Back

Six years of clinical herpes simplex virus genotypic acyclovir resistance testing confirms common resistance mechanisms and identifies novel mutations

Crawford, K. H. D.; Castor, J.; LaTurner, K.; Mack, A. R.; Pepper, G.; Greninger, A. L.

2026-06-27 microbiology
10.64898/2026.06.25.734554 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Identification of acyclovir-resistant herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections is critical for directing appropriate antiviral therapy, particularly for immunocompromised patients where resistance rates can reach 30%. In 2020, the University of Washington Clinical Virology Laboratory launched the first clinical genotypic HSV drug resistance test in the United States. While genotypic testing offers significantly faster turnaround times than traditional phenotypic assays, interpretation depends on established mutational databases and remains challenging when novel variants are identified. Here, we retrospectively reviewed all HSV acyclovir resistance Sanger sequencing tests performed from January 2020 to November 2025 at this primary national reference laboratory. Mutations identified via clinical sequencing were compared against published databases of HSV UL23 mutations to determine their phenotypic effects. Over the nearly six-year study period, 136 samples were sequenced with a median turnaround time of 10.6 days. Among these, 65 samples (47.8%) harbored acyclovir resistance mutations, including 45 frameshift mutations. Notably, across the 100 samples (73.5%) displaying mutations not known to cause acyclovir resistance at the time of clinical testing, we identified 56 distinct mutations, including 23 without prior characterization. Our national experience demonstrates that genotypic testing accelerates actionable results in clinical practice and confirms that frameshift mutations remain a primary driver of acyclovir resistance. Furthermore, by uncovering these 23 novel variants, this work provides critical targets for future biochemical and phenotypic characterization of HSV UL23 mutations.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
2
Journal of Virology
499 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
13.3%
3
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
130 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.1%
4
Journal of Clinical Virology
63 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
5
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.7%
50% of probability mass above
6
mSphere
302 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.3%
7
Journal of General Virology
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
8
PLOS Pathogens
820 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.5%
9
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
187 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.3%
10
Virus Evolution
155 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.3%
11
Journal of Medical Virology
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
12
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 47%
1.8%
13
mBio
833 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.8%
14
Frontiers in Microbiology
427 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
15
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
202 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
16
Virology
61 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
17
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.0%
18
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
19
The Lancet Microbe
44 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
20
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 55%
0.9%
21
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
109 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
22
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
23
Clinical Infectious Diseases
235 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
24
Virology Journal
32 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
25
Viruses
332 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
26
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%