Virus-like particles (VLPs) are virus-derived structures made up of one or more different molecules with the ability to self-assemble, mimicking the form and size of a virus particle but lacking the genetic material so they are not capable of infecting the host cell. Expression and self-assembly of the viral structural proteins can take place in various living or cell-free expression systems after which the viral structures can be assembled and reconstructed. VLPs are gaining in popularity in the field of preventive medicine and to date, a wide range of VLP-based candidate vaccines have been developed for immunization against various infectious agents, the latest of which is the vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, the efficacy of which is being evaluated. VLPs are highly immunogenic and are able to elicit both the antibody- and cell-mediated immune responses by pathways different from those elicited by conventional inactivated viral vaccines. However, there are still many challenges to this surface display system that need to be addressed in the future. VLPs that are classified as subunit vaccines are subdivided into enveloped and non- enveloped subtypes both of which are discussed in this review article. VLPs have also recently received attention for their successful applications in targeted drug delivery and for use in gene therapy. The development of more effective and targeted forms of VLP by modification of the surface of the particles in such a way that they can be introduced into specific cells or tissues or increase their half-life in the host is likely to expand their use in the future. Recent advances in the production and fabrication of VLPs including the exploration of different types of expression systems for their development, as well as their applications as vaccines in the prevention of infectious diseases and cancers resulting from their interaction with, and mechanism of activation of, the humoral and cellular immune systems are discussed in this review.

The agricultural sector is currently facing many global challenges, such as climate change, and environmental problems such as the release of pesticides and fertilizers, which will be exacerbated in the face of population growth and food shortages. Therefore, the need to change traditional farming methods and replace them with new technologies is essential, and the application of nanotechnology, especially green technology offers considerable promise in alleviating these problems. Nanotechnology has led to changes and advances in many technologies and has the potential to transform various fields of the agricultural sector, including biosensors, pesticides, fertilizers, food packaging and other areas of the agricultural industry. Due to their unique properties, nanomaterials are considered as suitable carriers for stabilizing fertilizers and pesticides, as well as facilitating controlled nutrient transfer and increasing crop protection. The production of nanoparticles by physical and chemical methods requires the use of hazardous materials, advanced equipment, and has a negative impact on the environment. Thus, over the last decade, research activities in the context of nanotechnology have shifted towards environmentally friendly and economically viable ‘green’ synthesis to support the increasing use of nanoparticles in various industries. Green synthesis, as part of bio-inspired protocols, provides reliable and sustainable methods for the biosynthesis of nanoparticles by a wide range of microorganisms rather than current synthetic processes. Therefore, this field is developing rapidly and new methods in this field are constantly being invented to improve the properties of nanoparticles. In this review, we consider the latest advances and innovations in the production of metal nanoparticles using green synthesis by different groups of microorganisms and the application of these nanoparticles in various agricultural sectors to achieve food security, improve crop production and reduce the use of pesticides. In addition, the mechanism of synthesis of metal nanoparticles by different microorganisms and their advantages and disadvantages compared to other common methods are presented.

Viral hepatitis, the most common cause of inflammatory liver disease, affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide. It is most commonly associated with one of the five nominal hepatitis viruses (hepatitis A–E viruses). HBV and HCV can cause acute infections and lifelong, persistent chronic infections, while HAV and HEV cause self-limiting acute infections. HAV and HEV are predominantly transmitted through the fecal-oral route, while diseases transmitted by the other forms are blood-borne diseases. Despite the success in the treatment of viral hepatitis and the development of HAV and HBV vaccines, there is still no accurate diagnosis at the genetic level for these diseases. Timely diagnosis of viral hepatitis is a prerequisite for efficient therapeutic intervention. Due to the specificity and sensitivity of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated sequences (Cas) technology, it has the potential to meet critical needs in the field of diagnosis of viral diseases and can be used in versatile point-of-care (POC) diagnostic applications to detect viruses with both DNA and RNA genomes. In this review, we discuss recent advances in CRISPR–Cas diagnostics tools and assess their potential and prospects in rapid and effective strategies for the diagnosis and control of viral hepatitis infection.

Background: Hemophilia A is an X-linked recessive bleeding disorder characterized by a qualitative and quantitative deficiency of coagulation factor VIII resulting from heterogeneous mutations in the factor VIII gene. About half of severe hemophilia A cases (40-50%) are caused by the F8 intron 22 inversion mutation. The development of inhibitor antibodies against transfused FVIII in patients with hemophilia A is the most significant treatment complication seen in hemophiliacs patients. Variations in the F8 gene, especially intron 22 inversions, are one of the genetic factors that lead to the development of FVIII inhibitors. The present study aimed to screen Intron 22 inversion type I and type II in severe hemophilia A patients and investigated its role as a predisposing factor for the inhibitor development. Furthermore, another aim of this study was to investigate a hypothesized association between the ABO blood group and the risk of inhibitor development in hemophilia A patients (including moderate and mild forms). Methods: Genetic analysis was conducted in 20 patients who were clinically diagnosed with severe hemophilia A and seven related female members by inversion-shifting PCR.Results: Intron 22 inversion mutation was detected in 35% (7/20) of patients with severe hemophilia A. Among them, 28% (2/7) had an inversion type I, and 72% (5/7) had an inversion type II. The frequency of intron 22 inversion variation in this small cohort study was almost similar to those reported in other populations, but the frequency of inversion type II was significantly higher than the frequencies of other reporting populations. Carrier status analysis showed that two cases were not carried abnormal alleles, 5 cases were carried inversion 22 type II and 2 cases were carried inversion 22 type I. The prior family history was shown in 70% of all patients and 71.1% (5/7) of hemophilia A patients with Inv22 variation. Inhibitor prevalence in patients was 15% (n=3) and seen in the mild, moderate, and severe phenotypes. The results indicated that there was no correlation between prior family history, as well as FVIII inhibitor development and intron 22 inversion variation. Our results also showed that the risk of inhibitor development was free from any significant correlation to the ABO blood group.Conclusions: The IS-PCR is a simple, rapid, and cost-effective method that can be used for both diagnosis of Inv22 variation in hemophilia A patient and carrier screening. Both approaches are important to determine carrier status and move forward with family planning. The prevalence of Inv22 of FVIII in this study is nearly like that of other populations. Despite the fact that the intron 22 inversion variant was related with 35% of severe hemophilia A phenotypic cases, it was not a substantial risk factor for inhibitor development. Furthermore, there was no significant association between ABO blood group and inhibitor development in this in this cohort of hemophiliacs.