This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Garkavenko, O.
Right arrow Articles by Elliott, R. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Garkavenko, O.
Right arrow Articles by Elliott, R. B.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2004, p. 5353-5356, Vol. 42, No. 11
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.11.5353-5356.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Monitoring for Presence of Potentially Xenotic Viruses in Recipients of Pig Islet Xenotransplantation

O. Garkavenko,1* M. C. Croxson,2 M. Irgang,3 A. Karlas,3 J. Denner,3 and R. B. Elliott1

Diatranz NZ Ltd., Papatoetoe,1 Auckland Hospital, Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand,2 Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany3

Received 8 September 2003/ Returned for modification 20 May 2004/ Accepted 7 August 2004


arrow
ABSTRACT
 
This study represents a long-term follow-up of human patients receiving pig islet xenotransplantation. Eighteen patients had been monitored for up to 9 years for potentially xenotic pig viruses: pig endogenous retrovirus, pig cytomegalovirus, pig lymphotropic herpesvirus, and pig circovirus type 2. No evidence of viral infection was found.


arrow
TEXT
 
Human xenotransplant recipients are theoretically at risk of infection with animal viruses. Pig endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) have been a major source of anxiety, since they are present in the genome of all pigs and infect human cells (25, 29). Whether PERV truly poses an infection risk will ultimately be determined by in vivo monitoring of patients and experimental animals receiving xenografts. To date, more than 200 patients exposed to pig cells have been tested for evidence of PERV infection (3, 5, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 24, 26, 27, 33, 34). Additionally, some 50 nonhuman primates have also been tested for PERV infection (20, 32). No evidence of infection has been found. Three different species of nonhuman primates, which were heavily immunosuppressed and injected with a human cell-adapted virus, also failed to show any evidence of PERV transmission (4, 30). Similar results were obtained when PERVs were injected into small animals, regardless of whether they were immunosuppressed (29-31).

Other pig viruses are able to establish persistent infections or, alternatively, are potentially oncogenic. These viruses include pig lymphotropic herpesvirus (PLHV), pig cytomegalovirus (PCMV), and pig circovirus (PCV) (10, 23, 35), all of which are highly prevalent in pig populations (1, 6, 7, 36). Since PLHV is very similar to lymphoproliferative herpesviruses of other species, this virus should be included in the follow-up program for pig cell transplant recipients. In vitro experiments have shown no transmission of PCMV to human cells (37). However, data on activation of cytomegalovirus in pig-to-primate organ transplantation demonstrate that PCMV may be an important pathogen in immunosuppressed xenograft recipients (22). It has been shown that PCV type 2 can be transmitted to human cells in vitro (14). It seems prudent, therefore, to include testing for a range of pig viruses in the follow-up of transplantation patients.

The aim of this study was to look for evidence of viral infection (PERV, PCMV, PLHV, and PCV type 2) in patients that had received pig islet cell transplants.

Eighteen type 1 diabetic patients received neonatal pig islet cell transplants via three different modes of delivery: encapsulated islets (8), Sertoli islet structures in a specially designed device (38), and free islet cells (Table 1). Pig cells were obtained from pigs of Large White and Cambrough breeds that had been screened extensively for conventional microorganisms and for viruses of particular relevance to xenotransplantation, namely PLHV, PCMV, and PCV. In none of the tested donor pigs were these viruses found (12).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Antibodies against PERV proteins and pig cellular proteins detected in xenotransplantation patients

Only one recipient had been immunosuppressed. This patient had previously received an allogeneic kidney transplant. All patients were given approximately 10,000 islet equivalents per kg of body weight. The Sertoli islet structures consisted of 20 to 100 Sertoli cells per islet equivalent.

To date, recipients have been monitored up to a maximum of 9 years. Recipient monitoring has included testing peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and blood plasma for PCV 2 (19), PLHV (7), PCMV (2, 11, 13), and PERV by PCR or reverse transcription-PCR (25). This testing has been carried out on each recipient before transplantation, at nine intervals during the first year posttransplantation, and once each subsequent year. From 14 patients, serum was collected before transplantation and at several intervals after transplantation for PERV serology (Table 1).

Screening for PERV infection was performed by using Western blot analysis and purified human cell-adapted PERV as an antigen (Fig. 1). In addition, two recombinant proteins were used as antigens, the transmembrane envelope protein p15E (9) and the major core protein p27Gag (17). The sequence amplified from pig PK-15 cells corresponded to the ectodomain of the transmembrane envelope protein p15E (amino acids 488 to 597) of PERV-A. For the generation of the PERV core protein p27Gag, the entire sequence encoding this protein was amplified and cloned. Both were expressed in Escherichia coli. Several PERV-specific antisera were used as positive controls, e.g., goat antisera against the recombinant p15E, the viral p15E, the surface envelope protein gp70, and the recombinant p27Gag.



View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1. Western blot analysis of sera from pig islet cell transplant recipients (only four selected patients are shown). In the upper panel, purified virus was used as the antigen; in the lower panels, recombinant p15E (rp15E) or p27Gag (rGag) was used as the antigen. Animal sera against viral proteins were used to evaluate the quality of the blots used. Negative values indicate the number of weeks before transplantation (Tx).

In the follow-up period of up to 9 years, pig islet cell transplantation was well tolerated by all 18 type 1 diabetics. No patient was admitted to the hospital for febrile disease. No patient had signs of lymphoproliferative or neurological disease. Studies of all patients receiving porcine islet cell xenotransplantation have not shown transmission of porcine viruses. PCR and reverse transcription-PCR analysis of PBMCs and plasma showed no evidence of PERV infection in transplanted patients. PBMC DNA from two patients was found to be positive for both PERV and pig cytochrome oxidase subunit II on one occasion each. Repeated analyses of samples taken at a later time point did not show any evidence of this porcine virus or porcine cells. Analysis for PERV-specific antibodies did not show evidence for PERV transmission since none of the patient's sera reacted simultaneously against Gag and Env (Fig. 1; Table 1). Three of the 14 patients tested had antibodies against p27Gag of PERV which were already detected before treatment and which have been described also for normal blood donors (34). Antibodies against p24Gag of HIV-1 were also described for healthy uninfected persons (28). The reaction against the gp70 is certainly directed against the carbohydrate part of the molecule (18). Some of the sera reacted with pig antigens (Table 1).

All 18 patients (four patients not shown in Table 1 had also received islet and Sertoli cells) were repeatedly checked for the presence of PCV, PCMV, and PLHV DNA, and all PCR results were negative.

This study represents a long-term follow-up of human patients receiving pig islet cell xenotransplantation and further confirms the absence of transmission of PERV and of other potentially xenotic pig viruses.


arrow
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank R. Valdes for his collaboration.


arrow
FOOTNOTES
 
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Diatranz NZ Ltd., P.O. Box 23566, Papatoetoe, Auckland, New Zealand. Phone: 64 9 276 2690. Fax: 64 9 276 2691. E-mail: ovlad{at}xtra.co.nz. Back


arrow
REFERENCES
 
    1
  1. Allan, G. M., and J. A. Ellis. 2000. Porcine circoviruses: a review. J. Vet. Diagn. Investig. 12:3-14.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    2. 2
  2. Clark, D. A., J. F. Fryer, A. W. Tucker, P. D. McArdle, A. E. Hughes, V. C. Emery, and P. D. Griffiths. 2003. Porcine cytomegalovirus in pigs being bred for xenotransplantation organs: progress towards control. Xenotransplantation 10:142-148.[CrossRef][Medline]
    3. 3
  3. Denner, J. 2003. Porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) and xenotransplantation: screening for transmission in several clinical trials and in experimental models using non-human primates. Ann. Transplant. 8(3):39-48.[Medline]
    4. 4
  4. Denner, J., V. Specke, J. Schwendemann, and S. J. Tacke. 2001. Porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs): adaptation to human cells and attempts to infect small animals and non-human primates. Ann. Transplant. 6(3):25-33.
    5. 5
  5. Dinsmore, J. H., C. Manhart, R. Raimeri, D. B. Jacoby, and A. Moore. 2000. No evidence for infection for human cells with porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV) after exposure to porcine fetal neuronal cells. Transplantation 70:1382-1389.[CrossRef][Medline]
    6. 6
  6. Edington, N. 1999. Cytomegalovirus, p. 125-131. In B. E. Straw, S. D'Allaire, W. L. Mengeling, and D. J. Taylor (ed.), Diseases of swine, 8th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.
    7. 7
  7. Ehlers, B., S. Ulrich, and M. Goltz. 1999. Detection of two novel porcine herpesviruses with high similarity to gammaherpesviruses. J. Gen. Virol. 80:971-974.[Abstract]
    8. 8
  8. Elliot, R. B., L. Escobar, O. Garkavenko, M. C. Croxson, B. A. Schroeder, M. McGregor, G. Ferguson, N. Beckman, and S. Ferguson. 2000. No evidence of infection with porcine retrovirus in recipients of encapsulated porcine islet-cell xenograft. Cell Transplant. 9:895-901.[Medline]
    9. 9
  9. Fiebig, U., O. Stephan, R. Kurth, and J. Denner. 2003. Neutralizing antibodies against conserved domains of p15E of porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs): basis for a vaccine for xenotransplantation? Virology 307:406-413.[CrossRef][Medline]
    10. 10
  10. Fishman, J. A. 2001. Prevention of infection in Xenotransplantation, p. 261-290. In J. L. Platt (ed.), Xenotransplantation. ASM Press, Washington, D.C.
    11. 11
  11. Fryer, J. F. L., P. D. Griffiths, J. A. Fishman, V. C. Emery, and D. A. Clark. 2001. Quantitation of porcine cytomegalovirus in pig tissue by PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39:1155-1156.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    12. 12
  12. Garkavenko, O., M. Muzina, Z. Muzina, K. Powels, R. B. Elliott, and M. C. Croxson. 2004. Monitoring for potentially xenozoonotic viruses in New Zealand pigs. J. Med. Virol. 72:338-344.[Medline]
    13. 13
  13. Hamel, A. L., L. Lin, C. Sachvie, E. Grudeski, and G. P. Nayer. 1999. PCR assay for detecting porcine cytomegalovirus. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37:3767-3768.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    14. 14
  14. Hattermann, K., C. Roedner, C. Schmitt, T. Finsterbusch, T. Steinfeldt, and A. Mankertz. 2004. Infection studies on human cell lines with porcine circovirus type 1 and porcine circovirus type 2. Xenotransplantation 11:284-294.[CrossRef][Medline]
    15. 15
  15. Heneine, W., A. Tibell, W. M. Switzer, P. Sandstrom, G. V. Rosales, A. Mathews, O. Korsgren, L. E. Chapman, T. M. Folks, and C. G. Groth. 1998. No evidence of infection with porcine endogenous retrovirus in recipients of porcine islet-cell xenografts. Lancet 352:695-699.[CrossRef][Medline]
    16. 16
  16. Heneine, W., W. M. Switzer, J. M. Sourcie, B. L. Evatt, V. Shanmugam, G. V. Rosales, A. Matthews, P. Sandstrom, and T. M. Folks. 2001. Evidence of porcine endogenous retroviruses in porcine factor VIII and evaluation of transmission to recipients with hemophilia. J. Infect. Dis. 183:648-652.[CrossRef][Medline]
    17. 17
  17. Irgang, M., I. M. Sauer, A. Karlas, K. Zeilinger, J. C. Gerlach, R. Kurth, P. Neuhaus, and J. Denner. 2003. Porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs): no infection in patients treated with a bioreactor based on porcine liver cells. J. Clin. Virol. 28:141-154.[CrossRef][Medline]
    18. 18
  18. Kurth, R., N. M. Teich, R. Weiss, and R. T. Oliver. 1977. Natural human antibodies reactive with primate type-C viral antigens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 74:1237-1241.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    19. 19
  19. Larochelle, R., M. Antaya, M. Morin, and R. Magar. 1999. Typing of porcine circovirus in clinical specimens by multiplex PCR. J. Virol. Methods 80:69-75.[CrossRef][Medline]
    20. 20
  20. Martin, U., S. J. Tacke, A. R. Simon, C. Schroder, K. Wiebe, B. Lapin, A. Haverich, J. Denner, and G. Steinhoff. 2002. Absence of PERV specific humoral immune response in baboons after transplantation of porcine cells or organs. Transplant. Int. 15:361-368.[Medline]
    21. 21
  21. Moza, A. K., H. Mertsching, T. Herden, A. Bader, and A. Haverich. 2001. Heart valves from pigs and porcine endogenous retrovirus: experimental and clinical data to assess the probability of porcine endogenous retrovirus infection in human subjects. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 121:697-701.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    22. 22
  22. Mueller, N. J., R. N. Barth, S. Yamamato, H. Kitimura, C. Patience, K. Yamada, D. K. Cooper, D. H. Sachs, A. Kaur, and J. A. Fishman. 2002. Activation of cytomegalovirus in pig-to-primate organ transplantation. J. Virol. 76:4734-4740.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    23. 23
  23. Onions, D., D. K. Cooper, T. J. Alexander, C. Brown, E. Classen, J. E. Foweraker, D. L. Harris, B. W. Mahy, P. D. Minor, A. D. Osterhaus, P. P. Pastoret, and K. Yamanouchi. 2000. An approach to the control of disease transmission in pig-to-human xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 7:143-155.[CrossRef][Medline]
    24. 24
  24. Paradis, K., G. Langford, Z. Long, W. Heneine, P. Sandstrom, W. M. Switzer, L. E. Chapman, C. Lockey, D. Onions, E. Otto, et al. 1999. Search for cross-species transmission of porcine endogenous retrovirus in patients treated with living pig tissue. Science 285:1236-1241.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    25. 25
  25. Patience, C., Y. Takeuchi, and R. A. Weiss. 1997. Infection of human cells by an endogenous retrovirus of pigs. Nat. Med. 3:282-286.[CrossRef][Medline]
    26. 26
  26. Patience, C., G. S. Patton, Y. Takeuchi, R. A. Weiss, M. O. McClure, L. Rydberg, and M. E. Breimer. 1998. No evidence of pig DNA or retroviral infection in patients with short-term extracorporeal connection to pig kidneys. Lancet 352:699-701.[CrossRef][Medline]
    27. 27
  27. Sauer, M., D. Kardassis, K. Zeillinger, A. Gruenwald, G. Pless, A. Pascher, M. Irgang, M. Kraemer, G. Puhl, J. Frank, A. R. Müller, T. Steinmüller, J. Denner, P. Neuhaus, and J. Gerlach. 2003. Extracorporeal hybrid liver support therapy—phase I study with primary porcine liver cells. Xenotransplantation 10:460-469.[CrossRef][Medline]
    28. 28
  28. Sayre, K. R., R. Y. Dodd, G. Tegtmeier, L. Layug, S. S. Alexander, and M. P. Busch. 1996. False-positive human immunodeficiency virus type 1 western blot tests in noninfected blood donors. Transfusion 36:45-52.[CrossRef][Medline]
    29. 29
  29. Specke, V., S. J. Tacke, K. Boller, J. Schwendemann, and J. Denner. 2001. Porcine endogenous retroviruses: in vitro host range and attempts to establish small animal models. J. Gen. Virol. 82:837-844.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    30. 30
  30. Specke, V., H. J. Schuurman, R. Plesker, C. Coulibaly, M. Ozel, G. Langford, R. Kurth, and J. Denner. 2002. Virus safety in xenotransplantation: first exploratory in vivo studies in small laboratory animals and non-human primates. Transplant. Immunol. 9:281-288.[CrossRef][Medline]
    31. 31
  31. Specke, V., R. Plesker, C. Coulibaly, K. Boller, and J. Denner. 2002. Productive infection of a mink cell line with porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) but lack of transmission to mink in vivo. Arch. Virol. 147:305-319.[CrossRef][Medline]
    32. 32
  32. Switzer, W. M., R. E. Michler, V. Shanmugam, A. Matthews, A. I. Hussain, A. Wright, P. Sandstrom, L. E. Chapman, C. Weber, S. Safley, R. R. Denny, A. Navarro, V. Evans, A. J. Norin, P. Kwiatkowski, and W. Heneine. 2001. Lack of cross-species transmission of porcine endogenous retrovirus infection to nonhuman primate recipients of porcine cells, tissues, or organs. Transplantation 71:959-965.[CrossRef][Medline]
    33. 33
  33. Tacke, S., R. Kurth, and J. Denner. 2000. Porcine endogenous retrovirus inhibits human immune cells: risk for xenotransplantation. Virology 268:87-93.[CrossRef][Medline]
    34. 34
  34. Tacke, S., K. Bodusch, A. Berg, and J. Denner. 2001. Sensitive and specific detection methods for porcine endogenous retroviruses applicable to experimental and clinical xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 8:125-135.[CrossRef][Medline]
    35. 35
  35. Tischer, I., L. Bode, J. Apodaca, H. Timm, D. Peters, D. Rasch, S. Pociuli, and E. Gerike. 1995. Presence of antibodies reacting with porcine circovirus in sera of humans, mice, and cattle. Arch. Virol. 140:1427-1439.[CrossRef][Medline]
    36. 36
  36. Trujano, M., G. Iglesias, J. Segales, and J. M. Palacios. 2001. PCV2 from emaciated pigs in Mexico. Vet. Record 148:792.[Medline]
    37. 37
  37. Tucker A. W., F. McNeilly, B. Meehan, D. Galbraith, P. D. McArdle, G. Allan, and C. Patience. 2003. Methods for the exclusion of circoviruses and gammaherpesviruses. Xenotransplantation 10:343-348.[CrossRef][Medline]
    38. 38
  38. Valdes, R. 2002. Xenotransplantation trials. Lancet 359:2281.[Medline]

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2004, p. 5353-5356, Vol. 42, No. 11
0095-1137/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.11.5353-5356.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Garkavenko, O.
Right arrow Articles by Elliott, R. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Garkavenko, O.
Right arrow Articles by Elliott, R. B.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»