Faculty Bibliography

The scarcity of transplantable organs represents a worldwide public health crisis, and as a result, thousands of people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) die waiting for a transplant each year. Xenotransplantation involves transplanting organs from an animal source into humans, offering a potential solution to this significant unmet need. Indeed, if there is a limitless supply of organs, many more patients who do not meet the current criteria for transplant eligibility could also be considered candidates. While there are examples of attempts to transplant animal tissues or organs into humans dating back over 300 years, none were successful due to cross-species immunologic incompatibility. Even so, significant advances in genetic engineering and the emergence of novel immunosuppressive agents have spurred impressive improvements in xenograft survival in preclinical studies involving nonhuman primates. Furthermore, recent reports of genetically modified pig kidney and heart xenotransplants in human decedents and living recipients on a compassionate use basis have provided impetus to advancing the field towards first-in-human trials. However, studies in nonhuman primates and humans thus far have described adaptive as well as innate immune-mediated xenograft injury. Understanding the mechanistic aspects of these responses at the cellular and molecular levels is critical to the development of targeted genetic modifications and innovative therapeutic strategies aimed at preventing rejection and inducing tolerance. Moreover, the physiological components of the bidirectional communication between the human host and pig xenograft must also be understood and manipulated. Here, we review the breakthroughs in renal xenotransplantation in the past few decades and highlight the immunologic hurdles that have yet to be overcome.

BACKGROUND:Kidney transplantation from donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to recipients with HIV is an emerging practice. It has been performed since 2016 under the U.S. congressional HIV Organ Policy Equity Act and is currently approved for research only. The Department of Health and Human Services is considering expanding the procedure to clinical practice, but data are limited to small case series that did not include donors without HIV as controls. METHODS:In an observational study conducted at 26 U.S. centers, we compared transplantation of kidneys from deceased donors with HIV and donors without HIV to recipients with HIV. The primary outcome was a safety event (a composite of death from any cause, graft loss, serious adverse event, HIV breakthrough infection, persistent failure of HIV treatment, or opportunistic infection), assessed for noninferiority (margin for the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval, 3.00). Secondary outcomes included overall survival, survival without graft loss, rejection, infection, cancer, and HIV superinfection. RESULTS:We enrolled 408 transplantation candidates, of whom 198 received a kidney from a deceased donor; 99 received a kidney from a donor with HIV and 99 from a donor without HIV. The adjusted hazard ratio for the composite primary outcome was 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.38), which showed noninferiority. The following secondary outcomes were similar whether the donor had HIV or not: overall survival at 1 year (94% vs. 95%) and 3 years (85% vs. 87%), survival without graft loss at 1 year (93% vs. 90%) and 3 years (84% vs. 81%), and rejection at 1 year (13% vs. 21%) and 3 years (21% vs. 24%). The incidence of serious adverse events, infections, surgical or vascular complications, and cancer was similar in the groups. The incidence of HIV breakthrough infection was higher among recipients of kidneys from donors with HIV (incidence rate ratio, 3.14; 95%, CI, 1.02 to 9.63), with one potential HIV superinfection among the 58 recipients in this group with sequence data and no persistent failures of HIV treatment. CONCLUSIONS:In this observational study of kidney transplantation in persons with HIV, transplantation from donors with HIV appeared to be noninferior to that from donors without HIV. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03500315.).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:Strongyloides stercoralis infection remains of concern due to its high associated morbidity among solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) and the risk of donor-derived infection (DDI). We review key aspects of epidemiology to inform screening for and treatment of chronic infection among organ transplant candidates to reduce the risk of infectious complications in the posttransplant setting. RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:In this work, we offer guidance regarding the optimal management of Strongyloides hyperinfection syndrome and disseminated infection and offer recommendations regarding posttreatment surveillance and the potential need for repeat treatment during subsequent periods of augmented immunosuppression. This review also provides updated recommendations for screening of deceased and living donors as recently proposed by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network's Ad Hoc Disease Transmission Advisory Committee. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:Risk reduction of Strongyloides infection in the SOTR population can be further enhanced by optimized treatment of infection, posttreatment surveillance during at-risk periods and recent proposed policy shifts to universal donor screening.

BACKGROUND:Kidney transplant (KT) candidates with HIV face higher mortality on the waitlist compared with candidates without HIV. Because the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act has expanded the donor pool to allow donors with HIV (D+), it is crucial to understand whether this has impacted transplant rates for this population. METHODS:Using a linkage between the HOPE in Action trial (NCT03500315) and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 324 candidates listed for D+ kidneys (HOPE) compared with 46 025 candidates not listed for D+ kidneys (non-HOPE) at the same centers between April 26, 2018, and May 24, 2022. We characterized KT rate, KT type (D+, false-positive [FP; donor with false-positive HIV testing], D- [donor without HIV], living donor [LD]) and quantified the association between HOPE enrollment and KT rate using multivariable Cox regression with center-level clustering; HOPE was a time-varying exposure. RESULTS:HOPE candidates were more likely male individuals (79% versus 62%), Black (73% versus 35%), and publicly insured (71% versus 52%; P < 0.001). Within 4.5 y, 70% of HOPE candidates received a KT (41% D+, 34% D-, 20% FP, 4% LD) versus 43% of non-HOPE candidates (74% D-, 26% LD). Conversely, 22% of HOPE candidates versus 39% of non-HOPE candidates died or were removed from the waitlist. Median KT wait time was 10.3 mo for HOPE versus 60.8 mo for non-HOPE candidates (P < 0.001). After adjustment, HOPE candidates had a 3.30-fold higher KT rate (adjusted hazard ratio = 3.30, 95% confidence interval, 2.14-5.10; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Listing for D+ kidneys within HOPE trials was associated with a higher KT rate and shorter wait time, supporting the expansion of this practice for candidates with HIV.

The latent viral reservoir(LVR) remains a major barrier to HIV-1 curative strategies. It is unknown whether receiving a liver transplant from a donor with HIV might lead to an increase in the LVR since the liver is a large lymphoid organ. We found no differences in intact provirus, defective provirus, or the ratio of intact to defective provirus between recipients with ART-supporesed HIV who received a liver from a donor with(n = 19) or without HIV(n = 10). All measures remained stable from baseline by one-year post transplant. These data demonstrate that the LVR is stable after liver transplantation in people living with HIV.

BACKGROUND:Cross-species immunological incompatibilities have hampered pig-to-human xenotransplantation, but porcine genome engineering recently enabled the first successful experiments. However, little is known about the immune response after the transplantation of pig kidneys to human recipients. We aimed to precisely characterise the early immune responses to the xenotransplantation using a multimodal deep phenotyping approach. METHODS:We did a complete phenotyping of two pig kidney xenografts transplanted to decedent humans. We used a multimodal strategy combining morphological evaluation, immunophenotyping (IgM, IgG, C4d, CD68, CD15, NKp46, CD3, CD20, and von Willebrand factor), gene expression profiling, and whole-transcriptome digital spatial profiling and cell deconvolution. Xenografts before implantation, wild-type pig kidney autografts, as well as wild-type, non-transplanted pig kidneys with and without ischaemia-reperfusion were used as controls. FINDINGS:cells. Both xenografts showed increased expression of genes biologically related to a humoral response, including monocyte and macrophage activation, natural killer cell burden, endothelial activation, complement activation, and T-cell development. Whole-transcriptome digital spatial profiling showed that antibody-mediated injury was mainly located in the glomeruli of the xenografts, with significant enrichment of transcripts associated with monocytes, macrophages, neutrophils, and natural killer cells. This phenotype was not observed in control pig kidney autografts or in ischaemia-reperfusion models. INTERPRETATION:Despite favourable short-term outcomes and absence of hyperacute injuries, our findings suggest that antibody-mediated rejection in pig-to-human kidney xenografts might be occurring. Our results suggest specific therapeutic targets towards the humoral arm of rejection to improve xenotransplantation results. FUNDING:OrganX and MSD Avenir.

BACKGROUND:Understanding immunogenicity and alloimmune risk following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in kidney transplant recipients is imperative to understanding the correlates of protection and to inform clinical guidelines. METHODS:We studied 50 kidney transplant recipients following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and quantified their anti-spike protein antibody, donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), gene expression profiling (GEP), and alloantibody formation. RESULTS:Participants were stratified using nucleocapsid testing as either SARS-CoV-2-naïve or experienced prior to vaccination. One of 34 (3%) SARS-CoV-2 naïve participants developed anti-spike protein antibodies. In contrast, the odds ratio for the association of a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection with vaccine response was 18.3 (95% confidence interval 3.2, 105.0, p < 0.01). Pre- and post-vaccination levels did not change for median dd-cfDNA (0.23% vs. 0.21% respectively, p = 0.13), GEP scores (9.85 vs. 10.4 respectively, p = 0.45), calculated panel reactive antibody, de-novo donor specific antibody status, or estimated glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSIONS:SARS-CoV-2 vaccines do not appear to trigger alloimmunity in kidney transplant recipients. The degree of vaccine immunogenicity was associated most strongly with a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Genetically modified xenografts are one of the most promising solutions to the discrepancy between the numbers of available human organs for transplantation and potential recipients. To date, a porcine heart has been implanted into only one human recipient. Here, using 10-gene-edited pigs, we transplanted porcine hearts into two brain-dead human recipients and monitored xenograft function, hemodynamics and systemic responses over the course of 66 hours. Although both xenografts demonstrated excellent cardiac function immediately after transplantation and continued to function for the duration of the study, cardiac function declined postoperatively in one case, attributed to a size mismatch between the donor pig and the recipient. For both hearts, we confirmed transgene expression and found no evidence of cellular or antibody-mediated rejection, as assessed using histology, flow cytometry and a cytotoxic crossmatch assay. Moreover, we found no evidence of zoonotic transmission from the donor pigs to the human recipients. While substantial additional work will be needed to advance this technology to human trials, these results indicate that pig-to-human heart xenotransplantation can be performed successfully without hyperacute rejection or zoonosis.

This guidance was developed to summarize current approaches to the potential transmission of swine-derived organisms to xenograft recipients, health care providers, or the public in clinical xenotransplantation. Limited specific data are available on the zoonotic potential of pig pathogens. It is anticipated that the risk of zoonotic infection in xenograft recipients will be determined by organisms present in source animals and relate to the nature and intensity of the immunosuppression used to maintain xenograft function. Based on experience in allotransplantation and with preclinical models, viral infections are of greatest concern, including porcine cytomegalovirus, porcine lymphotropic herpesvirus, and porcine endogenous retroviruses. Sensitive and specific microbiological assays are required for routine microbiological surveillance of source animals and xenograft recipients. Archiving of blood samples from recipients, contacts, and hospital staff may provide a basis for microbiological investigations if infectious syndromes develop. Carefully implemented infection control practices are required to prevent zoonotic pathogen exposures by clinical care providers. Informed consent practices for recipients and their close contacts must convey the lack of specific data for infectious risk assessment. Available data suggest that infectious risks of xenotransplantation are manageable and that clinical trials can advance with carefully developed protocols for pretransplant assessment, syndrome evaluation, and microbiological monitoring.