Characterization of genital strains of Herpesvirus hominis.

Slavin and Gavett (1946) reported antigenic differences between strains of Herpesvirus hominis (HVH) and subsequent serological studies have allowed strains of HVH to be alocated to one of two types (Pauls and Dowdle, 1967). In addition, an association between the clinical site of infection and the antigenic type of virus recovered has been established (Dowdle, Nahmias, Harwell, and Pauls, 1967; Schneweis, 1967), genital isolates being designated Type 2, while the typical oral, eye, and central nervous system strains are classified as Type 1. Further studies have shown that these two types of HVH may be distinguished biologically, by the cytopathic effect (CPE) they produce in tissue culture (Munk and Donner, 1963), by the size of pock that develops on the chorioallantoic membrane (Parker and Banatvala, 1967), and by the electron microscopial demonstration of filaments within the nuclei of infected cells (Couch and Nahmias, 1969). Other factors, such as the base composition of the viral nucleic acid and the pathogenenicity in animals, can also be used to differentiate the two types of virus (Nahmias and Dowdle, 1968). Josey, Nahmias, and Naib (1968) drew attention to a possible link between HVH infection of the cervix and cervical neoplasia. Evidence of the association was obtained in two ways. Firstly, from the results of cytological surveys (Naib, Nahmias, and Josey, 1966), it was apparent that infection of the cervix with HVH was associated with an increased incidence of cellular anaplasia. Secondly, serological studies indicated that sera from women with cervical cancer were more likely to contain antibody to HVH Type 2 than sera from controls matched for age and race (Royston and Aurelian, 1970; Rawls, Tompkins, and Melnick, 1969; Nahmias, Josey, Naib, Luce, and Guest, 1970; Skinner, Thouless, and Jordan, 1971). However, when additional factors such as parity and age at first pregnancy were considered in the selection of control patients, the difference between the two groups became less apparent (Rawls, Adam, and Melnick, 1972). Indeed, in studies of New Zealand (Rawls, Iwamoto, Adam, Melnick, and Green, 1970) and American cancer populations (Smith,