Skip to Main Content

We have a new app!

Take the Access library with you wherever you go—easy access to books, videos, images, podcasts, personalized features, and more.

Download the Access App here: iOS and Android


The field of antiviral therapy—both the number of antiviral drugs and our understanding of their optimal use—historically has lagged behind that of antibacterial treatment, but significant progress has been made in recent years on new drugs for several viral infections. The development of antiviral drugs poses several challenges. Viruses replicate intracellularly and often use host cell enzymes, macromolecules, and organelles for synthesis of viral particles. Therefore, useful antiviral compounds must discriminate between host and viral functions with a high degree of specificity; agents without such selectivity are likely to be too toxic for clinical use.

Significant progress has also been made in the development of laboratory assays to assist clinicians in the appropriate use of antiviral drugs. Phenotypic and genotypic assays for resistance to antiviral drugs are becoming more widely available, and correlations of laboratory results with clinical outcomes are being better defined. Of particular note has been the development of highly sensitive and specific methods that measure the concentration of virus in blood (virus load) and permit direct assessment of the antiviral effect of a given drug regimen in that host site. Virus load measurements have been useful in recognizing the risk of disease progression in patients with viral infections and in identifying patients for whom antiviral chemotherapy might be of greatest benefit. As with any in vitro laboratory test, results are highly dependent on and likely vary with the laboratory techniques used.

Information regarding the pharmacodynamics of antiviral drugs, and particularly the relationship of concentration effects to efficacy, has been slow to develop but is also expanding. However, assays to measure concentrations of antiviral drugs, especially of their active moieties within cells, are still primarily research procedures not widely available to clinicians. Thus, there are limited guidelines for adjusting dosages of antiviral agents to maximize antiviral activity and minimize toxicity. Consequently, clinical use of antiviral drugs must be accompanied by particular vigilance for unanticipated adverse effects.

Like that of other infections, the course of viral infections is profoundly affected by interplay between the pathogen and a complex set of host defenses. The presence or absence of preexisting immunity, the ability to mount humoral and/or cell-mediated immune responses, and the stimulation of innate immunity are important determinants of the outcome of viral infections. The state of the host’s defenses needs to be considered when antiviral agents are used or evaluated.

As with any therapy, the optimal use of antiviral compounds requires a specific and timely diagnosis. For some viral infections, such as herpes zoster, the clinical manifestations are so characteristic that a diagnosis can be made on clinical grounds alone. For other viral infections, such as influenza A, epidemiologic information (e.g., the documentation of a community-wide influenza outbreak) can be used to make a presumptive diagnosis with a high degree of accuracy. However, for most of the remaining viral infections, including herpes simplex encephalitis, cytomegaloviral infections ...

Pop-up div Successfully Displayed

This div only appears when the trigger link is hovered over. Otherwise it is hidden from view.