Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27862363›Full record

ArticleXenotransplantation2016

A comprehensive microbiological safety approach for agarose encapsulated porcine islets intended for clinical trials.

Lawrence S Gazda, James Collins, Archie Lovatt, Robert W Holdcraft, Merribeth J Morin, Daniel Galbraith, Melanie Graham, Melissa A Laramore, Christine Maclean, John Black and 8 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Xenotransplantation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Xenotransplantation: past, present, and future.Current opinion in organ transplantation · 2017
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.

Lawrence S GazdaThe Rogosin Institute-Xenia Division, Xenia, OH, USA.
James CollinsVeterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Archie LovattSGS Vitrology, Glasgow, UK.
Robert W HoldcraftThe Rogosin Institute-Xenia Division, Xenia, OH, USA.
Merribeth J MorinTargeted BioStrategies, Springfield, MA, USA.
Daniel GalbraithSartorius Stedim BioOutsource, Glasgow, UK.
Melanie GrahamDepartment of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Melissa A LaramoreThe Rogosin Institute-Xenia Division, Xenia, OH, USA.
Christine MacleanSGS Vitrology, Glasgow, UK.
John BlackSGS Vitrology, Glasgow, UK.
Euan W MilneSGS Vitrology, Glasgow, UK.
Douglas G MarthalerVeterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Horatiu V VinereanOffice of Laboratory Animal Research, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
Michelle M MichalakMaria Stein Animal Clinic, Maria Stein, OH, USA.
Deborah HofferThe Rogosin Institute-Xenia Division, Xenia, OH, USA.
Steven RichterAvista Pharma Solutions, Inc., Agawam, MA, USA.
Richard D HallBob Evans Farms, LLC, New Albany, OH, USA.
Barry H SmithDepartment of Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University and NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
Nippon Sheet Glass (United Kingdom) · GBThe Rogosin Institute · USUniversity of Minnesota · USAve Maria University · USBioStrategies (United States) · USBridge Pharma (United States) · USFlorida International University · USNewYork–Presbyterian Hospital · USSartorius (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity at Albany, State University of New York · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of porcine islets to replace insulin-producing islet β-cells, destroyed during the diabetogenic disease process, presents distinct challenges if this option is to become a therapeutic reality for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. These challenges include a thorough evaluation of the microbiological safety of the islets. In this study, we describe a robust porcine islet-screening program that provides a high level of confidence in the microbiological safety of porcine islets suitable for clinical trials.

methodsA four-checkpoint program systematically screens the donor herd (Large White - Yorkshire × Landrace F1 hybrid animals), individual sentinel and pancreas donor animals and, critically, the islet macrobeads themselves. Molecular assays screen for more than 30 known viruses, while electron microscopy and in vitro studies are employed to screen for potential new or divergent (emergent) viruses.

resultsOf 1207 monthly samples taken from random animals over a 2-year period, only a single positive result for Transmissible gastroenteritis virus was observed, demonstrating the high level of biosecurity maintained in the source herd. Given the lack of clinical signs, positive antibody titers for Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, Porcine parvovirus, and Influenza A confirm the efficacy of the herd vaccination program. Porcine respiratory coronavirus was found to be present in the herd, as expected for domestic swine. Tissue homogenate samples from six sentinel and 11 donor animals, over the same 2-year period, were negative for the presence of viruses when co-cultured with six different cell lines from four species. The absence of adventitious viruses in separate islet macrobead preparations produced from 12 individual pancreas donor animals was confirmed using validated molecular (n = 32 viruses), in vitro culture (cells from four species), and transmission electron microscopy assays (200 cell profiles per donor animal) over the same 2-year period. There has been no evidence of viral transmission following the implantation of these same encapsulated and functional porcine islets into non-immunosuppressed diabetic cynomolgus macaques for up to 4 years. Isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells from all time points were negative for PCV (Type 2), PLHV, PRRSV, PCMV, and PERV-A, PERV-B, and PERV-C by PCR analysis in all six recipient animals.

conclusionThe four-checkpoint program is a robust and reliable method for characterization of the microbiological safety of encapsulated porcine islets intended for clinical trials.

Indexed as

Transplantation, HeterologousAnimalsCell LineDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1InsulinInsulin SecretionLeukocytes, MononuclearPancreasPancreas TransplantationSepharoseSwineInsulinSepharosepancreatic isletsxenotransplantationzoonoses

Identifiers

PMID27862363
PMCPMC7169751
OpenAlexW2554925709

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.