APA Style
Fabrice Zobel Lekeumo Cheuyem, Constantine Tanywe Asahngwa, William Ndjidda Bakari, Chabeja Achangwa, Jessy Goupeyou-Youmsi, Brian Ngongheh Ajong, Claude Axel Minkandi, Solange Dabou, Mohamadou Adama , , Jude Tsafack Zefack, Badou Guianga, Jonathan Hangi Ndungo. (2026). Mpox and Varicella-Zoster Virus Coinfection in the Democratic Republic of Congo: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Evidence Synthesis in Healthcare Connect, 1 (Article ID: 0002). https://doi.org/10.69709/ESHC.2026.183845MLA Style
Fabrice Zobel Lekeumo Cheuyem, Constantine Tanywe Asahngwa, William Ndjidda Bakari, Chabeja Achangwa, Jessy Goupeyou-Youmsi, Brian Ngongheh Ajong, Claude Axel Minkandi, Solange Dabou, Mohamadou Adama , , Jude Tsafack Zefack, Badou Guianga, Jonathan Hangi Ndungo. "Mpox and Varicella-Zoster Virus Coinfection in the Democratic Republic of Congo: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis". Evidence Synthesis in Healthcare Connect, vol. 1, 2026, Article ID: 0002, https://doi.org/10.69709/ESHC.2026.183845.Chicago Style
Fabrice Zobel Lekeumo Cheuyem, Constantine Tanywe Asahngwa, William Ndjidda Bakari, Chabeja Achangwa, Jessy Goupeyou-Youmsi, Brian Ngongheh Ajong, Claude Axel Minkandi, Solange Dabou, Mohamadou Adama , , Jude Tsafack Zefack, Badou Guianga, Jonathan Hangi Ndungo. 2026. "Mpox and Varicella-Zoster Virus Coinfection in the Democratic Republic of Congo: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis." Evidence Synthesis in Healthcare Connect 1 (2026): 0002. https://doi.org/10.69709/ESHC.2026.183845.
ACCESS
Systematic Review
Volume 1, Article ID: 2026.0002
Fabrice Zobel Lekeumo Cheuyem
zobelcheuyem@gmail.com
Constantine Tanywe Asahngwa
asahngwa@gmail.com
William Ndjidda Bakari
bakariwilliam@yahoo.fr
Chabeja Achangwa
chabejaacha@yahoo.com
Jessy Goupeyou-Youmsi
goupeyou.youmsi@gmail.com
Brian Ngongheh Ajong
ajong.brian@yahoo.com
Claude Axel Minkandi
minkandiclaude@gmail.com
Solange Dabou
solangedabs@gmail.com
Mohamadou Adama ,
bachiroudoc@yahoo.fr
Jude Tsafack Zefack
judetsafackz@gmail.com
Badou Guianga
guiangabadou@gmail.com
Jonathan Hangi Ndungo
ndungojonathan@gmail.com
1 Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, The University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Cameroon
2 Department of anthropology, The University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Cameroon
3 Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Medicine, Pharmacy and Odontology, University Cheikh Anta Diop of Dakar, Dakar, Senegal
4 Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of West Indies, Bridgetown, Barbados
5 Institute of Healthcare Management, Strathmore University Business School, Nairobi, Kenya
6 Health Emergencies Programme, World Health Organization (WHO), Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo
7 National Multisectoral Programme to Fight against Maternal and Child Mortality, Ministry of Public Health, Yaoundé, Cameroon
8 Department of Biochemistry, University of Dschang, Dschang, Cameroon
9 Department of Global Health and Bioethics, Euclid University, Bangui, Central African Republic
10 Higher Institute of Medical Techniques, Bunia, Democratic Republic of Congo
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed
Received: 01 Nov 2025 Accepted: 20 Feb 2026 Available Online: 23 Feb 2026 Published: 18 Mar 2026
Introduction: Monkeypox (Mpox) is an endemic disease in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Despite five decades of outbreaks, gaps persist in understanding the clinical patterns of Mpox and its coinfections with varicella-zoster virus (VZV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in this high-burden setting. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to synthesize data on the clinical presentation of Mpox and coinfection trends in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Estimating the burden of VZV and HIV coinfections can provide valuable insights to inform decision-making in efforts to control this outbreak. Methods: Data for this study were systematically extracted from online databases, including PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. The pooled estimates of VZV and HIV coinfection rates was calculated using fixed and random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were carried out based on time period, geographic region, study design, setting, and participant characteristics. Results: Among a total of 1841 confirmed Mpox cases, VZV coinfection was 9.69% (95% CI: 1.33–18.06; 8 studies), with higher rates in Kivu (33.33%) compared to Equateur (11.10%). The VZV pooled prevalence rate among 64,131 suspected Mpox cases was 16.73% (95% CI: 5.36–28.10; 8 studies), with I2 = 99.4% (p < 0.001). The pooled estimate of HIV coinfection at the national level was low (0.52%, 95% CI: 0.18–0.87; 5 studies; n = 1,652) but was higher in South Kivu (1.64%). Among confirmed cases, the most common clinical presentations were rash (99.97%), painful lesions (78.17%), and malaise (77.14%), underscoring their diagnostic significance in case definitions. A similar clinical pattern of Mpox was observed among suspected cases, with nearly all reported cases presenting with rash (99.43%) and fever (98.91%). Heterogeneity was high (I2 > 90%) for most study outcomes. Conclusion: The substantial VZV coinfection prevalence and distinct regional HIV patterns highlight critical gaps in syndromic surveillance and the urgent need for integrated diagnostic strategies. This review confirms that Mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo presents with an almost universal rash, highlighting its central role in case definitions. These findings provide critical evidence to support enhanced frontline detection and targeted outbreak response in endemic regions.
The Simian Orthopoxvirus, responsible for monkeypox (Mpox), represents a significant public health threat, especially in areas of Central and West Africa where the disease is endemic [1,2]. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) continues to serve as the epicenter of human Mpox, where the disease has accounted for 4.18% mortality (95% CI: 0.29–8.08) among confirmed cases since its emergence in 1970 [3]. The Mpox virus belongs to the genus Orthopoxvirus, the same genus as the smallpox (variola) virus. Scientists have identified two primary clades of the Mpox virus: Clade I (formerly the Congo Basin clade) and Clade II (formerly the West African clade). Clade I, which is common in the DRC, tends to cause more severe illness, has a higher mortality rate (up to 10%), and spreads more easily than Clade II. The 2022–2023 global spread of Clade IIb, primarily through sexual contact, demonstrated the virus’s potential to cause widespread outbreaks [4,5]. However, in the DRC, Mpox mainly spreads from animals to humans, with occasional human outbreaks linked to animals like rodents and other small mammals [6,7]. The clinical presentation of Mpox often resembles that of smallpox, though typically less severe. Classic symptoms include fever, lymphadenopathy, and a characteristic vesiculopustular rash, which progresses through macular, papular, vesicular, and pustular stages before crusting [8,9]. Nonetheless, notable differences have been documented in clinical presentations between several outbreaks and demographic settings [4, 10-14]. Accurate clinical diagnosis is challenged by this variability, particularly in resource-limited settings where confirmatory testing may not be available [15]. The situation is further complicated by the co-circulation of varicella-zoster virus (VZV), as Mpox cases may be misdiagnosed or underreported due to the similar cutaneous presentations caused by VZV [10, 16-17]. Up to 40% of suspected Mpox cases in the DRC may actually be VZV infections, according to study reports, highlighting the urgent need to strengthen diagnostic capacity in endemic regions [4]. The epidemiological context has become more complex due to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) as a comorbidity among some Mpox patients [18,19]. Commercial sex work along transit routes, frequent cross-border migration, and extensive social and transport networks all contribute to the regional spread of infectious diseases such as HIV and Mpox [20]. According to preliminary data, HIV-Mpox coinfection rates in this endemic context are significantly lower (˂4%), which may reflect different transmission dynamics [6]. Although the impact of HIV on the immune response in individuals infected with Clade I Mpox remains unclear, coinfection is likely to exacerbate disease severity, potentially leading to fatal outcomes in the absence of appropriate medical care [19,21]. In addition, significant obstacles to optimal surveillance and case reporting in DRC are created by insufficient healthcare infrastructure, persistent violence in eastern regions, and restricted access to diagnostics [3,15]. Although Mpox has been endemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) for over 50 years, substantial gaps remain in our understanding of its epidemiology. Reliable burden estimation and outbreak response have been hampered by uneven diagnostic methods, a lack of established case criteria, as well as genetic surveillance. However, recent advances in molecular diagnostics, such as multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays, provide new tools to enhance case detection and can differentiate Mpox from varicella-zoster virus (VZV) [10]. Nonetheless, in the majority of the country, access to these advanced diagnostic instruments is still limited [22]. These difficulties may lead to a delayed diagnosis, insufficient treatment, and a higher Mpox death rate [23]. Furthermore, the 2022 global outbreak underscores the potential for Mpox virus adaptation to sustained human-to-human transmission, highlighting the need for enhanced surveillance in endemic regions to detect changes in clinical presentation or transmission patterns [24]. It is essential to generate updated data on the clinical and paraclinical presentation of Mpox to inform the development of context-specific case definitions for the DRC. This information will also provide evidence to guide clinical management and public health interventions in this high-burden setting. The study is particularly timely given the recent increase in Mpox vaccination trials in endemic countries and the requirement for data-driven strategies to optimize their deployment [25-28]. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize data on Mpox clinical presentation and coinfection trends in the Democratic Republic of the Congo from 1970 to 2024. The study aimed to estimate the burden of VZV and HIV coinfections by analyzing data from confirmed Mpox cases.
2.1. Study Design This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the clinical presentation and co-infection patterns of Mpox cases in the DRC. The study was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [29]. 2.2. Operational Definition A suspected Mpox case was defined as an individual presenting with a vesicular or pustular rash characterized by deep-seated, firm pustules, and at least one of the following: fever preceding the rash, lymphadenopathy (inguinal, axillary, or cervical), or pustules or crusts on the palms or soles. A case was considered laboratory-confirmed Mpox if at least one specimen tested positive for Orthopoxvirus using a specific assay or Mpox-specific real-time PCR, or if Mpox was isolated in culture. A case was defined as laboratory-confirmed VZV if at least one specimen yielded a positive result in a real-time PCR assay targeting the VZV-specific DNA signature [10]. Similarly, a case was defined as laboratory-confirmed HIV if at least one specimen showed a positive result in an HIV antigen-specific assay or HIV-specific real-time PCR [5,30]. 2.3. Eligibility Criteria Observational studies reporting Mpox clinical symptoms and VZV coinfection in the DRC were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. During the screening process, duplicate publications were removed, and studies with ambiguous result definitions were excluded. There were no publication date limits, but only original research articles written in English and French were included. 2.4. Article Searching Strategy PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were systematically searched to identify eligible published studies. The search strategy included looking through titles and abstracts using a combination of keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Boolean operators (“AND” and “OR”) were used to refine the search, with terms like (monkeypox) OR (monkeypox virus) OR (human monkeypox) OR (Mpox) OR (mpox) OR (MPX) OR (epidemiology) OR (severe) AND (DRC) OR (Democratic Republic of Congo) OR (Zaire) (Supplementary File S1 and Supplementary Table S1). Additionally, a manual search was conducted to identify publications not indexed in the selected databases. The final search was completed on February 27, 2025. 2.5. Data Extraction We developed a Microsoft Excel 2016 form to collect study characteristics from all included studies. This form captured the first author’s name, study year, region, study design, study type, participant type, setting, number of confirmed VZV cases, frequency of each clinical manifestation, and the number of suspected and confirmed Mpox cases. Two authors independently evaluated the relevance and quality of each study. Discrepancies were resolved through consultation with a third author to reach consensus. 2.6. Data Quality Assessment The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) quality assessment tool [31]. The risk of bias was evaluated using nine or ten criteria, depending on the study design. (1) For cross-sectional studies, criteria included: appropriateness of the sampling frame, use of a suitable sampling technique, adequate sample size, description of study subjects and setting, sufficient data analysis, use of valid methods for identifying conditions and measurements, use of appropriate statistical analysis, and an adequate response rate (≥60%). (2) For case series, criteria included: standardized measurement and valid identification of the condition for all participants, consecutive and complete inclusion of participants, reporting of participant demographics and clinical information, reporting of outcomes or follow-up results, reporting of the presenting site(s)/clinic(s) demographic information, and statistical analysis appropriate for case series studies. Each criterion was scored as 1 (yes) or 0 (no or unclear). The overall risk of bias was categorized as low (>50%), moderate (>25–50%), or high (≤25%). 2.7. Outcome Measurement The primary outcomes of this systematic review and meta-analysis were clinical manifestations of Mpox cases and the coinfection rate of VZV and Mpox. Secondary outcomes included the HIV and Mpox coinfection rate and the prevalence of VZV among suspected Mpox cases. The VZV and Mpox coinfection rate was calculated by dividing the number of VZV and Mpox coinfected cases by the number of confirmed Mpox cases. Similarly, the HIV–Mpox coinfection rate was calculated by dividing the number of confirmed HIV and Mpox coinfected cases by the total number of confirmed Mpox cases. The prevalence of VZV among suspected Mpox cases was calculated by dividing the number of confirmed VZV cases by the total number of suspected Mpox cases. For both suspected and confirmed Mpox cases, the proportion of each clinical manifestation was determined by dividing the frequency of the manifestation by the total number of suspected or confirmed cases, respectively. 2.8. Statistical Analysis and Synthesis The heterogeneity between studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic, which classified it as low (<25%), moderate (25–75%), or high (>75%). A random-effects model was employed for analyses exhibiting heterogeneity greater than 50%. Subgroup analyses were performed according to study period, geographic region, setting, participant characteristics, study design, and disease burden. Furthermore, meta-regression explored whether study characteristics explained the variability in results. For the prevalence of VZV or HIV among suspected or confirmed Mpox cases, the time frames were defined based on major developments in healthcare systems: (1) 1970–1990: limited healthcare infrastructure in endemic regions; (2) 1991–2010: improvements in healthcare access and disease surveillance; (3) 2011–2024: strengthened global health initiatives and response systems [3]. Only study variables with meaningful and practical categories were included in the analyses. Univariable and multivariable meta-regression models were used to assess whether the pooled estimate varied according to the selected explanatory variable categories. Statistical significance was set at a p-value of <0.05. All analyses were performed using the ‘meta’ package in R Statistics version 4.4.2 [32]. 2.9. Publication Bias and Sensitivity Test Publication bias was assessed visually using a funnel plot. The asymmetry of the inverted funnel shape suggested the potential of publication bias. The trim-and-fill method was used to adjust for potential missing studies [33]. To assess the robustness of the findings, sensitivity analyses were performed by iteratively excluding one study at a time and pooling the resulting estimates.
3.1. Studies Selection A total of 157 records were found through the database search, and 4 additional reports were identified from other sources, for a total of 161 records. Nine duplicate records were removed, and 152 unique records underwent title and abstract screening prior to eligibility assessment. Ultimately, 20 study reports met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis (Figure 1). 3.2. Characteristics of Studies Included Twenty studies, conducted between 1985 and 2024 in both community and hospital settings across the DRC, were included in this comprehensive analysis. Data collection in most (n = 19) utilized surveillance and investigation, targeting the general population and healthcare workers to describe VZV, HIV, and Mpox coinfection and the clinical features of suspected and confirmed Mpox cases (Table 1): Characteristics of studies assessing Mpox in DRC. 1 Date of study completion; VZV: Varicella-Zoster Virus; Surveillance and Investigation Report (Case reports and Case series); NR: Not Reported; DRC: Democratic Republic of Congo; PCR: Polymerase Chain Reaction. 3.3. Varicella-Zoster Virus Prevalence Among Suspected Mpox Cases The national pooled prevalence rate of VZV among 64,131 suspected Mpox caseswas 16.73% (95% CI: 5.36–28.10; n = 8), with I2 = 99.4% (p ˂ 0.001) (Figure 2). The subgroup analysis reveals a notable increase in the suspected Mpox event rate from 1.19% (95% CI: 0.39–2.76; n = 1 study) in 1991–2010 to 19.06% (95% CI: 6.96–31.17; n = 7 studies) in 2011–2024. Substantial heterogeneity (p ˂ 0.001) was observed across most subgroups, indicating considerable variation in event rates between studies. Regionally, the highest proportion was observed in the Northeastern region (32.61%; 95% CI: 24.88–41.10; n = 1 study), and among healthcare workers (14.29%; 95% CI: 1.78–42.81; n = 1 study), while setting and participant type also demonstrated varying event rates (Table 2 and Supplementary File S2, Supplementary Figures S1–S5). Subgroup meta-analysis of the pooled estimate of varicella-zoster virus proportion among suspected Mpox cases in DRC. 1 Random effects model; CI: Confidence Interval; 2 1970–1990: Limited healthcare infrastructure in endemic regions; 1991–2010: Improvements in healthcare access and disease surveillance; 2011–2024: Strengthened global health initiatives and response systems; 3 Northeastern = Bas-Uélé, Central/Western= Tshuapa and Kasai oriental; HCW: Healthcare Worker. 3.4. Varicella-Zoster Virus and Mpox Coinfection A total of 1841 confirmed Mpox cases were analyzed, and the pooled coinfection rate of VZV was estimated at 9.69% (95% CI: 1.33–18.06; n = 8 studies) in the country. Significant heterogeneity was observed across these studies (I2 = 96.9%, p < 0.001) (Figure 3). The subgroup analysis of coinfection cases indicates relatively stable event rates across the study periods of 1991–2010 (12.50%; 95% CI: 1.55–38.35; n = 1 study) and 2011–2024 (9.47%; 95% CI: 0.11–18.82; n = 7 studies), although the latter period benefits from more extensive data (n = 7 studies). Significant heterogeneity (p < 0.001) was prevalent across several subgroups, suggesting considerable variability in event rates between studies. Regionally, Equateur reported an event rate of 11.10% (95% CI: 1.69–20.51; n = 6) while Kivu regions showed a higher rate (33.33%; 95% CI: 0.84–90.7) based on limited data (n = 1). Similarly, event rates varied across participant types and disease burden categories, often showing substantial heterogeneity (Table 3; Supplementary File S3, Figures S1–S5). Subgroup meta-analysis of the pooled estimate of varicella-zoster virus and Mpox coinfection in DRC. 1 Random effects model; CI: Confidence interval; 2 1970–1990: Limited healthcare infrastructure in endemic regions; 1991–2010: Improvements in healthcare access and disease surveillance; 2011–2024: Strengthened global health initiatives and response systems; 3 Equateur = Equateur, Tshuapa and Bas-Uélé; Kivu = North and South Kivu; * Fixed effect model applied. 3.5. HIV and Mpox Coinfection The HIV coinfection rate among 1652 confirmed Mpox cases was 0.52% (95% CI: 0.18–0.87) with a low heterogeneity (I2 = 39.2%, p = 0.160) between studies included (n = 5) (Figure 4). The meta-analysis of HIV and Mpox coinfection in the DRC indicates a generally low pooled proportion, with a slight increase observed in 2011–2024 (0.52%; 95% CI: 0.18–0.87; n = 4 studies) compared to earlier (0.00%; 95% CI: 0.00–40.96; n = 1 study). Regional variations showed a higher proportion in South Kivu (1.64%; 95% CI: 0.61–2.66; n = 3 studies). Furthermore, a higher coinfection proportion was found in settings with a lower Mpox burden (3.01%; 95% CI: 0.34–5.68; n = 3 studies) (Table 4, Supplementary File S4, Supplementary Figures S1–S5). Subgroup meta-analysis of the pooled estimate proportion of HIV and Mpox coinfection in DRC. 1 Fixed effects model; CI: Confidence interval; 2 1970–1990: Limited healthcare infrastructure in endemic regions; 1991–2010: Improvements in healthcare access and disease surveillance; 2011–2024: Strengthened global health initiatives and response systems; 3 Equateur: Equateur, Tshuapa, and Bas-Uélé; Kivu: North and South Kivu. 3.6. Mpox Clinical Profile This comprehensive analysis of confirmed Mpox cases in the DRC reveals distinct clinical patterns, with rash being the most universal manifestation (99.97%; 95% CI: 99.85–100.00%), followed by painful lesions (78.17%) and malaise (77.14%). Genital lesions (60.97%) and oral lesions (41.22%) were observed with notable frequency, while systemic symptoms such as fever (67.94%) and lymphadenopathy (71.99%) were also commonly reported. High heterogeneity (I2 > 90% for most symptoms, p < 0.001) in the data indicates variation between studies. Severe manifestations like convulsions (0.23%), hemorrhagic lesions (2.78%), and hypothermia (1.39%) were rare but documented (Table 5, Figure 5, and Supplementary File S5, Supplementary Figure S1). Clinical pattern of confirmed Mpox cases in DRC. k = Number of studies; CI: Confidence interval; 1: Random effect model. A similar clinical pattern was observed among suspected Mpox cases, with nearly universal presentation of rash (99.43%, 95% CI: 98.92–99.94) and fever (98.91%, 95% CI: 98.32–99.50). Painful lesions (91.17%) and lymphadenopathy (68.93%) were also prevalent, while systemic symptoms such as fatigue (58.11%) and myalgia (49.49%) were moderately prevalent. Notably, conjunctivitis (9.92%) and diarrhea (10.91%) were infrequent but non-negligible. Heterogeneity was high for most symptoms (I2 > 90%, p < 0.001). Rare but severe clinical features, such as bedridden status (18.44%), and demographic-specific patterns, including genital lesions (34.00%), were also reported (Supplementary File S6, Supplementary Table S1, Supplementary Figures S1 and S2). 3.7. Meta-Regression Analysis The multivariate analysis of suspected Mpox cases revealed a significant temporal increase in VZV prevalence (β = 0.2247, p < 0.001), while regional studies showed significantly higher VZV estimates than nationwide estimates (β = 4.7148, p < 0.001). For confirmed Mpox cases, regional studies had higher VZV estimates (β = 4.2220, p = 0.018). South Kivu exhibited significantly higher HIV coinfection rates among confirmed Mpox cases compared to other regions (β = 3.608, p = 0.002). Participant type (p = 0.577 and p = 0.266), disease burden for suspected cases (p = 0.164), study year for confirmed cases (p = 0.959), study design (p = 0.826), and setting (p = 0.159) did not significantly explain heterogeneity in either univariable or multivariable analysis (Table 6). Meta-regression to explore sources of heterogeneity in the pooled estimate of varicella-zoster virus infection among suspected and confirmed Mpox cases in the DRC, 1970–2024. 1 Redundant predictor dropped from the model; VZV: Varicella-zoster virus; HIV: Human immunodeficiency virus; Others included Sankuru and Tshuapa Regions; SIR: Surveillance and investigation report (Case series). 3.8. Publication Bias The funnel plot asymmetry suggested a risk of publication bias for our study outcomes. The trim-and-fill analysis indicated the presence of four potentially missing studies, which did not substantially alter the pooled VZV prevalence among suspected Mpox cases, remaining at 16.7% (95% CI: 5.36–28.10) to 2.73% (95% CI: 0.00–18.47). After adjusting for three potentially missing studies, the pooled varicella-zoster virus and Mpox coinfection rate was 4.00% (95% CI: 0.00–13.85), not significantly different from the initial pooled estimate of 9.69% (95% CI: 1.33–18.06). Regarding HIV–Mpox coinfection, the trim-and-fill analysis suggested two potentially missing studies; however, their inclusion did not significantly alter the initial pooled rate of 0.52% (95% CI: 0.18–0.87) to 0.70% (95% CI: 0.00–1.60). (Supplementary Files S2–S4, Supplementary Figures S6 and S7). 3.9. Sensitivity Test Analysis Sensitivity analysis of the pooled VZV prevalence among suspected Mpox cases demonstrated stable estimates (95% CI: 1.88–2.17%) when individual studies were sequentially excluded, supporting the robustness of the primary findings. However, exclusion of the Bangwen et al. study [17] resulted in an outlier effect (8.60%; 95% CI: 7.78–9.43), indicating that this study disproportionately influenced the meta-analysis, potentially due to unique sample characteristics or methodological differences. Sensitivity analysis of the pooled VZV–Mpox coinfection rate also demonstrated stable estimates (95% CI: 0.47–3.88 events per 100 observations) when most studies were sequentially excluded. Conversely, excluding the Kinganda-Lusamaki et al. study [16] increased the estimate to 11.66 events per 100 observations, highlighting its outlier influence on the pooled results. The exclusion of any study from the meta-analysis had no significant impact on the pooled estimates of the HIV and Mpox coinfection rate (Supplementary File S2; Supplementary Figure S8, Supplementary File S3; Supplementary Figure S7, and Supplementary Figure S8, respectively).
Author
Study
Year 1Region
Setting
Study Population
Study Type
Sampling
Risk of Bias
Outcome of Interest
VZV Among
Confirmed Mpox CaseHIV Among Confirmed Mpox Cases
Summary of Findings
Jezek et al. [34]
1985
Nationwide
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
Clinical feature
NR
NR
Unvaccinated individuals, particularly young children, experienced an 11–15% case-fatality rate, while vaccinated individuals showed no deaths and altered disease presentation.
Hutin et al. [30]
1997
Sankuru
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
Clinical feature
NR
Yes, n = 0
This outbreak was characterized by notable attack and case-fatality rates. The cessation of smallpox vaccination in 1983, following global eradication, contributed to an increased population susceptibility to monkeypox.
Aplogan et al. [35]
1997
Kasai Oriental
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection
No
NR
There was a high prevalence of Mpox among children and a mix of primary and secondary transmission patterns across numerous villages. The outbreak was localized, and secondary transmission was facilitated by travel and close contact within households and neighborhoods.
Meyer et al. [36]
2001
Equateur
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection
Yes, n = 2
NR
Two outbreaks were confirmed as monkeypox (4 deaths), two as co-infection of monkeypox and chickenpox (1 death), two as chickenpox (no deaths), and one outbreak yielded no viral evidence (no deaths).
Pittman et al. [12]
2022
Sankuru
Hospital
General population
Cross-sectional study
Non-probabilistic
Moderate
Clinical feature
NR
NR
Clinical course of Mpox in 216 PCR-confirmed cases revealed a 1.4% mortality rate and significant fetal loss in pregnant patients. Key findings included a high prevalence of rash and lymphadenopathy, with younger children exhibiting higher lesion counts and severe disease being associated with hypoalbuminemia and elevated viral load.
Nolen et al. [37]
2012
Tshuapa
Hospital
General population and healthcare workers
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection
Yes, n = 0
NR
Half of the possible cases were lab-confirmed monkeypox. 50% household attack rate, multiple family transmissions, and a mean 8-day incubation period (4–14 days) were observed.
Hughes et al. [11]
2014
Tshuapa
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection and Clinical features
Yes, n = 134
NR
A significant proportion of Mpox cases were co-infected with VZV, with atypical clinical presentations that highlight the complex interplay between these two viruses.
Petersen et al. [38]
2014
Tshuapa
Community
Healthcare worker
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection
Yes, n = 1
NR
These findings suggest that while a smallpox vaccination scar may offer some protection against monkeypox, healthcare workers remain at risk of infection. The presence of co-infections further complicates the picture.
Osadebe et al. [4]
2014
Tshuapa
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection and Clinical features
No
NR
Laboratory-confirmed Mpox and VZV cases presented with many of the same signs and symptoms, and the analysis here emphasized the utility of including 12 specific signs/symptoms when investigating Mpox cases
McCollum et al. [39]
2014
Kivu (North and South)
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection
Yes, n = 1
NR
Report of the first confirmed cases of monkeypox (MPX) in forested areas of North and South Kivu Provinces, which aligns with ecological predictions for suitable Mpox transmission zones.
Whitehouse et al. [10]
2014
Tshuapa
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection and Clinical features
Yes, n = 169
Yes, n = 4
Increased incidence compared to previous decades, likely due to waning smallpox immunity. While males generally had higher infection rates, females reported frequent contact with symptomatic individuals. Animal exposures were most common in males.
Mande et al. [40]
2019
Bas-Uélé
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection and Clinical features
Yes, n = 0
NR
Among 77 suspected cases, PCR revealed 27.3% monkeypox, 58.4% chickenpox, and 14.3% negative. Monkeypox cases showed distinct skin lesions.
Ngbolua et al. [41]
2019
North Ubangui
Hospital
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
High
Clinical feature
NR
NR
Three cases of monkeypox in young males with similar clinical presentations, including fever, rash, itching, and abdominal pain. No cases of death.
Kinganda-Lusamaki et al. [16]
2022
Nationwide
Community and Hospital
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection and Clinical features
Yes, n = 0
NR
Adding antibody testing to PCR nearly doubled Mpox detection rates in the DRC (48% vs 34% with PCR alone), revealing hidden outbreaks in 14 additional health zones and proving current surveillance misses over 40% of cases.
Kibungu et al. [13]
2023
Kwango
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
Clinical feature
NR
NR
A cluster of clades I monkeypox cases in the DRC shows sexual transmission, indicating this route is not limited to clade IIb.
Bangwen et al. [17]
2023
Nationwide
Community and Hospital
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
VZV coinfection
No
NR
There was a fourfold increase in incidence between 2010 and 2023, a wider geographic spread, and a high fatality rate in young children.
Brosius et al. [5]
2024
South Kivu
Hospital
General population
Cross-sectional study
Non-probabilistic
Moderate
Clinical feature
NR
Yes, n = 6
Most suspected cases were PCR-positive for Mpox. Most cases reported contact with known Mpox, primarily spouses/partners in adults and family in children. Genital lesions were common in adults. Hospitalized mortality was low.
Mukadi-Bamuleka et al. [14]
2024
North Kivu
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
Clinical feature
NR
NR
Clade Ib monkeypox was introduced into North Kivu, including displacement camps, with suspected non-intimate contact transmission, affecting children.
Vakaniaki et al. [42]
2024
South Kivu
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
Clinical feature
NR
Yes, n = 3
The Mpox outbreak in eastern DRC was caused by a distinct Clade I Mpox lineage that differed from historical zoonotic patterns. The outbreak, predominantly affecting young adults, including a significant proportion of female sex workers, suggests a shift towards human-to-human transmission, potentially involving sexual contact.
Masirika et al. [6]
2024
South Kivu
Community
General population
Surveillance and investigation report
Non-probabilistic
Low
Clinical feature
NR
Yes, n = 2
The findings suggest heterosexual close contact as the main transmission route, highlighting the increased risk for sex workers and their clients in this region.
Subgroup
Suspected Mpox Cases
Event Rate 1 (%)
95% CI Limits 1
Number of Studies
Heterogeneity Statistic 1
Study period 2
Lower
Upper
I2 (%)
p-Value
1991–2010
419
1.19
0.39
2.76
1
-
-
2011–2024
63,712
19.06
6.96
31.17
7
99.5
˂0.001
Region 3
Northeastern
138
32.61
24.88
41.10
1
-
-
Central/Western
2833
18.93
3.31
34.54
5
99.6
˂0.001
Nationwide
61,160
3.84
0.00
7.86
2
92.7
˂0.001
Setting
Community
3434
18.96
6.75
31.16
7
99.4
˂0.001
Online
60,697
1.93
1.83
28.10
1
-
-
Participant
General population
64,013
19.05
4.76
33.33
6
99.6
˂0.001
General population and HCWs
104
4.81
1.58
10.86
1
-
-
HCWs
14
14.29
1.78
42.81
1
-
-
Disease burden (suspected Mpox cases)
˂400
256
17.25
0.00
34.69
3
94.8
˂0.001
≥400
63,875
16.46
0.25
32.67
5
99.7
˂0.001
Subgroup
Confirmed Mpox Cases
Event Rate 1 (%)
95% CI Limits 1
Number of Studies
Heterogeneity Statistic 1
Study period 2
Lower
Upper
I2 (%)
p-value
1991–2010
16
12.50
1.55
38.35
1
-
-
2011–2024
1825
9.47
0.11
18.82
7
98.1
˂0.001
Region 3
Equateur
1684
11.10
1.69
20.51
6
96.7
˂0.001
Kivu
3
33.33
0.84
90.7
1
-
-
Nationwide
154
0.00
0.00
2.37
1
-
-
Participant
General population
1785
11.33
1.42
21.24
6
98.4
˂0.001
General population and HCWs
50
0
0.00
7.11
1
-
-
HCWs
6
16.67
0.42
64.12
1
-
-
Disease burden (confirmed cases)
˂40
46
2.51
0.00
8.19
4
29.1 *
0.237
≥40
1795
10.21
0.00
22.35
4
99.1
˂0.001
Subgroup
Confirmed Cases
Event Rate 1 (%)
95% CI Limits 1
Number of Studies
Heterogeneity Statistic 1
Study period 2
Lower
Upper
I2 (%)
p-value
1991–2010
7
0.00
0.00
40.96
1
-
-
2011–2024
1645
0.52
0.18
0.87
4
54.4
0.087
Region 3
South Kivu
588
1.64
0.61
2.66
3
0.0
0.483
Other
1064
0.38
0.01
0.75
2
0.0
0.965
Study design
Cross-sectional
431
1.39
0.51
3.01
1
-
-
Surveillance and Investigation
1221
0.43
0.06
0.79
4
24.1
0.267
Study setting
Community
1221
0.43
0.06
0.79
4
24.1
0.267
Hospital
431
1.39
0.51
3.01
1
-
-
Disease burden (confirmed cases)
˂110
164
3.01
0.34
5.68
3
0.0
0.866
≥110
1488
0.48
0.13
0.83
2
65.5
0.089
Rank
Clinical Manifestation
Confirmed Cases Examined (n)
Frequency (%)
95% CI Limits
k
Heterogeneity Statistic 1
Lower
Upper
I2 (%)
p-value
1
Rash
2987
99.97
99.85
100.00
9
73.2
˂0.001
2
Painful lesion
426
78.17
74.25
82.09
1
-
-
3
Malaise
963
77.14
69.10
85.18
3
88.5
˂0.001
4
Pruritus or itchy lesion
1764
74.73
52.41
97.05
4
99.1
˂0.001
5
Palm lesions
1067
71.54
46.04
97.04
4
99.5
˂0.001
6
Lymphadenopathy
2943
71.99
59.27
84.71
9
98.7
˂0.001
7
Fatigue or asthenia
1029
70.25
43.92
96.57
5
98.9
˂0.001
8
Fever
2936
67.94
43.00
92.88
9
99.9
˂0.001
9
Genital lesions
1015
60.97
31.24
90.70
5
99.0
˂0.001
10
Chills or sweat
1714
60.95
34.53
87.38
5
97.4
˂0.001
11
Sore throat or dysphagia
2923
61.26
47.88
74.65
7
96.8
˂0.001
12
Sole lesions
1067
61.17
31.91
90.43
4
99.6
˂0.001
13
Headache
2222
57.42
37.66
77.17
7
98.8
˂0.001
14
Myalgia
1896
54.07
27.39
80.75
6
99.6
˂0.001
15
Anorexia
645
53.86
47.18
60.55
2
63.4
0.098
16
Cough
2928
40.88
29.62
52.15
8
95.7
˂0.001
17
Oral lesions
2910
41.22
28.68
53.76
9
97.6
˂0.001
18
Dysuria
425
39.53
34.88
44.18
1
-
-
19
Light sensitivity
1322
33.05
30.52
35.59
2
0.0
0.809
20
Anal lesions
645
31.55
27.17
35.94
1
-
-
21
Rhinorrhea
216
31.02
24.85
37.19
1
-
-
22
Abdominal pain
640
26.90
20.02
33.78
2
73.4
0.052
23
Painful eye
426
19.95
16.26
24.07
1
-
-
24
Corneal lesions
303
19.54
0.00
52.54
2
90.1
0.002
25
Bedridden status
2206
18.59
7.56
29.62
5
99.0
˂0.001
26
Vomiting or nausea
2264
16.42
7.98
24.83
5
97.3
˂0.001
27
Conjunctivitis
2399
14.13
7.64
20.62
7
97.0
˂0.001
28
Joint pain
216
13.89
9.28
18.50
1
-
-
29
Back pain
216
11.57
7.31
15.84
1
-
-
30
Rectal pain
424
10.85
7.89
13.81
1
-
-
31
Dyspnea
926
10.47
6.55
14.40
3
75.4
0.017
32
Diarrhea
926
7.71
2.93
12.49
3
86.9
˂0.001
33
Ear pain
216
6.94
3.55
10.33
1
-
-
34
Visual Problem
642
6.02
0.00
13.41
2
94.5
˂0.001
35
Chest pain
216
5.09
2.16
8.02
1
-
-
36
Hematuria
428
5.14
3.05
7.23
1
-
-
37
Confusion
645
4.10
1.00
7.20
2
68.7
0.074
38
Neck stiffness
216
4.17
1.50
6.83
1
-
-
39
Dehydration
216
3.24
0.88
5.60
1
-
-
40
Hemorrhagic skin lesions
216
2.78
0.59
4.97
1
-
-
41
Petechiae
216
0.93
0.00
2.20
1
-
-
42
Hypothermia
216
1.39
0.00
2.95
1
-
-
43
Convulsions
429
0.23
0.00
0.69
1
-
-
44
Hearing
216
0.46
0.00
1.37
1
-
-
45
Oedema
216
0.46
0.00
1.37
1
-
-
Epidemiological Estimate
Moderator
Univariate
Multivariate
Unadjusted coefficient (β)
p-value
Adjusted coefficient (β)
p-value
VZV among suspected Mpox cases
Study year
Years
0.0532
0.489
0.2247
<0.001
Region
Regional vs. Nationwide
−1.5582
0.192
4.7148
<0.001
Participant
General population vs. Other
0.2986
0.833
0.5377
0.577
Disease burden 1
˂400 vs. ≥400
0.5960
0.627
−1.2899
0.164
VZV among confirmed Mpox cases
Study year
Years
−0.1049
0.293
0.0046
0.959
Region
Regional vs. Nationwide
4.1257
0.006
4.2220
0.018
Participant
General population vs. Other
0.8139
0.554
1.2466
0.266
Disease burden
˂40 vs. ≥40
0.7141
0.5589
0.0275
0.976
HIV among confirmed Mpox cases
Study year
Years
−0.0030
0.964
−0.1592
0.063
Region
South Kivu vs. Others
1.3090
0.087
3.608
0.002
Study design 1
SIR vs. Cross-sectional
0.3004
0.826
-
-
Setting
Hospital vs. Community
−0.3004
0.826
−0.863
0.159
Disease burden 1
˂110 vs. ≥110
1.5627
0.033
-
-
4.1. Varicella-Zoster Virus-Mpox Coinfection A pooled VZV coinfection rate of 9.69% was found in our meta-analysis among 1841 confirmed Mpox cases in the DRC. Significant heterogeneity indicated substantial variation among the included studies. Subgroup analyses provided additional information on these differences. Despite increased surveillance efforts in the later period, coinfection rates remained temporally stable, with comparable rates observed during 1991–2010 and 2011–2024. Regional variation was evident, with the Equateur region reporting a coinfection rate of 11.10% (six studies) and the Kivu region demonstrating a higher rate of 33.33% (single study). The clinical similarities between VZV and Mpox rashes may result in diagnostic overlap and misclassification, particularly in settings with limited access to PCR confirmation [43]. The temporal stability of coinfection rates, despite improved diagnostics after 2010, suggests the influence of persistent underlying ecological drivers, such as deforestation and human encroachment [3]. The observed coinfection rates in this study were lower than those reported in studies from Nigeria, where 27–81% of confirmed Mpox cases were found to be coinfected with VZV [28,44]. Meanwhile, a study conducted in Belgium reported no cases of VZV among confirmed Mpox cases, suggesting that VZV did not cocirculate in the population at risk for Mpox during the Belgian 2022 outbreak, and also that Mpox does not commonly trigger reactivation of latent VZV in adult men [45]. VZV coinfection could be associated with greater disease severity and complications among confirmed Mpox cases in the DRC, consistent with findings from Nigeria, where coinfected individuals exhibited more complications than Mpox-only cases(56.3% vs. 22.5%, p = 0.015) [44]. In addition, in certain epidemiological contexts, rodents infected with poxvirus may transmit the disease via VZV skin lesions, potentially resulting in coinfection. Based on that hypothesis, the authors concluded that varicella infection is a risk factor for the acquisition of Mpox [46]. These findings have important implications for clinical practice and public health strategies in the DRC. To reliably differentiate between VZV–Mpox coinfections and single infections, the authors emphasize the need for dual diagnostic approaches, which may include PCR and serological testing [12]. Furthermore, due to their potentially more severe clinical presentation, coinfected patients may require additional care during hospitalization [44]. 4.2. HIV-Mpox Coinfection Among 1,652 confirmed Mpox cases, the HIV coinfection rate was 0.52%, with low heterogeneity observed across the five included studies. On the other hand, within a gender-specific group from industrialized nations, a study found a much greater percentage of HIV coinfection among confirmed Mpox cases (35%) [21]. According to a meta-analysis, those who had both HIV and Mpox were more likely to be hospitalized than people who just had Mpox (OR = 1.85; 95% CI 0.918–3.719; p = 0.085). These findings provide evidence that HIV–Mpox coinfection negatively affects clinical outcomes, including mortality [18]. Similar conclusions have been reported in a study from Nigeria [19]. 4.3. Mpox Clinical Pattern Rash, painful lesions, and malaise were the predominant clinical manifestations, suggesting that these symptoms should be incorporated into Mpox case definitions. The high heterogeneity among studies highlights significant inconsistency in clinical reporting [1]. The WHO and CDC case definitions, which emphasize rash as a cardinal symptom for probable Mpox, are consistent with the nearly universal prevalence of rash [1,9]. The high prevalence of painful lesions represents an important diagnostic marker for differentiating Mpox in endemic regions, despite being reported in only a single study. This result validates the DRC guidelines’ inclusion of painful rash in clinical algorithms [1]. Differential diagnosis is further complicated by the predominance of systemic symptoms, such as fever and lymphadenopathy, which overlap with malaria, VZV, and other febrile illnesses endemic to the DRC [47,48]. However, afebrile rash presentations should not be excluded from Mpox due to the reduced fever prevalence relative to rash, which challenges previous definitions that required fever as a criterion [49]. This study underscores the need to broaden clinical criteria to capture atypical presentations [50]. Given the overlapping symptoms with other endemic diseases, the high heterogeneity (I2 > 90%) in symptom reporting highlights the significance of standardizing clinical assessments and implementing dual-pathogen testing (Mpox/VZV PCR) to improve diagnostic accuracy [10]. 4.4. Strengths and Limitations This review has several limitations. The limited number of included studies (<10) restricted the assessment of publication bias to the funnel plot, as conventional methods such as Egger’s and Begg’s tests could not be applied. Furthermore, the precision of the results was limited by wide confidence intervals due to small sample sizes in certain subgroup analyses. Nonetheless, the strength of this systematic review and meta-analysis lies in its provision of valuable insights into Mpox coinfection with other viral pathogens, such as VZV and HIV, in the DRC. The results emphasize the necessity of public health surveillance and actions to lessen and avoid disease complications among infected patients.
The clinical profile of Mpox in the DRC is characterized by an almost universal presentation of rash and frequent systemic symptoms, including malaise and painful lesions. This study also identifies inadequacies in the current case definitions and surveillance methods. There is a need for standardized, context-specific diagnostic methods that incorporate dual-pathogen testing and expand criteria to detect atypical presentations. This is highlighted by the considerable variability in symptom reporting and the significant rates of VZV coinfection. To enhance early detection and epidemic response in Africa’s highest-burden settings, where Mpox remains a significant public health concern, these findings highlight the need for increased investment in laboratory capacity, healthcare worker training, and region-specific surveillance systems.
CI
Confidence interval
DRC
Democratic Republic of Congo
HCW
Healthcare worker
HIV
Human immunodeficiency virus
MeSH
Medical subject headings
Mpox
Monkeypox
PCR
Polymerase Chain Reaction
PRISMA
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis
VZV
Varicella-zoster Virus
Conceptualization: F.Z.L.C.; Methodology: F.Z.L.C., C.A., W.N.B., and C.T.A; Data curation: F.Z.L.C.; Software: F.Z.L.C.; Validation: F.Z.L.C.; Formal analysis: F.Z.L.C.; Investigation: F.Z.L.C., C.A., and C.T.A; Resources: All authors; Writing—original draft preparation: F.Z.L.C.; Writing—review and editing: All authors; Visualization: F.Z.L.C. and W.N.B.; Supervision: F.Z.L.C.; Project administration: F.Z.L.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The data sources supporting this systematic review are available in the references. All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and supplemental material.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The study did not receive any external funding and was conducted using only institutional resources.
This systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
None Declared.
Supplementary material associated with this article can be downloaded from here.
The AI tools (Gemini and Deepseek) were used to correct grammatical errors and ensure flow between different ideas presented in the text. The authors fully endorsed the content and findings in the present research article.
[1] Mpox WHO, Geneva. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mpox (accessed on 27 April 2025).
[2] Djuicy, D.D.; Sadeuh-Mba, S.A.; Bilounga, C.N.; Yonga, M.G.; Tchatchueng-Mbougua, J.B.; Essima, G.D.; Esso, L.; Nguidjol, I.M.; Metomb, S.F.; Chebo, C.; et al. Concurrent Clade I and Clade II Monkeypox Virus Circulation, Cameroon, 1979–2022. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2024, 30, 432–443. [CrossRef]
[3] Cheuyem, F.Z.L.; Zemsi, A.; Ndungo, J.H.; Achangwa, C.; Takpando-le-grand, D.R.; Goupeyou-Youmsi, J.M.; Dabou, S.; Adama, M.; Nouko, A.; Mbang, M.A.; et al. Mpox Severity and Mortality in the Most Endemic Focus in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (1970–2024). MedRxiv 2025. [CrossRef]
[4] Osadebe, L.; Hughes, C.M.; Lushima, R.S.; Kabamba, J.; Nguete, B.; Malekani, J.; Pukuta, E.; Karhemere, S.; Tamfum, J.J.M.; Okitolonda, E.W.; et al. Enhancing Case Definitions for Surveillance of Human Monkeypox in the Democratic Republic of Congo. PLoS Neglected Trop. Dis. 2017, 11, e0005857. [CrossRef]
[5] Brosius, I.; Vakaniaki, E.H.; Mukari, G.; Munganga, P.; Tshomba, J.C.; Vos, E.D.; Bangwen, E.; Mujula, Y.; Tsoumanis, A.; Van Dijck, C.; et al. Epidemiological and Clinical Features of Mpox During the Clade Ib Outbreak in South Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo: A Prospective Cohort Study. Lancet 2025, 405, 547–559. [CrossRef]
[6] Masirika, L.M.; Udahemuka, J.C.; Ndishimye, P.; Martinez, G.S.; Kelvin, P.; Nadine, M.B.; Steeven, B.K.; Mweshi, F.K.; Mambo, L.M.; Munnink, B.B.O.; et al. Epidemiology, Clinical Characteristics, and Transmission Patterns of a Novel Mpox (Monkeypox) Outbreak in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC): An Observational, Cross-Sectional Cohort Study. MedRxiv 2024. [CrossRef]
[7] Dieu-Merci, K.Y.; Singa Valentin, B.; Ley, B.L.; Antoine, E.L.; Guild, A.K.; Lwanga, K.A.K.U.L.E. MPOX: Epidemiological Profile and Factors Associated with Its Emergence in the Isangi Territory, Democratic Republic of Congo. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Rev. 2024, 5, 27–43. [CrossRef]
[8] WHO|The World Health Organisation. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. Available online: https://covid19.who.int (accessed on 20 October 2022).
[9] CDC. Signs and Symptoms of Mpox. CDC, Atlanta.:, 2024. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/mpox/signs-symptoms/index.html (accessed on 27 April 2025).
[10] Whitehouse, E.R.; Bonwitt, J.; Hughes, C.M.; Lushima, R.S.; Likafi, T.; Nguete, B.; Kabamba, J.; Monroe, B.; Doty, J.B.; Nakazawa, Y.; et al. Clinical and Epidemiological Findings from Enhanced Monkeypox Surveillance in Tshuapa Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo During 2011–2015. J. Infect. Dis. 2021, 223, 1870–1878. [CrossRef]
[11] Hughes, C.M.; Liu, L.; Davidson, W.B.; Radford, K.W.; Wilkins, K.; Monroe, B.; Metcalfe, M.G.; Likafi, T.; Lushima, R.S.; Kabamba, J.; et al. A Tale of Two Viruses: Coinfections of Monkeypox and Varicella Zoster Virus in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2021, 104, 604–611. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Pittman, P.R.; Martin, J.W.; Kingebeni, P.M.; Tamfum, J.J.M.; Mwema, G.; Wan, Q.; Ewala, P.; Alonga, J.; Bilulu, G.; Reynolds, M.G.; et al. Clinical Characterization and Placental Pathology of Mpox Infection in Hospitalized Patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. PLoS Neglected Trop. Dis. 2023, 17, e0010384. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Kibungu, E.M.; Vakaniaki, E.H.; Kinganda-Lusamaki, E.; Kalonji-Mukendi, T.; Pukuta, E.; Hoff, N.A.; Bogoch, I.I.; Cevik, M.; Gonsalves, G.S.; Hensley, L.E.; et al. Clade I–Associated Mpox Cases Associated with Sexual Contact, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2024, 30, 172–176. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Mukadi-Bamuleka, D.; Kinganda-Lusamaki, E.; Mulopo-Mukanya, N.; Amuri-Aziza, A.; O’Toole, Á.; Modadra-Madakpa, B.; Mutombo, G.; Ndongala; Vakaniaki, E.H.; Merritt, S.; Kacita, C.; et al. First Imported Cases of MPXV Clade Ib in Goma, Democratic Republic of the Congo: Implications for Global Surveillance and Transmission Dynamics. MedRxiv 2024. [CrossRef]
[15] Mpox—Democratic Republic of the Congo. WHO, Geneva. Available online: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2024-DON522 (accessed on 27 April 2025).
[16] Kinganda-Lusamaki, E.; Baketana, L.K.; Ndomba-Mukanya, E.; Bouillin, J.; Thaurignac, G.; Aziza, A.A.; Luakanda-Ndelemo, G.; Nuñez, N.F.; Kalonji-Mukendi, T.; Pukuta, E.S.; et al. Use of Mpox Multiplex Serology in the Identification of Cases and Outbreak Investigations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Pathogens 2023, 12, 916. [CrossRef]
[17] Bangwen, E.; Diavita, R.; Vos, E.D.; Vakaniaki, E.H.; Nundu, S.S.; Mutombo, A.; Mulangu, F.; Abedi, A.A.; Malembi, E.; Kalonji, T.; et al. Suspected and Confirmed Mpox Cases in DR Congo: A Retrospective Analysis of National Epidemiological and Laboratory Surveillance Data, 2010–2023. Lancet 2025, 405, 408–419. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Taha, A.M.; Elrosasy, A.; Mahmoud, A.M.; Saed, S.A.A.; Moawad, W.A.E.; Hamouda, E.; Nguyen, D.; Tran, V.P.; Pham, H.T.; Sah, S.; et al. The Effect of HIV and Mpox Co-Infection on Clinical Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Hiv. Med. 2024, 25, 897–909. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Mmerem, J.I.; Johnson, S.M.; Iroezindu, M.O. Monkeypox and Chickenpox Co-Infection in a Person Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus. J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 2024, 18, 1152–1156. [CrossRef]
[20] Tati, G. Territory and Border Crossing for Livelihoods Among (Voluntary and Forced) Migrants from DRC to Swaziland: The Re-Imagining of a Borderless Spatial System. In Crossing African Borders: Migration and Mobility; Centro de Estudos Internacionais: Lisboa, Portugal, 2012; pp. 126–144. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338143447_Territory_and_border_crossing_for_livelihoods_among_voluntary_and_forced_migrants_from_DRC_to_Swaziland_the_re-imagining_of_a_borderless_spatial_system.
[21] Liu, B.M.; Rakhmanina, N.Y.; Yang, Z.; Bukrinsky, M.I. Mpox (Monkeypox) Virus and Its Co-Infection with HIV, Sexually Transmitted Infections, or Bacterial Superinfections: Double Whammy or a New Prime Culprit? Viruses 2024, 16, 784. [CrossRef]
[22] Doshi, R.H.; Guagliardo, S.A.J.; Dzabatou-Babeaux, A.; Likouayoulou, C.; Ndakala, N.; Moses, C.; Olson, V.; McCollum, A.M.; Petersen, B.W. Strengthening of Surveillance During Monkeypox Outbreak, Republic of the Congo, 2017. Emerg Infect Dis. 2018, 24, 1158–1160. [CrossRef]
[23] Musuka, G.; Moyo, E.; Tungwarara, N.; Mhango, M.; Pierre, G.; Saramba, E.; Iradukunda, P.G.; Dzinamarira, T. A Critical Review of Mpox Outbreaks, Risk Factors, and Prevention Efforts in Africa: Lessons Learned and Evolving Practices. IJID Reg. 2024, 12, 100402. [CrossRef]
[24] Martins-Filho, P.R.; Dorea, F.C.M.; Sena, L.O.C.; Bezerra, G.V.B.; Teixeira, D.C.P.; Damaso, C.R.; Menezes, V.D.J.; de Souza, M.F.; Góis, M.A.O.; dos Santos, C.A. First Reports of Monkeypox and Varicella-Zoster Virus Coinfection in the Global Human Monkeypox Outbreak in 2022. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2023, 51, 102510. [CrossRef]
[25] Du, M.; Niu, B.; Liu, J. The Research and Development Landscape for Mpox Vaccines. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2025, 25, e198–e199. [CrossRef]
[26] Shafaati, M.; Forghani, S.; Davoudi, A.S.; Samiee, R.; Mohammadi, K.; Akbarpour, S.; Seifi, A.; Salehi, M.; Zare, M. Current Advances and Challenges in Mpox Vaccine Development: A Global Landscape. Ther. Adv. Vaccines Immunother. 2025, 13, 25151355251314339. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Petrichko, S.; Kindrachuk, J.; Nkamba, D.; Halbrook, M.; Merritt, S.; Kalengi, H.; Kamba, L.; Beya, M.; Hoff, N.A.; Luhata, C.; et al. Mpox Vaccine Acceptance, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2024, 30, 2614–2619. [CrossRef]
[28] Stephen, R.; Alele, F.; Olumoh, J.; Tyndall, J.; Okeke, M.I.; Adegboye, O. The Epidemiological Trend of Monkeypox and Monkeypox-Varicella Zoster Viruses’ Co-Infection in North-Eastern Nigeria. Front. Public. Health 2022, 10, 1066589. [CrossRef]
[29] Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Group, T.P. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [CrossRef]
[30] Hutin, Y.J.F.; Williams, R.J.; Malfait, P.; Pebody, R.; Loparev, V.N.; Ropp, S.L.; Rodriguez, M.; Knight, J.C.; Tshioko, F.K.; Khan, A.S.; et al. Outbreak of Human Monkeypox, Democratic Republic of Congo, 1996 to 1997. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001, 7, 434–438. [CrossRef]
[31] JBI Critical Appraisal Tools. The Joanna Briggs Institute, Adelaide. Available online: https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools (accessed on 3 December 2024).
[32] R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2024 Available online:; Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 19 December 2024).
[33] Shi, L.; Lin, L. The Trim-and-Fill Method for Publication Bias: Practical Guidelines and Recommendations Based on a Large Database of Meta-Analyses. Medicine 2019, 98, e15987. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[34] Jezek, Z.; Szczeniowski, M.; Paluku, K.M.; Mutombo, M. Human Monkeypox: Clinical Features of 282 Patients. J. Infect. Dis. 1987, 156, 293–298. [CrossRef]
[35] Aplogan, A.; Mangindula, V.; Muamba, P.; Mwema, G.; Okito, L.; Pebody, R.; Roth, C.E.; Shongo, L.S.; Szczeniowski, M.; Tshioko, K.F. Human Monkeypox—Kasai Oriental, Democratic Republic of Congo, February 1996-October 1997. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 1997, 46, 1168–1171. [View Online]
[36] Meyer, H.; Perrichot, M.; Stemmler, M.; Emmerich, P.; Schmitz, H.; Varaine, F.; Shungu, R.; Tshioko, F.; Formenty, P. Outbreaks of Disease Suspected of Being Due to Human Monkeypox Virus Infection in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2001. J Clin Microbiol. 2002, 40, 2919–2921. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[37] Nolen, L.D.; Osadebe, L.; Katomba, J.; Likofata, J.; Mukadi, D.; Monroe, B.; Doty, J.; Hughes, C.M.; Kabamba, J.; Malekani, J.; et al. Extended Human-to-Human Transmission During a Monkeypox Outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2016, 22, 1014–1021. [CrossRef]
[38] Petersen, B.W.; Kabamba, J.; McCollum, A.M.; Lushima, R.S.; Wemakoy, E.O.; Tamfum, J.M.; Nguete, B.; Hughes, C.M.; Monroe, B.P.; Reynolds, M.G. Vaccinating Against Monkeypox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Antivir. Res. 2019, 162, 171–177. [CrossRef]
[39] McCollum, A.M.; Nakazawa, Y.; Ndongala, G.M.; Pukuta, E.; Karhemere, S.; Lushima, R.S.; Ilunga, B.K.; Kabamba, J.; Wilkins, K.; Gao, J.; et al. Human Monkeypox in the Kivus, a Conflict Region of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Am. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2015, 93, 718–721. [CrossRef]
[40] Mande, G.; Akonda, I.; Weggheleire, A.D.; Brosius, I.; Liesenborghs, L.; Bottieau, E.; Ross, N.; Gembu, G.C.; Colebunders, R.; Verheyen, E.; et al. Enhanced Surveillance of Monkeypox in Bas-Uélé, Democratic Republic of Congo: The Limitations of Symptom-Based Case Definitions. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2022, 122, 647–655. [CrossRef]
[41] Te, N.N.K.; Ngambika, G.K.; Mbembo-wa-Mbembo, B.; Séraphin, K.P.; Fabrice, K.K.; Bongo, G.N.; Colette, M.A.; Ruphin, D.D. First Report on Three Cases of Monkey Pox in Nord Ubangi Province (Democratic Republic of the Congo). Br. Int. Exact. Sci. BIoEx J. 2020, 2, 120–125. [CrossRef]
[42] Vakaniaki, E.H.; Kacita, C.; Kinganda-Lusamaki, E.; O’Toole, Á.; Wawina-Bokalanga, T.; Mukadi-Bamuleka, D.; Amuri-Aziza, A.; Malyamungu-Bubala, N.; Mweshi-Kumbana, F.; Mutimbwa-Mambo, L.; et al. Sustained Human Outbreak of a New MPXV Clade I Lineage in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Nat. Med. 2024, 30, 2791–2795. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[43] Bourner, J.; Garcia-Gallo, E.; Mbrenga, F.; Boum, Y.; Nakouné, E.; Paterson, A.; Jones, B.; Olliaro, P.; Rojek, A. Challenges in Clinical Diagnosis of Clade I Mpox: Highlighting the Need for Enhanced Diagnostic Approaches. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2024, 18, e0012087. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[44] Mmerem, J.I.; Umenzekwe, C.C.; Johnson, S.M.; Onukak, A.E.; Chika-Igwenyi, N.M.; Chukwu, S.K.; Onyeaghala, C.A.; Ozougwu, J.J.; Alasia, D.; Ehiakhamen, O.; et al. Mpox and Chickenpox Coinfection: Case Series from Southern Nigeria. J Infect Dis. 2024, 229, S260–S264. [CrossRef]
[45] Coppens, J.; Liesenborghs, L.; Vercauteren, K.; Van Esbroeck, M.; Van Dijck, C. No Varicella Zoster Virus Infection among Mpox Cases in Antwerp, Belgium. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2023, 109, 1282–1283. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[46] Grose, C. Surveillance of Nigerian Children Suggests that Varicella May Be a Risk Factor for Acquisition of Monkeypox. Front. Public. Health 2023, 11, 1140956. [CrossRef]
[47] Endy, T.P. Viral Febrile Illnesses and Emerging Pathogens. In Hunter’s Tropical Medicine and Emerging Infectious Diseases; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 325–350.
[48] Acute Respiratory Infections Complicated by Malaria (Previously Undiagnosed Disease)—Democratic Republic of the Congo.; WHO: Geneva, 2024 Available online:; Available online: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2024-DON547 (accessed on 27 April 2025).
[49] Breman, J.G.; Kalisa-Ruti; Steniowski, M.V.; Zanotto, E.; Gromyko, A.I.; Arita, I. Human Monkeypox, 1970–1979. Bull World Health Organ. 1980, 58, 165–182. [View Online]
[50] Mpox Virus Infection 2022 Case Definition.:, 2024. Available online: https://ndc.services.cdc.gov/case-definitions/monkeypox-virus-infection-2023/ (accessed on 28 April 2025).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher or editors. The publisher and editors assume no responsibility for any injury or damage resulting from the use of information contained herein.
©2026 Copyright by the Authors.
Licensed as an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the CC BY 4.0 license
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies. Learn more