Measuring success in pig to non-human-primate renal xenotransplantation: Systematic review and comparative outcomes analysis of 1051 life-sustaining NHP renal allo- and xeno-transplants

Facile gene editing has accelerated progress in pig to non-human-primate (NHP) renal xenotransplantation, however, outcomes are considered inferior to NHP-allotransplantation. This systematic review and outcomes analysis of life-sustaining NHP-renal transplantation aimed to benchmark "preclinical success" and aggregated 1051 NHP-to-NHP or pig-to-NHP transplants across 88 articles. Although protocols varied, NHP-allotransplantation survival (1, 3, 12months, 67.5%, 37.1%, 13.2%) was significantly greater than NHP-xenotransplantation (1, 3, 12 months, 38.8%, 14.0%, 4.4%; p < .001); a difference partially mitigated by gene-edited donors containing at least knockout of alpha-1,3-galactosyltransferase (1, 3, 12 months, 47.1%, 24.2%, 7.6%; p < .001). Pathological analysis demonstrated more cellular rejection in allotransplantation (62.8% vs. 3.1%, p < .001) and more antibody-mediated rejection in xenotransplantation (6.8% vs. 45.5%, p < .001). Nonrejection causes of graft loss between allotransplants and xenotransplants differed; infection and animal welfare (1.7% vs. 11.2% and 3.9% vs. 17.0%, respectively, p < .001 for both). Importantly, even among a subgroup of unsensitized rhesus macaques under long-term immunosuppression, NHP-allotransplant survival was significantly inferior to clinical allotransplantation (6 months, 36.1% vs. 94.0%; p < .001), which suggests clinical outcomes with renal xenografts may be better than predicted by current preclinical data. Facile gene editing has accelerated progress in pig to non-human-primate (NHP) renal xenotransplantation, however, outcomes are considered inferior to NHP-allotransplantation. This systematic review and outcomes analysis of life-sustaining NHP-renal transplantation aimed to benchmark "preclinical success" and aggregated 1051 NHP-to-NHP or pig-to-NHP transplants across 88 articles. Although protocols varied, NHP-allotransplantation survival (1, 3, 12months, 67.5%, 37.1%, 13.2%) was significantly greater than NHP-xenotransplantation (1, 3, 12 months, 38.8%, 14.0%, 4.4%; p < .001); a difference partially mitigated by gene-edited donors containing at least knockout of alpha-1,3-galactosyltransferase (1, 3, 12 months, 47.1%, 24.2%, 7.6%; p < .001). Pathological analysis demonstrated more cellular rejection in allotransplantation (62.8% vs. 3.1%, p < .001) and more antibody-mediated rejection in xenotransplantation (6.8% vs. 45.5%, p < .001). Nonrejection causes of graft loss between allotransplants and xenotransplants differed; infection and animal welfare (1.7% vs. 11.2% and 3.9% vs. 17.0%, respectively, p < .001 for both). Importantly, even among a subgroup of unsensitized rhesus macaques under long-term immunosuppression, NHP-allotransplant survival was significantly inferior to clinical allotransplantation (6 months, 36.1% vs. 94.0%; p < .001), which suggests clinical outcomes with renal xenografts may be better than predicted by current preclinical data.