ReviewPorcine health management2026
CRISPR mediated PRRS resistant pigs: biological success, welfare implications, and ethical regulatory challenges for sustainable swine production.
Review in Porcine health management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cross-Species Reactivity and Differential Anti-PRRSV Activities of CD163 SRCR4/SRCR5 Monoclonal Antibodies.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) remains one of the most significant health and welfare challenges in global pig production. The disease is associated with substantial economic losses, impaired herd health, increased antimicrobial use, and ongoing animal welfare concerns. Despite widespread implementation of vaccination, biosecurity, and herd stabilization strategies, PRRS continues to persist endemically in many production systems, highlighting the need for additional disease-control approaches. Recent advances in genome editing have enabled the development of host-directed resistance strategies in pigs. In particular, targeted editing of the scavenger receptor CD163, a key host factor required for PRRS virus entry into macrophages, using CRISPR-Cas9 has demonstrated resistance to several PRRSV strains in experimental models. Deletion of the SRCR5 domain of CD163 prevents viral infection while largely preserving normal receptor function, representing a more targeted approach compared with complete gene knockout. Current evidence suggests resistance to both major PRRSV genotypes, although most data derive from controlled experimental studies rather than commercial field conditions. Important considerations remain regarding long-term health and welfare outcomes, immune competence under production environments, ethical considerations surrounding germline genome editing, and differences in regulatory frameworks that may influence adoption. From a pig health management perspective, genome-edited PRRS resistance should be viewed as a complementary strategy rather than a replacement for established control measures such as vaccination, biosecurity, and herd health management. Careful evaluation, veterinary oversight, and coordinated regulatory guidance will be necessary to determine how this technology may be integrated responsibly into future PRRS control programs.
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.