory cytokine expression and release; glial and myeloid cell activationTat, gp120, Nef, Vpr [122,304,305,306,307,308,309,310,311,312]
Suppression of NF-κB-elicited antiviral immune responsesVpu [313,314]
Induction of adhesion molecules expression and mediation of adhesion molecules’ releaseTat, gp120, Nef [315,316,317,318]
Regulation of protein stability through modulation of ubiquitinationVif, Vpu, Vpx, Vpr, Nef [319,320]
Promotion of apoptosisgp120, Tat, Vpu, Nef [319,321,322]
Inhibition of apoptosisTat, Vpr, Nef, Vif [323,324]
Alteration of intracellular ionic homeostasisTat, gp120, Nef, Vpr, Vpu, gp41 [325,326,327,328,329,330,331,332]
Disruption of cell–cell communicationTat, Nef, gp120 [333,334,335,336,337]
Disruption of metabolic pathwaysgp120, Tat, Vpr [338,339,340,341,342]
Disruption of DNA repairVpr [343,344,345]
Disruption of neurotransmitter signaling[346]
Induction of ROS and RNS productionTat, Vpr, Vpu, gp120, gp41, Nef [347,348,349,350]
Interaction with Aβ and/or Tau resulting in their accumulation (disruption of processing, localization, and phagocytosis by microglial cells)Tat, gp120, Vpr, Nef [351,352,353]
Modulation of infected T cell activation statusgp120, Env, Nef, Tat, Vpr [354,355,356,357,358]
Table 8. Endogenous retroviruses implicated in neurodegenerative disorders.
Table 8. Endogenous retroviruses implicated in neurodegenerative disorders.
Neurodegenerative DisorderHERVs Implicated in Disease
MSHERV-W, HERV-K, HERV-H, HERV-E, HERV-15 [467,468].
ALSHERV-K, HERV-W [469]
ADHERV-H, HERV-K, HERV-L, HERV-W [5,470]
progressive supranuclear palsyHERV-H, HERV-K, HERV-L [470]
FTDHERV-K [471]
PDHERV-K [5,472]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mielcarska, M.B.; Rouse, B.T. Viruses and the Brain—A Relationship Prone to Trouble. Viruses 2025, 17, 203. https://doi.org/10.3390/v17020203

AMA Style

Mielcarska MB, Rouse BT. Viruses and the Brain—A Relationship Prone to Trouble. Viruses. 2025; 17(2):203. https://doi.org/10.3390/v17020203

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mielcarska, Matylda Barbara, and Barry T. Rouse. 2025. "Viruses and the Brain—A Relationship Prone to Trouble" Viruses 17, no. 2: 203. https://doi.org/10.3390/v17020203

APA Style

Mielcarska, M. B., & Rouse, B. T. (2025). Viruses and the Brain—A Relationship Prone to Trouble. Viruses, 17(2), 203. https://doi.org/10.3390/v17020203

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop