12th International Conference on Human Retrovirology: HTLV and Related Retroviruses

A quantitative polymerase chain reaction test to enumerate leukocytes in allograft tissue and the implications for donor eligibility testing

A country-to-country analysis of infectious disease screening requirements for donated tissues or cells reveals they are not often harmonized. Transmission of one such infectious disease, human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV), is related to the transfer of HTLV-infected, viable leukocytes of sufficient number. The ability to characterize allograft tissue as being absent of leukocytes, or containing relatively few leukocytes, by using a specific test has not been previously investigated. A quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) test was developed to interrogate protein tyrosine phosphatase, receptor type C (PTPRC) gene expression in tissue samples and was able to determine the number of leukocytes present in a tissue. The impact of a qualified leukocyte tissue testing method should be significant and lead to changes in donor eligibility regulations in certain countries. Human leukapheresis samples were used as a control to establish the amount of PTPRC in leukocytes. That value was used as a comparator to determine the number of leukocyte equivalents in tissues of interest. The qPCR test measured tissue leukocyte equivalents and the results were consistent with the relative abundance of leukocytes predicted for each tissue. Using qPCR to calculate leukocyte equivalents based upon PTPRC gene expression can be successfully employed to estimate the number of leukocytes in a tissue or allograft. This method could be used as a screen to rule out tissues that do not meet the criteria of being leukocyte rich and, therefore, do not need direct HTLV testing.

The value of Institute of Human Virology meeting abstracts and beyond

This month Retrovirology publishes the meeting abstracts from the 10^th annual Institute of Human Virology conference held August 29^th to September 2^nd, 2005 in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. In this editorial, the rationale for publishing meeting abstracts is discussed.