First update of the International Xenotransplantation Association consensus statement on conditions for undertaking clinical trials of porcine islet products in type 1 diabetes - Chapter 2a: Source pigs - Preventing xenozoonoses

Xenotransplantation

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 25-31

  Spizzo, Thomas ^a   Denner, Joachim ^b   Gazda, Lawrence ^c   Martin, Michael ^a   Nathu, Divya ^d   Scobie, Linda ^e   Takeuchi, Yasuhiro ^f  

^a Spring Point Project   (United States)

^b ROBERT KOCH INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^c ROGOSIN INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d Diatranz Otsuka Ltd   (New Zealand)

^e GLASGOW CALEDONIAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

closed herd; designated pathogen free status; infectious disease; islet xenotransplantation; porcine endogenous retrovirus; porcine islet product; regulatory guidance; source pigs; type 1 diabetes; xenozoonoses

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BOVINE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DISEASE TRANSMISSION; DNA SEQUENCE; INFECTION RISK; INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; MATRIX ASSISTED LASER DESORPTION IONIZATION TIME OF FLIGHT MASS SPECTROMETRY; MICROORGANISM; NONHUMAN; PANCREAS ISLET TRANSPLANTATION; PIG; PRION DISEASE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REAL TIME POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; RNA SEQUENCE; XENOGRAFT; XENOTRANSPLANTATION; XENOZOONOSIS; ZOONOSIS; ANIMAL; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 1; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; PATIENT SELECTION; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 1; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; ISLETS OF LANGERHANS TRANSPLANTATION; PATIENT SELECTION; SWINE; TRANSPLANTATION, HETEROLOGOUS;

EID: 84960795467     PISSN: 0908665X     EISSN: 13993089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/xen.12223     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Hering BJ, Cooper DKC, Cozzi E, et al., The International Xenotransplantation Association consensus statement on conditions for undertaking clinical trials of porcine islet products in type 1 diabetes-Executive summary. Xenotransplantation 2009; 16: 196-262.
2. Schuurman H-J,. The International Xenotransplantation Association consensus statement on conditions for undertaking clinical trials of porcine islet products in type 1 diabetes-Chapter 2: Source pigs. Xenotransplantation 2009; 16: 215-222.
3. Gazda LS, Vinerean HV, Laramore MA, et al., No evidence of viral transmission following long-term implantation of agarose encapsulated porcine islets in diabetic dogs. J Diabetes Res 2014; 2014: 727483.
4. Fishman JA, Scobie L, Takeuchi Y,. Xenotransplantation-associated infectious risk: A WHO consultation. Xenotransplantation 2012; 19: 72-81.
5. Denner J, Tönjes RR,. Infection barriers to successful xenotransplantation focusing on porcine endogenous retroviruses. Clin Microbiol Rev 2012; 25: 318-343.
6. Valdes-Gonzalez R, Dorantes LM, Bracho-Blanchet E, Rodríguez-Ventura A, White DJG,. No evidence of porcine endogenous retrovirus in patients with type 1 diabetes after long-term porcine islet xenotransplantation. J Med Virol 2010; 82: 331-334.
7. Wang W, Mo Z, Ye B, et al., A clinical trial of xenotransplantation of neonatal pig islets for diabetic patients. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 2011; 36: 1134-1140.
8. Wynyard S, Nathu D, Garavenko O, Denner J, Elliott R,. Microbiological safety of the first clinical pig islet xenotransplantation trial in New Zealand. Xenotransplantation 2014; 21: 309-323.
9. Scobie L, Padler-Karavani V, Le Bas-Bernardet S, et al., Long-term IgG response to porcine Neu5Gc antigens without transmission of PERV in burn patients treated with porcine skin xenografts. J Immunol 2013; 191: 2907-2915.
10. Mueller NJ, Takeuchi Y, Mattiuzzo G, Scobie L,. Microbial safety in xenotransplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2011; 16: 201-206.
11. Meng XJ,. Emerging and re-emerging swine viruses. Transbound Emerg Dis 2012; 59 (S1): 85-102.
12. Yu J, Li J, Ao Y, Duan Z,. Detection of novel viruses in porcine fecal samples from China. Virol J 2013; 10: 39.
13. Zimmerman JJ, Karriker LA, Ramirez A, Schwartz KJ, Stevenson GW,. Diseases of Swine, 10th edn. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012; 397, 515.
14. Kahn CM,. Merck Veterinary Manual, 10th edn. Wiley, 2010. (accessed on 19 September 2014).
15. Hindson CM, Chevillet JR, Briggs HA, et al., Absolute quantification by droplet digital PCR versus analog real-time PCR. Nat Methods 2013; 10: 1003-1005.
16. Hayden RT, Gu Z, Ingersoll J, et al., Comparison of droplet digital PCR to real-time PCR for quantitative detection of cytomegalovirus. J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51: 540-546.
17. Kahn AS,. Current testing methods and challenges for detection of adventitious viruses. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol 2011; 65: 627-633.
18. Gombold J, Karakasidis S, Niska P, et al., Systematic evaluation of in vitro and in vivo adventitious virus assays for the detection of viral contamination of cell banks and biological products. Vaccine 2014; 32: 2916-2926.
19. Lubiniecki AS,. Evolution of approaches to viral safety issues for biological products. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol 2011; 65: 547-556.
20. Gazda LS, Vinerean HV, Laramore MA, et al., Encapsulation of porcine islets permits extended culture time and insulin independence in spontaneously diabetic BB rats. Cell Transplant 2007; 16: 609-620.
21. Kaulitz D, Mihica D, Dorna J, et al., Development of sensitive methods for detection of porcine endogenous retrovirus-C (PERV-C) in the genome of pigs. J Virol Methods 2011; 175: 60-65.
22. Wynyard S, Garkavenko O, Elliot R,. Multiplex high resolution melting assay for estimation of Porcine Endogenous Retrovirus (PERV) relative gene dosage in pigs and detection of PERV infection in xenograft recipients. J Virol Methods 2011; 175: 95-100.
23. Semaan M, Rotem A, Barkai U, Bornstein S, Denner J,. Screening pigs for xenotransplantation: Prevalence and expression of porcine endogenous retroviruses in Göttingen minipigs. Xenotransplantation 2013; 20: 148-156.
24. Tacke SJ, Specke V, Denner J,. Differences in release and determination of subtype of porcine endogenous retroviruses produced by stimulated normal pig blood cells. Intervirology 2003; 46: 17-24.
25. Shalginskikh N, Poleshko A, Skalka AM, Katz R,. Retroviral DNA methylation and epigenetic repression are mediated by the antiviral host protein Daxx. J Virol 2013; 87: 2137-2150.
26. Matouskova M, Vesely P, Daniel P, et al., Role of DNA methylation in expression and transmission of porcine endogenous retroviruses. J Virol 2013; 87: 12110-12120.
27. Dieckhoff B, Kessler B, Jobst D, et al., Distribution and expression of porcine endogenous retroviruses in multi-transgenic pigs generated for xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 2009; 16: 64-73.
28. U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). Guidance for Industry. Source animal, product, preclinical, and clinical issues concerning the use of xenotransplantation products in humans. April 2003.
29. Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council. The Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8th edn. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2011.
30. Federation of Animal Science Societies. The Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching. 3rd edn. Champaign, IL: The Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS), 2010.
31. Farm Animal Welfare Council. Farm Animal Welfare in Great Britain: Past, Present and Future. London; October 2009 (www.fawc.org.uk)
32. Heath CA, Barker RA, Esmonde TFG, et al., Dura mater-associated Creutzfeld-Jakob disease: Experience from surveillance in the UK. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006; 77: 880-882.
33. Kofler M, Seuberlich T, Maurer E, et al., TSE surveillance in small ruminants and pigs: A pilot study. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 2006; 148: 341-342 344-348.
34. Hedlin P, Taschuk R, Potter A, Griebel P, Napper S,. Detection and control of prion diseases in food animals. ISRN Vet Sci 2012; 2012: 254739.
35. Takemura K, Kahdre M, Joseph D, Yousef A, Sreevatsan S,. An overview of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Anim Health Res Rev 2004; 5: 103-124.
36. Novakofski J, Brewer MS, Mateus-Pinilla N, Killefer J, McCusker RH,. Prion biology relevant to bovine spongiform encephalopathy. J Anim Sci 2005; 83: 1455-1476.
37. Diaz-San Segundo F, Salquero FJ, de Avila A, et al., Distribution of the cellular prion protein (PrPC) in brains of livestock and domesticated species. Acta Neuropathol 2006; 112: 587-595.
38. Ryder SJ, Hawkins SA, Dawson M, Wells GA,. The neuropathology of experimental bovine spongiform encephalo-pathy in the pig. J Comp Pathol 2000; 122: 131-143.
39. Wells GA, Hawkins SA, Austin AR, et al., Studies of the transmissibility of the agent of bovine spongiform encephalopathy to pigs. J Gen Virol 2003; 84: 1021-1031.
40. Foster J, McKelvey W, Fraser H, et al., Experimentally induced bovine spongiform encephalopathy did not transmit via goat embryos. J Gen Virol 1999; 80: 517-524.
41. Hunter N,. Scrapie and experimental BSE in sheep. Br Med Bull 2003; 66: 171-183.
42. EMEA (European Medicines Agency). 22 October 2009 posting date. Guideline on xenogenic cell-based medicinal products. IMEA/CHMP/CPWP/83508/2009.
43. 810.213. Verordnung über die Transplantation von tierischen Organen, Geweben und Zellen. http://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/20051808/index.html. (This document is only available in German, French and Italian language).