Health Dictionary Find a Doctor

Measles

Template:DiseaseDisorder infobox

This page is about clinical aspects of the disease.  For microbiologic aspects of the causative organism(s), see Measles virus.

For patient information, click here

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1], Associate Editor-In-Chief: Joseph Nasr, M.D.[2] Synonyms and keywords: English measles; Morbilli; Rubeola

A child showing a day-four measles rash
Overview

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1], Associate Editor-In-Chief: Joseph Nasr, M.D.[2]

Overview

Measles is a highly contagious viral disease caused by the Morbillivirus, a member of the Paramyxoviridae family. The virus is transmitted primarily by respiratory droplets and aerosols from infected individuals.

The incubation period is typically 10–14 days (range, 7–23), during which patients are asymptomatic. Illness begins with a prodrome of fever plus cough, coryza, or conjunctivitis (the “three Cs”). Koplik spots on the buccal mucosa may appear 1–2 days before rash onset. The rash is an erythematous maculopapular exanthem that starts on the face and spreads to the trunk and extremities[1].

Infected persons are contagious from approximately 4 days before rash onset until 4 days after[1].

Measles remains a major global health concern. Since 2024, all WHO regions have reported rising numbers of measles cases. In 2024, there were 395,521 laboratory-confirmed cases worldwide, and in just the first two months of 2025, 16,147 cases were reported. Hospitalization occurred in more than half of reported cases, suggesting the true burden is much higher[2].

Historical Perspective

The measles virus was first isolated in cell culture in 1954 by John F. Enders and Thomas C. Peebles, leading to the development of measles-containing vaccines. The first vaccine was licensed in 1963, based on the Edmonston prototype strain. An inactivated (killed) vaccine, used between 1963 and 1967, was later withdrawn because it predisposed recipients to a severe form of disease called atypical measles syndrome when they were exposed to wild-type measles virus[3].

Subsequent development of live attenuated vaccine strains, including Edmonston B, Edmonston-Enders, and Moraten strains, provided effective durable protection. The first combined measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine was licensed in 1971[4].

In 1977, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced the Expanded Programme on Immunization, initially recommending a one-dose measles schedule. By 2000, WHO and UNICEF endorsed a two-dose schedule globally[5].

Despite large gains, measles resurgence has been a recurring theme. In 2019, global cases surged to 869,770, driven by outbreaks in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar, Samoa, Ukraine, and Brazil, largely due to vaccine hesitancy[6]. This factor also contributed to the more than 100,00 measles cases in Europe in 2019 and the increased number of measles cases in the United States almost 20 years after the declaration that the disease head been eliminated in 2000[7].

Since 2024, measles cases have been rising sharply again, with major outbreaks in Europe and the United States. If the United States experiences uninterrupted transmission for more than 12 months, it risks losing its measles elimination status[4].

Pathophysiology

Measles is caused by a nonsegmented, negative-stranded RNA virus of the Paramyxoviridae family, genus Morbillivirus. The virus initially infects the respiratory epithelium of the nasopharynx and then spreads systemically.

Cellular receptors:

  • CD46 – used primarily by vaccine strains[8][9].
  • SLAM (CD150⁺) – expressed on B and T lymphocytes, the main receptor for wild-type measles virus[10].
  • Nectin-4 – an epithelial cell receptor identified in 2010-2011[11].

The Virus induces a viremia that disseminates widely, causing systemic infection involving the skin, eyes, respiratory tract, and gastrointestinal tract[12].

A central feature of measles pathogenesis is immune amnesia. The virus depletes memory B and T lymphocytes (CD150⁺ cells), leading to loss of preexisting immunity to other pathogens. This results in increased susceptibility to secondary infections, particularly bacterial pneumonia, for up to a year after recovery[13][14].

Severe disease is more likely in malnourished children, immunocompromised patients (including those with HIV or undergoing cancer treatment), and pregnant women[15][16][17].

Differentiating Measles from other Diseases

The clinical features of measles, fever, cough, coryza, conjunctivitis, and a maculopapular rash, can overlap with several other infectious exanthems.

Conditions that may resemble measles include[18]:

  • Dengue fever
  • Zika virus infection
  • Parvovirus infection

Therefore, because of this overlap, laboratory confirmation is essential, particularly in the early stages of an outbreak or in areas with low measles incidence. Confirmation relies on[19]:

  • Detection of measles-specific IgM antibodies (enzyme immunoassays).
  • Detection of measles RNA by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).

These methods are especially important in immunocompromised patients, who may not mount a detectable antibody response.

Epidemiology and Demographics

Measles is one of the most contagious infectious diseases, with a primary case reproduction number (R₀) of 12 to 18[20]. According to the WHO, it remains a leading cause of vaccine-preventable childhood mortality worldwide.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), measles deaths had fallen substantially with the expansion of immunization programs. Between 1999 and 2005, global measles deaths decreased by approximately 60%, from an estimated 873,000 deaths to 345,000 deaths, with Africa experiencing a 75% reduction (from 506,000 to 126,000 deaths). This progress was largely driven by international partnerships such as the Measles Initiative (American Red Cross, CDC, UNICEF, UN Foundation, and WHO).

However, these gains have been eroded in recent years

  • 2019: Global cases rose to 869,770, the highest number in decades, with large outbreaks in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar, Samoa, Ukraine, and Brazil[6].
  • Covid-19 pandemic (2020): Caused major disruptions in routine immunization and catch-up campaigns. Global coverage with the first measles vaccine dose fell to 81% — the lowest since 2008 — before recovering slightly to 83% in 2022–2023[21].
  • 2024: WHO regions reported widespread resurgence, with 395,521 laboratory-confirmed measles cases worldwide[2].
  • Early 2025: In just the first two months, 16,147 cases were reported globally. More than half of confirmed cases required hospitalization, indicating that the true burden is likely higher[2].

Regional Burden

  • Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): Account for the vast majority of measles cases. In 2023–2024, more than 90% of global cases occurred in LMICs, mostly in children under 5 years of age. Mortality is highest in infants younger than 1 year[21].
  • Vietnam (2025): Among the top 10 countries for reported measles cases; children 6–8 months old accounted for up to 25% of cases in some areas[22].
  • Europe: In 2024, Europe reported its highest number of measles cases in more than 25 years, representing 20% of global cases[2].
  • United States: By May 30, 2025, there were 1,088 confirmed measles cases and 3 deaths. About 96% of these cases were in unvaccinated persons or those with unknown vaccination status, and 12% required hospitalization. This represents nearly four times the total reported in 2024. If uninterrupted transmission continues for 12 months, the United States will lose its elimination status[23].

Drivers of the resurgence

  • Vaccine hesitancy, fueled by misinformation (e.g., false claims linking MMR vaccine to autism, unfounded belief that vitamin A prevents measles)[24].
  • Disruptions during Covid-19, which delayed or canceled mass immunization campaigns[25].
  • Political and funding changes, including U.S. withdrawal of support from WHO and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, reducing resources for global measles control[4].

Risk Factors

Measles has very low incidence in many developed countries, but outbreaks continue to occur worldwide, especially in areas with low vaccination coverage.

Classic Risk Factors

  • Lack of vaccination: The strongest risk factor for measles. In the U.S. and other developed countries, most cases are attributed to unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated travelers or residents.
  • Vaccine hesitancy: A growing contributor to outbreaks worldwide. False claims linking the MMR vaccine to autism and misinformation about vitamin A as a preventive measure have lowered vaccine uptake.
  • Primary vaccine failure: Occurs in about 5% of individuals vaccinated with a single dose at 12 months of age or older, leaving them susceptible.
  • Infants under 6 months of age: Maternal antibodies are waning earlier than in past decades. By 3–4 months of age, most infants no longer have protective levels, leaving them vulnerable until vaccination[26]. Outbreak data from Vietnam in 2025 showed up to 25% of cases in infants aged 6–8 months[22].
  • Immunocompromised individuals: People with HIV, those undergoing cancer treatment, or those on immunosuppressive therapy are at higher risk of severe disease (e.g., giant-cell pneumonia, encephalitis) and poorer outcomes[27].
  • Pregnancy: Measles in pregnant women is associated with higher case fatality (5–30%, depending on context), as well as fetal loss, intrauterine growth restriction, and preterm birth[28].
  • Poor access to healthcare: Financial and logistical barriers to vaccination and postexposure prophylaxis increase risk in low- and middle-income countries.
  • Malnutrition: A major factor in measles mortality. Malnutrition worsens measles severity and measles itself can lead to nutritional deficits, including vitamin A deficiency. About 45% of measles-related deaths are associated with malnutrition[29].
  • Outbreak settings: Crowding (e.g., refugee camps, humanitarian crises) can raise attack rates and case fatality, sometimes exceeding 10–18%[28].

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

  • Transmission: Measles spreads via breathing, coughing, or sneezing; the virus can survive in the air or on surfaces for up to 2 hours. Nearly all susceptible children exposed will become infected.
  • Incubation: 7–23 days (typically 10–14); patients are asymptomatic.
  • Prodrome: Fever, cough, coryza, conjunctivitis; Koplik spots may appear before rash.
  • Rash: Maculopapular, starting on the face → trunk → extremities.
  • Contagious period: From ~4 days before rash onset to ~4 days after.
  • Immune amnesia: Depletion of B- and T-cell memory causes increased risk of secondary infections for 5–12 months after illness.

Complications (≈30% of cases):

  • Mild: Diarrhea (8–10%), otitis media (7–9%).
  • Serious: Pneumonia (1–6%; leading cause of death), keratitis/corneal ulceration → blindness (esp. with vitamin A deficiency).
  • Neurologic: Encephalitis (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis – SSPE) (1/1000; ~20% mortality), measles-inclusion body encephalitis (1/1000; nearly 100% fatal), SSPE (7–11 per 100,000; universally fatal).
  • High risk: Malnourished children (~45% of measles deaths linked to malnutrition), immunocompromised patients (giant-cell pneumonia, severe encephalitis), and pregnant women (maternal mortality 5–30%, fetal loss, prematurity).

Prognosis:

  • Case fatality: 1–3/1000 in high-income countries; 9–16/1000 in LMICs; up to 180/1000 in humanitarian crises.
  • Worst outcomes: infants <1 year, malnourished, immunocompromised, and pregnant women.

Diagnosis

Clinical criteria:

  • Fever ≥3 days plus one or more of: cough, coryza, conjunctivitis[30][31].
  • Koplik spots: pathognomonic but not always present.
  • Rash: erythematous, maculopapular, face → trunk → extremities.

Differentiation from other diseases:

  • Early clinical features may overlap with dengue, Zika, and parvovirus B19.
  • Laboratory confirmation is therefore essential, especially in early outbreak detection or low-incidence settings.

Laboratory confirmation:

  • IgM antibody detection (enzyme immunoassays).
  • RT-PCR for measles RNA from throat or nasopharyngeal swabs, and sometimes urine[31].
  • Genotyping of measles virus (currently B3, D8, and H1 circulating worldwide, 2024–2025)[32].
  • In immunocompromised patients, RT-PCR is preferred since they may not mount an antibody response.

Other tools:

  • Chest X-ray: may show pneumonia as a complication, but not specific for measles[33].
  • Vero/hSLAM cell culture methods are historical; no longer frontline diagnostics.

Emerging diagnostics:

  • Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for measles IgM detection in capillary blood or oral fluid are under evaluation and may allow point-of-care confirmation and outbreak surveillance[18][19].

Prevention and Treatment

Primary Prevention[34]

  • Vaccination (2-dose schedule; >95% coverage needed for herd immunity).
  • Public health measures: isolation, surveillance.
  • Cost-effective: vaccination prevents >99% of cases.
  • Future: microneedle patches, earlier infant vaccination (3–4 months).

Secondary Prevention[35]

  • Postexposure prophylaxis:
    • MMR vaccine within 72h.
    • Immune globulin within 6 days for infants, pregnant women, immunocompromised.
  • Diagnostic confirmation: IgM serology, RT-PCR, emerging rapid tests.

Tertiary Prevention

  • Supportive care: hydration, fever control, treat bacterial complications.
  • Vitamin A supplementation (all cases; reduces mortality/complications).
  • Manage complications: pneumonia, otitis media, encephalitis.

Quaternary Prevention

  • Avoid misuse: vitamin A overdosing, unnecessary antivirals.
  • Counter misinformation: vaccine safety, vitamin A not preventive.

Future/Investigational

  • Microneedle vaccine patches.
  • Early infant vaccination.
  • Pneumococcal booster post-measles (to counter immune amnesia).
  • Trained immunity benefits from MMR.

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 (No date) Iris home. Available at: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/365133 (Accessed: 17 September 2025).
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 World Health Organization. Immunization data: provisional measles and rubella data. 2024 (https://immunizationdata .who.int/global?topic=Provisional
  3. Polack, F.P. (2007) ‘Atypical measles and enhanced respiratory syncytial virus disease (ERD) made simple’, Pediatric Research, 62(1), pp. 111–115. doi:10.1203/pdr.0b013e3180686ce0.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Do, L.A. and Mulholland, K. (2025) ‘Measles 2025’, New England Journal of Medicine [Preprint]. doi:10.1056/nejmra2504516.
  5. MMR vaccine vis (no date) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/current-vis/mmr.html (Accessed: 17 September 2025).
  6. 6.0 6.1 Patel, M.K. et al. (2020) ‘Progress toward regional measles elimination — worldwide, 2000–2019’, MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69(45), pp. 1700–1705. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a6.
  7. Hotez, P.J., Nuzhath, T. and Colwell, B. (2020) ‘Combating vaccine hesitancy and other 21st century social determinants in the global fight against measles’, Current Opinion in Virology, 41, pp. 1–7. doi:10.1016/j.coviro.2020.01.001.
  8. Dorig RE, Marcil A, Chopra A, Richardson CD. The human CD46 molecule is a receptor for measles virus (Edmonston strain). Cell. 1993;75(2):295-305
  9. Naniche D, Varior-Krishnan G, Cervoni F, Wild TF, Rossi B, Rabourdin-Combe C, et al. Human membrane cofactor protein (CD46) acts as a cellular receptor for measles virus. J Virol. 1993;67(10):6025-32
  10. Tatsuo H, Ono N, Tanaka K, Yanagi Y. SLAM (CDw150) is a cellular receptor for measles virus. Nature. 2000;406(6798):893-7
  11. Muhlebach MD, Mateo M, Sinn PL, Prufer S, Uhlig KM, Leonard VH, et al. Adherens junction protein nectin-4 is the epithelial receptor for measles virus. Nature. 2011;480(7378):530-3
  12. World Health Organization. Immunization data: provisional measles and rubella data. 2024 (https://immunizationdata.who.int/global?topic=Provisional-measles-and-rubella-data&location=)
  13. Mina MJ, Kula T, Leng Y, Li M, de Vries RD, Knip M, et al. Measles virus infection diminishes preexisting antibodies that offer protection from other pathogens. Science. 2019;366(6465):599- 606
  14. Petrova VN, Sawatsky B, Han AX, Laksono BM, Walz L, Parker E, et al. Incomplete genetic reconstitution of B cell pools contributes to prolonged immunosuppression after measles. Sci Immunol. 2019;4(41)
  15. Routine MMR vaccination recommendations: For Providers (2021) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/hcp/recommendations.html (Accessed: 17 September 2025).
  16. e Y-L, Zhai X-W, Zhu Y-F, et al. Mea�sles outbreak in pediatric hematology and oncology patients in Shanghai, 2015. Chin Med J (Engl) 2017;130:1320-6
  17. Khalil A, Samara A, Campbell C, Lad�hani SN. Pregnant women and measles: we need to be vigilant during outbreaks. EClinicalMedicine 2024;72:102594
  18. 18.0 18.1 Brown DW, Warrener L, Scobie HM, Donadel M, Waku-Kouomou D, Mulders MN, et al. Rapid diagnostic tests to address challenges for global measles surveillance. Curr Opin Virol. 2020;41:77-84
  19. 19.0 19.1 Warrener L, Andrews N, Koroma H, Alessandrini I, Haque M, Garcia CC, et al. Evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test for measles IgM detection; accuracy and the reliability of visual reading using sera from the measles surveillance programme in Brazil, 2015. Epidemiol Infect. 2023;151:e151.
  20. Larson, H.J., Gakidou, E. and Murray, C.J.L. (2022) ‘The vaccine-hesitant moment’, New England Journal of Medicine, 387(1), pp. 58–65. doi:10.1056/nejmra2106441.
  21. 21.0 21.1 Minta, A.A. et al. (2023) ‘Progress toward measles elimination — worldwide, 2000–2022’, MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 72(46), pp. 1262–1268. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7246a3.
  22. 22.0 22.1 ProMed. Measles — Viet Nam (03): WHO assessment, alert 2025 (https:// promedmail.org/promed-post/?id=8721943)\
  23. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles cases and outbreaks. June 6, 2025 (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/ data-research/index.html)
  24. DeStefano, F. and Shimabukuro, T.T. (2019) ‘The MMR vaccine and autism’, Annual Review of Virology, 6(1), pp. 585–600. doi:10.1146/annurev-virology-092818-015515.
  25. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ACIP recommendations: measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. July 29, 2024 (https://www.cdc.gov/acip -recs/hcp/vaccine-specific/mmr.html)
  26. Guerra, F.M. et al. (2018) ‘Waning of measles maternal antibody in infants in measles elimination settings – a systematic literature review’, Vaccine, 36(10), pp. 1248–1255. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.01.002.
  27. Ferren, M., Horvat, B. and Mathieu, C. (2019) “Measles encephalitis: Towards new therapeutics,” Viruses, 11(11), p. 1017. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/v11111017.
  28. 28.0 28.1 Congera, P. et al. (2020) “Measles in pregnant women: A systematic review of clinical outcomes and a meta-analysis of antibodies seroprevalence,” The Journal of infection, 80(2), pp. 152–160. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2019.12.012.
  29. Bryce, J. et al. (2005) “WHO estimates of the causes of death in children,” Lancet, 365(9465), pp. 1147–1152. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)71877-8.
  30. “WHO GUIDELINES FOR EPIDEMIC PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TO MEASLES OUTBREAKS”.
  31. 31.0 31.1 “CDC Measles”.
  32. CDC (2024) Genetic Analysis of Measles Viruses, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/php/laboratories/genetic-analysis.html (Accessed: September 18, 2025).
  33. Kim, Eun A; Lee, Kyung Soo; Primack, Steven L.; Yoon, Hye Kyung; Byun, Hong Sik; Kim, Tae Sung; Suh, Gee Young; Kwon, O Jung; Han, Joungho (2002). “Viral Pneumonias in Adults: Radiologic and Pathologic Findings1”. RadioGraphics. 22 (suppl_1): S137–S149. doi:10.1148/radiographics.22.suppl_1.g02oc15s137. ISSN 0271-5333.
  34. Moss, William J; Griffin, Diane E (2012). “Measles”. The Lancet. 379 (9811): 153–164. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62352-5. ISSN 0140-6736.
  35. Huiming Y, Chaomin W, Meng M (2005). “Vitamin A for treating measles in children”. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4): CD001479. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001479.pub3. PMID 16235283.

Template:WH Template:WS

index.php?title=Category:Pediatrics index.php?title=Category:Dermatology index.php?title=Category:Viral diseases index.php?title=Category:Mononegavirales index.php?title=Category:Ophthalmology index.php?title=Category:Otolaryngology index.php?title=Category:Pulmonology index.php?title=Category:Disease

test

Historical Perspective

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Joseph Nasr, M.D.[2]; Guillermo Rodriguez Nava, M.D. [3]; Yamuna Kondapally, M.B.B.S[4];

Early descriptions and Discovery

  • Classical descriptions: Reports of measles predate the Common Era; the first scientific description of the disease and its distinction from smallpox is attributed to the Persian physician Ibn Razi (Rhazes) (860-932A.D.) in a book entitled “Smallpox and Measles” (in Arabic: Kitab fi al-jadari wa-al-hasbah).
  • 18th-19th century milestones: A Scottish physician, Francis Home, demonstrated in 1757 that measles was caused by an infectious agent present in the blood of patients.
  • Virus isolation (modern era): In 1954, the measles virus was isolated from an 11-year-old boy from the US, David Edmonston, and adapted and propagated on a chick embryo tissue culture in Boston, Massachusetts, by John F. Enders and Thomas C. Peebles. The Edmonston isolation was the seed for vaccine development[1].

Development of Treatment Strategies

  • Pre-Vaccine Disease Burden (U.S.): Before the measles vaccine, nearly all children contracted the virus by age 15; annually, approximately 549,00 reported cases and 495 deaths; around 48,000 hospitalizations, 7,000 seizures, and about 1,000 permanent disabilities from encephalitis (brain damage or deafness)[2].
  • First U.S. licensure (1963): The Edmonston B live-attenuated vaccine (Rubeovax, Merck) was licensed in 1963; later withdrawn in 1975 due to reactogenicity. It was further attenuated to yield Edmonston-Enders (Moraten) and Edmonston-Zagreb (EZ) strains[1].
  • Inactivated vaccine (1963): Licensed in parallel with Edmonston B, but withdrawn in 1967 due to lack of protection. Recipients often developed atypical measles if exposed to wild-type virus[3].
  • Schwarz strain (1965): Introduced as a further-attenuated vaccine; no longer used in the United States[1].
  • Edmonston-Enders strain (1968): Licensed as a further-attenuated vaccine; caused fewer reactions than Edmonston B[1].
  • Current U.S. use: Only the Edmonston-Enders strain (Moraten) remains in use, incorporated into MMR or MMRV (ProQuad). No single-antigen measles vaccine is available in the U.S[1].
  • Formulation: Vaccines are prepared in chick embryo fibroblast cultures; supplied as freeze-dried powder with stabilizers (human albumin, neomycin, sorbitol, gelatin).
  • Additional strains (Global): The Schwarz strain (derived from Edmonston A; genetically identical to Moraten) is a component of MMR (Priorix®, GSK), licensed in 1997 and used in >100 countries. AIK-C (Japan) is licensed as mono- and MR-combination vaccine in Japan, Vietnam, and Iran[1][4].
  • Non-Edmonston Strains: Leningrad-4, Shanghai-191, Chang-47, CAM-70 have been licensed/used regionally (Russia, China, South Africa)[4].
  • Effectiveness & Safety (summary): Dose-1 Effectiveness ≈ 84% (12mo) and 92.5% (≥ 12mo); ~94% after two doses; serious adverse events are rare across licensed strains[5].

U.S. Elimination, Importations, and Regional Certification

  • U.S. elimination (2000): Endemic transmission ceased in 2000 (definition: ≥12 months without endemic transmission with robust surveillance)[6].
  • Americas certification: Region of the Americas declared measles-free on September 27, 2016.
  • Ongoing importations: Despite elimination, U.S. cases continue annually due to importations and spread in under-vaccinated communities; frequent sources have included England, France, Germany, India, Philippines, among others[7][8][9][10].
  • Current resurgence: By May 30, 2025, there were 1,088 confirmed U.S. cases and 3 deaths; ~96% were unvaccinated/unknown vaccination status, and 12% were hospitalized. If transmission continues for >12 months, the U.S. will lose its measles elimination status[10].

Scientific Inflection Points (receptors, immune amnesia)

  • Receptor biology: Measles virus recognizes CD46, SLAM/CD150, and nectin-4. Wild-type virus primarily uses CD150 (lymphocytes) and nectin-4 (epithelial cells), while vaccine strains use CD46. Discovery of SLAM and nectin-4 in 2010–2011 clarified lymphocyte tropism and epithelial exit/transmission[11][12][13][14].
  • Mechanism of immune suppression: Wild-type MeV preferentially infects CD150^hi memory T cells and also infects naïve and memory B cells, leading to depletion and reshaping of preexisting immunity. This immune amnesia diminishes antibody repertoires and alters B-cell diversity, persisting for 5–12 months post-infection[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22].
  • Loss of prior vaccine protection: Children with prior measles may lose protective antibody levels to other vaccines, e.g., tetanus, highlighting the broad impact of immune amnesia[23].
  • Innate immune amnesia: MeV also induces apoptosis in MAIT cells, weakening first-line mucosal defenses and further increasing vulnerability to secondary infections[24].
  • Contrast with vaccine strains: Attenuated measles vaccines do not cause immune amnesia. Instead, they induce trained immunity, with epigenetic reprogramming of γδ T cells that enhances non-specific defenses against other pathogens[25][26][27][28][29][30].

Antigenic Stability, Genotypes, and Why the Classic Vaccines Still Work

  • Genotype history: WHO has defined 24 genotypes (based on the 450-bp N-gene window). Since 2018, global circulation has been limited to B3, D4, D8, and H1. As of 2024–2025, B3, D8, and H1 are the dominant strains in ongoing outbreaks[31].
  • Surface glycoproteins: The hemagglutinin (H) and fusion (F) proteins—major neutralizing antibody targets—have remained antigenically stable for decades. A key immunodominant epitope on H overlaps the SLAM-binding domain, which means mutations that escape neutralization often also reduce receptor binding and viral fitness[32][33][34].
  • Vaccine cross-protection: Current vaccines, all derived from genotype A (Edmonston lineage), still provide robust protection against these circulating wild-type genotypes[33].
  • Monoclonal antibody monitoring: A D4.2 sub genotype has shown reduced binding by some neutralizing monoclonals at major H epitopes, but clinical vaccine escape has not been documented. Ongoing sequencing is monitoring such variants[35].
  • Genomic surveillance advances: Low-cost Nanopore full-genome sequencing is increasingly used to track transmission chains and to watch for potential vaccine-escape variants[36].

Resurgence Era (2019 → 2024–2025)

  • 2019 global surge: Reported measles cases increased from 132,490 (2016) to 869,770 (2019), fueled by major outbreaks in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar, Samoa, Ukraine, and Brazil. NEJM highlights vaccine hesitancy as a central driver, alongside inequitable access[7].
  • Pandemic shock: COVID-19 pandemic disruptions pushed global MCV1 coverage down to 81%—the lowest since 2008. By 2022–2023, coverage had only partially recovered to 83%, leaving large immunity gaps[37].
  • 2024–2025 outbreaks:
    • Global scale: In 2024, WHO confirmed 395,521 laboratory-confirmed cases worldwide, and another 16,147 in the first two months of 2025. Over half of reported patients were hospitalized, indicating an underestimation of the true burden[38].
    • Europe: Recorded its highest measles case count in more than 25 years in 2024, accounting for ~20% of global cases[38].
    • United States: As of May 30, 2025, there were 1,088 confirmed cases and 3 deaths; ~96% were in unvaccinated or unknown-status individuals, and 12% required hospitalization. NEJM warns that if continuous transmission persists for >12 months, the U.S. will lose its elimination status[2].
  • Policy headwinds: NEJM notes that U.S. withdrawal of financial support from WHO (≈19% of its budget) and Gavi (≈13%) threatens global measles control and domestic health security.

Policy Context

  • 1987 – Vitamin A policy: WHO/UNICEF issued a landmark statement on vitamin A supplementation for measles, based on trial evidence that supplementation reduced complications and mortality[39].
  • 1998 – Measles Partnership: The Measles Partnership (later Measles & Rubella Initiative) was established by WHO, UNICEF, CDC, UN Foundation, and the American Red Cross to accelerate global control[6].
  • 2000 – Two-dose policy: WHO adopted the two-dose measles vaccination schedule for all children, to achieve and sustain elimination[6].
  • 2012 – Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP): Set measles elimination goals across all WHO regions by 2020 (not achieved)[6].
  • 2017 – WHO “Immunization Agenda 2030” (IA2030): Established elimination targets through 2030[6].
  • 2025 – Policy headwinds: According to the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), U.S. withdrawal of support from WHO (≈19% of its budget) and Gavi (≈13%), which undermines global measles control capacity and threatens U.S. health security[40].

Impact on Cultural History

  • Pre-vaccine burden (United States)[41]:
    • Before the introduction of a live measles vaccine in 1963, nearly all children contracted measles by age 15.
    • Each year: an average of 549,000 reported cases and 495 deaths, though the true annual burden was closer to 3–4 million infections.
    • Of reported cases, ~48,000 were hospitalized, 7,000 experienced seizures, and ~1,000 developed chronic disability from measles encephalitis.
  • Dramatic reduction after vaccination[6]:
    • Vaccine introduction and scale-up led to a >99% decline in U.S. measles cases compared with the pre-vaccine era.
    • Measles was declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000, defined as the absence of endemic transmission for ≥12 months with high-quality surveillance.
  • Global control milestones:
    • The WHO Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) adopted measles vaccine in 1977, marking it as a global public health priority.
    • The Region of the Americas was declared measles-free by PAHO/WHO on September 27, 2016.
  • Persistent global burden:
    • Measles remains a leading cause of vaccine-preventable childhood death globally despite progress[6].
    • In 2024, WHO confirmed 395,521 laboratory-confirmed cases worldwide, with another 16,147 cases in the first 2 months of 2025[38].
    • Over 50% of reported patients were hospitalized, meaning the true burden is substantially undercounted.
  • Importations and outbreaks in the U.S.[42][43]:
    • Between 2000–2013, the U.S. recorded 37–220 cases annually, largely due to importations from measles-endemic regions and spread in under-vaccinated communities.
    • In recent years, importations often originated from England, France, Germany, India, and the Philippines.
    • By May 30, 2025, the U.S. had 1,088 confirmed cases and 3 deaths, with 96% of cases in un/unknown-vaccinated individuals and 12% hospitalized. If transmission persists beyond 12 months, the U.S. will lose its elimination status.

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Orenstein, W.A. et al. (2023) Plotkin’s vaccines. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier – Health Sciences Division.
  2. 2.0 2.1 CDC (2025) Measles Cases and Outbreaks, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/data-research/index.html (Accessed: September 19, 2025).
  3. Polack, F.P. (2007) “Atypical measles and enhanced respiratory syncytial virus disease (ERD) made simple,” Pediatric research, 62(1), pp. 111–115. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1203/PDR.0b013e3180686ce0.
  4. 4.0 4.1 WHO Immunization Data portal – All Data (no date) Immunization Data. Available at: https://immunizationdata.who.int/global (Accessed: September 19, 2025).
  5. Uzicanin, A. and Zimmerman, L. (2011) “Field effectiveness of live attenuated measles-containing vaccines: a review of published literature,” The journal of infectious diseases, 204 Suppl 1(suppl_1), pp. S133-48. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jir102.
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 Do, L.A.H. and Mulholland, K. (2025) “Measles 2025,” The New England journal of medicine [Preprint], (NEJMra2504516). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2504516.
  7. 7.0 7.1 Patel, M.K. et al. (2020) “Progress toward regional measles elimination – worldwide, 2000-2019,” MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 69(45), pp. 1700–1705. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a6.
  8. Hotez, P.J., Nuzhath, T. and Colwell, B. (2020) “Combating vaccine hesitancy and other 21st century social determinants in the global fight against measles,” Current opinion in virology, 41, pp. 1–7. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coviro.2020.01.001.
  9. Rader, B. et al. (2025) “Revising US MMR vaccine recommendations amid changing domestic risks,” JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association, 333(14), pp. 1201–1202. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.3867.
  10. 10.0 10.1 CDC (2025) Measles Cases and Outbreaks, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/data-research/index.html (Accessed: September 19, 2025).
  11. Dörig, R.E. et al. (1993) “The human CD46 molecule is a receptor for measles virus (Edmonston strain),” Cell, 75(2), pp. 295–305. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(93)80071-l.
  12. Naniche, D. et al. (1993) “Human membrane cofactor protein (CD46) acts as a cellular receptor for measles virus,” Journal of virology, 67(10), pp. 6025–6032. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.67.10.6025-6032.1993.
  13. Tatsuo, H. et al. (2000) “SLAM (CDw150) is a cellular receptor for measles virus,” Nature, 406(6798), pp. 893–897. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/35022579.
  14. Mühlebach et al. (2011) “Adherens junction protein nectin-4 is the epithelial receptor for measles virus,” Nature, 480(7378). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10639.
  15. Condack C, Grivel JC, Devaux P, Margolis L, Cattaneo R. Measles virus vaccine attenuation: suboptimal infection of lymphatic tissue and tropism alteration. J Infect Dis. 2007;196(4):541-9
  16. de Vries RD, McQuaid S, van Amerongen G, Yuksel S, Verburgh RJ, Osterhaus AD, et al. Measles immune suppression: lessons from the macaque model. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8(8):e1002885
  17. Laksono BM, Grosserichter-Wagener C, de Vries RD, Langeveld SAG, Brem MD, van Dongen JJM, et al. In Vitro Measles Virus Infection of Human Lymphocyte Subsets Demonstrates High Susceptibility and Permissiveness of both Naive and Memory B Cells. J Virol. 2018;92(8).
  18. Laksono BM, de Vries RD, Verburgh RJ, Visser EG, de Jong A, Fraaij PLA, et al. Studies into the mechanism of measles-associated immune suppression during a measles outbreak in the Netherlands. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):4944.
  19. Mina MJ, Kula T, Leng Y, Li M, de Vries RD, Knip M, et al. Measles virus infection diminishes preexisting antibodies that offer protection from other pathogens. Science. 2019;366(6465):599- 606.
  20. Petrova VN, Sawatsky B, Han AX, Laksono BM, Walz L, Parker E, et al. Incomplete genetic reconstitution of B cell pools contributes to prolonged immunosuppression after measles. Sci Immunol. 2019;4(41).
  21. Mina MJ, Metcalf CJ, de Swart RL, Osterhaus AD, Grenfell BT. Long-term measles-induced immunomodulation increases overall childhood infectious disease mortality. Science. 2015;348(6235):694-9.
  22. Buhl D, Staudacher O, Santibanez S, Rossi R, Girschick H, Stephan V, et al. Specifically Increased Rate of Infections in Children Post Measles in a High Resource Setting. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:896086.
  23. Ashbaugh HR, Cherry JD, Hoff NA, Doshi RH, Mukadi P, Higgins SG, et al. Reported History of Measles and Long-term Impact on Tetanus Antibody Detected in Children 9-59 Months of Age and Receiving 3 Doses of Tetanus Vaccine in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2023;42(4):338-45
  24. Haeryfar SMM. On invariant T cells and measles: A theory of “innate immune amnesia”. PLoS Pathog. 2020;16(12):e1009071.
  25. Mina MJ. Measles, immune suppression and vaccination: direct and indirect nonspecific vaccine benefits. J Infect. 2017;74 Suppl 1:S10-S7.
  26. Sorup S, Benn CS, Stensballe LG, Aaby P, Ravn H. Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and respiratory syncytial virus-associated hospital contact. Vaccine. 2015;33(1):237-45.
  27. Aaby P, Martins CL, Garly ML, Bale C, Andersen A, Rodrigues A, et al. Non-specific effects of standard measles vaccine at 4.5 and 9 months of age on childhood mortality: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010;341:c6495.
  28. Arts RJW, Carvalho A, La Rocca C, Palma C, Rodrigues F, Silvestre R, et al. Immunometabolic Pathways in BCG-Induced Trained Immunity. Cell Rep. 2016;17(10):2562-71.
  29. Arts RJW, Moorlag S, Novakovic B, Li Y, Wang SY, Oosting M, et al. BCG Vaccination Protects against Experimental Viral Infection in Humans through the Induction of Cytokines Associated with Trained Immunity. Cell Host Microbe. 2018;23(1):89-100 e5.
  30. Roring RJ, Debisarun PA, Botey-Bataller J, Suen TK, Bulut O, Kilic G, et al. MMR vaccination induces trained immunity via functional and metabolic reprogramming of gammadelta T cells. J Clin Invest. 2024;134(7).
  31. CDC. Genetic Analysis of Measles Viruses 2025 [updated 7 June 2024. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/php/laboratories/genetic-analysis.html].
  32. Beaty SM, Lee B. Constraints on the Genetic and Antigenic Variability of Measles Virus. Viruses. 2016;8(4):109.
  33. 33.0 33.1 Munoz-Alia MA, Nace RA, Zhang L, Russell SJ. Serotypic evolution of measles virus is constrained by multiple co-dominant B cell epitopes on its surface glycoproteins. Cell Rep Med. 2021;2(4):100225.
  34. Tahara M, Ohno S, Sakai K, Ito Y, Fukuhara H, Komase K, et al. The receptor-binding site of the measles virus hemagglutinin protein itself constitutes a conserved neutralizing epitope. J Virol. 2013;87(6):3583-6.
  35. Munoz-Alia MA, Muller CP, Russell SJ. Antigenic Drift Defines a New D4 Subgenotype of Measles Virus. J Virol. 2017;91(11).
  36. Namuwulya P, Bukenya H, Tushabe P, Tweyongyere R, Bwogi J, Cotten M, et al. Near�Complete Genome Sequences of Measles Virus Strains from 10 Years of Uganda Country-wide Surveillance. Microbiol Resour Announc. 2022;11(8):e0060622.
  37. Minta, A.A. et al. (2024) “Progress toward measles elimination – worldwide, 2000-2023,” MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 73(45), pp. 1036–1042. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7345a4.
  38. 38.0 38.1 38.2 Provisional monthly measles and rubella data (no date) Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/teams/immunization-vaccines-and-biologicals/immunization-analysis-and-insights/surveillance/monitoring/provisional-monthly-measles-and-rubella-data (Accessed: September 19, 2025).
  39. World Health Organization (1987) “EXPANDED PROGRAMME ON IMMUNIZATION PROGRAMME FOR THE PREVENTION OF BLINDNESS NUTRITION : Joint WHO/UNICEF Statement on Vitamin A for measles = PROGRAMME ÉLARGI DE VACCINATION PROGRAMME DE PRÉVENTION DE LA CÉCITÉ NUTRITION : Déclaration conjointe OMS/FISE sur la vitamine A pour la rougeole,” Weekly Epidemiological Record = Relevé épidémiologique hebdomadaire, 62(19), pp. 133–134. Available at: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/226256 (Accessed: September 19, 2025).
  40. Bendavid, E. and Bhattacharya, J. (2014) “The relationship of health aid to population health improvements,” JAMA internal medicine, 174(6), pp. 881–887. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.292.
  41. CDC (2024) Chapter 13: Measles, Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/pinkbook/hcp/table-of-contents/chapter-13-measles.html (Accessed: September 19, 2025).
  42. van den Hof, S. et al. (2001) “Measles outbreak in a community with very low vaccine coverage, the Netherlands,” Emerging infectious diseases, 7(3 Suppl), pp. 593–597. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0707.010743.
  43. Woudenberg, T. et al. (2017) “Large measles epidemic in the Netherlands, May 2013 to March 2014: changing epidemiology,” Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles [Euro surveillance : European communicable disease bulletin], 22(3). Available at: https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.3.30443.

Template:WH Template:WS

index.php?title=Category:Needs content index.php?title=Category:Pediatrics index.php?title=Category:Dermatology index.php?title=Category:Viral diseases index.php?title=Category:Mononegavirales index.php?title=Category:Ophthalmology index.php?title=Category:Otolaryngology index.php?title=Category:Pulmonology index.php?title=Category:Disease

Pathophysiology

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Joseph Nasr, M.D.[2]; Guillermo Rodriguez Nava, M.D. [3]

Overview

  • Agent. Measles virus (MeV) is a nonsegmented, negative-sense RNA virus (family Paramyxoviridae, genus Morbillivirus). Primary entry is through the respiratory epithelium of the nasopharynx; transmission is via respiratory secretions/aerosolized droplets.
  • Systemic illness. Measles is a systemic infection, affecting skin, eyes, gut, and respiratory tract (complications in ~30% within ≈1 month)[1].

Pathogenesis

1) Entry & early replication → lymphoid seeding

  • Portal of entry & local replication. Initial MeV replication occurs in the nasopharyngeal epithelium and regional lymph nodes, then spreads hematogenously as primary viremia (≈day 2–3) and secondary viremia (≈day 5–7) with dissemination to multiple organs.
  • Systemic character emphasized in NEJM-Main and visualized in Figure 1D (timeline overlays): incubation, contagious window (Day −4 to Day +4), viremia, and immunosuppression period.

2) Cellular receptors & tissue tropism

  • Receptors. MeV recognizes CD46, SLAM/CD150, and nectin-4. Wild-type MeV (wt-MeV) primarily uses CD150 on lymphocytes and nectin-4 on epithelium; vaccine strains preferentially use CD46[2][3][4][5]. • CD46 identified as a measles receptor (Edmonston/vaccine lineage)[2][3]. • SLAM/CD150 identified as the lymphocyte receptor; nectin-4 as the epithelial receptor (2010–2011)[4][5].
  • Attenuation and tropism shift. Vaccine attenuation is associated with suboptimal infection of lymphatic tissue and altered lymphotropism[6].

3) Preferential lymphocyte targeting & the immune-amnesia cascade

  • Target cells. wt-MeV preferentially targets CD150^hi memory T cells; both naïve and memory B cells are highly susceptible/permissive in vitro; these patterns were first delineated in patients during outbreaks[6][7][8][9].
  • Immune amnesia (adaptive). Acute measles diminishes preexisting antibody repertoires and alters both naïve and memory B-cell diversity, with effects persisting ≈5 months to ~1 year post-infection; this mechanistically explains the elevated risk of non-measles infections after recovery[10][11][12][13].
  • Loss of prior vaccine protection. In the DRC, children with a history of measles had sub-protective tetanus antibody levels despite prior 3-dose vaccination[14].
  • Duration & clinical correlation (NEJM-Main). The main article’s key points explicitly note immune amnesia up to ~1 year with increased susceptibility to severe secondary infections[1].

4) Innate compartment: MAIT cells and trained immunity

  • Innate “immune amnesia.” Hypothesized mechanism: MeV programs mucosa-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells for apoptotic death, weakening first-line mucosal defenses (notably in respiratory/gut mucosa where most secondary infections arise)[15].
  • Vaccines do not cause amnesia. Measles vaccine strains do not cause adaptive or innate immune amnesia; instead, measles-containing vaccines have non-specific effects (NSEs) that reduce morbidity/mortality from other infections, plausibly via trained immunity (epigenetic reprogramming of innate cells)[16][17][18][19][20].
  • Direct RCT evidence (MMR). An RCT showed MMR induces long-term transcriptional/functional reprogramming of γδ T cells, consistent with trained immunity and potential heterologous protection[21][22].

5) Clinical timeline integration (for teaching/figures)

  • Incubation: 10–14 days (range 7–23 days) to prodrome/rash. Contagiousness: approx. Day −4 to Day +4 relative to rash onset[1].

Transmission — in depth

  • Mode. Highly contagious airborne spread via respiratory secretions/aerosol droplets from the nose/throat of infected persons; virus is deposited onto mucosae or hands/surfaces and then inoculates the respiratory tract.
  • Environmental stability. MeV remains infectious on surfaces for up to ~2 hours.
  • Secondary attack rate. In households, ~90% of susceptible close contacts become infected.
  • Contagious window. Infectiousness spans ≈4 days before to ≈4 days after rash[1].
  • Incubation. Typically 10–14 days (range 7–23 days) to prodrome; prodrome (fever + “3 Cs”) precedes rash[1].
  • Reservoir. Humans are the only known natural host (several non-human primates are susceptible experimentally).
  • Precautions. Airborne precautions are indicated for suspected/confirmed measles.

Virulence / Fitness Factors — in depth

A) Receptor–tropism–transmission axis

  • CD150/SLAM (lymphocytes) → deep lymphoid replication and immune amnesia; nectin-4 (epithelial exit) → efficient respiratory shedding and transmission; CD46 usage by vaccine strains correlates with attenuation[4][5][6].

B) Antigenic stability & cross-protection

  • Single serotype despite genomic diversity. The H (hemagglutinin) and F (fusion) glycoproteins — principal neutralizing-antibody targets — have retained antigenic structure for decades; H-specific antibodies dominate neutralization[23][24].
  • Why drift is constrained. A conserved immunodominant H epitope overlaps the SLAM-binding site; escape mutations impair receptor binding/fitness, limiting antigenic drift[24][25].
  • Vaccine breadth. All currently used vaccines derive from genotype A (Edmonston lineage) and remain protective against circulating B3, D8, H1 genotypes in 2024–2025[26][23][24].

C) Genotypes & surveillance (implications for virulence/escape)

  • Global genotypes. 24 genotypes defined by the 450-bp N-gene window; since 2018: B3, D4, D8, H1 predominate; B3/D8/H1 dominate 2024–2025 outbreaks[26].
  • Watch item — D4.2. Sub-genotype D4.2 (Europe, 2008–2016) showed reduced binding to several anti-H monoclonals at major epitopesmonitor closely (no clinical vaccine escape shown)[27].
  • Whole-genome resolution. Nanopore full-genome sequencing provides low-cost, higher-resolution transmission-chain tracing and variant surveillance[28].

Advanced Pathogenesis Topics (Mechanistic)

Interferon (IFN) antagonism by P/V/C proteins

  • V→JAK/STAT axis. The MeV V protein binds STAT1/STAT2/STAT3 and IRF9 and blocks IFN-α/β/γ signaling by preventing IFN-triggered STAT nuclear accumulation and downstream transcriptional responses[29].
  • STAT2 is the primary type-I IFN target. Genetic and biochemical data identify STAT2 as the dominant V-protein target for suppression of IFN-α/β signaling[30].
  • V→RLR axis (MDA5/LGP2). The V protein’s C-terminal domain binds the RIG-I-like helicases MDA5 and LGP2 and inhibits their ATPase activities, dampening cytosolic RNA sensing; critical residues for LGP2 binding are mapped (e.g., Arg455 in MeV-V)[31][32].
  • V→PP1 phosphatases (control of RLR licensing). MeV escapes MDA5-dependent detection by antagonizing PP1α/PP1γ, the phosphatases that dephosphorylate/activate RIG-I and MDA5; this is a second, host-directed arm of V-mediated innate immune evasion[33].
  • C protein (additional layers). The C protein suppresses IFN-β transcription in the nucleus and modulates polymerase/replication dynamics, providing a complementary brake on antiviral signaling[34].
  • DC-SIGN “outside-in” synergy. On dendritic cells (DCs), MeV engagement of DC-SIGN initiates a Raf-1 → PP1-inhibition cascade that keeps RIG-I/MDA5 phosphorylated (inactive), functionally converging with V-mediated PP1 antagonism to blunt type-I IFN[35].

Early in vivo targets and dissemination: dendritic cells (DCs) & alveolar macrophages (AMs)

  • Earliest targets after aerosol infection. In macaques infected by aerosol, alveolar macrophages and subepithelial DCs are productively infected in the airway within 2–5 days, followed by spread to CD150⁺ lymphocytes and lymphoid tissues[36][37].
  • DC-mediated transmission to T cells. DC-SIGN on DCs captures MeV and enables trans-infection to T lymphocytes; productive DC infection itself requires CD150 (SLAM). This establishes a division of labor between an attachment (DC-SIGN) and an entry receptor (CD150) on DCs and accelerates hematopoietic dissemination[38][39].
  • Innate silencing at the port of entry. The same DC-SIGN signaling program inhibits PP1, preventing dephosphorylation (activation) of RIG-I/MDA5 and suppressing type-I IFN during the very first immune synapses in airway DCs[35].

H–F fusion complex, syncytia, and giant-cell formation

  • Receptor engagement. MeV H (hemagglutinin) binds CD150/SLAM on lymphocytes and nectin-4 on epithelial cells; high-resolution structures of H–SLAM explain immune-cell tropism, and nectin-4 is the epithelial exit receptor supporting basolateral infection and lateral spread[40][5].
  • Triggering F. Receptor binding to one H dimer within the tetrameric H “dimer-of-dimers” is sufficient to trigger F to refold from prefusion to postfusion, driving membrane merger[41].
  • Fusion machinery & inhibition. Prefusion F structures (± fusion-inhibitor peptide FIP or small molecule AS-48) define druggable states and reveal how hyperfusogenic substitutions destabilize F and raise fusion propensity[42].
  • Pathology link. H–F-driven cell–cell fusion underlies multinucleated giant cells (syncytia) observed in lung/lymphoid tissues; fusion efficiency correlates with cytopathicity and tissue damage in morbillivirus infections[43].

Encephalitis and SSPE (persistence mechanisms)

  • Conceptual framework. SSPE is a fatal, chronic brain infection years after measles, characterized by defective but persistent MeV with biased hypermutations (U→C/A→G) that disrupt assembly while preserving cell-to-cell spread[44].
  • M-gene hypermutation & assembly defects. SSPE strains often harbor hypermutated M genes that decouple nucleocapsid and glycoprotein trafficking, reduce budding, and favor intracellular nucleocapsid accumulation—compatible with persistence without robust virion release[45][46].
  • Neuronal spread & hyperfusogenic F. Hyperfusogenic F variants promote neuron-to-neuron spread with limited syncytium formation, explaining neuropathogenesis despite poor particle production; saturating mutagenesis maps F residues that confer CNS fitness[47].
  • Within-brain evolution. High-depth sequencing across multiple brain regions from SSPE autopsy demonstrates spatially structured viral evolution and support for collective infectious units during CNS colonization[48].


index.php?title=Category:Pediatrics index.php?title=Category:Dermatology index.php?title=Category:Viral diseases index.php?title=Category:Mononegavirales index.php?title=Category:Ophthalmology index.php?title=Category:Otolaryngology index.php?title=Category:Pulmonology index.php?title=Category:Disease

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Do, L.A.H. and Mulholland, K. (2025) “Measles 2025,” The New England journal of medicine [Preprint], (NEJMra2504516). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2504516.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Dörig, R.E. et al. (1993) “The human CD46 molecule is a receptor for measles virus (Edmonston strain),” Cell, 75(2), pp. 295–305. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(93)80071-l.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Naniche, D. et al. (1993) “Human membrane cofactor protein (CD46) acts as a cellular receptor for measles virus,” Journal of virology, 67(10), pp. 6025–6032. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.67.10.6025-6032.1993.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Tatsuo, H. et al. (2000) “SLAM (CDw150) is a cellular receptor for measles virus,” Nature, 406(6798), pp. 893–897. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/35022579.
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Mühlebach et al. (2011) “Adherens junction protein nectin-4 is the epithelial receptor for measles virus,” Nature, 480(7378). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10639.
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 Condack, C. et al. (2007) “Measles virus vaccine attenuation: suboptimal infection of lymphatic tissue and tropism alteration,” The journal of infectious diseases, 196(4), pp. 541–549. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1086/519689.
  7. de Vries, R.D. et al. (2012) “Measles immune suppression: lessons from the macaque model,” PLoS pathogens, 8(8), p. e1002885. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1002885.
  8. Laksono, B.M. et al. (2018) “In Vitro Measles Virus Infection of Human Lymphocyte Subsets Demonstrates High Susceptibility and Permissiveness of both Naive and Memory B Cells,” Journal of virology, 92(8). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00131-18.
  9. Laksono, B.M. et al. (2018) “Studies into the mechanism of measles-associated immune suppression during a measles outbreak in the Netherlands,” Nature communications, 9(1), p. 4944. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07515-0.
  10. Mina, M.J. et al. (2019) “Measles virus infection diminishes preexisting antibodies that offer protection from other pathogens,” Science (New York, N.Y.), 366(6465), pp. 599–606. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay6485.
  11. Petrova, V.N. et al. (2019) “Incomplete genetic reconstitution of B cell pools contributes to prolonged immunosuppression after measles,” Science immunology, 4(41), p. eaay6125. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.aay6125.
  12. Mina, M.J. et al. (2015) “Long-term measles-induced immunomodulation increases overall childhood infectious disease mortality,” Science (New York, N.Y.), 348(6235), pp. 694–699. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa3662.
  13. Buhl D, Staudacher O, Santibanez S, Rossi R, Girschick H, Stephan V, et al. Specifically Increased Rate of Infections in Children Post Measles in a High Resource Setting. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:896086.
  14. Ashbaugh, H.R. et al. (2023) “Reported history of measles and long-term impact on tetanus antibody detected in children 9-59 months of age and receiving 3 doses of tetanus vaccine in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,” The pediatric infectious disease journal, 42(4), pp. 338–345. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1097/INF.0000000000003840.
  15. Haeryfar, S.M.M. (2020) “On invariant T cells and measles: A theory of ‘innate immune amnesia,’” PLoS pathogens, 16(12), p. e1009071. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1009071.
  16. Mina, M.J. (2017) “Measles, immune suppression and vaccination: direct and indirect nonspecific vaccine benefits,” The Journal of infection, 74 Suppl 1, pp. S10–S17. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-4453(17)30185-8.
  17. Sørup, S. et al. (2015) “Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and respiratory syncytial virus-associated hospital contact,” Vaccine, 33(1), pp. 237–245. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.07.110.
  18. Aaby, P. et al. (2010) “Non-specific effects of standard measles vaccine at 4.5 and 9 months of age on childhood mortality: randomised controlled trial,” BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 341(v30 2), p. c6495. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c6495.
  19. Arts, R.J.W. et al. (2016) “Immunometabolic pathways in BCG-induced trained immunity,” Cell reports, 17(10), pp. 2562–2571. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.11.011.
  20. Arts, R.J.W. et al. (2018) “BCG vaccination protects against experimental viral infection in humans through the induction of cytokines associated with trained immunity,” Cell host & microbe, 23(1), pp. 89-100.e5. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2017.12.010.
  21. Röring, R.J. et al. (2024) “MMR vaccination induces trained immunity via functional and metabolic reprogramming of γδ T cells,” The journal of clinical investigation, 134(7). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI170848.
  22. Do LAH, Toh ZQ, Licciardi PV, Mulholland EK. Can early measles vaccination control both measles and respiratory syncytial virus infections? Lancet Glob Health. 2022;10(2):e288-e92.
  23. 23.0 23.1 Beaty, S.M. and Lee, B. (2016) “Constraints on the genetic and antigenic variability of measles virus,” Viruses, 8(4), p. 109. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/v8040109.
  24. 24.0 24.1 24.2 Muñoz-Alía, M.Á. et al. (2021) “Serotypic evolution of measles virus is constrained by multiple co-dominant B cell epitopes on its surface glycoproteins,” Cell reports. Medicine, 2(4), p. 100225. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100225.
  25. Tahara, M. et al. (2013) “The receptor-binding site of the measles virus hemagglutinin protein itself constitutes a conserved neutralizing epitope,” Journal of virology, 87(6), pp. 3583–3586. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.03029-12.
  26. 26.0 26.1 Mathis, A.D. et al. (2025) “Measles update – United States, January 1-April 17, 2025,” MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 74(14), pp. 232–238. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7414a1.
  27. Muñoz-Alía, M.Á., Muller, C.P. and Russell, S.J. (2017) “Antigenic drift defines a new D4 subgenotype of measles virus,” Journal of virology, 91(11). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00209-17.
  28. Namuwulya, P. et al. (2022) “Near-complete genome sequences of measles virus strains from 10 years of Uganda country-wide surveillance,” Microbiology resource announcements, 11(8), p. e0060622. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/mra.00606-22.
  29. Palosaari H, Parisien J-P, Rodriguez JJ, Ulane CM, Horvath CM. STAT protein interference and suppression of cytokine signal transduction by measles virus V protein. J Virol. 2003;77(13):7635-7644. doi:10.1128/JVI.77.13.7635-7644.2003.
  30. Ramachandran A, Parisien J-P, et al. STAT2 Is a Primary Target for Measles Virus V Protein–Mediated Type I IFN Inhibition. J Virol. 2008;82: (details in PubMed). doi:10.1128/JVI.00831-08.
  31. Parisien J-P, et al. A shared interface mediates paramyxovirus interference with antiviral RNA helicases MDA5 and LGP2. J Biol Chem/PNAS (as indexed). 2009. PMID:19403670.
  32. Rodriguez KR, et al. Amino Acid Requirements for MDA5 and LGP2 Binding to Paramyxovirus V Proteins. J Virol. 2013;87(14): (PMCID: PMC3571387).
  33. Davis ME, et al. Antagonism of the phosphatase PP1 by the measles virus V protein is a strategy for evading innate immunity. Cell Host & Microbe. 2014;16(1):19-30.
  34. Sparrer KMJ, et al. The measles virus C protein interferes with beta interferon transcription in the nucleus. J Virol. 2012;86(14): (PMCID: PMC3255862).
  35. 35.0 35.1 Mesman AW, et al. Measles virus suppresses RIG-I-like receptor activation in dendritic cells via DC-SIGN–mediated inhibition of PP1 phosphatases. Cell Host & Microbe. 2014;16(1):31-42.
  36. Lemon K, et al. Early target cells of measles virus after aerosol infection of non-human primates. PLoS Pathog. 2011;7(1):e1001263.
  37. de Swart RL, et al. Predominant infection of CD150⁺ lymphocytes and dendritic cells during measles virus infection of macaques. PLoS Pathog. 2007;3(11):e178. (Cited in de Vries 2012 review).
  38. de Witte L, et al. DC-SIGN and CD150 have distinct roles in transmission of measles virus from dendritic cells to T-lymphocytes. PLoS Pathog. 2008;4(4):e1000049.
  39. Koethe S, et al. Measles Virus Transmission from Dendritic Cells to T Cells. J Virol. 2012;86(9): (PDF available).
  40. Hashiguchi T, et al. Structure of the measles virus hemagglutinin bound to its cellular receptor SLAM. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2011;18(2):135-142.
  41. Brindley MA, et al. Triggering the measles virus membrane fusion machinery. PNAS. 2012;109(24):E3018–E3027.
  42. Hashiguchi T, et al. Structures of the prefusion form of measles virus fusion protein in complex with inhibitors. PNAS. 2018;115(10):2496-2501.
  43. Plattet P, Plemper RK. Measles Virus Fusion Protein: Structure, Function and Inhibition. Viruses. 2016;8(4):112.
  44. Griffin DE. Measles virus, immune control, and persistence. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2012;36(3):649-662.
  45. Patterson JB, et al. Evidence that the hypermutated M protein of an SSPE measles virus contributes to chronic progressive CNS disease. J Virol. 2001;75(9): (PMID:11878891).
  46. Baczko K, et al. Clonal expansion of hypermutated measles virus in a brain from a case of subacute sclerosing panencephalitis. J Virol. 1993;67(10): (PMID:8212553).
  47. Ikegame S, et al. Fitness selection of hyperfusogenic measles virus F proteins that enable efficient neuronal spread. PNAS. 2021;118(17):e2026027118.
  48. Yousaf I, et al. Brain tropism acquisition: spatial dynamics and evolution of a measles virus collective infectious unit in SSPE. PLoS Pathog. 2023;19(12):e1011817.
Causes
Measles
Measles virus electron micrograph
Measles virus electron micrograph
Virus classification
Group: Group V ((-)ssRNA)
Order: Mononegavirales
Family: Paramyxoviridae
Subfamily: Paramyxovirinae
Genus: Morbillivirus
Species: Measles virus

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor-In Chief: Joseph Nasr, M.D.[2]

Overview

Measles virus (MeV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense, enveloped RNA virus of the genus Morbillivirus within the family Paramyxoviridae. Humans are the natural hosts of the virus; no animal reservoirs are known to exist.

Measles is highly contagious (R₀ ≈ 12–18) and spreads readily where vaccination coverage has fallen[1].

Persons with measles typically transmit the virus from ~4 days before to ~4 days after rash onset[1].

Microbiology & Clinical Correlates

  • Syndrome. After an incubation of 10–14 days (range 7–23), illness begins with fever and the “3 Cs” (cough, coryza, conjunctivitis); Koplik spots may precede the maculopapular rash by 1–2 days[1].
  • Systemic nature & complications. Because measles is systemic, complications (≈30% of cases) include diarrhea, pneumonia, otitis media, conjunctivitis; pneumonitis/giant-cell pneumonia occur mainly in immunosuppressed persons and young children[2].
  • Encephalitis spectrum. Acute post-infectious encephalitis (days 0–7), measles-inclusion body encephalitis (1–6 months), and SSPE (years later) are rare but serious[3].
  • Immune amnesia (clinical impact). Temporary B- and T-cell memory depletion increases susceptibility to secondary infections for months after recovery[4].


Additional properties: One antigenic type (epidemiologically); 100–200 nm; inactivated by heat, light, acidic pH, ether, trypsin; short environmental survival (<2 h); transmitted via respiratory secretions/aerosols.

Replication cycle

Entry

The measles virus has two envelope glycoproteins on the viral surface – hemagglutinin (H) and membrane fusion protein (F). These proteins are responsible for host cell binding and invasion. Three receptors for the H protein have been identified to date: complement regulatory molecule CD46, the signaling lymphocyte activation molecule (SLAM) and the cell adhesion molecule Nectin-4.[5]

Receptors, tropism, and dissemination[6][7][8][9]

  • Entry receptors (H protein). CD46, SLAM/CD150[10], and nectin-4 are the three recognized receptors; CD150 (immune cells) and nectin-4 (epithelium) were identified in 2010–2011.
  • Wild-type vs vaccine strains. Wild-type MeV primarily uses CD150[11], whereas vaccine strains mainly use CD46 (attenuation-associated shift).
  • Cellular targeting in humans. CD150^hi memory T cells are preferential targets; CD150⁺ memory B cells and naïve B cells are also susceptible[12].
  • Pathogenesis timeline: NEJM’s figure aligns incubation, contagious window (Day −4 to +4), MeV viremia, and immune-cell targets (CD150⁺ lymphocytes).

Replication cycle[1]

  • Entry & fusion. H binds receptor (CD150 or nectin-4), F mediates membrane fusion → nucleocapsid release.
  • Early spread & shedding. After initial respiratory/lymphoid infection, systemic viremia follows; patients are typically infectious Day −4 to +4 around rash appearance[1].

Immune modulation: immune amnesia & trained immunity

  • Immune amnesia. During acute infection and for ≈5–12 months after resolution, measles can cause diminished pre-existing antibody repertoires and alter B-cell diversity, mechanistically explaining elevated post-measles morbidity/mortality from other infections.
  • Vaccine does not cause amnesia; potential trained immunity. The appendix notes that measles vaccine strains do not cause adaptive or innate immune amnesia and summarizes evidence that MMR can induce “trained immunity” (innate immune reprogramming, including γδ T cells).

Evolution

The measles virus evolved from the formerly widespread rinderpest virus, which infects cattle.[13] Sequence analysis has suggested that the two viruses most probably diverged in the 11th and 12th centuries, though the periods as early as the 5th century fall within the 95% confidence interval of these calculations.[13]

Other analysis has suggested that the divergence may be even older because of the technique’s tendency to underestimate ages when strong purifying selection is in action.[14] There is some linguistic evidence for an earlier origin within the seventh century.[15][16] The current epidemic strain evolved at the beginning of the 20th century—most probably between 1908 and 1943.[17]

Genotypes, antigenic stability, and vaccine cross-protection

Virology (brief). Measles virus (MV/MeV) is an enveloped, non-segmented, negative-sense RNA virus (Paramyxoviridae, Morbillivirus). It measures ~100–200 nm; two envelope glycoproteins drive entry: F (fusion) for membrane merger and H (hemagglutinin) for receptor binding. There is functionally one antigenic type in circulation; documented H changes have not translated into loss of vaccine effectiveness. MV is rapidly inactivated by heat, light, acidic pH, ether, and trypsin and survives <2 h in air/on surfaces.


Genotyping framework. For molecular surveillance, 24 MeV genotypes are recognized using the 450-bp N-gene window (“N-450”). Since 2018, genotypes B3, D4, D8, and H1 have been identified in global surveillance, with B3, D8, and H1 dominating 2024–2025 outbreaks[18].

(WHO defines 8 clades (A–H) with numbered subtypes (e.g., A1, D2); the genotyping scheme was introduced in 1998 and extended in 2002–2003; N-450 is the minimum sequence required for genotyping)


Antigenic stability (why vaccines still work). The surface glycoproteins H and F have largely retained their antigenic structure for decades; H-specific antibodies are major contributors to protection. A conserved immunodominant epitope on H overlaps the SLAM-binding site, so escape mutations tend to impair receptor binding/fitness rather than propagate[10][11][12].


Vaccine lineage & breadth. All currently used measles vaccines descend from genotype A (Edmonston lineage) and remain protective against circulating wild-type strains; the main text also reiterates that the vaccine is highly effective against all circulating genotypes[10][11][12].


Watch items (surveillance). Sub-genotype D4.2 has shown reduced binding to several monoclonal antibodies targeting major H epitopes; while clinical vaccine escape has not been shown, NEJM flags this as requiring close monitoring[19].


Elimination status notes. The predominant genotypes differ across regions and depend on whether endemic circulation persists. (indigenous transmission was interrupted in the United States and Australia by 2000 and in the Americas by 2002.)

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Do, L.A.H. and Mulholland, K. (2025) “Measles 2025,” The New England journal of medicine [Preprint], (NEJMra2504516). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2504516.
  2. CDC (2025) Measles Symptoms and Complications, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/signs-symptoms/index.html (Accessed: September 22, 2025).
  3. Ferren, M., Horvat, B. and Mathieu, C. (2019) “Measles encephalitis: Towards new therapeutics,” Viruses, 11(11), p. 1017. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/v11111017.
  4. Mina, M.J. et al. (2015) “Long-term measles-induced immunomodulation increases overall childhood infectious disease mortality,” Science (New York, N.Y.), 348(6235), pp. 694–699. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa3662.
  5. Lu G, Gao GF, Yan J (2013) The receptors and entry of measles virus: a review. Sheng Wu Gong Cheng Xue Bao 29(1):1–9
  6. Dorig RE, Marcil A, Chopra A, Richardson CD. The human CD46 molecule is a receptor for measles virus (Edmonston strain). Cell. 1993;75(2):295-305
  7. Naniche D, Varior-Krishnan G, Cervoni F, Wild TF, Rossi B, Rabourdin-Combe C, et al. Human membrane cofactor protein (CD46) acts as a cellular receptor for measles virus. J Virol. 1993;67(10):6025-32.
  8. Tatsuo H, Ono N, Tanaka K, Yanagi Y. SLAM (CDw150) is a cellular receptor for measles virus. Nature. 2000;406(6798):893-7.
  9. Muhlebach MD, Mateo M, Sinn PL, Prufer S, Uhlig KM, Leonard VH, et al. Adherens junction protein nectin-4 is the epithelial receptor for measles virus. Nature. 2011;480(7378):530-3.
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 Beaty SM, Lee B. Constraints on the Genetic and Antigenic Variability of Measles Virus. Viruses. 2016;8(4):109.
  11. 11.0 11.1 11.2 Munoz-Alia MA, Nace RA, Zhang L, Russell SJ. Serotypic evolution of measles virus is constrained by multiple co-dominant B cell epitopes on its surface glycoproteins. Cell Rep Med. 2021;2(4):100225.
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 Tahara M, Ohno S, Sakai K, Ito Y, Fukuhara H, Komase K, et al. The receptor-binding site of the measles virus hemagglutinin protein itself constitutes a conserved neutralizing epitope. J Virol. 2013;87(6):3583-6.
  13. 13.0 13.1 Furuse Y, Suzuki A, Oshitani H (2010). “Origin of measles virus: divergence from rinderpest virus between the 11th and 12th centuries”. Virol. J. 7: 52. doi:10.1186/1743-422X-7-52. PMC 2838858. PMID 20202190.
  14. Template:Cite doi
  15. Griffin DE (2007). “Measles Virus”. In Martin, Malcolm A.; Knipe, David M.; Fields, Bernard N.; Howley, Peter M.; Griffin, Diane; Lamb, Robert. Fields’ virology (5th ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN 0-7817-6060-7.
  16. McNeil, W. (1976). Plagues and Peoples. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday. ISBN 0-385-11256-4.
  17. Pomeroy LW, Bjørnstad ON, Holmes EC (February 2008). “The evolutionary and epidemiological dynamics of the paramyxoviridae”. J. Mol. Evol. 66 (2): 98–106. doi:10.1007/s00239-007-9040-x. PMC 3334863. PMID 18217182.
  18. CDC (2024) Genetic Analysis of Measles Viruses, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/php/laboratories/genetic-analysis.html (Accessed: September 22, 2025).
  19. Munoz-Alia MA, Muller CP, Russell SJ. Antigenic Drift Defines a New D4 Subgenotype of Measles Virus. J Virol. 2017;91(11).

Template:WH Template:WS

index.php?title=Category:Pediatrics index.php?title=Category:Dermatology index.php?title=Category:Viral diseases index.php?title=Category:Mononegavirales index.php?title=Category:Ophthalmology index.php?title=Category:Otolaryngology index.php?title=Category:Pulmonology index.php?title=Category:Disease

Differentiating Measles from other Diseases

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Guillermo Rodriguez Nava, M.D. [2]; Vidit Bhargava, M.B.B.S [3]

Overview

Measles is a disease characterized by the classical clinical triad of cough, coryza and conjunctivitis. In most cases the presentation is classical and the diagnosis can be sufficiently made clinically. However, in a few cases certain other diagnostic possibilities must be kept in mind. These include other viral exanthams such as erythema infectiosum, other maculopapular rashes etc. Also, in areas where killed vaccines are used, the probability of atypical measles with fever, conjunctivitis, pneumonitis and rash must be kept in mind. It is worthwhile to consider Kawasaki’s disease, rubella, dengue, systemic lupus erythematosus and serum sickness while considering the diagnosis of measles.

Differentiating Measles from other Diseases

The following table summarizes the most commonly confused conditions with measles:

Differential Diagnosis of Measles. Table adapted from CDC Pinkbook.[1]
Disease Agent Typical Season Typical Age Prodrome Fever Duration of the rash (days) Rash Other Signs & Symptoms
Measles Paramyxovirus
Measles virus
Winter – Spring 1 to 20 years 2-4 days of cough, conjunctivitis, and coryza High 5 – 6 Erythematous, irregular size, maculopapular; starts on temples and behind ears; progresses down from face; fades to brownish Koplik’s spots: C blue-white papules (salt grains) on bright red mucosa opposite premolar teeth
Kawasaki disease Unknown Winter – Spring < 5 years 3 days of abrupt fever High; fever of 5 days is a diagnostic criteria 5 – 7 Erythematous, morbilliform, maculopapular or scarlatiniform, central distribution; erythematous, indurated palms and soles Acute: dry, fissured and injected lips, strawberry tongue; irritability; cervical lymphadenopathy; conjunctival injection; peripheral edema; Subacute: finger-tip desquamation; Complications: arthritis, carditis
Roseola Infantum (exanthem subitum) Human herpes virus type 6 Any season 6 months to 2 years None High 1-2; it follows defervescence Discrete erythematous macules, rarely involves face, begins as fever ends Lymphadenopathy, irritability
Rubella Togavirus Spring 7 months to 29 years 0 – 4 days; mild malaise, fever; absent in children Low grade 1 – 3 Discrete, rose-pink, diffuse, maculopapular; progresses downward from face, may change quickly Arthralgia (usually in adults), tender posterior cervical and suboccipital lymphadenopathy, malaise, petechiae on soft palate
Scarlet Fever ß-hemolytic streptococci Winter > 2 years 0 – 6 day, marked Low to high 2 – 7 Scarlet “sunburn” with punctate papules “sandpaper”, circumoral pallor, increased intensity in skin folds, blanches stars face/head, upper trunk and progresses downward Sore throat, exudative tonsillitis, vomiting, abdominal pain, lmphadenopathy, white then red strawberry tongue
Erythema Infectiosum (Fifth Disease) Human parvovirus type B19 Spring 5 – 10 years None, usually in children, may occur in adults None to low-grade 2 – 4 Starts as “slapped cheek”, maculopapular; progresses to reticular (lacy) pattern; can recur with environmental changes such as sunlight exposure Arthralgia/arthritis in adults, adenopathy
Enterovirus Echovirus
Coxsackie virus
Summer – Fall Mainly childhood 0 – 1 day fever and myalias Low to high 1 – 5 Fine, pink, always affects face; variant is Boston exanthem (large ~ 1 cm, discrete maculopapules) Sore throat, headache, malaise, no lymphadenopathy, gastroenteritis
Dengue Fever Flavivirus
Dengue virus types 1 – 4
None High 1 – 5 Generalized maculopapular rash after defervescence; spares palms and soles Headache, myalgia, abdominal pain, pharyngitis, vomiting
Drug induced rash Many Any Any Possible due to underlying illness Possible Varies Typically diffuse but may be concentrated in diaper area, typically no progression, erythema multiform rash can progress over a few days Possibly due to underlying illness or complications
Infectious Mononucleosis Epstein-Barr Virus None 10 – 30 years 2 – 5 days of malaise and fatigue Low to high 2 – 7 Trunk and proximal extremities. Rash common if Ampicillin given Pharyngitis, lymphadenopathy, splenomegaly, malaise
Pharyngoconjunctival Fever Adenovirus types 2, 3, 4, 7, 7a Winter – Spring < 5 years Low to high 3 – 5 Starts on face and spreads down to trunk and extremities Sore throat, conjunctivitis, headache, anorexia

The following table is a list of differential diagnosis oral lesions presenting similar to measles:

Disease Presentation Risk Factors Diagnosis Affected Organ Systems Important features Picture
Coxsackie virus
  • Symptomatic treatment
Hand-foot-and-mouth disease
Chicken pox Chickenpox
Measles Koplick spots (Measles)
Herpangina
  • Attendance at a kindergarten/child care center
  • Contact with herpangina cases
  • Residence in rural areas
  • Overcrowding
  • Poor hygiene
  • Low socioeconomic status
  • Skin
  • Oral Cavity
  • Characteristic enanthem- Punctate macule which evolve over a period of 24 hours to 2-4mm erythematous papules which vesiculate, and then centrally ulcerate.
  • The lesions are usually small in number, and evolve rapidly. The lesions are seen more commonly on the soft palate and uvula. The lesions can also be seen on the tonsils, posterior pharyngeal wall and the buccal mucosa.
Erythema, vesicles and ulcerating lesions in herpangina
Erythema, vesicles and ulcerating lesions in herpangina
Primary herpetic gingivoestomatitis[4]
  • Oral cavity
  • Mucous membranes
  • Ulcers are common on lips, gums, throat, front of tongue, inside of the cheeks and roof of the mouth
  • Treatment is with antiviral agents such as Valacyclovir and Famciclovir

Koplik spots must be differentiated from other diseases causing oral lesions such as leukoplakia and herpes simplex virus infection.

Disease Presentation Risk Factors Diagnosis Affected Organ Systems Important features Picture
Diseases predominantly affecting the oral cavity
Oral Candidiasis
  • Denture users
  • As a side effect of medication, most commonly having taken antibiotics. Inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of lung conditions (e.g, asthma or COPD) may also result in oral candidiasis which may be reduced by regularly rinsing the mouth with water after taking the medication.
  • Clinical diagnosis
  • Confirmatory tests rarely needed
Localized candidiasis

Invasive candidasis

Tongue infected with oral candidiasis – By James Heilman, MD – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, httpscommons.wikimedia.orgwindex.phpcurid=11717223.jpg
Herpes simplex oral lesions
  • Stress
  • Recent URTI
  • Female sex
  • The symptoms of primary HSV infection generally resolve within two weeks
Oral herpes simplex infection – By James Heilman, MD – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, httpscommons.wikimedia.orgwindex.phpcurid=19051042.jpg
Aphthous ulcers
  • Painful, red spot or bump that develops into an open ulcer
  • Physical examination
  • Diagnosis of exclusion
  • Oral cavity
  • Self-limiting , Pain decreases in 7 to 10 days, with complete healing in 1 to 3 weeks
Apthous ulcer on the lower surface of the tongue – By Ebarruda – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, httpscommons.wikimedia.orgwindex.phpcurid=7903358
Squamous cell carcinoma
Squamous cell carcinoma – By Luca Pastore, Maria Luisa Fiorella, Raffaele Fiorella, Lorenzo Lo Muzio – http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/showImageLarge.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0050212.g001, CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15252632
Leukoplakia
  • Vulvar lesions occur independent of oral lesions
Leukoplakia – By Aitor III – Own work, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9873087
Melanoma
Oral melanoma – By Emmanouil K Symvoulakis, Dionysios E Kyrmizakis, Emmanouil I Drivas, Anastassios V Koutsopoulos, Stylianos G Malandrakis, Charalambos E Skoulakis and John G Bizakis – Symvoulakis et al. Head & Face Medicine 2006 2:7 doi:10.1186/1746-160X-2-7 (Open Access), [1], CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9839811
Fordyce spots
Fordyce spots – Por Perene – Obra do próprio, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=19772899
Burning mouth syndrome
Torus palatinus
Torus palatinus – By Photo taken by dozenist, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=846591
Diseases involving oral cavity and other organ systems
Behcet’s disease
Behcet’s disease – By Ahmet Altiner MD, Rajni Mandal MD – http://dermatology.cdlib.org/1611/articles/18_2009-10-20/2.jpg, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17863021
Crohn’s disease
Agranulocytosis
Syphilis[8]
oral syphilis – By CDC/Susan Lindsley – http://phil.cdc.gov/phil_images/20021114/34/PHIL_2385_lores.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2134349
Coxsackie virus
  • Symptomatic treatment
Coxsackie virus stomatitis – Adapted from Dermatology Atlas.[9]
Chicken pox
Chickenpox – By James Heilman, MD – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=52872565
Measles
  • Unvaccinated individuals[2][3]
  • Crowded and/or unsanitary conditions
  • Traveling to less developed and developing countries
  • Immunocompromized
  • Winter and spring seasons
  • Born after 1956 and never fully vaccinated
  • Health care workers
Koplick spots (Measles) – By CDC – http://phil.cdc.gov/PHIL_Images/20040908/4f54ee8f0e5f49f58aaa30c1bc6413ba/6111_lores.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=824483


References

  1. “Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases”.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Feikin DR, Lezotte DC, Hamman RF, Salmon DA, Chen RT, Hoffman RE (2000). “Individual and community risks of measles and pertussis associated with personal exemptions to immunization”. JAMA. 284 (24): 3145–50. PMID 11135778.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Ratnam S, West R, Gadag V, Williams B, Oates E (1996). “Immunity against measles in school-aged children: implications for measles revaccination strategies”. Can J Public Health. 87 (6): 407–10. PMID 9009400.
  4. Kolokotronis, A.; Doumas, S. (2006). “Herpes simplex virus infection, with particular reference to the progression and complications of primary herpetic gingivostomatitis”. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 12 (3): 202–211. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2005.01336.x. ISSN 1198-743X.
  5. Chauvin PJ, Ajar AH (2002). “Acute herpetic gingivostomatitis in adults: a review of 13 cases, including diagnosis and management”. J Can Dent Assoc. 68 (4): 247–51. PMID 12626280.
  6. Ann M. Gillenwater, Nadarajah Vigneswaran, Hanadi Fatani, Pierre Saintigny & Adel K. El-Naggar (2013). “Proliferative verrucous leukoplakia (PVL): a review of an elusive pathologic entity!”. Advances in anatomic pathology. 20 (6): 416–423. doi:10.1097/PAP.0b013e3182a92df1. PMID 24113312. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  7. Andrès E, Zimmer J, Affenberger S, Federici L, Alt M, Maloisel F. (2006). “Idiosyncratic drug-induced agranulocytosis: Update of an old disorder”. Eur J Intern Med. 17 (8): 529–35. Text “pmid 17142169” ignored (help)
  8. title=”By Internet Archive Book Images [No restrictions], via Wikimedia Commons” href=”https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_manual_of_syphilis_and_the_venereal_diseases%2C_(1900)_(14595882378).jpg
  9. “Dermatology Atlas”.

Template:WikiDoc Sources

Epidemiology and Demographics

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Joseph Nasr, M.D.[2] ;Guillermo Rodriguez Nava, M.D. [3];

Global Overview

  • Leading vaccine-preventable killer of children. Measles remains a leading cause of vaccine-preventable childhood mortality worldwide.
  • Steep global resurgence since 2019. After a historic low of 132,490 reported cases in 2016, global measles reports surged to 869,770 in 2019, driven by large outbreaks in the DRC, Madagascar, Samoa, Ukraine, and Brazil, with vaccine hesitancy cited as a major driver; in 2019 the WHO listed vaccine hesitancy among the top 10 global health challenges[1][2][3].
  • Pandemic shock to coverage. Routine immunization disruptions during Covid-19 pushed MCV1 coverage to 81% (lowest since 2008), with only partial recovery to 83% in 2022–2023; coverage is lowest in low-income countries (64%) and 86% in middle-income countries[4].
  • Current case burden (2024–2025). All WHO regions have reported increases since 2024; 395,521 laboratory-confirmed cases were reported in 2024 and 16,147 in the first 2 months of 2025; >50% of reported patients were hospitalized, implying substantial under-ascertainment[5][6].
  • European region, 2024. The WHO European Region recorded its highest measles case count in >25 years in 2024, accounting for ~20% of global cases[5].

Historical mortality reductions (Measles Initiative) according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Global measles deaths fell ~60% (from ~873,000 in 1999 to ~345,000 in 2005). In Africa, deaths declined ~75% (from ~506,000 to ~126,000 in 5 years).

Transmission geography, elimination, and importations

  • Importations sustain outbreaks in elimination settings. Countries with interrupted endemic transmission (e.g., United States, elimination declared 2000) still see outbreaks seeded by imported cases, with spread in undervaccinated pockets[7][2].
  • Global elimination setbacks. Since 2019, no WHO region has achieved and sustained measles elimination[7].

Coverage gaps, susceptibility, and demographics

  • Sub-national heterogeneity (U.S. example). County-level analyses in 37 U.S. states showed MMR coverage <95% in 990/1501 counties and <74% in 70 counties, identifying large susceptible clusters[8].
  • Infants. Maternal antibody waning earlier than in past decades leaves most infants seronegative by 6 months, amplifying risk during periods of community transmission[9][10][11][12].
  • Adolescents/young adults. Immunity gaps are documented among persons ~13–30 years (and some >40 years) who received the standard two-dose schedule in childhood; these gaps account for some adult cases during outbreaks in well-vaccinated countries[10][13][14].

Burden and clinical impact (selected metrics relevant to epi)

  • Hospitalization share as severity proxy. In 2024–2025, >50% of reported cases required hospitalization, which the NEJM authors note implies undercounting of true infections[5].
  • Complications and fatality gradients (context for demographic risk and setting): case-fatality 1–3/1000 in high-income settings vs 9–16/1000 in middle-/low-income settings; up to 180/1000 in humanitarian crises[15][16][17].

Region-specific notes

Europe

  • 2019 surge and 2024 peak. >100,000 European cases in 2019 amid global resurgence; in 2024, the region reached the highest burden in >25 years (~20% of global cases)[1][5].

United States

Pre-elimination Era

  • In the decade prior to the licensure of live measles vaccine in 1963, an average of 549,000 measles cases and 495 measles deaths were reported annually.[18]
  • Almost every American was affected by measles during their lifetime; it is estimated that 3–4 million measles cases occurred each year.
  • Following implementation of the one dose measles vaccine program, there was significant reduction in the reported incidence in the United States by 1988 resulting in decline in measles-related hospitalizations and death.
  • During 1989–1991, a resurgence of measles occurred when over 55,000 cases and 123 deaths were reported.
  • The epidemiology during the resurgence was characterized mainly by cases in unvaccinated preschool-age children who had not been vaccinated on time with one dose of measles vaccine.
  • Outbreaks were reported among highly vaccinated school-age children who received one dose of measles-containing vaccine.
  • In 1989, a second-dose vaccination schedule was recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP).
  • In 1998, the ACIP recommended that states ensure second dose coverage of children in all grades by 2001.
  • Following the resurgence, improved implementation of the timely administration of the first dose of MMR vaccine and increased implementation of two doses among school-age children led to a dramatic decline in measles cases.
  • In 2000, endemic measles was declared “eliminated” from the United States.
  • Elimination and ongoing importations. The U.S. declared elimination in 2000; present-day cases reflect importations and spread within undervaccinated communities[7][2].

Post-elimination Era

Measles Cases and Outbreaks. Image extracted from CDC Measles Cases and Outbreaks.[19]
  • In 2017, a measles outbreak began in Minnesota among the Somali American community. The number of cases of measles in Minnesota by May 2017 exceeded the annual rate in the entire United States in 2016.
  • During 2001–2011, 911 measles cases were reported. [18]
  • The median number of measles cases reported per year was 62 (range: 37–220 cases/year).
  • Measles incidence has continuously remained below one case per million since 1997. The majority of measles cases were unvaccinated (65%) or had unknown vaccination status (20%).
  • Of the 911 reported measles cases, 372 (40%) were importations (on average 34 importations/year), 239 (26%) were epidemiologically linked to these importations, 190 (21%) either had virologic evidence of importation or had been linked to those cases with virologic evidence of importation, and 110 (12%) had unknown source (unknown source cases represent cases where epidemiologic- or virologic-link to an imported case was not detected0
  • The highest incidence of measles cases in recent years occurred in 2008 (0.48 cases/million) and 2011 (0.72 cases/million):
    • The epidemiology of measles in 2008 was characterized by (1) a high proportion (95%) of cases among U.S. residents who were unvaccinated or who had unknown vaccination status, most of whom were U.S. school-age children whose parents had religious or philosophical objections to vaccination, and (2) more spread from imported cases than other years.
    • In 2011, 220 measles cases were reported, the highest number of reported measles cases since 1996; 80 (36%) were importations, 144 (65%) were unvaccinated, and 47 (21%) had unknown vaccination status. Most of the importations were the result of unvaccinated U.S. travelers who had traveled to measles endemic countries, mainly Western Europe and India.
  • Although measles elimination has been achieved in the United States, importation of measles will continue to occur as measles remains endemic in many other parts of the world.
  • 2025 situation (as of May 30). 1,088 confirmed cases and 3 deaths; ~96% unvaccinated/unknown status; ~12% hospitalized; current counts are ~4× the 2024 total; loss of U.S. elimination status is possible if transmission persists >12 months[20].
  • Domestic determinants. Misinformation (e.g., now-disproven autism claims) and vaccine hesitancy contribute to under-vaccination; modeling suggests that a 10% drop in MMR could yield ~11.1 million U.S. measles cases over 25 years[21][22].

Developed countries

  • Routine immunization commonly at ~12–18 months as part of MMR; importation-linked outbreaks still occur when pockets of susceptibility exist; Japan experienced a notable 2007 surge; broad MMR eradication proposals have circulated but are not prioritized before global polio eradication.

South America

  • Regional initiatives to eliminate rubella by 2010; as of 2006, endemic measles still reported in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru, Venezuela; immunization campaigns ongoing (e.g., Dominican Republic)[23].
  • The Americas were formally declared free of endemic rubella and congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) in April 2015, and PAHO notes the region has maintained rubella/CRS elimination in subsequent years (despite measles flare-ups)[24].

Developing countries

  • Programmatic setbacks (e.g., early-2000s northern Nigeria) with vaccine refusals led to large outbreaks and child deaths[25].
  • In developing countries, measles remains common. Unvaccinated populations are at risk for the disease.
  • After vaccination rates dropped in northern Nigeria in the early 2000s due to religious and political objections, the number of cases rose significantly, and hundreds of children died.[25]
  • A 2005 measles outbreak in Indiana was attributed to children whose parents refused vaccination.[26]
  • 2016→2019 global surge (major LMIC impact). Reported measles cases climbed to 869,770 in 2019 (highest since 1996), with deaths up ~50% from 2016 to ~207,500 in 2019; large outbreaks were concentrated in countries with chronic under-immunization and health-system gaps (DRC, Madagascar, Samoa, Ukraine, others)[4][27].

Flagship LMIC outbreaks:

  • DRC, 2019–2020: “World’s worst measles epidemic” with >6,000 deaths by Jan 2020; drivers included low coverage, malnutrition, weak systems, other epidemics, access insecurity[28].
  • Madagascar, 2018–2019: explosive nationwide epidemic; >100,000 cases over first 6 months[29][30].
  • Pacific (Samoa et al.), 2019: severe outbreaks with emergency declarations; extremely low MMR coverage preceded the surge[31].
  • WHO Europe spillover affecting lower-income settings (2019): Regional spike, majority of cases in Ukraine early 2019 (vaccine gaps)[32].
  • Pandemic shock and recovery lag in LMICs. First-dose measles coverage (MCV1) fell to ~81% (2021) and only partly recovered to ~83% (2022), below 2019’s 86%; WHO estimates ~35.2 million additional children at risk from service disruptions[4][33].
  • Ongoing high burden post-COVID. CDC estimates ~10.3 million infections in 2023 and outbreaks in every region; LMICs bear disproportionate morbidity/mortality[34].
  • Surveillance & lab capacity improvements relevant to LMICs.
    • Field confirmation: Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for measles IgM (capillary blood/oral fluid) facilitate real-time confirmation where EIA/RT-PCR capacity is limited. Genes can be amplified from dried IgM-positive RDTs to support genotyping. (Appendix section “Measles diagnostic and genotypes monitoring”)[35][36].
    • Genomic surveillance: 24 genotypes (N-450 window) remain the basis for global tracking; since 2018, B3, D4, D8, H1 are identified, with B3/D8/H1 dominating 2024–2025 outbreaks; Nanopore enables low-cost near-full genomes for chain tracking in resource-limited labs[37][38].
    • Antigenic stability & vaccine breadth: Despite genotype diversity, H and F have remained antigenically stable for decades; H-specific antibodies dominate protection; vaccine lineage (genotype A) continues to protect across circulating genotypes[39][40][41][42].
  • Programmatic shifts & evidence relevant to LMIC policy.
    • Early-age vaccination discussions: WHO technical consultations and multiple studies examine <9-month dosing (maternal antibody interference vs. outbreak control), waning dynamics, and boost strategies — critically relevant for LMIC settings with high infant exposure risk[43][44][45].
    • Vitamin A in severe measles (still pertinent in LMICs): WHO clinical guidance and evidence syntheses reaffirm adjunct vitamin A for complicated measles (malnutrition, eye complications), reflecting persistent LMIC risk profiles[46][47][48].
  • Financing headwinds (program risk). Recent reporting raised concerns about potential U.S. cuts to Gavi; Gavi stated no official termination notice had been received, but any reduction would jeopardize LMIC immunization[49].

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Patel, M.K. et al. (2020) “Progress toward regional measles elimination – worldwide, 2000-2019,” MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 69(45), pp. 1700–1705. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a6.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 Hotez, P.J., Nuzhath, T. and Colwell, B. (2020) “Combating vaccine hesitancy and other 21st century social determinants in the global fight against measles,” Current opinion in virology, 41, pp. 1–7. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coviro.2020.01.001.
  3. Larson, H.J., Gakidou, E. and Murray, C.J.L. (2022) “The vaccine-hesitant moment,” The New England journal of medicine, 387(1), pp. 58–65. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2106441.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Minta, A.A. et al. (2024) “Progress toward measles elimination – worldwide, 2000-2023,” MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 73(45), pp. 1036–1042. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7345a4.
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 WHO Immunization Data portal – All Data (no date) Immunization Data. Available at: https://immunizationdata.who.int/global (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  6. “In Japan, there are concerns that measles infections will spread due to the Osaka/Kansai World Expo in April 2025” (2025). Available at: https://www.bmj.com/content/388/bmj.r528/rr (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 Do, L.A.H. and Mulholland, K. (2025) “Measles 2025,” The New England journal of medicine [Preprint], (NEJMra2504516). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2504516.
  8. Rader, B. et al. (2025) “Revising US MMR vaccine recommendations amid changing domestic risks,” JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association, 333(14), pp. 1201–1202. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.3867.
  9. Guerra, F.M. et al. (2018) “Waning of measles maternal antibody in infants in measles elimination settings – A systematic literature review,” Vaccine, 36(10), pp. 1248–1255. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.01.002.
  10. 10.0 10.1 Schenk, J. et al. (2021) “Immunogenicity and persistence of trivalent measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” The Lancet infectious diseases, 21(2), pp. 286–295. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30442-4.
  11. Science M, Savage R, Severini A, et al. Measles antibody levels in young infants. Pediatrics 2019;144(6):e20190630.
  12. Bokop, C. et al. (2025) “Sero-epidemiology of measles immunoglobulin G antibodies among newborns from South-East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa: an observational, multicenter study,” International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 154. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2025.107882.
  13. Robert A, Suffel AM, Kucharski AJ. Long-term waning of vaccine-induced im�munity to measles in England: a mathe�matical modelling study. Lancet Public Health 2024;9(10):e766-e775.
  14. Mehra, S. et al. (2025) “Unveiling immunity gaps and determining a suitable age for a third dose of the measles-containing vaccine: a strategic approach to accelerating measles elimination,” The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia, 32(100523), p. 100523. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lansea.2024.100523.
  15. CDC (2025) Measles Symptoms and Complications, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/signs-symptoms/index.html (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  16. Sbarra, A.N. et al. (2023) “Estimating national-level measles case-fatality ratios in low-income and middle-income countries: an updated systematic review and modelling study,” The Lancet. Global health, 11(4), pp. e516–e524. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00043-8.
  17. Salama, P. et al. (2001) “Malnutrition, measles, mortality, and the humanitarian response during a famine in Ehiopia,” JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association, 286(5), pp. 563–571. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.286.5.563.
  18. 18.0 18.1 “Measles” (PDF).
  19. “Measles Cases and Outbreaks”.
  20. CDC (2025) Measles Cases and Outbreaks, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/data-research/index.html (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  21. DeStefano, F. and Shimabukuro, T.T. (2019) “The MMR vaccine and autism,” Annual review of virology, 6(1), pp. 585–600. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-virology-092818-015515.
  22. Kiang, M.V. et al. (2025) “Modeling reemergence of vaccine-eliminated infectious diseases under declining vaccination in the US,” JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association, 333(24), pp. 2176–2187. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.6495.
  23. “www.paho.org”. Retrieved 2013-02-25.
  24. Americas region is declared the world’s first to eliminate rubella (no date) Paho.org. Available at: https://www.paho.org/en/news/29-4-2015-americas-region-declared-worlds-first-eliminate-rubella (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  25. 25.0 25.1 Youth and migration (2007) The New Humanitarian. Available at: https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/feature/2007/02/06/youth-and-migration (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  26. Parker A, Staggs W, Dayan G; et al. (2006). “Implications of a 2005 measles outbreak in Indiana for sustained elimination of measles in the United States”. N Engl J Med. 355 (5): 447–55. PMID 16885548.
  27. Worldwide measles deaths climb 50% from 2016 to 2019 claiming over 207 500 lives in 2019 (no date) Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/news/item/12-11-2020-worldwide-measles-deaths-climb-50-from-2016-to-2019-claiming-over-207-500-lives-in-2019?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  28. Deaths from Democratic Republic of the Congo measles outbreak top 6000 (no date) WHO | Regional Office for Africa. Available at: https://www.afro.who.int/news/deaths-democratic-republic-congo-measles-outbreak-top-6000 (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  29. Measles – Madagascar (no date) Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/17-january-2019-measles-madagascar-en?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  30. Nimpa, M.M. et al. (2020) “Measles outbreak in 2018-2019, Madagascar: epidemiology and public health implications,” The Pan African medical journal, 35, p. 84. Available at: https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2020.35.84.19630.
  31. (No date) Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/wpro—documents/dps/outbreaks-and-emergencies/measles-2019/measles-pacific-who-unicef-sitrep-20200103.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  32. Measles – European Region (no date) Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2019-DON140?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  33. Childhood immunization begins recovery after COVID-19 backslide (no date) Who.int. Available at: https://www.who.int/news/item/18-07-2023-childhood-immunization-begins-recovery-after-covid-19-backslide?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  34. CDC (2025) Global Measles Outbreaks, Global Measles Vaccination. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/global-measles-vaccination/data-research/global-measles-outbreaks/index.html (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  35. Brown, D.W. et al. (2020) “Rapid diagnostic tests to address challenges for global measles surveillance,” Current opinion in virology, 41, pp. 77–84. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coviro.2020.05.007.
  36. Warrener, L. et al. (2023) “Evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test for measles IgM detection; accuracy and the reliability of visual reading using sera from the measles surveillance programme in Brazil, 2015,” Epidemiology and infection, 151, p. e151. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268823000845.
  37. CDC (2024) Genetic Analysis of Measles Viruses, Measles (Rubeola). Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/php/laboratories/genetic-analysis.html (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  38. Namuwulya, P. et al. (2022) “Near-complete genome sequences of measles virus strains from 10 years of Uganda country-wide surveillance,” Microbiology resource announcements, 11(8), p. e0060622. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/mra.00606-22.
  39. Beaty, S.M. and Lee, B. (2016) “Constraints on the genetic and antigenic variability of measles virus,” Viruses, 8(4), p. 109. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/v8040109.
  40. Muñoz-Alía, M.Á. et al. (2021) “Serotypic evolution of measles virus is constrained by multiple co-dominant B cell epitopes on its surface glycoproteins,” Cell reports. Medicine, 2(4), p. 100225. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100225.
  41. Tahara, M. et al. (2013) “The receptor-binding site of the measles virus hemagglutinin protein itself constitutes a conserved neutralizing epitope,” Journal of virology, 87(6), pp. 3583–3586. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.03029-12.
  42. Muñoz-Alía, M.Á., Muller, C.P. and Russell, S.J. (2017) “Antigenic drift defines a new D4 subgenotype of measles virus,” Journal of virology, 91(11). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00209-17.
  43. Varma, A. et al. (2025) “What is the current evidence base for measles vaccination earlier than 9 months of age?: Report from an informal technical consultation of the World Health Organization,” Vaccine, 57(127187), p. 127187. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127187.
  44. Njie-Jobe, J. et al. (2012) “Immunological impact of an additional early measles vaccine in Gambian children: responses to a boost at 3 years,” Vaccine, 30(15), pp. 2543–2550. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.01.083.
  45. Garly, M.-L. et al. (2006) “Prophylactic antibiotics to prevent pneumonia and other complications after measles: community based randomised double blind placebo controlled trial in Guinea-Bissau,” BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 333(7581), p. 1245. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38989.684178.AE.
  46. Stinchfield, P.A. and Orenstein, W.A. (2020) “Vitamin A for the management of measles in the United States,” Infectious diseases in clinical practice (Baltimore, Md.), 28(4), pp. 181–187. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1097/ipc.0000000000000873.
  47. Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals (2020) Guide for clinical case management and infection prevention and control during a measles outbreak, Who.int. World Health Organization. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240002869 (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
  48. Huiming, Y., Chaomin, W. and Meng, M. (2005) “Vitamin A for treating measles in children,” Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005(4), p. CD001479. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001479.pub3.
  49. Vaccines group Gavi says U.S. has not confirmed it will end funding (2025) AP News. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/gavi-alliance-vaccines-us-funding-3123781dd776b0019d4f869789e2715e (Accessed: September 24, 2025).

Template:WH Template:WS

index.php?title=Category:Pediatrics index.php?title=Category:Dermatology index.php?title=Category:Viral diseases index.php?title=Category:Mononegavirales index.php?title=Category:Ophthalmology index.php?title=Category:Otolaryngology index.php?title=Category:Pulmonology index.php?title=Category:Disease

Risk Factors

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Guillermo Rodriguez Nava, M.D. [2]

Overview

Measles is a disease with very low incidence in the developed world. Lack of vaccination against measles is one of the biggest risk factors that predisposes measles spread. In developed countries like USA, most cases are attributed to unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated travelers from other parts of the world. Primary vaccine failure occurs in approximately 5% of individuals vaccinated with a single dose of vaccine at 12 months of age or older and also predisposes an individual to the risk of developing measles.[1]

Common Risk Factors

  • Unvaccinated individuals: a retrospective cohort study showed that children who have philosophical and religious exemptions from immunization were 22.2 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.9-31.1) more likely to acquire measles.[2]
  • Limited vaccination: incomplete doses of the vaccine; up to 35% children vaccinated with only 1 dose of MMR vaccine do not have protective antibodies.[3]
  • Living in crowded and/or unsanitary conditions such as prisons and college dorm rooms
  • Traveling to less developed and developing countries where measles is common
  • Weakened immune system even if vaccinated
  • Winter and spring seasons
  • Born after 1956 and never fully vaccinated since.
  • Health care workers

References

  1. “Measles” (PDF).
  2. Feikin DR, Lezotte DC, Hamman RF, Salmon DA, Chen RT, Hoffman RE (2000). “Individual and community risks of measles and pertussis associated with personal exemptions to immunization”. JAMA. 284 (24): 3145–50. PMID 11135778.
  3. Ratnam S, West R, Gadag V, Williams B, Oates E (1996). “Immunity against measles in school-aged children: implications for measles revaccination strategies”. Can J Public Health. 87 (6): 407–10. PMID 9009400.

Template:WikiDoc Sources

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Guillermo Rodriguez Nava, M.D. [2]; Vidit Bhargava, M.B.B.S [3]

Overview

Measles spreads through the air by breathing, coughing or sneezing. It is so contagious that any child who is exposed to it and is not immune will probably get the disease. The virus lives in the mucus in the nose and throat of the infected person. When that person sneezes or coughs, droplets spray into the air. The virus can live on infected surfaces for up to 2 hours and spreads so easily that people who are not immune will probably get it when they come close to someone who is infected. Measles is a disease of humans.

Complications with measles are relatively common, ranging from relatively mild and less serious diarrhea, to pneumonia and encephalitis (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis – SSPE). Complications are usually more severe amongst adults who catch the virus.

Measles itself is unpleasant, but the complications are dangerous. Six to 20 percent of the people who get the disease will get an ear infection, diarrhea, or even pneumonia. One out of 1000 people with measles will develop inflammation of the brain, and about one out of 1000 will die.

Natural History

Complications

Complications with measles are relatively common. In industrialized countries, complications occur in around 10-15% of cases, ranging from relatively mild and less serious diarrhea, to pneumonia and encephalitis (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis – SSPE). The frequency of complications in developing countries is less well known. At least three-quarters of cases in developing countries can be expected to have at least one complication and some have multiple systems involvement. Complications are usually more severe amongst adults who catch the virus. SSPE is a very rare, but fatal degenerative disease of the central nervous system that results from a measles virus infection acquired earlier in life. The first signs of SSPE may be changes in personality, a gradual onset of mental deterioration and myoclonia (muscle spasms or jerks). The diagnosis of SSPE is based on signs and symptoms and on test results, such as typical changes observed in electroencephalographs, an elevated anti-measles antibody (IgG) in the serum and cerebrospinal fluid, and typical histologic findings in brain biopsy tissue. There are reports of remission and some treatments are available; however, the average survival is one to two years. There is no evidence that measles vaccine can cause SSPE.

The fatality rate from measles for otherwise healthy people in developed countries is low: approximately 1 death per thousand cases. In underdeveloped nations with high rates of malnutrition and poor healthcare, fatality rates of 10 percent are common. In immunocompromised patients, the fatality rate is approximately 30 percent.

Serious Complications[2]

Approximately 20% of reported measles cases experience one or more complications. These complications are more common among children under 5 years of age and adults over 20 years old. Measles causes ear infections in nearly one out of every 10 children who get it. As many as one out of 20 children with measles gets pneumonia, and about one child in every 1,000 who get measles will develop encephalitis. (This is an inflammation of the brain that can lead to convulsions, and can leave your child deaf or mentally retarded.) For every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it. Measles can also make a pregnant woman have a miscarriage, give birth prematurely, or have a low-birth-weight baby. In developing countries, where malnutrition and vitamin A deficiency are prevalent, measles has been known to kill as many as one out of four people. It is the leading cause of blindness among African children. Measles kills almost 1 million children in the world each year.

Measles can also lead to life-long disabilities, including blindness, brain damage and deafness. Low vitamin A status has been associated with a higher rate of complications and a higher death rate, as it has similar pathological effects on epithelia and the immune system.

Prognosis

Measles itself is unpleasant, but the complications are dangerous. Six to 20 percent of the people who get the disease will get an ear infection, diarrhea, or even pneumonia. One out of 1000 people with measles will develop inflammation of the brain, and about one out of 1000 will die.

Most measles deaths (98%) occur in developing countries, where vitamin A deficiency is common. The case fatality rates in developing countries are normally estimated to be 3-5%, but may reach 10-30% in some situations. This compares with 0.1% in many industrialised countries. Through synergy with measles infection, vitamin A deficiency contributes to the estimated 1 million childhood deaths from measles every year. Half of the childhood corneal blindness in developing countries is attributable to vitamin A deficiency, and half to measles infection.[1]

References

Template:WH Template:WS

Diagnosis

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms | Physical Examination | Laboratory Findings | Chest X Ray | Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Treatment

Medical Therapy | Primary Prevention | Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy | Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case Studies

Case #1

External Links

Template:Viral diseases Template:Exanthema

index.php?title=Category:Pediatrics index.php?title=Category:Dermatology index.php?title=Category:Viral diseases index.php?title=Category:Mononegavirales index.php?title=Category:Ophthalmology index.php?title=Category:Otolaryngology index.php?title=Category:Pulmonology index.php?title=Category:Disease

Looking for the patient version?

Back to the patient-friendly article

© 2026 MyEClinic – IFTM Institut für Telematik in der Medizin GmbH