Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Past Issues
    • Supplements
    • Article Type
  • Specialty
    • Articles by Specialty
  • CME/MOC
    • Articles
    • Calendar
  • Info For
    • Manuscript Submission
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Subscriptions
    • About CCJM
    • Contact Us
    • Media Kit
  • Conversations with Leaders
  • Conference Coverage
    • Kidney Week 2024
    • CHEST 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • Kidney Week 2023
    • ObesityWeek 2023
    • IDWeek 2023
    • CHEST 2023
    • MDS 2023
    • IAS 2023
    • ACP 2023
    • AAN 2023
    • ACC / WCC 2023
    • AAAAI Meeting 2023
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • Kidney Week 2022
    • AIDS 2022
  • Other Publications
    • www.clevelandclinic.org

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • www.clevelandclinic.org
  • Register
  • Log in
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Past Issues
    • Supplements
    • Article Type
  • Specialty
    • Articles by Specialty
  • CME/MOC
    • Articles
    • Calendar
  • Info For
    • Manuscript Submission
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Subscriptions
    • About CCJM
    • Contact Us
    • Media Kit
  • Conversations with Leaders
  • Conference Coverage
    • Kidney Week 2024
    • CHEST 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • Kidney Week 2023
    • ObesityWeek 2023
    • IDWeek 2023
    • CHEST 2023
    • MDS 2023
    • IAS 2023
    • ACP 2023
    • AAN 2023
    • ACC / WCC 2023
    • AAAAI Meeting 2023
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • Kidney Week 2022
    • AIDS 2022
Review

Mpox: Keep it on the differential

Sara L. Clemens, MD and Stuart N. Isaacs, MD
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine September 2023, 90 (9) 565-575; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.90a.23020
Sara L. Clemens
Infectious Diseases Fellow, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stuart N. Isaacs
Associate Professor of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA; Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Mpox lesions in various stages of development: (A) early vesicle, (B) small pustule, (C) umbilicated pustule, (D) ulcerated lesion, (E) crusted mature lesions under the lower lip, and (F) partially removed scab.

    Adapted from reference 15.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Sites of mpox lesions in an observational cohort study in southern France. (A) Primary inoculation site showing an irregular pustule with necrotic crust of the right nipple. (B) Pustular lesions with a crusted center on the mucosa of the upper lip, close to the left oral commissure and left nasal orifice. (C) Pustules circumferentially distributed on the anal margin and perianal skin of varying sizes and stages of evolution, some with central necrotic crusts. (D) Perineally extended purpuric lesions. (E) Scrotal lesions of varying sizes and stages of evolution, with edema surrounding the larger ulcero-hemorrhagic ulcers. (F) Scattered papules, pustules, and umbilicated pustules surrounded by an erythematous halo on the back. (G) Reddened and swollen right palatine tonsil with a fibrin-covered ulcer. (H) Pustular lesion on the nose with a necrotic central crust, whitish deposit, and erythematous halo.

    Adapted from reference 16.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Our recommended screening for sexually transmitted infections in patients with mpox

    Sample siteScreening
    BloodHIV-1/HIV-2 antigen-antibody immunoassay (screening test) a
    Nontreponemal test (eg, rapid plasma reagin), reflexively followed by treponemal test, if positive
    Hepatitis C antibody b
    Hepatitis B surface antibody, surface antigen, and core antibody c
    UrineGonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification test
    Rectum
    (if patient participates in receptive anal intercourse or has rectal symptoms)
    Gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification test
    Oropharynx
    (if patient participates in oral intercourse or has oropharyngeal symptoms)
    Gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification test
    Vagina, cervix
    (if patient participates in vaginal intercourse or has vaginal symptoms)
    Gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification test
    Lesion
    (when clinically unable to differentiate between mpox and herpesvirus)
    HSV-1 and HSV-2 polymerase chain reaction test
    Varicella virus polymerase chain reaction test
    Not recommendedSerologic testing for HSV-1 and HSV-2 antibodies (does not distinguish current from previous infection)
    Serologic HSV or varicella virus polymerase chain reaction test (insensitive and nonspecific for dermatologic infection)
    • ↵a HIV-1/HIV-2 antigen-antibody immunoassay will detect HIV about 17 days after HIV acquisition. For patients with a potential exposure < 17 days and concern for acute retroviral syndrome, send for HIV nucleic acid amplification testing (viral load). Caution in patients on preexposure prophylaxis, which can result in delayed seroconversion and indeterminate results on HIV differentiation assay.

    • ↵b Sexually active men who have sex with men should undergo hepatitis C virus screening at least annually.

    • ↵c Men who have sex with men without serologic evidence of immunity to hepatitis B should undergo vaccination.

    • HIV = human immunodeficiency virus; HSV = herpes simplex virus

    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Indications for tecovirimat treatment in individuals with mpox

    Severe disease
    Hemorrhagic disease
    Confluent lesions
    Organ involvement (central nervous system, lungs, eyes)
    At risk for severe disease
    Extremes of age
    History of dermatologic condition, including atopic dermatitis
    Pregnant or breastfeeding
    Secondary bacterial infection
    Dehydration
    Immunocompromised
    High-risk sites of infection
    Oropharyngeal lesions
    Anogenital lesions
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Dosing and patient counseling for tecovirimat

    Dosing of oral tecovirimat
    Patient weight 40 to < 120 kg: 600 mg every 12 hours
    Patient weight ≥ 120 kg: 600 mg every 8 hours
    Patient counseling
    Tecovirimat is generally well-tolerated
    The most frequently reported side effects are headache, nausea, and abdominal pain
    Tecovirimat must be administered with a full meal with high fat content (ideally 600 calories and 25 g of fat)a
    For patients who cannot swallow capsules, the capsules may be opened and the entire contents mixed with 30 mL of liquid or soft food
    • ↵a If the patient cannot consume a high-fat meal, providers should consider using the intravenous formulation to ensure adequate drug levels are achieved.

    • View popup
    TABLE 4

    Indications for preexposure prophylaxis for HIV

    Any person who has had anal or vaginal sex in the past 6 months with:
    • A partner who is HIV-positive with unknown or detectable viral load

    • One or more partners of unknown HIV status and inconsistent condom use

    • Any bacterial sexually transmitted infection (chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis) in the past 6 monthsa

    People who inject drugs and share injection equipment
    Any individual who does not meet the above criteria, but requests preexposure prophylaxis
    • ↵a CDC guidelines note that this does not include chlamydia in women who have sex with men and men who have sex with women, but local HIV incidence should be taken into consideration.

    • HIV = human immunodeficiency virus

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine: 90 (9)
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine
Vol. 90, Issue 9
1 Sep 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Mpox: Keep it on the differential
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Mpox: Keep it on the differential
Sara L. Clemens, Stuart N. Isaacs
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine Sep 2023, 90 (9) 565-575; DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.90a.23020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Mpox: Keep it on the differential
Sara L. Clemens, Stuart N. Isaacs
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine Sep 2023, 90 (9) 565-575; DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.90a.23020
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Linkedin Share Button

Jump to section

  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • RELATED TO SMALLPOX
    • SHIFTING EPIDEMIOLOGY
    • THE CLINICAL PRESENTATION HAS CHANGED
    • DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
    • TESTING FOR MPOX
    • MANAGEMENT
    • INFECTION CONTROL IN HEALTHCARE SETTINGS
    • INFECTION CONTROL AT HOME
    • HIV PROPHYLAXIS
    • VACCINIA VACCINATION
    • CONDOMS ARE NOT EFFECTIVE PROTECTION AGAINST MPOX
    • LESSONS LEARNED, LESSONS TO BE LEARNED
    • DISCLOSURES
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Painful targetoid lesions on the penis and pubis
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • High-output heart failure from arteriovenous dialysis access: A structured approach to diagnosis and management
  • Direct oral anticoagulants: Challenging prescribing scenarios in everyday practice
  • IgA nephropathy: Update on pathogenesis and treatment
Show more Review

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Infectious Diseases

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Supplements
  • Article Type
  • Specialty
  • CME/MOC Articles
  • CME/MOC Calendar
  • Media Kit

Authors & Reviewers

  • Manuscript Submission
  • Authors & Reviewers
  • Subscriptions
  • About CCJM
  • Contact Us
  • Cleveland Clinic Center for Continuing Education
  • Consult QD

Share your suggestions!

Copyright © 2025 The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. All rights reserved. The information provided is for educational purposes only. Use of this website is subject to the website terms of use and privacy policy. 

Powered by HighWire