CMR FigSearch
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boneva, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, L. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Boneva, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, L. E.

Next Article 

Clinical Microbiology Reviews, January 2001, p. 1-14, Vol. 14, No. 1
0893-8512/01/$04.00+0   DOI: 10.1128/CMR.14.1.1-14.2001

Infectious Disease Issues in Xenotransplantation

Roumiana S. Boneva,* Thomas M. Folks, and Louisa E. Chapman

HIV/AIDS and Retrovirology Branch, Division of AIDS, STD and TB Laboratory Research, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333

Xenotransplantation, the transplantation of living organs, tissues, or cells from one species to another, is viewed as a potential solution to the existing shortage of human organs for transplantation. While whole-organ xenotransplantation is still in the preclinical stage, cellular xenotransplantation and extracorporeal perfusion applications are showing promise in early clinical trials. Advances in immunosuppressive therapy, gene engineering, and cloning of animals bring a broader array of xenotransplantation protocols closer to clinical trials. Despite several potential advantages over allotransplantation, xenotransplantation encompasses a number of problems. Immunologic rejection remains the primary hindrance. The potential to introduce infections across species barriers, another major concern, is the main focus of this review. Nonhuman primates are unlikely to be a main source for xenotransplantation products despite their phylogenetic proximity to humans. Genetically engineered pigs, bred under special conditions, are currently envisaged as the major source. Thus far, there has been no evidence for human infections caused by pig xenotransplantation products. However, the existence of xenotropic endogenous retroviruses and the clinical evidence of long-lasting porcine cell microchimerism indicate the potential for xenogeneic infections. Thus, further trials should continue under regulatory oversight, with close clinical and laboratory monitoring for potential xenogeneic infections.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: HIV/AIDS and Retrovirology Branch, Division of AIDS, STD and TB Laboratory Research, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mail Stop G-19, 1600 Clifton Rd, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30333. Phone: (404) 639-1024 (branch); (404) 639-0220 (direct). Fax: (404) 639-1174. E-mail: rrb5{at}cdc.gov.

Clinical Microbiology Reviews, January 2001, p. 1-14, Vol. 14, No. 1
0893-8512/01/$04.00+0   DOI: 10.1128/CMR.14.1.1-14.2001


This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Vaccine Immunol.
J. Clin. Microbiol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.