ArticleXenotransplantation
How to Detect Porcine Endogenous Retrovirus (PERV) Infections in Patients After Transplantation of Pig Organs.
Article in Xenotransplantation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Redefining post-xenotransplantation surveillance: leveraging metagenomic next-generation sequencing to discriminate true pathogen replication from microchimerism-induced false positives.Clinical transplantation and research · 2026Review
- Gammaretrovirus Infections in Humans in the Past, Present, and Future: Have We Defeated the Pathogen?Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Hypoimmune platforms: from rejection to immune evasion and regulatory implications.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026Review
- Xenotransplantation Literature Update: January-June 2025.XenotransplantationReview
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) are integrated into the genome of all pigs and can infect human cells in culture. However, no PERV infections have been reported in recipients following preclinical or clinical xenotransplantation or deliberate infection experiments. Detection of PERV infection in transplanted recipients is challenging due to microchimerism, such as the presence of pig cells containing PERV proviruses in the recipient. Based on our previous publications on PERV detection in xenotransplant recipients, particularly from the first clinical trials, we developed a comprehensive strategy to screen for PERV infections. Recipients can be monitored for increasing levels of viral genomic RNA and mRNA using real-time reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR, which can indicate PERV expression and replication. To test this strategy, explanted pig hearts and organs from baboons after pig heart transplantation were analyzed. No PERV genomic RNA or mRNA was detected in these tissues, although both were found in PERV-producing human control cells. Screening for antibodies against PERV as indirect evidence of infection is the method of choice. Recombinant viral proteins were prepared for use in Western blot assays. Animal antisera generated through immunization with recombinant PERV proteins served as positive controls. No antibodies against PERV were detected in transplanted baboons, even though microchimerism was observed in many of the animals' organs. For effective antibody screening, at least two PERV proteins should be used as antigens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.