Del alotransplante al xenotransplante: la compatibilidad antigénica donante-receptor por medio del Complejo Mayor de Histocompatibilidad CMH

Del alotransplante al xenotransplante: la compatibilidad antigénica donante-receptor por medio del Complejo Mayor de Histocompatibilidad CMH

Organ transplants have been a clinical area tool for the search of the improvement of the quality in thehuman health and it also offers the patient a new opportunity of life. This solution has been blocked by thedeficit of enough organs. To obtain them there have been big difficulties like the negative of the families, thecosts, the delay in the reception of the organ, the lack of logistical infrastructure that allows to carry it in atimely fashion, the flaws in the transport of the organ risking the success of the transplant, among others. Forall the above and keeping in mind the possible rejection because of the compatibility of the complex antigen torecognize among donor and receiver, the scientists have looked at organs of animals denominated xenogenicsthat can solve this problem and it will allow us to have an alternative for the easy obtaining of organs forpeople that require it. This publication tries to carry out a wide revision of the contents of the transplant withthe purpose of analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of a xenogenic transplant from the molecular andimmunologic point of view.

1. Fuchimoto Y, Yamada K, Shimizu A, Yasumoto A, Sawada T, Huang C, et al. Relationship between Chimerism and Tolerance in a Kidney Transplantation Model. The Journal of Immunology. 1999; 162: 5704-5711.
2. Horig H, Papadopoulos J, Vegh Z, Palmier E, Angeletti R, Nathenson S. An in vitro study of the dynamic features of
3. the major histocompatibility complex class I complex relevant to its role as a versatile peptide-receptive molecule. PNAS. 1997; 94:13826–13831.
4. Weir D, Stewart J. Inmunología. 3a. Ed. Editorial Manual Moderno, México. 1999.
5. Spice B. Are pigs the future of transplants? Health, Science and Environment. 2004 en post-gazette.com
6. Guéguen M, Long E. Presentation of a cytosolic antigen by major histocompatibility complex class II molecules requires a long-lived form of the antigen. PNAS. 1996; 93: 14692-14697.
7. Abbas, A. Cellular and Molecular Immunology. 3a. Ed Philadelphia: Saunders Company, 2004.
8. Bazán M, González N, Delgado L. Xenotransplante. Estado actual. limitantes y expectativas. Rev Cubana Cir; 2004: 43(2).
9. Pereyra L, Neblina F. Xenotransplantation: A View to the Past and an Unrealized Promise to the Future. Experimental
10. and clinical transplantation. 2003: 1(1).
11. Pérez R, Fresnedo G, Rodríguez M. Rechazo de trasplantes. Medicine, Doyma. 2000; 8(26): 1342 - 1350.
12. Calne R. The future of organ transplantion: from the laboratory to the clinic. The Royal Society Lond. 2001; 767-761.
13. Rojas W. Inmunología. 13ava. Ed. Corporación para las investigaciones Biológicas. Colombia.2004.
14. Guedes M, Monitor T. ¿Son los cerdos la mejor opción para el xenotrasplante? Internacional Pigletter. 2002;22(8):45-48.
15. Cervantes J. Aspectos inmunológicos de la infección por papilomavirus humano. Rol del complejo mayor de
16. histocompatibilidad. Rev Med. 2003; 14 (2): 95.
17. Costa C, Zhao L, Burton W, Bondioli K, Williams B. Expression of the human 1,2-fucosyltransferase in transgenic pigs modifies the cell surface carbohydrate phenotype and confers resistance to human serum-mediated cytolysis. The
18. Faseb Journal. 1999; 13:1762-1773.
19. Ackerman L, Kyritsis C, Tampe R, Cresswell P. Early phagosomes in dendritic cells form a cellular compartment
20. sufficient for cross presentation of exogenous antigens. PNAS. 2003; 100(22).
21. Tizard I. Inmunológia veterinaria. 2da edición. Mac Graw Hill. 2002.
22. Niebert M, Tonjes R. Evolutionary Spread and Recombination of Porcine Endogenous Retroviruses in the Suiformes. Journal of virology. 2005; 79: 649–654.
23. Hughes E, Hammond C, Cresswell P. Misfolded major histocompatibility complex class I heavy chains are
24. translocated into the cytoplasm and degraded by the proteasome. PNAS. 1997; 94: 1896-1901.
25. Qari H. Magre S. J. Lerma García G. Hussain Althaf I. Takeuchi Y. Patience C. Robin A. Weiss. Heneine W. Susceptibility of the Porcine Endogenous Retrovirus to Reverse Transcriptase and Protease Inhibitors. Journal of Virology. 2001; 75(2): 1048-1053.
26. Lavitrano M, Bacci M, Forni M, Lazzereschi D, Stefano C, Fioretti D. Efficient production by sperm-mediated gene
27. transfer of human decay accelerating factor (hDAF) transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation. PNAS. 2002; 99(22):14230-14235.
28. Yamamoto J, Granados J. El complejo mayor de histocompatibilidad (MHC) y las enfermedades autoinmunes.
29. Departamento de Inmunológia y Reumatología. Instituto Nacional de nutrición Salvador Subirán. México 2000.
30. Díaz J. ¿Cómo ganar la batalla contra la escasez de tejidos y órganos para trasplantes? Cirugía y Cirujanos. 2005; 73(3): 159-160.
31. Lee R, Yamada K, Houser S, Womer K, Maloney M, Rose H,Sayegh M, Madsen J. Indirect recognition of allopeptides promotes the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. PNAS. 2001; 98(6): 3276–3281.
32. Thaunat O, Field A, Dai J, Louedec L, Patey N, Bloch M, Mandet C, Belair M, Bruneval P, Meilhac O, Bellon B, Joly
33. E, Michel J, Nicoletti A. Lymphoid neogenesis in chronic rejection: Evidence for a local humoral alloimmune response. PNAS. 2005;102(41):14723–14728.
34. Blanco Myriam L. El rechazo de los xenoinjertos se podría evitar con nuevas estrategias. Salud y medicina. 1997(27).
35. Cotran K, Collins R. Patología Estructural y Funcional. 6 ed. Editorial McGraw Hill interamericana. 2004.
36. Otchet A. Xenotrasplantes: sopesar los riesgos. UNESCO. 2000.
37. Bartosch B, Stefanidis D, Myers R, Weiss R, Patience C, Takeuchi Y. Evidence and Consequence of Porcine
38. Endogenous Retrovirus Recombination. J Virol. 2004; 78: 13880–13890.
39. Cozzi E, Bhatti F, Schmoeckel M. et al. Long-term survival of nonhuman primates receiving life-supporting transgenic porcine kidney xenografts, Transplantation 2000; 70:15-21.
40. Ybarra R. Bloquean en cerdos dos genes asociados al rechazo hiperagudo. XIX congreso internacional de la sociedad de trasplantes. 2002; diariomedico.com.
41. Stein A. Mañez R, Crespo F. Xenotrasplante. ¿Estamos listos? Complejo Hospitalario Juan Canalejo. 1er congreso virtual de cardiología. 2004.
42. Sugita M, Van der Wel N, Rogers R, Peters P, Brenner M. CD1c molecules broadly survey the endocytic system. PNAS. 2000; 97(15): 8445-8450.
43. Morera L, González T, Lorenzo R, Vilches D, Martínez Z, Guerreiro A. Estudio preeliminar de la frecuencia fenotípica y genética de los antígenos HLA en la enfermedad de Voghtkoyanagi-harada. Rev Cubana Hematol Inmunol Hemoter 2001;17(2):128-31.
44. Tourne S, Miyazaki T, Wolf P, Ploegh H, Benoist C, Mathis D. Functionality of major histocompatibility complex class II molecules in mice doubly deficient for invariant chain and H-2M complexes. 1997; 94: 9255-9260
45. Sánchez Vizcaino J. Introducción a la inmunología porcina. En: www.sanidadanimal.info.2001
46. Borrego M, Speight P, Barreto W. Expression of Major Histocompatibility Complex class II and costimulatory molecules in oral carcinomas in vitro. Med Oral Patol Ora Cir Bucal. 2005; 10: 188-195.
47. Casciani C, Cipriani S. The first renal human transplant and the first xenotransplant in Italy. J Nephrol 2004(17): 479-482
48. Máximo J. Obtenga sus órganos de reemplazo en el supermercado. San Juan Star. 2002.
49. Ramsoondar J, Macháty Z, Costa C, Barry L, Fodor W,Bondioli K. Production of Ü-1,3-Galactosyltransferase-Knockout Cloned Pigs Expressing Human Ü-1,2-Fucosylosyltransferase. Society for the Study of Reproduction. 2003: 437–445.
50. Rocha P, Carvalho E. Prostanoids modulate inflammation and alloimmune responses during graft rejection. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2005; 38: 1759-1768
51. Harrison I, Takeuchi Y, Bartosch B, Stoye J. Determinants of High Titer in Recombinant Porcine Endogenous
52. Retroviruses. Journal of virology. 2004; 78(24): 13871–13879.
53. Castañeda M. Trasplantes celulares: De terapia celular a células autólogas personalizadas. Acta médica grupo ángeles. 2005;3(2).
54. Méndez Aguilar C. Vázquez Suárez M. Pinson Guerra A. Participación de enfermería en la coordinación de trasplantes de órganos. Archivos de cardiología México. 2002;(72): 241-246.
55. Manni J. Lo propio, lo extraño y lo propio modificado. Medicina. 1996; 56(6).
56. Gromme M, Uytdehaag F, Janssen H, Calafat I, Binnendijk R. Recycling MHC class I molecules and endosomal peptide loading. PNAS. 1999;(96): 10326–10331.
57. Ericsson T, Takeuchi Y, Templin C, Gary Q, Farhadian S, Wood J. Identification of receptors for pig endogenous
58. retrovirus. PNAS. 2003; 100(11): 6759-6764.
59. Cruz R. Recognition of classical works in the history of genetics. Rev Méd Chile 2003; (131):220-224.
60. Thomas A, Takeuchi Y, Templin C, Quinn G, Farhadian S. Wood B, Oldmixon Beth A, Suling K, Ishii J, Kitagawa Y,
61. Miyazawa T, Salomon D, Weiss R. Patience Clive. Identification of receptors for pig endogenous retrovirus. PNAS. 2003; 100(11): 6759-6764.
62. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
63. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22490/24629448.364