Abstract
To this day, the etiology of multiple sclerosis has yet to be fully comprehended by the scientific community. However, the knowledge on mechanisms leading to the development of this neurodegenerative autoimmune disorder increases daily, along with the development of new disease-modifying treatments. A correlation between Epstein–Barr Virus infection and the disease incidence has recently shed light on possible innovative antiviral therapies. Here, we review the literature on Human Endogenous Retroviral sequences as emerging actors for the impairment of remyelination as a major challenge in disease progression. Our primary focus is the HERV-W envelope protein, which has been found at elevated levels in individuals affected by this condition and is suggested here as a potential therapeutic target. We then continue analyzing the clinical cases where antiretroviral drugs have been tested to treat multiple sclerosis patients and, from successes and failures, we finally narrow down our therapeutic hypothesis to the administration of Nucleoside-analog Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors to target the HERV-W envelope protein, possibly leading to remyelination and significantly improving the condition of those affected by the disease. The main purpose of this review is to present a rationale for the therapeutic potential of this drug class and offer a new perspective for therapeutic options against multiple sclerosis.
1. Multiple Sclerosis: Characteristics of the Disease, Main Therapeutic Approaches and Unanswered Questions
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disorder that develops as a chronic inflammatory and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system (CNS) [1]. It is one of the most frequent causes of neurological disability in young adults, displaying a vast array of symptoms such as fatigue, visual impairments, progressive motor disability and various degrees of cognitive dysfunction, among others [2], and it has a significant social impact on affected patients [3]. Although knowledge about various elements of the disease is growing, some aspects are still not fully understood [4]. Its autoimmune characteristics are an example of that, as they have been linked historically with a T-cell-mediated response [5], but recent successful therapies targeting B-cells [6] suggest a more complex cellular involvement [5]. MS is known to deteriorate the myelin sheath of neurons produced by oligodendrocytes in different, patient-specific regions of the brain, cranial nerves, brain stem, cerebellum, and spinal cord [7]. This degeneration affects neuronal function and may lead to neuronal loss, eventually causing the typical symptoms associated with MS. Nevertheless, numerous neurological challenges remain not fully understood. For instance, the precise mechanisms that cause inefficient remyelination of nervous system lesions remain unclear [8] due to the complex molecular interplay that allows for the process of remyelination and the variable extent thereof in MS patients [9]. Although our understanding of the causes of MS is still limited, noteworthy advancements have been achieved with injectable and oral medications that fight symptoms or slow down disease progression [10]. As a result, major disabilities are now largely prevented, and the life expectancy of patients diagnosed with MS is only marginally reduced. Since the introduction of interferon (IFN) β-1b in 1993 as the first therapeutic drug for the disease [10], a plethora of drugs have been approved for treating MS, almost entirely dedicated to the relapse-remitting MS form (RRMS) [11], but not only that, treatments showing modest but clinically meaningful effects have been approved for the management of progressive multiple sclerosis, such as Ocrelizumab for primary progressive MS (PPMS) and Siponimod for secondary progressive MS (SPMS) [12]. Notwithstanding these remarkable improvements, MS remains a not-fully met medical need, considering that the available therapies only slow down the disease, that no definitive cure exists [13], and that they show limited efficacy for PPMS and SPMS [14].
The neuroprotective and immunomodulating mechanisms of the approved drugs are not entirely clear. The first approved drug against MS, injectable IFN-β, is mainly thought to cause a shift in the regulation of the cellular immune response, decreasing the threat of autoimmune reactions against the nerve cells [15], but it may also act at a genetic level by correcting gene dysregulation in MS [16]. Also, the mechanism of action of the increasingly relevant anti-CD20 antibodies (such as the aforementioned Ocrelizumab), although more straightforward, is not completely understood and some of the consequences of the treatment, such as the B-cell depletion and the kinetics of this process, still evade full comprehension [17]. The first oral treatment against MS, Fingolimod, induces an internalization of Sphingosine-1-Phosphate-1 (S1P1) receptors, reducing the penetration of lymphocytes in the CNS and, consequently, MS-related inflammation [18]. However, its selectivity for the S1P1 receptor had to be improved to avoid safety issues such as bradycardia, causing a wave of second-generation S1P1-receptor antagonists (like Siponimod), which show a shorter half-life compared to their predecessor and have a higher risk of rebound effects [18]. Among oral medications for MS, Dimethyl-Fumarate (DMF) is the most prescribed [19]. It is thought to activate the transcription of an antioxidant response [20] through the nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) [21]; however, a Nrf2-independent mechanism reducing cytokine production in the microglia has also been proposed [22]. Of note, no EMA- or FDA-approved disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) target disease mechanisms beyond immunomodulation [23]. Thus, the door for new targets and therapeutic strategies is open to innovative inputs.
2. Viral Infections Related to MS Development
A pivotal role in expanding the possible approaches for DMTs against MS could be played by the recent studies on Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) infection and the incidence of MS, which is based on the assumption that viruses have a key role in the development of the disease. Bjornevik et al. [24] conducted a retrospective analysis on more than 10 million enrolled US military personnel and found a 32-fold increased risk of MS after infection with EBV [24]. This correlation was not found for other viral infections. Also, the augmentation of serum levels of neurofilament light chain increased only after EBV seroconversion: this prompted the authors of the study to suggest EBV as the leading cause of MS [24]. This result sparked a great debate, due to the extremely high prevalence of EBV infection, which is thought to occur in 95% of adults worldwide regardless of being symptomatic or not [25]. The EBV infection has therefore been deemed a required factor, but on its own, not sufficient for the development of MS [26]. The mechanism leading from EBV infection to MS still eludes the researchers, though numerous hypotheses have been formulated. Among those, one of the most detailed involves HLA-DRB1*15:01, an allele of the HLA-DRB1 gene constituting one of the most prevalent genetic risk factors for MS, that has been found to act as a co-receptor for EBV, possibly facilitating B-cell infections [27] and increasing susceptibility to MS [28]. Other studies have tested the interaction between EBV and MS-predisposing genes in a broader manner, elucidating a distributed dysregulation of MS-associated EBV interactors at the CNS level and related disease-specific mechanisms, e.g., the ones related to EBV nuclear antigen 2 (EBNA-2) expression [29]. However, the links between EBV infection and MS insurgency should still be more thoroughly studied: few examples that need further research include the possible interactions between EBV and innate immunity mechanisms, which have often been underestimated [30], or the still unknown differences in MS incidence between being infected by EBV as an infant or as an adult [31]. Altogether, these recent evolutions involving viruses, or viral sequences, in MS etiology lay their foundation on solid bases, but they do call for a deeper understanding and thus leave room for other interpretations and more elucidated mechanisms to explain MS insurgency and, consequently, new therapeutic approaches to adopt.
5. Conclusions: NRTIs as Suitable Option for MS Treatment and Future Perspectives
This review offers a renewed insight into a rising topic among MS therapeutic options. The recent light shed on the role of viral infections in the development of the disease is a refreshing element for the hopes of MS patients, but it certainly needs refinement. The rationale behind the proposed implementation of NRTIs against MS could indeed not only be clinically solid, according to the growing evidence here reported, but also fill the gaps between the recent discoveries about EBV infection and the etiology of the disease. What is more, the hypothesized beneficial effects of NRTIs should not be limited to their hindering of EBV replication, as HERVs, and especially HERV-W env, offer many new possibilities for targets that deserve a deeper understanding, especially because it could provide new DMTs that finally allow remyelination and tackle the disease from another perspective: in vivo transgenic models suggest an important role of HERV-W env in enhancing the degeneration of myelin sheath due to the induction of a complex neurodegenerative environment [54]; in contrast, in vitro tests have shown that blocking the negative effect on remyelination by HERV-W env can lead to a full rescue of this dysregulation [53]. Also, NRTIs by themselves showed potential against neurodegenerative diseases; particularly, a potential beneficial effect against Alzheimer’s Disease was proposed, due to NRTIs (e.g., Lamivudine [65]) blocking NRLP3 inflammasome activation [70]. The neurodegenerative, inflammatory characteristics of MS can therefore be targeted by NRTIs, and this rationale further calls for deeper inspection due to the possible pathogenic role of HERVs in MS development. Retrotransposition of endogenous elements can lead to RNA/DNA hybrids that have been shown to activate NRLP3 inflammasome [71]; therefore, the aforementioned benefit from NRTIs against this specific pathogenic mechanism could prove instrumental also in treating MS. Altogether, the mechanisms behind this observed specific beneficial pattern of NRTIs against HERV-W env (and, consequently, against MS) show promise, but need further studies to be truly understood in their complexity; however, the therapeutic superiority of NRTIs reported in this review, when compared to other classes of antiretroviral drugs, should not be overlooked, and instead be thoroughly tested from both a clinical and a biological point of view.
The first and probably most immediate of the consequences of the rationale presented here is surely the repurposing of NRTIs against MS. Already licensed drugs for other diseases, such as Tenofovir, Emicitrabine or Combivir, could be tested for their efficacy to stop typical MS lesions and the progression of the symptoms in large-scale clinical trials. In Australia, an association of scientists, the Australian Anti-EBV Drugs for MS Working Group, has screened 11 drugs with anti-EBV activity and shortlisted four of those as the ones needing most immediate evaluation through Phase III clinical trials [72]. Among those, Tenofovir, particularly the TAF formulation, was present, and currently, to our knowledge, three clinical trials involving three of the four selected drugs are underway, investigating whether these compounds can improve MS outcomes by suppressing EBV activity [73]. Going more into detail about the possible utilization of NRTIs against MS, the FIRMS-EBV clinical trial (registration number: ACTRN12624000423516) is a randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III study that follows the screening from the Australian Anti-EBV Drugs for MS Working Group and is testing whether TAF (or Spironolactone) can reduce fatigue in RRMS patients [74]. Also, a Phase II interventional study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05957913) held at the Massachusetts General Hospital is testing if the combination of Emicitrabine and TDF (commercially available as Truvada) is able to reduce EBV levels in blood and saliva and, also, if it is safe and tolerable for MS patients [75]. However, it is important to remember that said EBV activity could not be the end of the story for MS development, and underline again that HERVs, particularly HERV-W env, offer a target that could potentially lead to remyelination [54] and also avoid worsening the effects of viral infection. Therefore, repurposing of the other NRTI drugs could very well open a plethora of new chances for clinical improvement of MS patients.
Perhaps even more intriguing is the possibility that existing, licensed NRTIs could offer the basis for new and improved drugs, counting on growing knowledge about not only their structural features, but the ones of HERVs as well. As an example, a very recent study explored the structural conservation of the various HERV domains and sequences in our genome, and a few conserved features across the HERV families were observed [76]. While it remains unclear if it happened due to regulatory or structural reasons, this genome-wide map of conserved HERV features could narrow the target for therapeutic approaches, possibly aiming at conserved domains for structural reasons or finding out which ones are present only in pathogenic situations to select them for new therapies. As an example, HERV-K reverse transcriptase and HIV reverse transcriptase showed some significant structural resemblances [77], thus concretely opening the door for further functional refinement of NRTIs to target HERV sites that can be conserved among different families and remain susceptible to NRTI therapeutic action. The knowledge regarding structural features of HERV-W env or envelope proteins from other HERV families is growing as well [78,79], thus providing new possibilities to narrow down the important features of HERVs, and their envelope proteins, for the insurgency of MS.
In conclusion, a growing body of evidence for the implementation of NRTIs in MS therapeutic strategies warrants for more investigation about the topic, and offers new possibilities on repurposing existing drugs or adapting them into improved molecules to target MS. This approach could also open a new era of DMTs that would not only focus on immunomodulation, but also on myelin sheath repair, focusing on the most fundamental pathogenic traits of MS and offering a new hope for MS patients.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.; writing—review and editing, A.M. and P.P.; supervision, P.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
No new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Conflicts of Interest
Author P.P. is employed by the company Tivenix SA. Both authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be constructed as a potential conflict of interest.
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
| NRTI | Nucleoside-analog Reverse-Transcriptase Inhibitor |
| MS | Multiple Sclerosis |
| EBV | Epstein–Barr Virus |
| HERV | Human Endogenous Retroviral sequences |
| HERV-W env | HERV-W envelope |
| CNS | Central nervous system |
| IFN | Interferon |
| RRMS | Relapse-remitting MS |
| PPMS | Primary progressive MS |
| SPMS | Secondary progressive MS |
| S1P1 | Sphingosine-1-Phosphate-1 |
| DMF | Dimethyl-Fumarate |
| Nrf2 | Nuclear (erythroid-derived 2) related factor |
| EMA | European Medicines Agency |
| FDA | Food and Drug Administration |
| DMT | Disease-modifying treatment |
| EBNA-2 | EBV nuclear antigen 2 |
| ISD | Immunosuppressing domain |
| ALS | Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis |
| TLR4 | Toll-like receptor 4 |
| HIV | Human immunodeficiency virus |
| HAART | Highly active antiretroviral therapy |
| TAF | Tenofovir Alafenamide |
| TDF | Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate |
| NNRTI | Non-Nucleoside-analog Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor |
| gp350 | EBV glycoprotein |
| NLRP3 | NLR family pyrin domain-containing 3 |
References
- Baldin, E.; Lugaresi, A. Ponesimod for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 2020, 21, 1955–1964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jakimovski, D.; Bittner, S.; Zivadinov, R.; Morrow, S.A.; Benedict, R.H.; Zipp, F.; Weinstock-Guttman, B. Multiple sclerosis. Lancet 2024, 403, 183–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Vergani, V.E.; Silveira, B.R.; Cardoso, G.S.M.E.; Faber, J.; Bichuetti, D.B. The impact of multiple sclerosis on wellbeing, productivity, and societal relations. Arq. Neuro-Psiquiatr. 2025, 83, s00451809400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Dobson, R.; Giovannoni, G. Multiple sclerosis—A review. Eur. J. Neurol. 2019, 26, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Greenfield, A.L.; Hauser, S.L. B-cell Therapy for Multiple Sclerosis: Entering an era. Ann. Neurol. 2018, 83, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Longbrake, E.E.; Cross, A.H. Effect of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies on B cells and humoral immunity. JAMA Neurol. 2016, 73, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Compston, A.; Coles, A. Multiple sclerosis. Lancet 2008, 372, 1502–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chari, D.M. Remyelination in multiple sclerosis. Int. Rev. Neurobiol. 2007, 79, 589–620. [Google Scholar]
- Garcha, G.K.; Ahmed, M. Remyelination as a therapeutic target in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. AIMS Neurosci. 2025, 12, 539–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, W.; Zandoná, M.E.; Kim, S.H.; Kim, H.J. Oral disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis. J. Clin. Neurol. 2015, 11, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Rommer, P.S.; Milo, R.; Han, M.H.; Satyanarayan, S.; Sellner, J.; Hauer, L.; Stuve, O. Immunological aspects of approved MS therapeutics. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chataway, J.; Williams, T.; Li, V.; Marrie, R.A.; Ontaneda, D.; Fox, R.J. Clinical trials for progressive multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. 2024, 23, 277–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zettl, U.K.; Hecker, M.; Aktas, O.; Wagner, T.; Rommer, P.S. Interferon β-1a and β-1b for patients with multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev. Clin. Immunol. 2018, 14, 137–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dangond, F.; Donnelly, A.; Hohlfeld, R.; Lubetzki, C.; Kohlhaas, S.; Leocani, L.; Salvetti, M. Facing the urgency of therapies for progressive MS. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 2021, 17, 185–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dhib-Jalbut, S.; Marks, S. Interferon-β mechanisms of action in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2010, 74, S17–S24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Feng, X.; Bao, R.; Li, L.; Deisenhammer, F.; Arnason, B.G.; Reder, A.T. Interferon-β corrects massive gene dysregulation in multiple sclerosis. eBioMedicine 2019, 49, 269–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- de Sèze, J.; Maillart, E.; Gueguen, A.; Laplaud, D.A.; Michel, L.; Thouvenot, E.; Liblau, R. Anti-CD20 therapies in multiple sclerosis. Front. Immunol. 2023, 14, 1004795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Roy, R.; Alotaibi, A.A.; Freedman, M.S. Sphingosine 1-Phosphate Receptor Modulators for Multiple Sclerosis. CNS Drugs 2021, 35, 385–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Biogen. Statement: Biogen Receives Favorable Decision from European Patent Office on Patent Related to TECFIDERA (Dimethyl Fumarate). Available online: https://investors.biogen.com/news-releases/news-release-details/statement-biogen-receives-favorable-decision-european-patent (accessed on 25 April 2026).
- Schulze-Topphoff, U.; Varrin-Doyer, M.; Pekarek, K.; Spencer, C.M.; Shetty, A.; Sagan, S.A.; Zamvil, S.S. Dimethyl fumarate treatment induces adaptive and innate immune modulation independent of Nrf2. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 4777–4782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Linker, R.A.; Lee, D.H.; Ryan, S.; van Dam, A.M.; Conrad, R.; Bista, P.; Gold, R. Fumaric acid esters exert neuroprotective effects via Nrf2. Brain 2011, 134, 678–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Peng, H.; Li, H.; Sheehy, A.; Cullen, P.; Allaire, N.; Scannevin, R.H. Dimethyl fumarate alters microglia phenotype and protects neurons against proinflammatory toxic microenvironments. J. Neuroimmunol. 2016, 299, 35–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- De Keersmaecker, A.V.; Van Doninck, E.; Wens, I.; El Ouaamari, Y.; Popescu, V.; Laureys, G.; Willekens, B. Recent advances in remyelination. Eur. J. Neurol. 2025, 32, e70397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bjornevik, K.; Cortese, M.; Healy, B.C.; Kuhle, J.; Mina, M.J.; Leng, Y.; Ascherio, A. Longitudinal analysis reveals high prevalence of EBV in MS. Science 2022, 375, 296–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Damania, B.; Kenney, S.C.; Raab-Traub, N. Epstein-Barr virus: Biology and clinical disease. Cell 2022, 185, 3652–3670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Afrasiabi, A.; Ahlenstiel, C.; Swaminathan, S.; Parnell, G.P. The interaction between Epstein–Barr virus and multiple sclerosis genetic risk loci. Clin. Transl. Immunol. 2023, 12, e1454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Menegatti, J.; Schub, D.; Schäfer, M.; Grässer, F.A.; Ruprecht, K. HLA-DRB1*15:01 is a co-receptor for Epstein–Barr virus. Eur. J. Immunol. 2021, 51, 2348–2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kaur, G.; Khurana, D.; Minz, R.W.; Kumar, A.; Singh, P.; Singh, J. Predisposed HLA-DRB1 alleles and EBV infection increase MS susceptibility. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2023, 80, 105210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mechelli, R.; Umeton, R.; Bellucci, G.; Bigi, R.; Rinaldi, V.; Angelini, D.F.; Ristori, G. A disease-specific convergence of host and Epstein–Barr virus genetics in multiple sclerosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2025, 122, e2418783122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- van de Waterweg Berends, A.; Broux, B.; Machiels, B.; Gillet, L.; Hellings, N. The EBV–MS connection: The enigma remains. Front. Immunol. 2024, 15, 1466339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Farrell, P.J. EBV and MS: The evidence is growing stronger. Cell 2023, 186, 5675–5676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Maruszak, H.; Brew, B.J.; Giovannoni, G.; Gold, J. Could antiretroviral drugs be effective in multiple sclerosis? Eur. J. Neurol. 2011, 18, e110–e111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Khan, M.; Zahoor, I.; Haq, E. Human immunodeficiency virus and multiple sclerosis risk. J. Mult. Scler. 2015, 2, 1000141. [Google Scholar]
- Gold, J.; Goldacre, R.; Maruszak, H.; Giovannoni, G.; Yeates, D.; Goldacre, M. HIV and lower risk of multiple sclerosis: Beginning to unravel a mystery using a record-linked database study. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2015, 86, 9–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Küry, P.; Nath, A.; Créange, A.; Dolei, A.; Marche, P.; Gold, J.; Perron, H. Human endogenous retroviruses in neurological diseases. Trends Mol. Med. 2018, 24, 379–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Stein, R.A.; DePaola, R.V. Human endogenous retroviruses: Our genomic fossils and companions. Physiol. Genom. 2023, 55, 249–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Wang, Y.N.; Ye, Y.; Zhou, D.; Guo, Z.W.; Xiong, Z.; Gong, X.X.; Chen, H. The role of syncytin in placental angiogenesis and fetal growth. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022, 10, 852561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chen, Y.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, D.; Sun, Y. Functions of the fusogenic and non-fusogenic activities of Syncytin-1. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2025, 761, 151746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Gholami Barzoki, M.; Shatizadeh Malekshahi, S.; Heydarifard, Z.; Mahmodi, M.J.; Soltanghoraee, H. The important biological roles of Syncytin-1 and Syncytin-2 in human placenta development. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2023, 50, 7901–7907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lokossou, A.G.; Toudic, C.; Nguyen, P.T.; Elisseeff, X.; Vargas, A.; Rassart, É.; Barbeau, B. Endogenous retrovirus-encoded Syncytin-2 contributes to exosome-mediated immunosuppression of T cells. Biol. Reprod. 2020, 102, 185–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dolei, A. The aliens inside us: HERV-W endogenous retroviruses and multiple sclerosis. Mult. Scler. J. 2018, 24, 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- de la Hera, B.; Varade, J.; García-Montojo, M.; Lamas, J.R.; de la Encarnación, A.; Arroyo, R.; Urcelay, E. Role of the human endogenous retrovirus HERV-K18 in autoimmune disease susceptibility. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e62090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dolei, A.; Ibba, G.; Piu, C.; Serra, C. Expression of HERV genes as possible biomarker and target in neurodegenerative diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 3706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Li, W.; Lee, M.H.; Henderson, L.; Tyagi, R.; Bachani, M.; Steiner, J.; Nath, A. Human endogenous retrovirus-K contributes to motor neuron disease. Sci. Transl. Med. 2015, 7, 307ra153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Curty, G.; Marston, J.L.; de Mulder Rougvie, M.; Leal, F.E.; Nixon, D.F.; Soares, M.A. Human endogenous retrovirus K in cancer: A potential biomarker and immunotherapeutic target. Viruses 2020, 12, 726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Morandi, E.; Tanasescu, R.; Tarlinton, R.E.; Constantinescu, C.S.; Zhang, W.; Tench, C.; Gran, B. The association between human endogenous retroviruses and multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- García-Montojo, M.; de la Hera, B.; Varadé, J.; de la Encarnación, A.; Camacho, I.; Domínguez-Mozo, M.; Urcelay, E. HERV-W polymorphism in chromosome X is associated with multiple sclerosis risk and with differential expression of MSRV. Retrovirology 2014, 11, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Elkjaer, M.L.; Frisch, T.; Tonazzolli, A.; Röttger, R.; Reynolds, R.; Baumbach, J.; Illes, Z. Unbiased examination of genome-wide human endogenous retrovirus transcripts in MS brain lesions. Mult. Scler. J. 2021, 27, 1829–1837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kremer, D.; Gruchot, J.; Weyers, V.; Oldemeier, L.; Göttle, P.; Healy, L.; Küry, P. pHERV-W envelope protein fuels microglial cell-dependent damage of myelinated axons in multiple sclerosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 15216–15225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Ryan, F.P. Human endogenous retroviruses in multiple sclerosis: Potential for novel neuro-pharmacological research. Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2011, 9, 360–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Madeira, A.; Burgelin, I.; Perron, H.; Curtin, F.; Lang, A.B.; Faucard, R. MSRV envelope protein is a potent, endogenous and pathogenic agonist of human toll-like receptor 4. J. Neuroimmunol. 2016, 291, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- van Horssen, J.; van der Pol, S.; Nijland, P.; Amor, S.; Perron, H. Human endogenous retrovirus W in brain lesions: Rationale for targeted therapy in multiple sclerosis. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2016, 8, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Göttle, P.; Förster, M.; Gruchot, J.; Kremer, D.; Hartung, H.P.; Perron, H.; Küry, P. Rescuing the negative impact of human endogenous retrovirus envelope protein on oligodendroglial differentiation and myelination. Glia 2019, 67, 160–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Gruchot, J.; Lewen, I.; Dietrich, M.; Reiche, L.; Sindi, M.; Hecker, C.; Herrero, F.; Charvet, B.; Weber-Stadlbauer, U.; Hartung, H.P.; et al. Transgenic expression of the HERV-W envelope protein leads to polarized glial cell populations and a neurodegenerative environment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2023, 120, e2308187120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Pérez-Pérez, S.; Domínguez-Mozo, M.I.; García-Martínez, M.Á.; Ballester-González, R.; Nieto-Gañán, I.; Arroyo, R.; Alvarez-Lafuente, R. Epstein-Barr virus load correlates with multiple sclerosis-associated retrovirus envelope expression. Biomedicines 2022, 10, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Evans, E.F.; Saraph, A.; Tokuyama, M. Transactivation of human endogenous retroviruses by viruses. Viruses 2024, 16, 1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Delgado, S.R.; Maldonado, J.; Rammohan, K.W. CNS demyelinating disorder with mixed features of neuromyelitis optica and multiple sclerosis in HIV-1 infection. J. Neurovirol. 2014, 20, 531–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chalkley, J.; Berger, J.R. Multiple sclerosis remission following antiretroviral therapy in an HIV-infected man. J. Neurovirol. 2014, 20, 640–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Gold, J.; Marta, M.; Meier, U.C.; Christensen, T.; Miller, D.; Altmann, D.; Giovannoni, G. A phase II baseline versus treatment study to determine the efficacy of raltegravir in preventing progression of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: The INSPIRE study. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2018, 24, 123–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hartung, H.P.; Derfuss, T.; Cree, B.A.; Sormani, M.P.; Selmaj, K.; Stutters, J.; Barkhof, F. Efficacy and safety of temelimab in multiple sclerosis: Results of a randomized phase 2b and extension study. Mult. Scler. J. 2022, 28, 429–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Morandi, E.; Tanasescu, R.; Tarlinton, R.E.; Constantin-Teodosiu, D.; Gran, B. Do antiretroviral drugs protect from multiple sclerosis by inhibiting expression of MS-associated retrovirus? Front. Immunol. 2019, 9, 3092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kornmann, K.; Curtin, F. Safety Profile of Temelimab, an Anti–Human Endogenous Retrovirus Type W Envelope Monoclonal Antibody, in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Drug Saf. 2020, 43, 1211–1220. [Google Scholar]
- Holec, A.D.; Mandal, S.; Prathipati, P.K.; Destache, C.J. Nucleotide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors: A Thorough Review, Present Status and Future Perspective as HIV Therapeutics. Curr. HIV Res. 2017, 15, 411–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Foka, F.E.T.; Mufhandu, H.T. Current ARTs, Virologic Failure, and Implications for AIDS Management: A Systematic Review. Viruses 2023, 15, 1732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Fabiola, O.; Angelica, G.; Massimiliano, B. Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors as a Therapeutic Opportunity to Counteract Inflammaging and Age-Related Diseases: New Evidence from Epidemiological Data. Ageing Res. Rev. 2025, 112, 102878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Drosu, N.C.; Edelman, E.R.; Housman, D.E. Could antiretrovirals be treating EBV in MS? A case report. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2018, 22, 19–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Labella, F.; Acebrón, F.; Blanco-Valero, M.D.C.; Rodrígez-Martín, A.; Monterde Ortega, Á.; Agüera Morales, E. HIV infection and multiple sclerosis: A case with unexpected “no evidence of disease activity” status. J. Int. Med. Res. 2021, 49, 0300060521999577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Drosu, N.; Levy, M. Radiologic and clinical stability after tenofovir in HIV-negative MS. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2024, 83, 105396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Torkildsen, Ø.; Myhr, K.M.; Brugger-Synnes, P.; Bjørnevik, K. Antiviral therapy with tenofovir in MS. Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2024, 83, 105436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Magagnoli, J.; Ambati, M.; Cummings, T.H.; Nguyen, J.; Thomas, C.C.; Ambati, V.L.; Sutton, S.S.; Gelfand, B.D.; Ambati, J. Association of Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor Use with Reduced Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease. Alzheimer’s Dement. 2025, 21, e70180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kailasan Vanaja, S.; Rathinam, V.A.; Atianand, M.K.; Kalantari, P.; Skehan, B.; Fitzgerald, K.A.; Leong, J.M. Bacterial RNA: DNA Hybrids Are Activators of the NLRP3 Inflammasome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 7765–7770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Li, V.; McKay, F.C.; Tscharke, D.C.; Smith, C.; Khanna, R.; Lechner-Scott, J.; Australian Anti-EBV Drugs for MS Working Group. Repurposing licensed drugs with anti-EBV activity for MS. CNS Drugs 2025, 39, 305–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Shapiro, L. Can Epstein-Barr Virus Cause Multiple Sclerosis? Available online: https://multiplesclerosisnewstoday.com/epstein-barr-virus-and-ms/ (accessed on 20 March 2026).
- Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). Efficacy of Reducing Fatigue in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: An Epstein Barr Virus Treatment Trial (FIRMS EBV). Available online: https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12624000423516 (accessed on 26 April 2026).
- ClinicalTrials.gov; Massachusetts General Hospital. Effects of Antiviral Therapies on Epstein-Barr Virus Replication. Available online: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05957913 (accessed on 26 April 2026).
- Montserrat-Ayuso, T.; Pujol, A.; Esteve-Codina, A. A Comprehensive Annotation of Conserved Protein Domains in Human Endogenous Retroviruses. NAR Genom. Bioinform. 2026, 8, lqag013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Baldwin, E.T.; Götte, M.; Tchesnokov, E.P.; Arnold, E.; Hagel, M.; Nichols, C.; Romero, D.L. Human Endogenous Retrovirus-K (HERV-K) Reverse Transcriptase (RT) Structure and Biochemistry Reveals Remarkable Similarities to HIV-1 RT and Opportunities for HERV-K–Specific Inhibition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2200260119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Durnaoglu, S.; Lee, S.K.; Ahnn, J. Syncytin: No longer “fossil” in the human genome. Anim. Cells Syst. 2021, 25, 358–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Nikolopoulos, N.; Modis, Y. Crystal structure of HERV-K envelope glycoprotein surface subunit. bioRxiv 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.