Hubbry Logo
EchovirusEchovirusMain
Open search
Echovirus
Community hub
Echovirus
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Echovirus
Echovirus
Echovirus
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Echovirus is a polyphyletic group of viruses associated with enteric disease in humans. The name is derived from "enteric cytopathic human orphan virus". These viruses were originally not associated with disease, but many have since been identified as disease-causing agents. The term "echovirus" was used in the scientific names of numerous species, but all echoviruses are now recognized as strains of various species, most of which are in the family Picornaviridae.[1]

List of echoviruses

[edit]

Thirty-four echoviruses are known:[1]

  • Human echoviruses 1–7, 9, 11–21, 24–27, and 29–33 are strains of the species Enterovirus B of the genus Enterovirus.[2]
  • Human echovirus 8 was shown to be identical to Human echovirus 1 and was abolished as a species.
  • Human echovirus 10 was reclassified as a strain of the species Reovirus type 1, currently named Mammalian orthoreovirus of the genus Orthoreovirus, which belongs to the family Reoviridae. As such, Human echovirus 10 is the only echovirus that does not belong to the family Picornaviridae.
  • Human echoviruses 22 and 23 are strains of the species Parechovirus A of the genus Parechovirus.[3]
  • Human echovirus 28 was reclassified as the species Human rhinovirus 1A, which was later merged with other rhinovirus strains into the currently named species Rhinovirus A of the genus Enterovirus.
  • Human echovirus 34 was abolished as a species and reclassified as a strain of Human coxsackievirus A24, which is now classified as a strain of the species Enterovirus C of the genus Enterovirus.

Symptoms

[edit]

When one is infected with echovirus, symptoms are rare but can occur. When symptoms occur, they often include a cough, rash, and influenza-like symptoms. Rare symptoms include viral meningitis, which affects the brain and spinal cord.[4]

Treatment

[edit]

Echovirus infection mostly clears up on its own. Doctors may give an immune-system treatment called IVIG, which can help those with weak immune systems. No medicines are known to help against the virus.[4]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Echovirus

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Echovirus, an abbreviation for Enteric Cytopathic Human Orphan virus, refers to a group of 28 serotypes of non-enveloped, single-stranded, positive-sense viruses in the Enterovirus within the family Picornaviridae. These viruses are approximately 20–30 nm in diameter, exhibit icosahedral symmetry, and are acid-resistant, allowing them to survive in the . Initially identified in the as "orphan" viruses without known disease associations, echoviruses are now recognized for causing a range of infections, primarily in children, through fecal-oral transmission via contaminated stool, respiratory secretions, or fomites. Echoviruses are endemic worldwide and circulate seasonally, with peaks in summer and early fall in temperate climates like the . They spread efficiently in community settings, such as schools and daycare centers, due to their stability in the environment and to be transmitted person-to-person. Incubation periods typically range from 3 to 5 days, and most infections (over 90%) are , contributing to silent spread. Certain serotypes, such as echovirus 9, 11, and 30, are more commonly associated with outbreaks and have been documented in surveillance data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Notably, echovirus 11 has been linked to severe neonatal infections, including outbreaks in and elsewhere from 2022 to 2025, with high rates of morbidity and mortality in newborns. While most infections resolve without intervention, echoviruses can cause diverse clinical manifestations, including mild respiratory illnesses and maculopapular rashes. More severe outcomes include , , , and , particularly with of serotypes like echovirus 11, which can lead to high morbidity and mortality in newborns. Diagnosis relies on clinical presentation, with confirmatory PCR or used in severe cases; treatment is supportive, as no specific antiviral exists, though intravenous immunoglobulin may benefit immunocompromised patients. Prevention focuses on practices like handwashing, as no vaccines are available.

Overview

Definition and characteristics

Echoviruses represent a group of non-polio enteroviruses classified within the species Human enterovirus B of the genus in the family Picornaviridae. They comprise 28 serotypes that were initially isolated from human fecal specimens and identified as distinct from polioviruses and coxsackieviruses. The term "echovirus" originates from "enteric cytopathic human ," coined in to describe these viruses that caused cytopathic effects in cell cultures derived from the enteric tract but were initially not linked to any known disease, hence "." Although subsequent research reclassified many enteroviruses and removed the "" status, the "" prefix persists in for these serotypes. These viruses exhibit key structural and genomic properties typical of the Picornaviridae family. Echoviruses are non-enveloped particles with icosahedral symmetry, featuring a protein that protects the . The virion measures approximately 28-30 nm in diameter, rendering it resistant to environmental stresses such as low pH. Their consists of a single-stranded positive-sense molecule, roughly 7,400 in length, which enables direct upon without requiring a reverse transcription step. Echoviruses play an etiological role in a range of human infections, primarily affecting the gastrointestinal and respiratory systems before potentially disseminating to other sites. Unlike polioviruses, which are specialized for causing paralytic poliomyelitis, or coxsackieviruses, often linked to and , echoviruses are more commonly associated with and nonspecific febrile illnesses, particularly in children. This distinction underscores their position as non-polio enteroviruses within the broader spectrum.

Medical importance

Echoviruses, a group of non-polio enteroviruses, are associated with a broad spectrum of clinical illnesses ranging from infections to severe manifestations, including as the most common severe form, acute , , and neonatal sepsis-like illness. These viruses can also cause , respiratory infections, hand-foot-and-mouth disease, , exanthems, and gastrointestinal symptoms such as and . While most infections resolve without intervention, severe cases can lead to significant neurological damage, cardiac complications, or multi-organ failure. Neonates, infants, young children, and immunocompromised individuals face the highest risk of severe outcomes, with echovirus infections exhibiting higher morbidity and mortality in these groups compared to healthy adults. Overall mortality remains low in the general population, but outbreaks—typically occurring in summer and fall seasons—can strain healthcare resources due to increased cases of hospitalization-requiring illnesses. Transmission primarily occurs via the fecal-oral route or respiratory droplets, facilitating seasonal surges in temperate regions. Globally, non-polio enteroviruses like echoviruses contribute to millions of infections annually, serving as a leading cause of acute febrile illnesses and , particularly in children, though underreporting is common due to the prevalence of mild or subclinical cases. In the United States alone, these viruses account for 10 to 15 million infections and tens of thousands of hospitalizations each year. Among echovirus serotypes, echovirus 11 stands out for its association with neonatal outbreaks, often resulting in severe , , and high case fatality rates in preterm infants. This serotype's clinical relevance differentiates it from other enteroviruses by its propensity for and rapid progression in vulnerable newborns.

Virology

Viral structure

Echoviruses belong to the Picornaviridae family and feature a non-enveloped, icosahedral approximately 30 nm in diameter, assembled from 60 copies each of four structural proteins: , VP2, VP3, and VP4. These proteins form a pseudo T=3 symmetry shell, with , VP2, and VP3 constituting the external layer while VP4 resides internally, lining the inner surface and interfacing with the packaged genome. The capsid surface displays distinct morphological features that underpin its function, including a prominent canyon—a deep, narrow depression encircling the fivefold symmetry axes—which serves as the primary site for receptor binding in many enteroviruses. acts as the major external protein, with its exposed loops and a hydrophobic pocket within the canyon accommodating cellular receptors such as (DAF, also known as CD55) or the neonatal (FcRn), with usage varying by , thereby facilitating host cell attachment. This canyon architecture also shields receptor-binding residues from neutralizing antibodies, contributing to immune evasion. The lack of an renders echoviruses highly stable in diverse environmental conditions, including acidic environments like the , which supports their resilience during fecal-oral transmission. High-resolution structural analyses, including cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) reconstructions at resolutions up to 2.9 Å for echovirus 30 and at 3.1 Å for echovirus 7, have elucidated antigenic sites primarily on the surface loops of , VP2, and VP3, as well as precise receptor-capsid interactions that influence and specificity.

Genome and replication

The genome of echovirus is a linear, positive-sense single-stranded RNA molecule approximately 7.4 kilobases (kb) in length, featuring a 5' untranslated region (UTR) of about 740 nucleotides, a 3' UTR of around 100 nucleotides, and a single open reading frame (ORF) that encodes a polyprotein of roughly 2,194 amino acids. This polyprotein is post-translationally cleaved into 11 functional proteins: four structural capsid proteins (VP1–VP4) derived from the P1 region, and seven non-structural proteins from the P2 (2A–2C) and P3 (3A–3D) regions. The 5' end is covalently linked to a viral protein (VPg, or 3B), and the 3' end terminates in a poly(A) tail, structures that facilitate genome stability, translation initiation via an internal ribosome entry site (IRES) in the 5' UTR, and replication. The replication cycle of echovirus begins with viral attachment to host cell receptors, such as (DAF) or , mediated by the canyon-like depression on the surface. Following receptor binding, the virus undergoes and uncoating, releasing the genomic into the . Host ribosomes then translate the positive-sense directly into the polyprotein using the IRES, bypassing the need for a 5' . This polyprotein is rapidly processed by viral proteases: the 2A protease (2Apro) performs initial cleavages, including at the P1–P2 junction, while the 3C protease (3Cpro) executes most subsequent cleavages to generate mature proteins. Notably, 2Apro also cleaves 4G (eIF4G), disrupting host cap-dependent translation and favoring viral protein synthesis. Viral RNA replication occurs in cytoplasmic membrane-bound compartments, such as double-membrane vesicles induced by non-structural proteins 2BC and 3A. The 3Dpol initiates replication by uridylylating VPg using a cis-acting replication element (cre) in the , forming a VPg-pUpU primer for synthesizing a complementary negative-sense RNA strand. This negative strand serves as a template for producing multiple positive-sense progeny RNAs, which are either translated into new polyproteins, replicated further, or packaged into virions by structural proteins. Assembly of new capsids occurs in the , with mature virions released primarily through host cell . Echovirus replication is characterized by a high mutation rate, approximately 10−4 to 10−5 substitutions per nucleotide per replication cycle, driven by the error-prone nature of 3Dpol lacking proofreading activity. This leads to the formation of heterogeneous viral quasispecies populations within infected hosts, enabling rapid adaptation, antigenic drift, and evasion of immune responses.

Classification

Serotypes and nomenclature

Echoviruses are classified into distinct serotypes primarily based on antigenic differences, as determined by serum neutralization assays that measure the ability of specific antibodies to inhibit viral infectivity. Originally identified in the and , 34 serotypes (designated E1 through E34) were established under the term "enteric cytopathic human orphan" viruses, reflecting their isolation from the without known disease associations at the time. Over time, this evolved with advancements in ; several serotypes were reclassified due to genetic and antigenic reevaluations, such as E22 and E23, which are now recognized as parechoviruses rather than . Today, 28 serotypes remain classified within the , with the standard abbreviation "E" followed by the number (e.g., E6, E11). While serotyping relies on antigenic properties, modern classification also incorporates genetic criteria, such as greater than 25% divergence in the gene between types. This dual approach—antigenic and genotypic—facilitates precise identification amid the group's diversity, though neutralization remains the cornerstone for traditional typing. The integration of echoviruses into the B species underscores their shared genomic and structural features with other non-polio enteroviruses. Certain serotypes are notably associated with specific clinical manifestations, guiding diagnostic and surveillance efforts. For instance, E11 and E30 are among the most frequently linked to , while E6 and E9 often correlate with exanthematous rashes alongside neurological symptoms.
SerotypePrimary Disease Associations
E6Aseptic meningitis, rashes
E9, rashes
E11
E30

Genetic evolution

Echoviruses exhibit a high , typically in the range of 10^{-3} to 10^{-4} substitutions per site per year, attributed to the error-prone nature of their (3Dpol), which lacks proofreading activity. This elevated mutation frequency generates substantial intrahost , manifesting as quasispecies populations that facilitate rapid to host immune pressures and environmental changes. Specific estimates for echovirus serotypes, such as Echovirus 30 (E30) at approximately 8 × 10^{-3} substitutions per site per year and Echovirus 11 (E11) at 6.32 × 10^{-3} substitutions per site per year, underscore this dynamic variability across strains. In addition to point , intertypic recombination is a predominant evolutionary driver in echoviruses, particularly within the non-structural genomic regions (P2 and P3), leading to the formation of mosaic genomes within the B (EV-B) species. These recombination events often occur between distinct serotypes, such as exchanges between echoviruses and coxsackieviruses, promoting while preserving determinants for serotype specificity. Phylogenetic analyses reveal that such mosaicism is widespread, with recombinant strains displaying independent evolutionary trajectories for structural (P1) and non-structural regions, enhancing viral fitness and immune evasion. Phylogenetically, echovirus serotypes predominantly cluster within the EV-B species, reflecting their shared human enterovirus ancestry with limited evidence of zoonotic origins or frequent cross-species transmissions. Full-genome sequencing consistently places echoviruses in monophyletic clades alongside other EV-B members like coxsackie B viruses, with rare interspecies jumps documented primarily in rather than broader zoonoses. Recent evolutionary dynamics are exemplified by the emergence of recombinant E11 variants associated with severe neonatal outbreaks in 2023 across and , including strains with novel genotype D5 featuring multiple recombination breakpoints in non-structural genes. These variants, linked to high-mortality cases of and multi-organ failure, demonstrate accelerated evolution through recombination with other EV-B serotypes, highlighting ongoing genetic shifts in circulating populations, with continued severe neonatal infections reported in 2024 and 2025 in regions including , , and .

Epidemiology

Transmission mechanisms

Echoviruses are primarily transmitted through the fecal-oral route, where the virus is ingested via contaminated , , or hands in contact with fecal matter from infected individuals. This mode of spread is facilitated by poor personal hygiene and inadequate , allowing the virus to persist in environments conducive to . Secondary transmission can occur via respiratory droplets in close-contact settings, though this is less common than the fecal-oral pathway. The virus exhibits notable environmental persistence, remaining infectious in water for weeks, and showing resistance to disinfectants, surviving for several days in chlorinated pools at typical concentrations. Additionally, echoviruses are acid-stable, capable of surviving the low of the stomach (around 2-3), which enables them to reach the intestines intact after . Person-to-person spread is common in high-density settings such as households, daycares, and hospitals, where close interactions and shared facilities amplify transmission risks. In temperate climates, echovirus infections peak during the summer and early fall, correlating with increased outdoor activities and potential environmental exposure. Unlike some other es, echoviruses do not involve vectors for transmission, relying solely on direct or indirect human contact. The typical ranges from 3 to 6 days, during which the virus can be shed asymptomatically, contributing to ongoing spread.

Global distribution and outbreaks

Echoviruses are ubiquitous pathogens with a global distribution, endemic across all continents and primarily affecting children worldwide. Incidence is highest among children under 10 years of age, particularly in developing regions where poor , overcrowded living conditions, and inadequate hygiene exacerbate transmission rates. Seasonal patterns vary by geography: in temperate climates, infections peak during summer and early fall, aligning with increased person-to-person contact in warmer weather, whereas tropical regions experience year-round circulation due to consistently favorable environmental conditions for viral survival. Key risk factors for outbreaks include in households or institutions, international travel facilitating cross-border spread, and immunocompromised hosts who face higher severity. Surveillance efforts by organizations such as the (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) monitor these patterns through global networks, enabling early detection of surges. Notable historical outbreaks occurred in the United States during the mid-20th century, including widespread echovirus 30 epidemics linked to in 1959–1960 and 1968–1969, which affected thousands and highlighted the virus's potential for rapid community spread. In , a severe cluster of echovirus 11 infections emerged in neonates starting in 2022, with 19 cases reported across , the , and other EU/EEA countries by mid-2023, and additional cases in 2024 and 2025 in countries including and , resulting in high mortality rates exceeding 50% among affected infants.

Pathogenesis

Infection process

Echoviruses initiate infection primarily through the fecal-oral or respiratory route, targeting the intestinal or where they bind to host cell receptors such as (DAF, also known as CD55) or (CAR). This attachment triggers , allowing the to enter the host cell and initiate uncoating of its genome. For instance, echovirus 7 and echovirus 30 utilize DAF as the primary attachment receptor on polarized epithelial cells, facilitating entry without necessarily requiring CAR, though some serotypes like echovirus 11 may engage both. Following entry and initial replication in mucosal cells, echoviruses spread systemically via , entering the bloodstream to reach secondary target organs such as the (CNS), heart, and . This dissemination exploits the virus's for neural cells, enabling invasion of the CNS, potentially via crossing the blood-brain barrier through mechanisms such as infection of endothelial cells or transport by infected immune cells, and for cardiac myocytes, leading to potential . Similarly, serotypes like echovirus 6 demonstrate for both exocrine and endocrine pancreatic cells, contributing to localized replication in these tissues. Within target tissues, echovirus replication directly causes of infected cells, releasing progeny virions and amplifying local damage. Additionally, the viral 2A plays a key role in inducing by cleaving host proteins involved in cell survival pathways, further exacerbating tissue injury without relying on immune-mediated mechanisms. Most echovirus infections are self-limited, typically resolving within 1 to 2 weeks as innate immune responses, including type I interferons, and adaptive immunity, such as neutralizing antibodies, clear the from the host. Notably, a novel variant of echovirus 11 ( D5), emerging since 2022, has been linked to severe neonatal infections with high mortality rates, as reported in surveillance from and as of 2025.

Host immune interactions

Echoviruses, as members of the Enterovirus genus, elicit a robust innate immune response primarily through the recognition of viral RNA by pattern recognition receptors, leading to the production of type I interferons (IFNs). Upon infection, viral double-stranded RNA intermediates are detected by melanoma differentiation-associated protein 5 (MDA5) and retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I), which signal through mitochondrial antiviral-signaling protein (MAVS) to activate interferon regulatory factors (IRFs) and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB), inducing IFN-α and IFN-β expression. However, echoviruses counteract this by employing their 2A protease (2Apro), which cleaves MAVS and MDA5, thereby disrupting the signaling cascade and suppressing IFN production to facilitate viral replication. In macrophages, early control of echovirus infection involves Toll-like receptor 3 (TLR3), which recognizes dsRNA in endosomes and activates the adaptor TIR-domain-containing adapter-inducing interferon-β (TRIF) to promote type I IFN and proinflammatory secretion. The MyD88-dependent pathway, utilized by other TLRs such as TLR7 and TLR8 in phagocytic cells, further amplifies innate responses by triggering activation and release, including interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α, to limit viral spread. Similar to other enteroviruses, echoviruses may evade TLR pathways through viral protease activities, though specific mechanisms require further study. The adaptive immune response to echovirus infection is dominated by humoral immunity, with neutralizing antibodies targeting conformational epitopes on the capsid protein VP1, which block viral attachment to host receptors and provide serotype-specific protection that can persist for years. Cellular immunity involves CD8+ T cells that recognize viral peptides presented on MHC class I molecules and lyse infected cells, contributing to clearance, though this response is often delayed in neonates due to immature T-cell development and lower antigen presentation efficiency. In newborns, the reliance on maternally derived antibodies highlights the vulnerability when passive immunity wanes, as poor endogenous antibody responses correlate with disseminated disease and higher mortality rates from echovirus infections like echovirus 11. Echoviruses employ multiple strategies to evade adaptive immunity, including the shutdown of host protein via 2Apro cleavage of 4G (eIF4G), which preferentially inhibits cap-dependent host mRNA while sparing viral internal ribosome entry site (IRES)-driven synthesis. Additionally, the viral 3A protein disrupts the host secretory pathway by altering membrane trafficking, leading to reduced surface expression of molecules and impaired to CD8+ T cells. While persistent echovirus infections are rare in immunocompetent individuals, they occur in immunodeficient patients, such as those with , where chronic from serotypes like echovirus 11 or 30 can evolve genomically over years due to unchecked replication.

Clinical manifestations

Common symptoms

Echovirus infections, as a subset of non-polio enteroviruses, most commonly manifest as mild, self-limited illnesses characterized by nonspecific febrile symptoms in affected individuals. Typical presentations include fever, often accompanied by , , and , with symptoms generally resolving within 2-4 days without specific intervention. In outbreak settings, fever has been reported in 75-94% of cases, alongside in 70-77%. Gastrointestinal involvement is frequent, particularly in young children, where , , and may occur, contributing to in some instances. These symptoms align with the enteroviral for mucosal surfaces and are often transient, lasting a few days. Respiratory symptoms such as , runny nose (coryza), , and are common, resembling a summer or "grippe," and can include herpangina-like oral sores with in children under 10 years. Certain serotypes, like echovirus 11, have been associated with croup-like presentations featuring harsh and respiratory distress, though typically mild. Dermatological manifestations are more common with echoviruses compared to other enteroviruses, most often as a maculopapular or morbilliform on the trunk and extremities. Hand-foot-and-mouth disease occurs less frequently than with coxsackieviruses. Age-specific variations influence symptom expression; infants and young children may exhibit alongside fever and gastrointestinal upset, while adults more commonly report and prolonged fever duration. Overall, these mild symptoms predominate, with most infections resolving without progression to severe forms.

Severe complications

Echoviruses can lead to rare but severe complications, particularly in neonates and immunocompromised individuals, involving multiple organ systems beyond typical mild gastrointestinal or respiratory symptoms. These outcomes include neurological, cardiac, and hepatic involvement, often progressing rapidly and carrying significant morbidity or mortality risks. Neurological complications are among the most documented severe manifestations of echovirus infections. Aseptic meningitis, primarily associated with echovirus 30 (E30), occurs in a subset of cases and is characterized by inflammation of the meninges without bacterial involvement, leading to symptoms such as severe headache, fever, and photophobia. E30 has been linked to multiple outbreaks of aseptic meningitis worldwide, with cerebrospinal fluid analysis confirming viral presence in affected patients. Encephalitis, involving brain parenchymal inflammation, is rarer but reported with serotypes like E9 and E25, potentially resulting in altered mental status, seizures, and long-term neurological deficits. Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM), a polio-like syndrome causing limb weakness and paralysis, has been documented in pediatric cases due to E11, mimicking transverse myelitis through anterior horn cell damage. Additionally, E7 infections have been associated with meningoencephalitis, presenting with encephalitis, pneumonia, and septic shock in children. Cardiac complications, such as myocarditis and pericarditis, are infrequent but particularly devastating in neonates, often linked to E11. These infections can cause acute myocardial injury, evidenced by elevated cardiac enzymes and reduced ventricular function, with reported lethality rates up to 38.6% and cardiac sequelae in over 40% of survivors. In severe cases, fulminant myocarditis leads to cardiogenic shock and multi-organ failure, as seen in autopsy-confirmed E11 and E5 infections. Recent surges in severe E11 neonatal infections, including myocarditis, have been reported in Europe from 2022 to 2025, prompting alerts from the World Health Organization and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, with case-fatality rates varying from 6% overall to up to 50% in fulminant cases. Neonatal echovirus infections frequently manifest as sepsis, hepatitis, and coagulopathy, especially in preterm infants, with mortality rates ranging from 10% to 31% depending on the serotype and concurrent factors like myocarditis. These cases often involve E11, presenting with fulminant hepatitis, disseminated intravascular coagulation, and multi-organ dysfunction, as highlighted in reports of hemorrhage-hepatitis syndrome. Elevated liver enzymes and coagulopathy are strong predictors of poor outcomes in such infections. Other severe complications include pleurodynia, an acute syndrome causing sharp chest or , associated with E19 among other serotypes like E1, E6, and E9. Long-term sequelae, such as chronic fatigue, are uncommon but possible following resolved severe infections.

Diagnosis

Clinical evaluation

Clinical evaluation of suspected echovirus infection begins with a thorough history to assess potential exposures and epidemiological context. Clinicians should inquire about recent contact with infected individuals in high-risk settings such as daycares, schools, summer camps, or during travel, as echoviruses spread via fecal-oral transmission, respiratory droplets, or contaminated surfaces. Infections often exhibit , peaking in summer and early fall in temperate climates, with family or community clustering indicating possible outbreaks. A prodromal phase typically involves fever, , and occasionally a transient , preceding more specific symptoms like or gastrointestinal upset. Physical examination aims to detect manifestations suggestive of echovirus involvement across multiple systems. For symptoms, signs of —such as nuchal rigidity, , or —warrant close attention, particularly in children and young adults. Dermatologic findings include characteristic rashes: maculopapular or petechial on the trunk and extremities, or vesicular lesions in severe cases. In patients with gastrointestinal involvement, assess for through indicators like sunken eyes, dry mucous membranes, , or poor skin turgor, as and can lead to fluid loss. Respiratory signs, such as or pleuritic , may also be evident in summer grippe-like presentations. Risk stratification guides urgency, prioritizing neonates under 3 months and immunocompromised patients (e.g., those with agammaglobulinemia or post-transplant status) for aggressive evaluation due to heightened risk of severe complications like or . In these groups, even mild symptoms demand prompt assessment to prevent rapid deterioration. Differential diagnosis encompasses infectious and non-infectious entities to avoid misdiagnosis. Bacterial must be excluded emergently via clinical features like high fever and altered mental status, while other enteroviruses (e.g., coxsackieviruses or EV-D68) present overlapping syndromes requiring epidemiological distinction. Non-infectious mimics, such as with persistent fever and rash, should be considered in pediatric cases lacking clear viral exposure. Laboratory confirmation is recommended to differentiate these, but initial management relies on clinical suspicion.

Laboratory confirmation

Laboratory confirmation of echovirus infection relies on a combination of traditional virological methods and modern molecular techniques to detect and identify the virus in clinical specimens. Molecular detection via real-time RT-PCR is the current gold standard for definitive diagnosis, targeting conserved regions of the enterovirus genome for rapid detection, typically within hours. Virus isolation can serve as a confirmatory method by inoculating patient samples into susceptible cell lines such as rhabdomyosarcoma (RD) or human diploid fibroblast (MRC-5) cells, where echovirus replication induces a characteristic cytopathic effect (CPE), including cell rounding and lysis, observable within 3-7 days. This method allows for subsequent serological typing but is limited by its time-intensive nature and lower sensitivity compared to molecular approaches, particularly in cases with low viral loads. Molecular detection has become the preferred frontline method due to its speed and higher sensitivity, with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) targeting the VP1 capsid protein gene enabling both detection and serotype identification of echovirus. Multiplex RT-PCR panels for enteroviruses, including echovirus, are widely used to amplify conserved regions while distinguishing serotypes through subsequent sequencing or probe-based assays. These assays demonstrate sensitivities exceeding 90% for detecting echovirus RNA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from patients with meningitis, outperforming culture in rapid diagnosis. Common specimens include CSF for neurological cases, stool or rectal swabs for gastrointestinal involvement, and throat swabs or serum for systemic infections, with RT-PCR detecting viral RNA even in culture-negative samples. Serological testing, involving the detection of echovirus-specific IgM and IgG antibodies in paired acute- and convalescent-phase sera, can confirm recent by demonstrating a fourfold rise in , but it is less commonly employed due to significant with other enteroviruses. For precise characterization, advanced methods such as full-genome or VP1 region sequencing are utilized to determine and , facilitating epidemiological tracking and outbreak investigation from the same clinical samples. These techniques require biosafety level 2 (BSL-2) containment due to the virus's moderate risk profile. Challenges in laboratory confirmation include the frequent asymptomatic shedding of echovirus in stool and respiratory secretions, which can persist for weeks and complicate interpretation of positive results in non-acute settings. Additionally, the need for specialized equipment and expertise for molecular assays may limit availability in resource-constrained settings, underscoring the importance of integrating clinical suspicion with targeted testing.

Management

Supportive treatments

Supportive treatments for echovirus infections emphasize symptom management and complication prevention, as no specific antiviral agents are approved for routine clinical use. Hydration is a cornerstone of care, achieved through oral rehydration for mild cases or intravenous fluids for patients at risk of or exhibiting , especially neonates and young children with poor oral intake. Fever control relies on antipyretics such as acetaminophen, while aspirin is contraindicated in children due to the elevated risk of Reye's syndrome during viral illnesses. Pain relief for associated headaches and myalgias is provided by analgesics like acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in appropriate cases, and antiemetics such as can address and to prevent further . Hospitalization is warranted for neonates, infants with , those experiencing seizures, or patients showing signs of neurological deterioration, allowing for close monitoring and supportive interventions. In severe manifestations like , particularly in immunocompromised individuals, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) may be administered early, with suggesting potential benefits in reducing viral persistence and improving outcomes based on case reports. Ongoing monitoring includes serial clinical assessments to track for neurological worsening or other complications, though most infections are self-limiting and resolve within 7-10 days without sequelae. Antibiotics are reserved for confirmed secondary bacterial infections and are not indicated for the primary viral process. For cases unresponsive to supportive measures, experimental antivirals may be explored under investigational protocols.

Experimental antivirals

, a capsid-binding compound, inhibits uncoating by targeting the viral protein and preventing entry into host cells. Although phase III clinical trials for broad-spectrum treatment, including common colds, failed to demonstrate sufficient efficacy and led to non-approval by regulatory agencies, has shown potent antiviral activity against specific echovirus serotypes such as E11 and E30, with 50% inhibitory concentrations as low as 0.03 μM for many clinical isolates. In preclinical models, improved survival rates in mice infected with , including echoviruses, when administered prophylactically or therapeutically. Compassionate use in severe enteroviral cases, such as neonatal infections, has yielded mixed virological responses, with some echovirus strains like E11 exhibiting resistance . Pocapavir (V-073), another inhibitor with a mechanism similar to , blocks viral attachment and uncoating in non-polio es. Development of pocapavir was discontinued for indications due to emerging resistance mutations, but structural analogs continue to be explored for broader non-polio applications, including echoviruses, showing promising potency against neonatal sepsis strains. As of 2025, pocapavir remains investigational and available only under emergency use for severe enteroviral infections, with reports of successful outcomes in treating neonatal echovirus cases involving . Analogs like compound 12b have demonstrated activity across multiple enterovirus serotypes in preclinical studies, addressing some resistance concerns. Ribavirin and amantadine exhibit inhibition of echovirus replication, primarily through interference with viral synthesis and early replication stages, respectively. Ribavirin depletes cellular GTP pools to suppress enteroviral genome replication, showing moderate synergy with interferon-alpha in models relevant to echoviruses. Amantadine disrupts post-entry processes, potentially enhancing to limit viral spread, as observed in related systems. Despite these preclinical effects, no robust clinical evidence supports their efficacy against echovirus infections, and they are occasionally used off-label in immunocompromised patients with chronic enteroviral disease due to limited alternatives. Host-targeted approaches, such as inducers and inhibitors, have been evaluated in animal models of echovirus to modulate immune responses and limit . Type I signaling, inducible via receptor agonists, controls echovirus dissemination and in neonatal models expressing human FcRn, reducing viral loads in the and improving . Compounds like poly(I:C), an inducer, enhance innate antiviral states in these models, mitigating severe outcomes in IFNAR-deficient mice. inhibitors, including bovine derivatives, prevent echovirus-induced by blocking endocytic pathways and cytopathic effects , with potential extension to models where viral modulation exacerbates tissue damage. These strategies aim to bolster host defenses without directly targeting viral proteins, showing preliminary efficacy in suckling models of echovirus . Key challenges in developing experimental antivirals for echovirus include serotype variability, which promotes and reduces broad-spectrum efficacy across the 28 recognized serotypes. Preclinical models often fail to fully recapitulate dynamics, complicating translation to clinical settings. As of 2025, no FDA-approved antiviral specifically targets echovirus or other non-polio enteroviruses, leaving supportive care as the standard despite ongoing analog development and combination therapies.

Prevention

Public health measures

measures for controlling echovirus transmission emphasize behavioral and environmental interventions, given the virus's fecal-oral and respiratory routes of spread. Hygiene promotion is a cornerstone, with frequent handwashing using and for at least 20 seconds recommended, particularly after using the , changing diapers, or handling potentially contaminated items, and before preparing meals or eating. Covering the mouth and nose with a tissue or during coughing or sneezing further reduces transmission. Surfaces and objects frequently touched, such as toys and doorknobs, should be cleaned and disinfected regularly using a () solution at approximately 0.3% (3120 ppm), which inactivates echovirus within 5 minutes. Sanitation infrastructure plays a critical role in preventing waterborne and fecal , especially in endemic or resource-limited areas. Access to safe and proper disposal systems significantly reduces the risk of echovirus spread through contaminated sources. Community-level improvements in management and education in high-prevalence settings have been shown to lower incidence by minimizing environmental reservoirs. Isolation protocols help contain outbreaks by limiting exposure in communal settings. Symptomatic individuals, particularly children, should be excluded from schools or daycares until symptoms resolve, typically 7-10 days for common manifestations like those in caused by related enteroviruses. In outbreak scenarios, identifies and monitors exposed individuals, with enhanced precautions such as droplet and contact isolation recommended in healthcare and community environments. Surveillance systems enable early detection and response to echovirus activity. Routine monitoring through sentinel laboratories, such as the CDC's National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System (NREVSS), tracks detections via specimen testing to inform actions. Rapid reporting of neonatal clusters is essential due to their high severity, allowing for timely interventions like enhanced screening in maternity units. During peak transmission seasons (summer to fall) in high-risk regions, travel advisories may recommend heightened personal practices and avoidance of crowded settings to mitigate introduction of echovirus into new communities.

Vaccine development status

As of November 2025, no licensed exists for preventing echovirus infections, despite their association with severe diseases such as , , and . Ongoing research emphasizes the need for vaccines targeting non-polio enteroviruses (NPEVs), including echoviruses, but development remains in early stages with no candidates advancing to late-phase clinical trials specifically for echovirus serotypes. The inactivated (IPV) offers only minimal cross-protection against echoviruses due to limited antigenic overlap between poliovirus and other enteroviruses. Similarly, live-attenuated approaches, while successful for poliovirus, pose risks of neurovirulence reversion, a concern amplified by the natural neurotropism of many echovirus serotypes that can cause infections. Vaccine efforts prioritize inactivated or (VLP) formats to mitigate these safety issues, focusing on key serotypes like E6, E11, and E30, which are frequently linked to viral , neonatal , and outbreaks. Maternal strategies are also being explored to enhance transplacental transfer, providing passive protection to neonates who are particularly vulnerable to severe echovirus disease due to immature immunity. Major obstacles to echovirus vaccine development include the extensive serotype diversity, with over 30 recognized echovirus s exhibiting poor , frequent antigenic drift through recombination, and unpredictable patterns that complicate prioritization and strain selection. These factors have limited progress to preclinical models, such as studies evaluating multivalent inactivated s for B (including echoviruses and coxsackie B viruses), with some hexavalent candidates demonstrating in animals but not yet tested in humans for echoviruses. Looking ahead, novel platforms like mRNA-based vaccines show promise in preclinical research for related es (e.g., EV-D68 and EV-A71), inducing robust neutralizing antibodies and protection in animal models, potentially adaptable for broader echovirus coverage through conserved epitopes. Early explorations of universal vaccines targeting shared structural proteins are underway, aiming to overcome barriers, though human trials remain distant.

History

Discovery and early research

Echoviruses were first isolated in the early from the feces of asymptomatic children as part of extensive efforts aimed at identifying viruses during a period of heightened . These viruses were detected using newly developed techniques that allowed for the propagation of enteroviruses in human and monkey kidney cells, revealing cytopathic effects distinct from those of es. played a pivotal role in these isolations, recovering hundreds of such agents in 1950 and contributing to their initial characterization as non- enteroviruses recovered from healthy individuals. Initially termed "orphan viruses," they were so named because no specific human diseases could be clearly associated with them at the time of discovery, distinguishing them from pathogenic agents like and coxsackieviruses. The formal description of the first echovirus serotypes occurred between and , with types 1 through 7 identified through stool cultures that demonstrated enteric cytopathic effects—characteristic cell rounding and degeneration—without the neurological or paralysis-inducing traits of viruses. In December , the Committee on the ECHO Viruses (Enteric Cytopathogenic Human Orphan) published a seminal report in Science outlining the common properties of these prototypes, including their acid stability, ether sensitivity, and ability to replicate in rhesus monkey kidney cells. These early isolations, often from routine polio monitoring in the United States and , highlighted the viruses' prevalence in the of children, with strains like prototype ECHO-1 (Farouk) recovered from and fecal samples. By the 1960s, echoviruses were classified alongside coxsackieviruses as non-polio enteroviruses within the genus of the Picornaviridae family, based on shared morphological, antigenic, and pathogenic features established through collaborative efforts by researchers including John F. Enders, Gilbert Dalldorf, and Joseph L. Melnick. Serological typing advanced rapidly, expanding from the initial seven types to 34 recognized serotypes by the 1970s, facilitated by neutralization assays and reference antisera distributed by institutions like the . This classification emphasized their enteroviral nature, with echoviruses differentiated from coxsackieviruses primarily by their lack of pathogenicity in suckling mice. Early perceptions viewed echoviruses as largely non-pathogenic due to their frequent isolation from healthy carriers, but this misconception was challenged in 1957 when outbreaks of were directly linked to specific serotypes. In Belgium, virus type 9 was identified as the causative agent in a major affecting over 100 cases, with virus recovered from and stools of affected children. Similarly, in , an institutional outbreak of was attributed to virus type 4, marking one of the first demonstrations of echovirus neurovirulence and shifting research toward their . These events prompted intensified serological and epidemiological studies, revealing echoviruses' potential to cause mild to severe illnesses beyond infections.

Key milestones and recent developments

In the and , significant advances in enabled the and sequencing of echovirus genomes, marking a shift from serological identification to genetic characterization. The first complete genome sequences of echoviruses emerged during this period, with early efforts focusing on prototype strains; for instance, techniques were applied to echovirus 9 in studies that laid the groundwork for understanding viral structure and variation. Recognition of as a key evolutionary mechanism in echoviruses also gained traction, with evidence from comparative sequencing revealing intertypic exchanges in non-structural regions, contributing to strain diversity observed in outbreaks. The 2000s brought transformative improvements in diagnostics and . (PCR) assays, particularly real-time and serotype-specific methods developed around 2001, revolutionized echovirus detection by enabling rapid identification from clinical samples like , surpassing traditional in sensitivity and speed. Concurrently, the International Committee on of Viruses (ICTV) reclassified human es, including echoviruses, into species based on phylogenetic ; in 2002, echoviruses were primarily assigned to Human enterovirus B, reflecting their genetic clustering with coxsackieviruses B and other non-polio enteroviruses. From the 2010s to the early , genomic surveillance illuminated echovirus evolution during outbreaks. Whole-genome sequencing of strains from neurological cases, such as the 2018 echovirus 11 (E11) outbreak in , revealed intertypic recombination events and intra-host mutations that enhanced viral fitness and pathogenicity. This period also saw heightened epidemiological scrutiny, culminating in a 2023 European alert from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and (WHO) on severe neonatal E11 infections, which reported 19 cases across multiple countries by mid-2023, prompting intensified surveillance and genomic tracking to monitor lineage emergence. In 2024, severe neonatal E11 infections emerged in from to , with at least several fatal cases reported, while enhanced genomic surveillance in identified new recombinant forms of E11 associated with severe outcomes. Additionally, outbreaks of echovirus 7 were detected in during 2022–2023 through post-mortem pathogen discovery, and echovirus 18 was linked to in in 2024. As of 2025, these events underscore the ongoing global circulation of pathogenic echovirus variants, with WHO emphasizing continued surveillance for non-polio enteroviruses. As of 2025, recent syntheses have advanced understanding of echovirus , with comprehensive reviews integrating genomic, immunological, and to elucidate mechanisms of severe disease in vulnerable populations like neonates. Preclinical studies have explored broad-spectrum antivirals, such as combinations of , rupintrivir, and , showing efficacy against multiple echovirus serotypes including E1, E6, and E11, with data suggesting potential for future human evaluation. In policy contexts, post-polio eradication efforts have elevated echoviruses on WHO watch lists for non-polio enteroviruses, emphasizing global surveillance to detect emerging threats and inform strategies.

References

  1. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001340.htm
  2. https://www.lecturio.com/concepts/picornaviridae-echovirus/
  3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/echovirus
  4. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5036a1.htm
  5. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/news-events/epidemiological-update-echovirus-11-infections-neonates
  6. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/laboratory-biosafety-biosecurity/pathogen-safety-data-sheets-risk-assessment/echovirus-pathogen-safety-data-sheet.html
  7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK562330/
  8. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/enteroviruses/facts
  9. https://doi.org/10.54117/ijamb.v4i4.91
  10. https://www.cdc.gov/non-polio-enterovirus/about/index.html
  11. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2023-DON474
  12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7999254/
  13. https://viralzone.expasy.org/33
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7474057/
  15. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.152161599
  16. https://www.jbc.org/article/S0021-9258(18)44542-5/fulltext
  17. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-06309-1
  18. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4576193/
  19. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.74.22.10359-10370.2000
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7024059/
  21. https://ictv.global/report/picornaviridae/enterovirus/
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3298778/
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11452578/
  24. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/veterinary-science-and-veterinary-medicine/echovirus
  25. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jcm.00475-09
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2643716/
  27. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%252Fjmv.29658
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC368751/
  29. https://www.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/vir.0.81264-0
  30. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00783-10
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10714939/
  32. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Phylogenetic-relationships-among-Enterovirus-B-strains-from-human-and-non-human-primates_fig5_264390885
  33. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22221751.2024.2361814
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11719806/
  35. https://ijponline.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13052-025-01880-5
  36. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/216564-overview
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/echovirus-infection
  38. https://microchemlab.com/microorganisms/echovirus/
  39. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6266091/
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7152480/
  41. https://publications.aap.org/redbook/book/755/chapter/14077054/Enterovirus-Nonpoliovirus-Group-A-and-B
  42. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5508a1.htm
  43. https://journals.asm.org/doi/pdf/10.1128/jcm.37.12.3928-3933.1999
  44. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s15010-024-02315-9
  45. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3324788/
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10359910/
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11430599/
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3060663/
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8707869/
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC307666/
  51. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5332944/
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7044131/
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6733961/
  54. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5232a1.htm
  55. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7161091/
  56. https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1003231
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6102382/
  58. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/13/4/870
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5026793/
  60. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12570726/
  61. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590053623001088
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5875893/
  63. https://www.cdc.gov/non-polio-enterovirus/signs-symptoms/index.html
  64. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/216564-clinical
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8955149/
  66. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00129-22
  67. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/571566/
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5772484/
  69. https://icjournal.org/DOIx.php?id=10.3947/ic.2020.0081
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11844064/
  71. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pediatrics/articles/10.3389/fped.2023.1063558/full
  72. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353414890_Fulminant_Myocardial_Involvement_in_Neonatal_Echovirus-induced_Sepsis_Two_Autopsy_Cases
  73. https://journals.lww.com/pidj/fulltext/2008/01000/neonatal_echovirus_30_infection_associated_with.25.aspx
  74. https://europepmc.org/article/med/11734737
  75. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/pharmacology-toxicology-and-pharmaceutical-science/echovirus-infection
  76. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-professions/echovirus-infection
  77. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/216564-differential
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC154609/
  79. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16884950/
  80. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2852672/
  81. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jcm.39.4.1299-1302.2001
  82. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC84754/
  83. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC149663/
  84. https://biomed.papers.upol.cz/pdfs/bio/2019/04/11.pdf
  85. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/216564-workup
  86. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2129535/
  87. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016609349090108R
  88. https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12985-023-02179-9
  89. https://policies.unc.edu/TDClient/2833/Portal/KB/ArticleDet?ID=131889
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11159588/
  91. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/216564-treatment
  92. https://publications.aap.org/pediatriccare/article/doi/10.1542/aap.ppcqr.396158/1597/Enterovirus-Infections
  93. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001108.htm
  94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC96160/
  95. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00018-025-05581-4
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC89431/
  97. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/aac.43.9.2109
  98. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3851/IMP1936
  99. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/13/11/969
  100. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.08.08.668114v1.full-text
  101. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12474030/
  102. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3851/IMP2939
  103. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3910773/
  104. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36040176/
  105. https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/12/5/ofaf212/8110162
  106. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7875378/
  107. https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1009252
  108. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17023058/
  109. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/molecular-biosciences/articles/10.3389/fmolb.2020.00146/full
  110. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health-agency/services/laboratory-biosafety-biosecurity/pathogen-safety-data-sheets-risk-assessment/echovirus.html
  111. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21565426/
  112. https://www.cdc.gov/hand-foot-mouth/about/index.html
  113. https://www.cdc.gov/non-polio-enterovirus/hcp/clinical-overview/index.html
  114. https://www.cdc.gov/non-polio-enterovirus/outbreak-surveillance/index.html
  115. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7327a2.htm
  116. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2025.1657471/full
  117. https://jbiomedsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12929-024-01058-x
  118. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11045126/
  119. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18250-w
  120. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1684118223001123
  121. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.adi1625
  122. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6953510/
  123. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.micro.50.1.1
  124. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8905074/
  125. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.122.3181.1187
  126. https://www.ebm-journal.org/journals/experimental-biology-and-medicine/articles/10.3181/00379727-100-24650/pdf
  127. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8024744/
  128. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13506722/
  129. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13444262/
  130. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/498982
  131. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC112895/
  132. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1567134810001875
  133. https://ictv.global/report/chapter/picornaviridae/picornaviridae/enterovirus
  134. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.29323
  135. https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2025.30.1.2400822
  136. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1557576/full
  137. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12542352/
  138. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12562741/
  139. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354224000500
  140. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34265258/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.