Review of Whole Plant Extracts With Activity Against Herpes Simplex Viruses In Vitro and In Vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herpes simplex viruses, HSV-1 and HSV-2, are highly contagious and cause lifelong, latent infections with recurrent outbreaks of oral and/or genital lesions. No cure exists for HSV-1 or HSV-2 infections, but antiviral medications are commonly used to prevent and treat outbreaks. Resistance to antivirals has begun to emerge, placing an importance on finding new and effective therapies for prophylaxis and treatment of HSV outbreaks. Botanicals may be effective HSV therapies as the constituents they contain act through a variety of mechanisms, potentially making the development of antiviral resistance more challenging. A wide variety of plants from different regions in the world have been studied for antiviral activity against HSV-1 and/or HSV-2 and showed efficacy of varying degrees. The purpose of this review is to summarize research conducted on whole plant extracts against HSV-1 and/or HSV-2 in vitro and in vivo. The majority of the research reviewed was conducted in vitro using animal cell lines, and some studies used an animal model design. Also summarized are a limited number of human trials conducted using botanical therapies on HSV lesions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".