FETAL PANCREAL TRANSPLANTATION IN NONOBESE DIABETIC (NOD) MICE - A COMPARISON OF ISOGRAFTS, ALLOGRAFTS AND XENOGRAFTS

被引:0
|
作者
MANDEL, TE
KOULMANDA, M
BACELJ, A
机构
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Prediabetic NOD/Wehi male mice aged 100 days were each transplanted under the renal capsule with three pieces of organ-cultured fetal pancreas; an isograft of NOD pancreas, an allograft of CBA (H-2k) pancreas, and a xenograft of fetal pig tissue. Groups of mice were given immunosuppression on days -1, 0 and +1 relative to transplantation with either an anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody (MAb, GK1.5), with or without a low dose (50 mg/kg IP) of cyclosporin A (CsA), with CsA alone or phosphate buffered saline tometric analysis showed that CD4+ cells were severely depleted in mice that had been given GK1.5 11 days previously, but these cells slowly recovered to 35% of control levels by day 28, and 70% by day 56. The xenografted islets were slowly destroyed in the MAb-treated mice, at a rate which was slower than rejection of the allografts. At 28 days, when the allografts were severely affected, the xenografts were generally well preserved. The immunosuppression also did not stop mononuclear cell infiltration of the isografts. However, by 56 days all xenografts and most allografts were totally destroyed, and the isografts were infiltrated to an extent similar to that present in the pancreas. These results suggest that xenogeneic islets are no more and possibly even less immunogeneic than MHC-mismatched allografts, and are only slowly rejected after a peri-transplant period of immunosuppression used to transiently deplete CD4+ cells. However, the transient immunisuppression used did not result in indefinite xenograft survival suggestive of immunological tolerance.
引用
收藏
页码:166 / 173
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A COMPARISON OF ORGAN-CULTURED FETAL PANCREAS ALLOGRAFTS, ISOGRAFTS, AND XENOGRAFTS (PIG) IN NONIMMUNOSUPPRESSED NONOBESE DIABETIC MICE
    MANDEL, TE
    KOVARIK, J
    KOULMANDA, M
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY, 1995, 147 (03): : 834 - 844
  • [2] ISLET GRAFTS IN NOD MICE - A COMPARISON OF ISOGRAFTS, ALLOGRAFTS, AND PIG XENOGRAFTS
    MANDEL, TE
    KOULMANDA, M
    LOUDOVARIS, T
    BACELJ, A
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1989, 21 (05) : 3813 - 3814
  • [3] XENOGRAFTS OF ORGAN-CULTURED FETAL PIG PANCREAS IN NOD MICE - A COMPARISON WITH ALLOGRAFTS AND ISOGRAFTS IN TRANSIENTLY IMMUNOSUPPRESSED RECIPIENTS
    MANDEL, TE
    KOULMANDA, M
    LOUDOVARIS, T
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1990, 22 (02) : 816 - 818
  • [4] THE TRANSPLANTATION OF SEGMENTAL PANCREAS ISOGRAFTS IN NONOBESE DIABETIC MICE
    PURCELL, LJ
    MOTTRAM, PL
    MANDEL, TE
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1992, 24 (05) : 2299 - 2299
  • [5] THE SURVIVAL OF XENOGRAFTS, ALLOGRAFTS AND ISOGRAFTS IN NOD MICE, AND XENOGRAFTS IN OTHER STRAINS, AFTER IMMUNOSUPPRESSION WITH ANTI-CD4 MONOCLONAL-ANTIBODY
    MANDEL, TE
    KOULMANDA, M
    DIABETES NUTRITION & METABOLISM, 1992, 5 (03) : 91 - 96
  • [6] Expression of cytokines during rejection of fetal pig islet xenografts in nonobese diabetic mice
    Kovarik, J
    FaulknerJones, BE
    Koulmanda, M
    Mandel, TE
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1996, 28 (02) : 811 - 811
  • [7] Mechanism of destruction of fetal pig proislet xenografts in diabetic NOD recipient mice
    Wilson, JD
    Simeonovic, CJ
    Townsend, MJ
    McKenzie, KUS
    Zarb, JC
    Young, IG
    DIABETOLOGIA, 1997, 40 : 479 - 479
  • [8] PANCREATIC-ISLET ISOGRAFTS, ALLOGRAFTS, AND XENOGRAFTS - COMPARISON OF MORPHOLOGY AND FUNCTION
    WEBER, C
    ZATRIQI, A
    WEIL, R
    MCINTOSH, R
    HARDY, MA
    REEMTSMA, K
    SURGERY, 1976, 79 (02) : 144 - 151
  • [9] CAMP SIGNALING PATHWAY IN NONOBESE DIABETIC (NOD) MICE
    PURUSHOTHAM, K
    HU, Y
    WANG, P
    HUMPHREYSBEHER, M
    FASEB JOURNAL, 1993, 7 (07): : A1122 - A1122
  • [10] Development of transplanted fetal bones - Differences between isografts and allografts in mice
    Fraitzl, CR
    Leunig, M
    Demhartner, TJ
    Sckell, A
    Ganz, R
    Hofstetter, W
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2001, (382) : 267 - 276