4.2 Article

Modified glycan models of pig-to-human xenotransplantation do not enhance the human-anti-pig T cell response

Journal

TRANSPLANT IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue -, Pages 47-51

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.trim.2016.02.001

Keywords

Sialic acid; Glycan; Xenotransplantation; Cellular responses; T cell

Funding

  1. American Society of Transplant Surgeons
  2. Association for Academic Surgery Foundation
  3. IU Health Transplant Institute
  4. National Center for Research Resources, National Institute of Health [C06RR10601-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genetically modified porcine models of pig-to-human xenotransplantation offer the most immediate answer to a growing shortage of available solid organs. Recently a modified porcine glycan model has been discovered that reduces human antibody binding to levels comparable with allograft standards. As this background provides an answer to the problem of acute humoral xenograft rejection (AHXR), it is important to consider the impact these modifications have on measures of cell-mediated rejection. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of currently relevant glycan knockout models of pig-to-human xenotransplantation in a lymphocyte proliferation assay. To accomplish these goals, genetically modified pigs were created through CRISPR/Cas9-directed silencing of the GGTA1, and CMAH genes. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and spleen cells were obtained from these animals and used as a source of stimulation for human responders in one-way mixed lymphocyte reactions. The response was tested in the presence and absence of clinically available immunomodifiers. Conclusions: Clinically relevant glycan knockout models of pig-to-human xenotransplantation do not enhance the human anti-pig cellular response. Currently available and conventional immunosuppression has the capacity to mediate the human xenogeneic T cell response to these knockout cells. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available