Faculty Bibliography

This manuscript reports on a landmark symposium on the ethical, legal and technical challenges of xenotransplantation in the UK. King's College London, with endorsement from the British Transplantation Society (BTS), and the European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT), brought together a group of experts in xenotransplantation science, ethics and law to discuss the ethical, regulatory and technical challenges surrounding translating xenotransplantation into the clinical setting. The symposium was the first of its kind in the UK for 20 years. This paper summarises the content of the expert lectures showcasing the progress which has been made in xenotransplantation including-the history of xenotransplantation, advances in gene edited animals and progress towards clinical xenotransplantation. We then set out the ethical and legal issues still to be resolved. Finally, we report the themes of the roundtable discussion highlighting areas of consensus and controversy. While the detail of the legal discussion was directed towards the UK, the principles and summary reported here are intended to be applicable to any jurisdiction seeking to implement clinical xenotransplantation.

Xenotransplantation offers the potential to meet the critical need for heart and lung transplantation presently constrained by the current human donor organ supply. Much was learned over the past decades regarding gene editing to prevent the immune activation and inflammation that cause early organ injury, and strategies for maintenance immunosuppression to promote longer-term xenograft survival. However, many scientific questions remain regarding further requirements for genetic modification of donor organs, appropriate contexts for xenotransplantation research (including non-human primates, recently deceased humans, and living human recipients), and risk of xenozoonotic disease transmission. Related ethical questions include appropriate selection of clinical trial participants, challenges with obtaining informed consent, animal rights and welfare considerations, and cost. Research involving recently deceased humans has also emerged as a potential novel way to understand how xeno-organs will impact the human body. Clinical xenotransplantation and research involving decedents also raise ethical questions, and will require consensus regarding regulatory oversight and protocol review. These considerations and the related opportunities for xenotransplantation research were discussed in a workshop sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and are summarized in this meeting report.

In a workshop sponsored by the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, experts identified current knowledge gaps and research opportunities in the scientific, conceptual, and ethical understanding of organ donation after the circulatory determination of death and its technologies. To minimize organ injury from warm ischemia and produce better recipient outcomes, innovative techniques to perfuse and oxygenate organs postmortem in situ, such as thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion, are being implemented in several medical centers in the US and elsewhere. These technologies have improved organ outcomes but have raised ethical and legal questions. Re-establishing donor circulation postmortem can be viewed as invalidating the condition of permanent cessation of circulation on which the earlier death determination was made and clamping arch vessels to exclude brain circulation can be viewed as inducing brain death. Alternatively, TA-NRP can be viewed as localized in-situ organ perfusion, not whole-body resuscitation, that does not invalidate death determination. Further scientific, conceptual, and ethical studies, such as those identified in this workshop, can inform and help resolve controversies raised by this practice.

On June 3, 2023, the American Society of Transplant Surgeons convened a meeting in San Diego, California to (1) develop a consensus statement with supporting data on the ethical tenets of thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) and abdominal NRP; (2) provide guidelines for the standards of practice that should govern thoracoabdominal NRP and abdominal NRP; and (3) develop and implement a central database for the collection of NRP donor and recipient data in the United States. National and international leaders in the fields of neuroscience, transplantation, critical care, NRP, Organ Procurement Organizations, transplant centers, and donor families participated. The conference was designed to focus on the controversial issues of neurological flow and function in donation after circulatory death donors during NRP and propose technical standards necessary to ensure that this procedure is performed safely and effectively. This article discusses major topics and conclusions addressed at the meeting.

BACKGROUND:Xenotransplantation clinical trials may begin soon. A persistent risk of xenotransplantation, known for decades, is the possibility that a xenozoonotic infection could be transferred from a xenograft to its recipient and then to other human contacts. Because of this risk, guidelines and commentators have advocated for xenograft recipients to agree to either long-term or lifelong surveillance mechanisms. METHODS:For the past few decades, one solution that has been proposed to ensure that xenograft recipients will comply with surveillance protocols is the use of a heavily modified Ulysses contract, which we review. RESULTS:These contracts are most often used in psychiatry, and their application to xenotransplantation has been espoused several times with minimal criticism. CONCLUSIONS:In this article, we argue against the applicability of Ulysses contracts in xenotransplantation based upon (1) the telos of the advance directive that may not be applicable to this clinical context, (2) the suspect nature of enforcing Ulysses contracts in xenotransplantation, and (3) the ethical and regulatory hurdles that such enforcement would require. Although our focus is on the US regulatory landscape in preparation for clinical trials, there are applications globally.

Research institutions often lack policies addressing the risks and benefits of enrolling "invested parties" such as investigators, research staff, and patient, caregiver, and community representatives (groups most affected by a disease or intervention) in studies where they have direct involvement. Invested parties may have both strong motivations to study the condition or intervention and to participate as study subjects. More guidance is needed to promote appropriate access to research participation and mitigate potential risks. This article addresses the gap in guidance by presenting an ethical framework and practical guidelines for the enrollment of invested parties. Drawing from experiences with the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative, a large multisite observational cohort study, we argue that invested parties should not be categorically excluded from enrollment in their own research studies if certain criteria are met and appropriate safeguards are in place. We underscore the need to balance inclusion with fairness, promote valid voluntary informed consent, ensure data privacy, protect scientific validity, and mitigate unique risks to invested parties as participants. Additionally, we recommend regular reporting and empirical assessment to evaluate the impact of enrolling invested parties on participants and study outcomes.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Individuals who work on health data systems and services are uniquely positioned to understand the risks of health data collection and use. We designed and conducted a survey assessing the perceptions of those who work with health data around health data consent, sharing, and privacy practices in healthcare and clinical research. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:tests and ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Most of our respondents (61.7%) reported that they would trust people to use their health data across various sectors, but more respondents trusted those working in academic medical research (86.5%) and healthcare offices (89.9%) compared to those working in industry (68.2%). Despite this reported trust, a strong majority believed that individuals should have complete control over their health data (97.3%), specific consent should be obtained for each use of their health data (92.0%), and that there should be higher standards of consent and privacy for health records data than other types of data (93.7%). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Based on our findings, we might infer that people who work with health data generally trust institutions across sectors to protect their health data. However, many would prefer to have complete control over who has access to their health data and how it is used. These insights should be explored further through qualitative studies.

IMPORTANCE/OBJECTIVE:SARS-CoV-2 infection can result in ongoing, relapsing, or new symptoms or organ dysfunction after the acute phase of infection, termed Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC), or long COVID. The characteristics, prevalence, trajectory and mechanisms of PASC are poorly understood. The objectives of the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) tissue pathology study (RECOVER-Pathology) are to: (1) characterize prevalence and types of organ injury/disease and pathology occurring with PASC; (2) characterize the association of pathologic findings with clinical and other characteristics; (3) define the pathophysiology and mechanisms of PASC, and possible mediation via viral persistence; and (4) establish a post-mortem tissue biobank and post-mortem brain imaging biorepository. METHODS:RECOVER-Pathology is a cross-sectional study of decedents dying at least 15 days following initial SARS-CoV-2 infection. Eligible decedents must meet WHO criteria for suspected, probable, or confirmed infection and must be aged 18 years or more at the time of death. Enrollment occurs at 7 sites in four U.S. states and Washington, DC. Comprehensive autopsies are conducted according to a standardized protocol within 24 hours of death; tissue samples are sent to the PASC Biorepository for later analyses. Data on clinical history are collected from the medical records and/or next of kin. The primary study outcomes include an array of pathologic features organized by organ system. Causal inference methods will be employed to investigate associations between risk factors and pathologic outcomes. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:RECOVER-Pathology is the largest autopsy study addressing PASC among US adults. Results of this study are intended to elucidate mechanisms of organ injury and disease and enhance our understanding of the pathophysiology of PASC.