Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Aug;101(8):1766-1769.
doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001683.

Regulation of Clinical Xenotransplantation-Time for a Reappraisal

Affiliations
Review

Regulation of Clinical Xenotransplantation-Time for a Reappraisal

David K C Cooper et al. Transplantation. 2017 Aug.

Abstract

The continual critical shortage of organs and cells from deceased human donors has stimulated research in the field of cross-species transplantation (xenotransplantation), with the pig selected as the most suitable potential source of organs. Since the US Food and Drug Administration concluded a comprehensive review of xenotransplantation in 2003, considerable progress has been made in the experimental laboratory to improve cell and organ xenograft survival in several pig-to-nonhuman primate systems that offer the best available models to predict clinical outcomes. Survival of heart, kidney, and islet grafts in nonhuman primates is now being measured in months or even years. The potential risks associated with xenotransplantation, for example, the transfer of an infectious microorganism, that were highlighted in the 2003 Food and Drug Administration guidance and subsequent World Health Organization consensus documents have been carefully studied and shown to be either less likely than previously thought or readily manageable by donor selection or recipient management strategies. In this context, we suggest that the national regulatory authorities worldwide should re-examine their guidelines and regulations regarding xenotransplantation, so as to better enable design and conduct of safe and informative clinical trials of cell and organ xenotransplantation when and as supported by the preclinical data. We identify specific topics that we suggest require reconsideration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

B.J.H. is a member of the board of directors and a shareholder of Diabetes-Free, Inc. The other authors have no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Cooper DK, Satyananda V, Ekser B, et al. Progress in pig-to-non-human primate transplantation models (1998–2013): a comprehensive review of the literature. Xenotransplantation. 2014;21:397–419. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tchantchaleishvili V, Umakanthan R, Karp S, et al. General surgical complications associated with the use of long-term mechanical circulatory support devices: are we 'under-reporting' problems? Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013;10:379–387. - PubMed
    1. Mohite PN, Maunz O, Simon AR. Pearls and pitfalls in short-term mechanical circulatory assist: how to avoid and manage complications. Artif Organs. 2014;38:829–837. - PubMed
    1. Mou L, Chen F, Dai Y, et al. Potential alternative approaches to xenotransplantation. Int J Surg. 2015;23:322–326. - PubMed
    1. Satyananda V, Hara H, Ezzelarab MB, et al. New concepts of immune modulation in xenotransplantation. Transplantation. 2013;96:937–945. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms