Faculty Bibliography

Xenotransplantation (XTx) presents a potential clinical alternative to the shortage of human organs for transplantation. Before clinical trials occur in the United States, public assessments are crucial to understand potential barriers to acceptance. The purpose of this study was to explore barriers and identify characteristics associated with attitudes toward XTx. A survey assessing demographic characteristics and attitudes toward XTx was distributed to a nationally representative sample of adults aged ≥18 years in the United States. Regression analysis was employed to identify characteristics associated with attitudes toward XTx. Between May 25 and June 14, 2023, 5008 respondents completed the survey. Importantly, half of the respondents expressed low or no knowledge of either transplantation or XTx. Approximately 40% expressed discomfort with receiving a pig organ for themselves or a loved one. Despite a lack of xenotransplant outcome data, 36% were open to experimental XTx if they needed a transplant. However, 57% rated lack of current evidence of success or fear of complications as top concerns. Regression models consistently associated being younger, female, not needing an organ, or being a member of a racial minority group with lower acceptance. This survey is the largest to date exploring public attitudes toward XTx. Despite overall acceptance, concerns persist. Increasing public acceptance is key as the field advances.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Research involving recently deceased humans that are physiologically maintained following declaration of death by neurologic criteria-or 'research involving the recently deceased'-can fill a translational research gap while reducing harm to animals and living human subjects. It also creates new challenges for honouring the donor's legacy, respecting the rights of donor loved ones, resource allocation and public health. As this research model gains traction, new empirical ethics questions must be answered to preserve public trust in all forms of tissue donation and in the practice of medicine while respecting the legacy of the deceased and the rights of donor loved ones. This article suggests several topics for immediate investigation to understand the attitudes and experiences of researchers, clinical collaborators, donor loved ones and the public to ensure research involving the recently deceased advances ethically.

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.