Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News & Views
  • Published:

Xenotransplantation

New risks, new gains

Nature volume 407, pages 27–29 (2000)Cite this article

No field of medicine has stimulated more excitement and controversy than xenotransplantation — the transplanting of animal organs and tissues into humans. The excitement stems from the possibility that transplantation could finally be extended to all patients who need it. The controversies arise from the immunological hurdles to xenotransplantation, and from the possibility that infectious agents might be passed from the animal source to the human recipient and, potentially, more broadly in the human population. In this issue are two papers (first published in electronic form three weeks ago) that speak to this excitement and controversy. On page 86, Polejaeva et al.1 describe how they have cloned pigs — a step towards surmounting the immunological hurdle. Meanwhile, on page 90, van der Laan et al.2 report that pig pancreatic islet cells, transplanted into mice, can transmit porcine endogenous retroviruses to the mice.

Pigs are ideal sources of xenotransplants because they are available in large numbers and because their organs are similar in size and nature to those of humans. Polejaeva et al.1 cloned pigs by a two-stage approach, which ultimately involved the transfer of nuclei from cultured adult cells to fertilized eggs from which the nuclei had been removed. This approach is similar to that used recently by Onishi et al.3, also to clone pigs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The role of antibodies in the rejection of xenotransplants and in resistance to porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs).

References

  1. Polejaeva, I. A. et al. Nature 407, 86–90 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Laan, L. J. W. et al. Nature 407, 90– 94 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Onishi, A. et al. Science 289, 1188–1190 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Platt, J. L. Nature 392 (suppl.), 11–17 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Patience, C., Takeuchi, Y. & Weiss, R. A. Nature Med. 3, 282– 286 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Paradis, K. et al. Science 285, 1236– 1241 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Heneine, W. et al. Lancet 352, 695–699 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rother, R. P. et al. J. Exp. Med. 182, 1345– 1355 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Surgery Immunology and Pediatrics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, 55905, Minnesota , USA

    Jeffrey L. Platt

Authors
  1. Jeffrey L. Platt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey L. Platt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Platt, J. New risks, new gains. Nature 407, 27–29 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35024181

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35024181

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing