ArticleXenotransplantation
Genomic Validation of PERV-C-Free Pigs to Support Xenotransplantation.
Article in Xenotransplantation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Xenotransplantation Literature Update: January-June 2026.XenotransplantationReview
- Genomic Validation of PERV-C-Free Pigs to Support Xenotransplantation.XenotransplantationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) are present in the germ lines of domesticated pigs (Sus scrofa) and related suids. There are three types of PERVs, PERV-A, -B, and -C, which differ in their host range. PERV-A and -B can infect human and porcine cells, while PERV-C only infects porcine cells. PERV-A and -B are found in the genomes of all pigs, while PERV-C is found in most but not all pigs. Although many PERV provirus insertions are defective, in vitro culture of porcine cells has produced infectious virions of all three types as well as PERV-A/C recombinants, which show enhanced replication competence. Identifying pigs that are PERV-C negative could help prevent such recombination events and would advance the development of porcine germplasm as a safer source of xenografts for humans. Here, we present the results of extensive screening involving 142 Landrace, Duroc, Large White, and crossbred pigs using up to nine primer pairs to identify putative PERV-C-negative animals. Long-read whole genome sequencing was conducted on a subset of four pigs (one PERV-C PCR positive and three PERV-C PCR putative negatives), which confirmed their status as PERV-C positive or negative, respectively. Our results confirmed that the screened pigs were truly PERV-C negative, establishing the existence of PERV-C-negative germplasm within the herd. These findings support the feasibility of developing or selecting PERV-C-negative pigs as a source of germplasm for xenotransplantation and other biomedical applications.
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.