» Articles » PMID: 25641488

Review on Porcine Endogenous Retrovirus Detection Assays--impact on Quality and Safety of Xenotransplants

Overview
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2015 Feb 3
PMID 25641488
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Xenotransplantation of porcine organs, tissues, and cells inherits a risk for xenozoonotic infections. Viable tissues and cells intended for transplantation have to be considered as potentially contaminated non-sterile products. The demands on microbial testing, based on the regulatory requirements, are often challenging due to a restricted shelf life or the complexity of the product itself. In Europe, the regulatory framework for xenogeneic cell therapy is based on the advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMP) regulation (2007), the EMA CHMP Guideline on xenogeneic cell-based medicinal products (2009), as well as the WHO and Council of Europe recommendations. In the USA, FDA guidance for industry (2003) regulates the use of xenotransplants. To comply with the regulations, validated test methods need to be established that reveal the microbial status of a transplant within its given shelf life, complemented by strictly defined action alert limits and supported by breeding in specific pathogen-free (SPF) facilities. In this review, we focus on assays for the detection of the porcine endogenous retroviruses PERV-A/-B/-C, which exhibit highly polymorphic proviral loci in pig genomes. PERVs are transmitted vertically and cannot be completely eliminated by breeding or gene knock out technology. PERVs entail a public health concern that will persist even if no evidence of PERV infection of xenotransplant recipients in vivo has been revealed yet. Nevertheless, infectious risks must be minimized by full assessment of pigs as donors by combining different molecular screening assays for sensitive and specific detection as well as a functional analysis of the infectivity of PERV including an adequate monitoring of recipients.

Citing Articles

Monitoring for PERV Following Xenotransplantation.

Denner J Transpl Int. 2024; 37:13491.

PMID: 39434857 PMC: 11491343. DOI: 10.3389/ti.2024.13491.


Development and qualification of clinical grade decellularized and cryopreserved human esophagi.

Godefroy W, Faivre L, Sansac C, Thierry B, Allain J, Bruneval P Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):18283.

PMID: 37880340 PMC: 10600094. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-45610-5.


Virus Safety of Xenotransplantation.

Denner J Viruses. 2022; 14(9).

PMID: 36146732 PMC: 9503113. DOI: 10.3390/v14091926.


Porcine Endogenous Retroviruses and Xenotransplantation, 2021.

Denner J Viruses. 2021; 13(11).

PMID: 34834962 PMC: 8625113. DOI: 10.3390/v13112156.


PERVading strategies and infectious risk for clinical xenotransplantation.

McGregor C, Takeuchi Y, Scobie L, Byrne G Xenotransplantation. 2018; 25(4):e12402.

PMID: 30264876 PMC: 6174873. DOI: 10.1111/xen.12402.


References
1.
Fishman J, Scobie L, Takeuchi Y . Xenotransplantation-associated infectious risk: a WHO consultation. Xenotransplantation. 2012; 19(2):72-81. PMC: 3768267. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3089.2012.00693.x. View

2.
Wang D, Coscoy L, Zylberberg M, Avila P, Boushey H, Ganem D . Microarray-based detection and genotyping of viral pathogens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99(24):15687-92. PMC: 137777. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.242579699. View

3.
Dieckhoff B, Petersen B, Kues W, Kurth R, Niemann H, Denner J . Knockdown of porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV) expression by PERV-specific shRNA in transgenic pigs. Xenotransplantation. 2008; 15(1):36-45. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3089.2008.00442.x. View

4.
Ericsson T, Takeuchi Y, Templin C, Quinn G, Farhadian S, Wood J . Identification of receptors for pig endogenous retrovirus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100(11):6759-64. PMC: 164520. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1138025100. View

5.
Tenenbaum J, Sansone S, Haendel M . A sea of standards for omics data: sink or swim?. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013; 21(2):200-3. PMC: 3932466. DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002066. View