Islet Xeno/transplantation and the risk of contagion: local responses from Canada and Australia to an emerging global technoscience

This paper situates the public debate over the use of living animal organs and tissue for human therapies within the history of experimental islet transplantation. Specifically, the paper compares and contrasts the Canadian and Australian responses on xenotransplantation to consider what lessons can be learnt about the regulation of a complex and controversial biotechnology. Sobbrio and Jorqui described public engagement on xenotransplantation in these countries as 'important forms of experimental democracy.' While Canada experimented with a novel nation-wide public consultation, Australia sought public input within the context of a national inquiry. In both instances, the outcome was a temporary moratorium on all forms of clinical xenotransplantation comparable to the policies adopted in some European countries. In addition, the Australian xenotransplantation ban coincided with a temporary global ban on experimental islet allotransplantation in 2007. Through historical and comparative research, this paper investigates how public controversies over organ and tissue transplantation can inform our understanding of the mediation of interspeciality and the regulation of a highly contested technoscience. It offers an alternative perspective on the xenotransplantation controversy by exploring the ways in which coinciding moratoriums on islet allograft and xenograft challenge, complicate and confound our assumptions regarding the relationships between human and animal, between routine surgery and clinical experimentation, between biomedical science and social science, and between disease risks and material contagion.

Organ procurement and transplantation network. Final rule

: HHS is issuing this final rule (herein referred to as ``this rule'') to add vascularized composite allografts (VCAs) as specified herein to the definition of organs covered by the rules governing the operation of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) (herein referred to as the OPTN final rule). When it enacted the National Organ Transplant Act in 1984, Congress included a definition of the term organ and authorized the Secretary to expand this definition by regulation. The Secretary has previously exercised this authority and expanded the statutory definition of organ. Prior to this rule, the OPTN final rule defined covered organs as ``a human kidney, liver, heart, lung, or pancreas, or intestine (including the esophagus, stomach, small and/or large intestine, or any portion of the gastrointestinal tract). Blood vessels recovered from an organ donor during the recovery of such organ(s) are considered part of an organ with which they are procured for purposes of this part if the vessels are intended for use in organ transplantation and labeled `For use in organ transplantation only.' '' This rule also includes a corresponding change to the definition of human organs covered by section 301 of the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, as amended (NOTA).

Custom, contract, and kidney exchange

In this Essay, we examine a case in which the organizational and logistical demands of a novel form of organ exchange (the nonsimultaneous, extended, altruistic donor (NEAD) chain) do not map cleanly onto standard cultural schemas for either market or gift exchange, resulting in sociological ambiguity and legal uncertainty. In some ways, a NEAD chain resembles a form of generalized exchange, an ancient and widespread instance of the norm of reciprocity that can be thought of simply as the obligation to “pay it forward” rather than the obligation to reciprocate directly with the original giver. At the same time, a NEAD chain resembles a string of promises and commitments to deliver something in exchange for some valuable consideration--that is, a series of contracts. Neither of these salient "social imaginaries" of exchange--gift giving or formal contract--perfectly meets the practical demands of the NEAD system. As a result, neither contract nor generalized exchange drives the practice of NEAD chains. Rather, the majority of actual exchanges still resemble a simpler form of exchange: direct, simultaneous exchange between parties with no time delay or opportunity to back out. If NEAD chains are to reach their full promise for large-scale, nonsimultaneous organ transfer, legal uncertainties and sociological ambiguities must be finessed, both in the practices of the coordinating agencies and in the minds of NEAD-chain participants. This might happen either through the further elaboration of gift-like language and practices, or through a creative use of the cultural form and motivational vocabulary, but not necessarily the legal and institutional machinery, of contract.

[Logistics and European laws on allogeneic tissue transplantation]

European rules stipulate quality and safety requirements on recruitment, testing, preserving, and distributing human tissues for application in patients in order to obtain a high level of health safety. In order to avoid transmissible diseases in tissue transplantation, specific requirements for all individual groups of tissues of human origin were defined. European Member States need to implement these directives in order to obtain a high level of health protection in human application. Precise instructions for tissue institutes regarding organization, management, documentation, and quality controls are required. Adverse effects have to be registered by these institutions. Costs need to be contained and therefore uniform administrative directives will engineer the modern techniques of communication. A uniform European code is needed for easy traceability of human tissues. The directive respects the basic human rights as laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

[Philosophical and ethics aspects of the composite tissues allotransplantations (CTA)]

The first successes of total hand and partial face transplants raise several philosophical and ethical questions. This paper examines the perspective of the recipient, the donor and the social aspect. The question of the identity remains unsolved. Philosophical point of view shows an historical continuity in the desire of the human being for improving his condition.

Decreasing latitude and increasing regulation in transplantable tissue programs

•

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY and improved surgical techniques have led to new therapeutic uses for allografts.

•

DISEASE TRANSMISSION via allograft tissue transplants has prompted federal intervention in the tissue banking industry and resulted in federal regulations.

•

NEW STANDARDS from the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations became effective July 1,2005, and apply to all hospitals that store or implant allograft tissues. These standards include mandatory policies on all aspects of hospital transplantation programs, including tissue ordering, receipt, storage, issuance, and record keeping. AORN J 82 (November 2005) 806–814.

Human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products; establishment registration and listing. Interim final rule; opportunity for public comment

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an interim final rule to except human dura mater and human heart valve allografts, currently subject to application or notification requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act), from the scope of the definition of "human cells, tissues, or cellular or tissue-based products (HCT/P's)" subject to the registration and listing requirements contained in 21 CFR part 1271. That definition became effective on January 21, 2004. FDA is taking this action to assure that these products, which are currently subject to the act and therefore regulated under the current good manufacturing practice regulations set out in the quality system regulations in 21 CFR part 820 are not released from the scope of those regulations before a more comprehensive regulatory framework applicable to HCT/P's, including donor suitability requirements, good tissue practice regulations, and appropriate enforcement provisions, is fully in place. When that comprehensive framework is in place, FDA intends that human dura mater and human heart valves will be subject to it. FDA intends to revoke this interim final rule at that time.