Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Adenovirus Infection - UpToDate
Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Adenovirus Infection - UpToDate
www.uptodate.com
© 2022 UpToDate, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.
All topics are updated as new evidence becomes available and our peer review process is complete.
Literature review current through: Sep 2022. | This topic last updated: May 11, 2022.
INTRODUCTION
Adenoviruses are a family of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) viruses that are an important cause of
febrile illnesses in young children. They are most frequently associated with upper respiratory
tract syndromes such as pharyngitis or coryza but can also cause pneumonia. Less commonly,
adenoviruses cause gastrointestinal, ophthalmologic, genitourinary, neurologic, and
disseminated disease. Most adenoviral diseases are self-limiting, although fatal infections can
occur in immunocompromised hosts and occasionally in healthy children and adults.
The available diagnostic tests and strategies for treatment and prevention of adenovirus
infection will be reviewed here. The virology, epidemiology, and clinical manifestations of
adenovirus infection are discussed separately. (See "Pathogenesis, epidemiology, and clinical
manifestations of adenovirus infection".)
OVERVIEW
Since adenoviruses are associated with a variety of clinical syndromes and nonspecific
manifestations, diagnosis based upon clinical criteria alone is challenging. The diagnosis of
adenovirus disease should be confirmed in outbreaks of infection and in individual patients
with serious disease manifestations. Confirmation of adenovirus infection is important in order
to decide on the use of antiviral agents, exclude other treatable infections, establish a
prognosis, and initiate infection control measures when appropriate.
DIAGNOSTIC TESTS
A number of different approaches are available for the specific diagnosis of adenovirus
infection ( table 1). Viral culture, adenovirus-specific viral antigen assays, and polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) assays are used most frequently.
Adenoviruses are relatively stable and can be readily recovered from clinical samples early in
the course of the disease. Appropriate samples include nasopharyngeal swabs or aspirates,
throat swabs or washes, sputum, tracheal aspirates, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid,
conjunctival swabs or scrapings, stool or rectal swabs, urine, blood, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF),
and tissue samples. Swabs and tissue biopsies should be placed in a viral transport medium to
prevent drying and to inhibit bacterial overgrowth. Specimens should be transported to the
laboratory on ice. The duration of viral excretion at the time of acute disease is approximately
one to three days from throat in adults with upper respiratory infection; three to five days from
nose, throat, and eye in patients with pharyngoconjunctival fever; and two weeks from eye
cultures in patients with keratoconjunctivitis. Viral excretion may be prolonged (for weeks) in
young children [1-4].
After acute infection, adenoviruses may be intermittently excreted in stool (or upper respiratory
tract, less commonly) for months in some patients. In immunocompromised hosts,
adenoviruses may be continuously shed from stool or urine for months without symptoms.
Therefore, a positive culture result needs to be interpreted based upon the current clinical
manifestations. (See "Pathogenesis, epidemiology, and clinical manifestations of adenovirus
infection".)
Commercially available assays use adenovirus-specific monoclonal antibodies that react with
common antigenic determinants on all serotypes. In particular, antigen assays are the test of
choice for the detection of the fastidious adenovirus types 40 and 41 in stool samples [7]. These
enteric adenoviruses are an important cause of diarrhea in infants.
Another application for direct antigen assays is in the rapid diagnosis of EKC. (See 'Epidemic
keratoconjunctivitis' below.)
Direct adenovirus antigen assays can also be used to screen cell cultures before the
development of CPE, as well as to confirm the presence of adenovirus in cell cultures positive
for CPE.
Polymerase chain reactions — PCR is a highly sensitive and specific assay that can be used to
detect adenovirus DNA from a variety of clinical specimens including fixed tissues. PCR is
particularly helpful in samples from normally sterile sites such as blood, CSF, and tissues. A
positive result from upper respiratory tract or stool samples is more difficult to interpret as it
may represent virus shedding rather than symptomatic infection. Therefore, PCR results must
be interpreted in the context of the clinical findings of adenovirus disease. Because different
adenovirus serotypes are heterogeneous at the DNA level, PCR primers may be selected to
detect specific serotypes or related serotypes [8]. Commercial adenovirus PCR assays use
universal primers and probes that detect most or all serotypes [9,10].
Detection of adenovirus DNA in the blood by quantitative PCR is increasingly utilized for the
evaluation of adenovirus infections in immunocompromised patients [9,11]. Studies have
demonstrated an association between rising or high-level viremia and the risk of both invasive
disease and mortality [12,13]. In addition, quantification of adenovirus DNA can be used to
assess response to antiviral treatment [14-17]. In one study, a greater than 10-fold decrease in
viral load one week after the first dose of antiviral therapy was associated with a favorable
clinical course, whereas all patients with fatal disease failed to show a significant reduction in
viral load [14]. PCR can also be used in conjunction with sequencing in order to rapidly
genotype adenovirus isolates [18]. (See 'Serotyping and genotyping' below.)
PCR has been used to diagnose adenovirus myocarditis. Routine viral cultures and
histopathology are rarely positive in cases of presumed viral myocarditis. In one study, 38
myocardial tissue samples from 34 patients with acute myocarditis and 17 control patients with
congenital heart disease or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy were tested by PCR for adenovirus
and enterovirus [19]. Although enteroviruses have been implicated as the major etiology of viral
myocarditis, adenovirus DNA was detected more commonly (15 samples) than enterovirus DNA
(8 samples). All control samples were negative. In another report, PCR was used to make a
diagnosis of intrauterine adenovirus myocarditis [20]. (See "Myocarditis: Causes and
pathogenesis", section on 'Adenovirus' and "Clinical manifestations and diagnosis of
Adenoviruses can cause characteristic intranuclear inclusions ( picture 1) [22]. Early post-
infection, cells may display small eosinophilic inclusions. During the later stages of infection,
basophilic inclusions appear, which initially may be surrounded by a clear halo within the
nucleus. When these intranuclear inclusions enlarge and obscure the nuclear membrane, the
cells are referred to as "smudge" cells ( picture 1). Occasionally, adenovirus inclusions may be
confused with cytomegalovirus (CMV) inclusions, but, unlike CMV, adenoviruses cause neither
intracytoplasmic inclusions nor multinucleated cells [23].
If routine histopathology is non-diagnostic and viral culture of tissue is negative (or not done),
more specialized tests may be performed on tissue samples. Electron microscopy can be used
to detect the characteristic icosahedral virions that typically form large paracrystalline
aggregates with the nuclei of infected cells [24]. Adenovirus-specific immunohistochemical
assays and in situ DNA assays are also available [25,26].
Commercially available EIAs and complement fixation assays measure adenovirus-specific anti-
hexon antibodies but do not provide information about the serotype. In contrast, detection of
hemagglutination inhibition antibodies or neutralizing antibodies is more sensitive and is
serotype specific. These assays are primarily performed in reference laboratories and are best
interpreted when the patient's sera is tested against the patient's own isolate.
The serotype is determined by first grouping the isolate by hemagglutination pattern with rat
and rhesus red blood cells. Then, hemagglutination inhibition and/or serum neutralization
assays can be performed using a selected panel of type-specific sera. Genotyping can also be
accomplished by PCR and sequencing, which is substantially faster than the traditional
serotyping methods, although it is not widely available. (See 'Polymerase chain reactions'
above.)
The diagnostic test of choice varies depending upon the clinical scenario ( table 3).
When warranted, such as during an epidemic, diagnosis can be confirmed by viral culture of the
nasopharynx or throat. If viral culture is unavailable, the specimen may be tested with the less
sensitive adenovirus-specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
● Influenza (see "Seasonal influenza in children: Clinical features and diagnosis", section on
'Whom to test' and "Seasonal influenza in adults: Clinical manifestations and diagnosis")
● Respiratory syncytial virus (see "Respiratory syncytial virus infection: Clinical features and
diagnosis", section on 'Laboratory confirmation')
It is best to obtain conjunctival swabs for both viral culture and adenovirus-specific ELISA or
polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay to make a diagnosis of EKC, since subgroup D isolates,
which are frequently implicated, can take two to four weeks to grow in tissue culture.
The differential diagnosis includes bacterial conjunctivitis as well as other viral pathogens such
as enteroviruses and herpes simplex virus. (See "Conjunctivitis", section on 'Bacterial
conjunctivitis' and "Enterovirus and parechovirus infections: Clinical features, laboratory
diagnosis, treatment, and prevention", section on 'Ocular infections' and "Epidemiology, clinical
manifestations, and diagnosis of herpes simplex virus type 1 infection", section on 'Keratitis'.)
Multiplex PCR assays that detect a panel of respiratory viruses including adenovirus from
nasopharyngeal specimens are especially useful for evaluation of hospitalized patients with
● Respiratory syncytial virus (see "Respiratory syncytial virus infection: Clinical features and
diagnosis", section on 'Laboratory confirmation')
● Influenza (see "Seasonal influenza in children: Clinical features and diagnosis", section on
'Whom to test' and "Seasonal influenza in adults: Clinical manifestations and diagnosis")
Adenoviruses may cause severe, sometimes fatal, disease in hematopoietic stem cell transplant
recipients. After hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, recovery of T cell function and
adenovirus-specific T cells has been associated with a favorable outcome [37,38]. Recipients of T
cell-depleted grafts or those with graft-versus-host disease are at highest risk for disease and
mortality. (See "Overview of infections following hematopoietic cell transplantation".)
The specific diagnosis of adenovirus infection in immunocompromised patients may require the
use of multiple diagnostic modalities on various specimens. PCR, viral culture, or direct antigen
assays of upper nasopharyngeal, throat, urine, and stool or rectal samples will detect viral
shedding. Results should be interpreted in the context of clinical manifestations consistent with
adenovirus infection. In addition, testing of blood and affected sites (including lower respiratory
tract secretions collected by tracheal aspirate or bronchoalveolar lavage in patients with
pneumonia; urine in patients with hemorrhagic cystitis; cerebrospinal fluid in patients with
central nervous system involvement; and tissue biopsy in patients with pneumonia, colitis,
nephritis, or hepatitis) may be needed to diagnose adenovirus infection. Quantitative PCR of
blood is helpful to establish a diagnosis, evaluate risk for dissemination and prognosis, and
monitor response to antiviral therapy [13-17,39].
As has been shown for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections, early identification of patients at risk
for adenovirus disease by monitoring for viremia by PCR is beneficial; thus, some centers have
adopted routine weekly surveillance measures for pediatric recipients of allogeneic
hematopoietic stem cell transplants [13,40-42]. If viremia is detected, then patients should be
carefully evaluated for evidence of disease, such as pneumonia, hepatitis, cystitis, and colitis,
and specimens should be obtained for adenovirus testing from affected sites. Although viremia
is self-limited in some patients, a rising viral load has been associated with invasive disease
[12,13]. In contrast to CMV, the benefit of preemptive treatment based on viremia alone has not
been established for adenovirus and is not currently recommended because of the toxicity of
the most commonly used antiviral agent, cidofovir. Further clinical studies are also needed to
identify effective and safe treatments. (See 'Treatment' below.)
TREATMENT
Most adenovirus infections are self-limited and treatment is supportive. However, adenovirus
infections can be fatal in neonates and immunocompromised hosts and rarely in healthy
children and adults. Antiviral therapy is generally reserved for patients with severe adenovirus
disease, the majority of whom are immunocompromised.
Approach to antiviral therapy — Cidofovir has been the antiviral agent most frequently used
to treat adenovirus infections, but severe nephrotoxicity is a major dose-limiting toxicity.
Brincidofovir, an experimental lipid ester of cidofovir that has lower potential for nephrotoxicity
than cidofovir, is being studied for adenovirus but is no longer available for use through an
expanded access protocol [43].
Given the potential toxicities of the therapy for adenovirus infections (especially nephrotoxicity
with cidofovir), an infectious diseases specialist should be consulted when treatment is being
considered.
There have been no controlled trials demonstrating benefit for any antiviral agent in human
adenoviral disease.
Antiviral agents
Cidofovir — Cidofovir appears more active against adenovirus in vitro than other antiviral
drugs such as ganciclovir [44] and also appears active in vivo as demonstrated by reductions in
adenoviral load measured by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) [14,15]. Published data
on the efficacy of cidofovir for adenovirus infection in humans are limited to case reports and
small nonrandomized studies [14,15,45-49]. In hematopoietic stem cell and lung transplant
recipients, cidofovir therapy has been associated with clinical improvement and a suggestion of
increased survival [15,45-47].
Prior to the use of cidofovir, the mortality in patients with invasive adenoviral disease following
allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) varied from 25 to 75 percent in different
series [50,51], with the higher rates being described in patients with pneumonia and
disseminated disease [15,51,52]. In contrast, the mortality rate from adenoviral disease was
only 19 percent in a review of 70 published cases of definite or probable adenovirus infection
treated with two or more doses of cidofovir; most of these patients were severely
immunocompromised (eg, graft-versus-host disease and/or T cell-depleted allografts) [15].
However, in a report of 11 severely immunocompromised patients with adenovirus infection
who were treated with cidofovir, five died, including all three with pneumonia [53]. Therefore,
although early diagnosis and treatment of adenovirus infections in this patient population may
improve outcomes, lymphocyte reconstitution also appears crucial for recovery from disease
[54].
Nephrotoxicity is a major dose-limiting factor for cidofovir. As a result, doses of 1 mg/kg every
other day or three times per week instead of the standard treatment dose of 5 mg/kg weekly
have been used in an attempt to reduce this toxicity [47]. Cidofovir can also cause a Fanconi-
type syndrome, with proteinuria, glucosuria, and bicarbonate wasting. When cidofovir is used, it
is given together with probenecid and aggressive hydration. Renal function, urine protein, and
electrolytes must be monitored closely. Further clinical studies are needed to assess the efficacy
and the nephrotoxicity of cidofovir in various dosing schedules. (See "Cidofovir: An overview".)
Little is known about the appropriate duration of therapy. In patients who tolerate cidofovir, it is
often continued until resolution of symptomatic disease or viremia. The decision of how long to
continue therapy should be made on a case-by-case basis.
In a randomized trial that compared brincidofovir once per week, twice per week, and placebo
for asymptomatic adenovirus viremia (>100 copies/mL) in 48 allogeneic HCT recipients with
asymptomatic adenovirus viremia (>100 copies/mL), no reduction in treatment failure (disease
or rising viremia) was detected with brincidofovir compared with placebo [56]. However, in a
post hoc analysis of patients with viremia >1000 copies/mL, significantly more patients assigned
to twice weekly brincidofovir than to placebo had undetectable viremia after one week of
therapy (8 of 12 versus 2 of 8). There was no evidence of nephrotoxicity or myelotoxicity.
However, diarrhea was more common in the treatment group and led to discontinuation in one
patient.
Other — Ganciclovir has limited activity against adenovirus in vitro [61] and in a hamster
model [62]. Neither ribavirin nor vidarabine has consistent activity against adenovirus in vitro
[63]. There are case reports of patients responding to treatment with each of these agents, but
the evidence for efficacy in vivo remains anecdotal [64-66].
Patients receiving cidofovir require close monitoring for nephrotoxicity and Fanconi-type
syndrome. (See 'Cidofovir' above.)
T cell immunity is critical for recovery from adenovirus infection following hematopoietic stem
cell transplantation [71]. Pilot studies of adoptive transfer of T cell immunity have been
performed in children with adenovirus infection after stem cell transplantation. In one study,
virus-specific donor T cells were isolated and infused into nine children with systemic
adenovirus infection [72]. In vivo expansion of adenovirus-specific T cells was demonstrated
and viral clearance was attained in five of six evaluable patients. In one patient, adoptive T cell
transfer led to exacerbation of preexisting graft-versus-host disease.
In a study of pediatric HCT recipients treated with donor lymphocytes stimulated in vitro with
adenovirus, reductions in viral load were documented in three of three patients with active
infection, and clinical improvement was documented in one patient with adenovirus pneumonia
[73]. In another study, treatment of two haploidentical HCT recipients who had rising
adenovirus loads with donor-derived virus-specific T cells (expanded in vitro using overlapping
polypeptides in combination with interleukin-15) resulted in viral clearance in one and reduction
of >1.5 log in viral load in the other [74].
PREVENTION
Vaccination and infection control measures have been applied in certain settings to prevent
adenovirus infections.
In 2011, a new live, oral adenovirus vaccine against adenovirus serotypes 4 and 7 was approved
for use in United States military personnel aged 17 through 50 years [80,81]. During the two
years following reintroduction of the vaccine, United States military trainees had a 100-fold
decline in adenovirus disease burden (from 5.8 to 0.02 cases per 1000 person-weeks) [82].
There was also a marked decline in the incidence of disease caused by adenovirus serotypes
other than 4 and 7, including adenovirus serotype 14. These data suggest that the emergence
of adenovirus 14 in military recruits during the non-vaccination period was related to the
discontinuation of the adenovirus serotypes 4 and 7 vaccine program, since heterotypic
antibodies to adenovirus 14 develop following adenovirus 7 immunization [79,83,84]. (See
"Pathogenesis, epidemiology, and clinical manifestations of adenovirus infection", section on
'Adenovirus serotype 14'.)
Adenoviruses can cause significant healthcare-associated infections [87-89]. In one report, 126
(7 percent) of 1870 ophthalmology clinic patients developed epidemic keratoconjunctivitis (EKC)
due to adenovirus serotype 8 [87]. Transmission was attributed to inadequate disinfection of
instruments and to finger-to-eye transmission by healthcare workers. Of note, hand washing
did not reliably remove adenoviruses from contaminated fingers. The recommendations from
this study included using gloves to examine patients with EKC and decontaminating
instruments with 10% bleach. In another study, contamination of multidose dilating eye drop
vials was implicated in an outbreak at a large, hospital-affiliated eye clinic that affected 44
patients [90].
● For patients with conjunctivitis and for patients with gastroenteritis who are incontinent or
in diapers, contact precautions should be maintained for the duration of the illness. (See
"Infection prevention: Precautions for preventing transmission of infection", section on
'Contact precautions'.)
● For those with respiratory tract infections, contact and droplet precautions are
recommended for the duration of the hospitalization. (See "Infection prevention:
Precautions for preventing transmission of infection", section on 'Droplet precautions' and
"Infection prevention: Precautions for preventing transmission of infection", section on
'Contact precautions'.)
● Disposable gloves and assiduous hand washing should be used when caring for infected
patients.
Children who participate in group childcare, particularly during the first two years of life, are at
increased risk for adenoviral respiratory tract infections and gastroenteritis. Specific preventive
measures in this setting have not been established.
UpToDate offers two types of patient education materials, "The Basics" and "Beyond the
Basics." The Basics patient education pieces are written in plain language, at the 5th to 6th grade
reading level, and they answer the four or five key questions a patient might have about a given
condition. These articles are best for patients who want a general overview and who prefer
short, easy-to-read materials. Beyond the Basics patient education pieces are longer, more
sophisticated, and more detailed. These articles are written at the 10th to 12th grade reading
level and are best for patients who want in-depth information and are comfortable with some
medical jargon.
Here are the patient education articles that are relevant to this topic. We encourage you to print
or email these topics to your patients. (You can also locate patient education articles on a
variety of subjects by searching on "patient info" and the keyword(s) of interest.)
● Clinical criteria are not sufficient to accurately diagnose adenovirus infection. Laboratory
confirmation of adenovirus infection should be performed if there is suspicion of this
diagnosis and confirmation would be helpful in making decisions about antiviral therapy,
excluding other treatable infections, establishing a prognosis, and continuing infection
control measures when appropriate. (See 'Overview' above.)
● Diagnostic tests for adenovirus include viral culture, viral antigen assays (adenovirus-
specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or immunofluorescence assay), polymerase
chain reaction assays, histopathologic studies, and serology ( table 1). (See 'Diagnostic
tests' above.)
● The diagnostic test of choice varies depending upon the clinical scenario ( table 3). (See
'Diagnostic tests of choice for different adenovirus syndromes' above.)
● Most adenovirus infections are self-limited and treatment is supportive. Antiviral therapy
generally is reserved for immunocompromised hosts and patients with severe disease, but
controlled clinical trials have not been performed. (See 'Treatment' above.)
● When treatment is indicated, cidofovir has been the antiviral agent most frequently used.
Nephrotoxicity is a major dose-limiting factor for cidofovir. Brincidofovir, an experimental
oral lipid ester of cidofovir that has lower potential for nephrotoxicity than cidofovir, has
enhanced in vitro activity against adenoviruses but is not available for compassionate use.
An infectious diseases specialist should be consulted when treatment is being considered.
(See 'Approach to antiviral therapy' above and 'Cidofovir' above.)
REFERENCES
1. Fox JP, Hall CE, Cooney MK. The Seattle Virus Watch. VII. Observations of adenovirus
infections. Am J Epidemiol 1977; 105:362.
2. Edwards KM, Thompson J, Paolini J, Wright PF. Adenovirus infections in young children.
Pediatrics 1985; 76:420.
3. Munoz FM, Piedra PA, Demmler GJ. Disseminated adenovirus disease in
immunocompromised and immunocompetent children. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 27:1194.
https://www.uptodate.com/contents/diagnosis-treatment-and-prevention-of-adenovirus-infection/print?search=neumonia viral&source=search_result… 15/28
22/10/22, 16:02 Diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of adenovirus infection - UpToDate
4. Basu G, Rossouw J, Sebunya TK, et al. Prevalence of rotavirus, adenovirus and astrovirus
infection in young children with gastroenteritis in Gaborone, Botswana. East Afr Med J
2003; 80:652.
18. Gray GC, McCarthy T, Lebeck MG, et al. Genotype prevalence and risk factors for severe
clinical adenovirus infection, United States 2004-2006. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45:1120.
19. Martin AB, Webber S, Fricker FJ, et al. Acute myocarditis. Rapid diagnosis by PCR in children.
Circulation 1994; 90:330.
20. Towbin JA, Griffin LD, Martin AB, et al. Intrauterine adenoviral myocarditis presenting as
nonimmune hydrops fetalis: diagnosis by polymerase chain reaction. Pediatr Infect Dis J
1994; 13:144.
21. Shirali GS, Ni J, Chinnock RE, et al. Association of viral genome with graft loss in children
after cardiac transplantation. N Engl J Med 2001; 344:1498.
22. Becroft DM. Histopathology of fatal adenovirus infection of the respiratory tract in young
children. J Clin Pathol 1967; 20:561.
23. Landry ML, Fong CK, Neddermann K, et al. Disseminated adenovirus infection in an
immunocompromised host. Pitfalls in diagnosis. Am J Med 1987; 83:555.
24. Pinkerton H, Carroll S. Fatal adenovirus pneumonia in infants. Correlation of histologic and
electron microscopic observations. Am J Pathol 1971; 65:543.
25. Matsuoka T, Naito T, Kubota Y, et al. Disseminated adenovirus (type 19) infection in a
neonate. Rapid detection of the infection by immunofluorescence. Acta Paediatr Scand
1990; 79:568.
26. Wu TC, Kanayama MD, Hruban RH, et al. Virus-associated RNAs (VA-I and VA-II). An efficient
target for the detection of adenovirus infections by in situ hybridization. Am J Pathol 1992;
140:991.
27. Horwitz MS. Adenoviruses. In: Fields Virology, 3rd ed, Fields BN, Knipe DM, Howley PM (Ed
s), Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia 1996. p.2160.
28. McMinn PC, Stewart J, Burrell CJ. A community outbreak of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis in
central Australia due to adenovirus type 8. J Infect Dis 1991; 164:1113.
29. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. AdenoPlus point-of-care test for diagnosi
ng adenoviral conjunctivitis. Medtech innovation briefing [MIB46]. December 2015. Availabl
e at: https://www.nice.org.uk/advice/mib46/chapter/introduction (Accessed on April 19, 201
8).
30. Sambursky R, Trattler W, Tauber S, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the AdenoPlus test for
diagnosing adenoviral conjunctivitis. JAMA Ophthalmol 2013; 131:17.
31. Kam KY, Ong HS, Bunce C, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the AdenoPlus point-of-care
system in detecting adenovirus in conjunctivitis patients at an ophthalmic emergency
department: a diagnostic accuracy study. Br J Ophthalmol 2015; 99:1186.
32. Klinger JR, Sanchez MP, Curtin LA, et al. Multiple cases of life-threatening adenovirus
pneumonia in a mental health care center. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998; 157:645.
33. Yang E, Rubin BK. "Childhood" viruses as a cause of pneumonia in adults. Semin Respir
Infect 1995; 10:232.
34. Lee WM, Grindle K, Pappas T, et al. High-throughput, sensitive, and accurate multiplex PCR-
microsphere flow cytometry system for large-scale comprehensive detection of respiratory
viruses. J Clin Microbiol 2007; 45:2626.
35. Caliendo AM. Multiplex PCR and emerging technologies for the detection of respiratory
pathogens. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52 Suppl 4:S326.
36. Self WH, Williams DJ, Zhu Y, et al. Respiratory Viral Detection in Children and Adults:
Comparing Asymptomatic Controls and Patients With Community-Acquired Pneumonia. J
Infect Dis 2016; 213:584.
37. Chakrabarti S, Mautner V, Osman H, et al. Adenovirus infections following allogeneic stem
cell transplantation: incidence and outcome in relation to graft manipulation,
immunosuppression, and immune recovery. Blood 2002; 100:1619.
38. Myers GD, Bollard CM, Wu MF, et al. Reconstitution of adenovirus-specific cell-mediated
immunity in pediatric patients after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow
Transplant 2007; 39:677.
39. Erard V, Huang ML, Ferrenberg J, et al. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction for
detection of adenovirus after T cell-replete hematopoietic cell transplantation: viral load as
a marker for invasive disease. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45:958.
40. Yusuf U, Hale GA, Carr J, et al. Cidofovir for the treatment of adenoviral infection in
pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. Transplantation 2006; 81:1398.
41. Sivaprakasam P, Carr TF, Coussons M, et al. Improved outcome from invasive adenovirus
infection in pediatric patients after hemopoietic stem cell transplantation using intensive
clinical surveillance and early intervention. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2007; 29:81.
42. Watson T, MacDonald D, Song X, et al. Risk factors for molecular detection of adenovirus in
pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
2012; 18:1227.
43. ClinicalTrials.gov. Expanded access protocol to provide brincidofovir for the treatment of se
rious adenovirus infection or disease. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02596997 (Acc
essed on April 26, 2018).
44. Kodama E, Shigeta S, Suzuki T, De Clercq E. Application of a gastric cancer cell line (MKN-28)
for anti-adenovirus screening using the MTT method. Antiviral Res 1996; 31:159.
45. Legrand F, Berrebi D, Houhou N, et al. Early diagnosis of adenovirus infection and
treatment with cidofovir after bone marrow transplantation in children. Bone Marrow
Transplant 2001; 27:621.
46. Ljungman P, Ribaud P, Eyrich M, et al. Cidofovir for adenovirus infections after allogeneic
hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a survey by the Infectious Diseases Working Party
of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant
2003; 31:481.
47. Doan ML, Mallory GB, Kaplan SL, et al. Treatment of adenovirus pneumonia with cidofovir
in pediatric lung transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant 2007; 26:883.
48. Hoffman JA, Shah AJ, Ross LA, Kapoor N. Adenoviral infections and a prospective trial of
cidofovir in pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow
Transplant 2001; 7:388.
49. Alcamo AM, Wolf MS, Alessi LJ, et al. Successful Use of Cidofovir in an Immunocompetent
Child With Severe Adenoviral Sepsis. Pediatrics 2020; 145.
50. Flomenberg P, Babbitt J, Drobyski WR, et al. Increasing incidence of adenovirus disease in
bone marrow transplant recipients. J Infect Dis 1994; 169:775.
51. La Rosa AM, Champlin RE, Mirza N, et al. Adenovirus infections in adult recipients of blood
and marrow transplants. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32:871.
52. Baldwin A, Kingman H, Darville M, et al. Outcome and clinical course of 100 patients with
adenovirus infection following bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant
2000; 26:1333.
53. Symeonidis N, Jakubowski A, Pierre-Louis S, et al. Invasive adenoviral infections in T-cell-
depleted allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: high mortality in the era of
cidofovir. Transpl Infect Dis 2007; 9:108.
54. Heemskerk B, Lankester AC, van Vreeswijk T, et al. Immune reconstitution and clearance of
human adenovirus viremia in pediatric stem-cell recipients. J Infect Dis 2005; 191:520.
55. Florescu DF, Pergam SA, Neely MN, et al. Safety and efficacy of CMX001 as salvage therapy
for severe adenovirus infections in immunocompromised patients. Biol Blood Marrow
Transplant 2012; 18:731.
56. Grimley MS, Chemaly RF, Englund JA, et al. Brincidofovir for Asymptomatic Adenovirus
Viremia in Pediatric and Adult Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients: A
Randomized Placebo-Controlled Phase II Trial. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2017; 23:512.
57. Hartline CB, Gustin KM, Wan WB, et al. Ether lipid-ester prodrugs of acyclic nucleoside
phosphonates: activity against adenovirus replication in vitro. J Infect Dis 2005; 191:396.
58. Ciesla SL, Trahan J, Wan WB, et al. Esterification of cidofovir with alkoxyalkanols increases
oral bioavailability and diminishes drug accumulation in kidney. Antiviral Res 2003; 59:163.
59. Marty FM, Winston DJ, Chemaly RF, et al. Brincidofovir for prevention of cytomegalovirus
(CMV) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in CMV-seropositive
patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 3 trial. Biol
Blood Marrow Transplant 2016; 22:S23.
66. Kawakami M, Ueda S, Maeda T, et al. Vidarabine therapy for virus-associated cystitis after
allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 1997; 20:485.
67. Mawhorter S, Yamani MH. Hypogammaglobulinemia and infection risk in solid organ
transplant recipients. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2008; 13:581.
68. Flomenberg PR, Chen M, Munk G, Horwitz MS. Molecular epidemiology of adenovirus type
35 infections in immunocompromised hosts. J Infect Dis 1987; 155:1127.
69. Dagan R, Schwartz RH, Insel RA, Menegus MA. Severe diffuse adenovirus 7a pneumonia in
a child with combined immunodeficiency: possible therapeutic effect of human immune
serum globulin containing specific neutralizing antibody. Pediatr Infect Dis 1984; 3:246.
70. Lenaerts L, Kelchtermans H, Geboes L, et al. Recovery of humoral immunity is critical for
successful antiviral therapy in disseminated mouse adenovirus type 1 infection. Antimicrob
Agents Chemother 2008; 52:1462.
71. Hromas R, Cornetta K, Srour E, et al. Donor leukocyte infusion as therapy of life-threatening
adenoviral infections after T-cell-depleted bone marrow transplantation. Blood 1994;
84:1689.
72. Feuchtinger T, Matthes-Martin S, Richard C, et al. Safe adoptive transfer of virus-specific T-
cell immunity for the treatment of systemic adenovirus infection after allogeneic stem cell
transplantation. Br J Haematol 2006; 134:64.
73. Leen AM, Myers GD, Sili U, et al. Monoculture-derived T lymphocytes specific for multiple
viruses expand and produce clinically relevant effects in immunocompromised individuals.
Nat Med 2006; 12:1160.
74. Geyeregger R, Freimüller C, Stemberger J, et al. First-in-man clinical results with good
manufacturing practice (GMP)-compliant polypeptide-expanded adenovirus-specific T cells
after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. J Immunother 2014; 37:245.
75. Leen AM, Bollard CM, Mendizabal AM, et al. Multicenter study of banked third-party virus-
specific T cells to treat severe viral infections after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Blood 2013; 121:5113.
76. Top FH Jr, Dudding BA, Russell PK, Buescher EL. Control of respiratory disease in recruits
with types 4 and 7 adenovirus vaccines. Am J Epidemiol 1971; 94:142.
77. Barraza EM, Ludwig SL, Gaydos JC, Brundage JF. Reemergence of adenovirus type 4 acute
respiratory disease in military trainees: report of an outbreak during a lapse in vaccination.
J Infect Dis 1999; 179:1531.
78. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Two fatal cases of adenovirus-related
illness in previously healthy young adults--Illinois, 2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
2001; 50:553.
79. Metzgar D, Osuna M, Kajon AE, et al. Abrupt emergence of diverse species B adenoviruses
at US military recruit training centers. J Infect Dis 2007; 196:1465.
80. Lyons A, Longfield J, Kuschner R, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the
safety and immunogenicity of live, oral type 4 and type 7 adenovirus vaccines in adults.
Vaccine 2008; 26:2890.
81. Adenovirus type 4 and type 7 live oral vaccine prescribing information. http://www.fda.gov/
downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM247515.pdf (Accessed
on March 03, 2021).
82. Radin JM, Hawksworth AW, Blair PJ, et al. Dramatic decline of respiratory illness among US
military recruits after the renewed use of adenovirus vaccines. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 59:962.
83. Binn LN, Sanchez JL, Gaydos JC. Emergence of adenovirus type 14 in US military recruits--a
new challenge. J Infect Dis 2007; 196:1436.
84. van der VEEN, PRINS A. Studies of the significance of the recall phenomenon in the
antibody response to adenovirus vaccine and infection. J Immunol 1960; 84:562.
85. Buehler JW, Finton RJ, Goodman RA, et al. Epidemic keratoconjunctivitis: report of an
outbreak in an ophthalmology practice and recommendations for prevention. Infect
Control 1984; 5:390.
86. D'Angelo LJ, Hierholzer JC, Keenlyside RA, et al. Pharyngoconjunctival fever caused by
adenovirus type 4: report of a swimming pool-related outbreak with recovery of virus from
pool water. J Infect Dis 1979; 140:42.
87. Jernigan JA, Lowry BS, Hayden FG, et al. Adenovirus type 8 epidemic keratoconjunctivitis in
an eye clinic: risk factors and control. J Infect Dis 1993; 167:1307.
88. Finn A, Anday E, Talbot GH. An epidemic of adenovirus 7a infection in a neonatal nursery:
course, morbidity, and management. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1988; 9:398.
89. Faden H, Wynn RJ, Campagna L, Ryan RM. Outbreak of adenovirus type 30 in a neonatal
intensive care unit. J Pediatr 2005; 146:523.
90. Muller MP, Siddiqui N, Ivancic R, Wong D. Adenovirus-related epidemic keratoconjunctivitis
outbreak at a hospital-affiliated ophthalmology clinic. Am J Infect Control 2018; 46:581.
91. Piedra PA. Adenovirus in the neonatal intensive care unit: formidable, forgotten foe. J
Pediatr 2005; 146:447.
92. American Academy of Pediatrics. Adenovirus infections. In: Red Book: 2021-2024 Report of
the Committee on Infectious Diseases, 32nd ed, Kimberlin DW, Barnett ED, Lynfield R, Sawy
er MH (Eds), American Academy of Pediatrics, Itasca, IL 2021. p.188.
Topic 8348 Version 25.0
GRAPHICS
Appropriate
Diagnostic test Comments
samples
Viral antigen assays (eg, Nasopharyngeal Results available in less than 30 minutes.
adenovirus-specific enzyme- swabs or
Specific, but less sensitive than viral culture for
linked immunosorbent aspirates
respiratory secretions.
assay or Throat swabs or
immunofluorescence assay) Test of choice for adenovirus serotypes 40 and
washes
41 (which cause infantile gastroenteritis);
Tracheal
adjunct to viral culture for epidemic
aspirate or BAL
keratoconjunctivitis (more rapid results for
material
subgroup D serotypes).
Conjunctival
swabs or
scrapings
Stool or rectal
swabs
Throat swabs or
washes
Sputum,
tracheal
aspirates, or
BAL fluid
Blood
Urine
Stool
Cerebrospinal
fluid
Biopsy
specimens
Fixed tissue
Adenoviral inclusions
A 31 Infantile gastroenteritis*
14 Pneumonia
Remaining serotypes are infrequently isolated or not clearly associated with disease.
* Association with gastroenteritis not as firmly established as with types 40 and 41.
Upper respiratory Viral culture if available and/or viral antigen assay on respiratory
illness specimen(s) (eg, nasopharyngeal swab or aspirate; throat swab or wash)
Immunocompromised Viral culture or PCR of affected sites; quantitative PCR of blood; biopsy if
hosts clinically indicated¶
* If there is a potential outbreak or an individual patient has a severe manifestation (to make
decisions about antiviral therapy, exclude other treatable infections, determine prognosis, and/or
initiate infection control measures).
¶ The appropriate diagnostic tests depend upon the severity and site(s) of infection, as well as the
degree of immunocompromise.
Contributor Disclosures
Flor M Munoz, MD, MSc Grant/Research/Clinical Trial Support: Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention [Respiratory virus epidemiology]; Abt/CDC [Influenza epidemiology]; National Institutes of
Health [Zika epidemiology, COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy, vaccines]; Pfizer [COVID-19 vaccine].
Consultant/Advisory Boards: CDC [Grant review]; Moderna [DSMB]; NIH [DSMB]; Pfizer [DSMB]. All of the
relevant financial relationships listed have been mitigated. Phyllis Flomenberg, MD No relevant financial
relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose. Martin S Hirsch, MD No relevant financial
relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose. Morven S Edwards, MD Grant/Research/Clinical Trial
Support: Pfizer [Group B Streptococcus].
Other Financial Interest: Texas State University personal services
agreement [Chagas disease].
All of the relevant financial relationships listed have been mitigated. Sheila
Bond, MD No relevant financial relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose. Mary M Torchia,
MD No relevant financial relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose.
Contributor disclosures are reviewed for conflicts of interest by the editorial group. When found, these are
addressed by vetting through a multi-level review process, and through requirements for references to be
provided to support the content. Appropriately referenced content is required of all authors and must
conform to UpToDate standards of evidence.