Pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of equine herpesvirus‐1 in domesticated horses: A systematic review

• Published in: Journal of veterinary internal medicine 2024-05, Vol.38 (3), p.1892-1905
• Main Authors: Goehring, Lutz, Dorman, David C., Osterrieder, Klaus, Burgess, Brandy A., Dougherty, Kelsie, Gross, Peggy, Neinast, Claire, Pusterla, Nicola, Soboll‐Hussey, Gisela, Lunn, David P.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; Antiviral Agents - therapeutic use; chemotherapy; EQUINE; equine herpesvirus myeloencephalopathy; Herpesviridae Infections - drug therapy; Herpesviridae Infections - veterinary; Herpesvirus 1, Equid - drug effects; herpesvirus‐1; Horse Diseases - drug therapy; Horse Diseases - virology; Horses; Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; Software; Systematic Review; Valacyclovir - therapeutic use; Viral infections
• ISSN: 0891-6640; 1939-1676
• DOI: 10.1111/jvim.17016

Background Equine herpes virus type 1 (EHV‐1) infection in horses is associated with upper respiratory disease, neurological disease, abortions, and neonatal death. Review Question Does pharmacological therapy decrease either the incidence or severity of disease or infection caused by EHV‐1 in domesticated horses? Methods A systematic review was preformed searching AGRICOLA, CAB s, Cochrane, PubMed, Web of Science, and WHO Global Health Index Medicus Regional Databases to identify articles published before February 15, 2021. Selection criteria were original research reports published in peer reviewed journals, and studies investigating in vivo use of therapeutic agents for prevention or treatment of EHV‐1 in horses. Outcomes assessed included measures related to clinical outcomes that reflect symptomatic EHV‐1 infection or virus infection. We evaluated risk of bias and performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. Results A total of 7009 unique studies were identified, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. Two studies evaluated valacyclovir or small interfering RNAs, and single studies evaluated the use of a Parapoxvirus ovis‐based immunomodulator, human alpha interferon, an herbal supplement, a cytosine analog, and heparin. The level of evidence ranged between randomized controlled studies and observational trials. The risk of bias was moderate to high and sample sizes were small. Most studies reported either no benefit or minimal efficacy of the intervention tested. Conclusions and Clinical Importance Our review indicates minimal or limited benefit either as a prophylactic or post‐exposure treatment for any of the studied interventions in the mitigation of EHV‐1‐associated disease outcome.