Skip to main content
Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal logoLink to Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal
. 2025 May 15;21(3):92–99. doi: 10.14797/mdcvj.1590

Allogeneic, Xenogeneic, and Exogenic Hearts for Transplantation

Daniel J Garry 1,2, Mary G Garry 1,2, Hiromitsu Nakauchi 3,4,5, Hideki Masaki 3,6, David H Sachs 7,8, Joshua I Weiner 7, Daniel Reichart 9,10,11, Eckhard Wolf 10,11
PMCID: PMC12082467  PMID: 40384731

Abstract

The only curative therapy for end-stage heart failure is orthotopic allogeneic heart transplantation. This therapy has extended the survival of patients worldwide but is limited due to the scarcity of donor organs. Potential alternative donor sources of organs for transplantation include genetically-modified (GM) large animal donors (ie, xenografts) and human organs developed in large animal hosts. These strategies utilize gene editing and somatic cell nuclear transfer technologies to engineer partially or completely humanized organs. Preclinical xenotransplantation studies of GM pig hearts into baboons have already provided an important clinical foundation, as two patients have received cardiac xenografts from GM pigs and have survived for up to 2 months. Additional issues need to be addressed in order for patients to survive more than 1 year, which would make these strategies clinically applicable. Thus, in combination with immunosuppression agents, xenogeneic and exogenic organ sources hold tremendous promise for an unlimited and transformative supply of organs for transplantation.

Keywords: orthotopic heart transplantation, exogenesis, xenotransplantation, gene editing, somatic cell nuclear transfer, blastocyst complementation

Introduction

Heart failure is a progressive and eventually terminal disease that impacts communities and societies worldwide.1,2 Many causes can contribute to heart failure, including coronary artery disease,3 hypertension,4 obesity,5,6 diabetes mellitus, sarcoidosis, amyloidosis, structural heart disease,7 infectious etiologies (ie, viral, parasitic or others),8 toxins (alcohol, cocaine, methamphetamine, etc.),9 muscular dystrophies, and many others.10,11 Seminal studies have demonstrated benefits and improved survival using reverse remodeling agents/medications in patients with heart failure. Such guideline-directed medical therapies include beta adrenergic receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers), and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors.12 In combination with these medical therapies, device therapies such as cardiac resynchronization therapies (cardiac resynchronization therapy or biventricular pacing) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators have been shown to improve survival in patients with severe, end-stage heart failure. Despite these major advances using medical and device therapies, 50% of patients with heart failure do not survive beyond 5 years from their initial date of diagnosis.12,13 The only curative therapy for end-stage heart failure is orthotopic allogeneic heart transplantation.14 In this brief review, we will examine this modality as well as alternative strategies and donor organ sources that may complement the use of allogeneic organ transplantation. We also highlight the current state and areas of investigation related to cardiac transplantation that are underway in order to broadly apply these therapies to patients with end-stage cardiovascular diseases.

Allogeneic Cardiac Transplantation

The first orthotopic allogeneic heart transplant was performed in Cape Town, South Africa (Groote Schuur Hospital), by Christiaan N. Barnard in 1967.15 Initially (1967-1980), patient survival following allogeneic heart transplantation was limited. However, scientific advances in immunobiology transformed the field and improved the survival of transplant recipients. Specifically, the discovery of cyclosporine in 1972 and its eventual approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for use as an immunosuppressant agent in 1983 improved graft and patient survival.16 Today, most immunosuppression protocols include a corticosteroid taper, a reversible inhibitor of inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase (mycophenolate mofetil), and a calcineurin inhibitor (tacrolimus or cyclosporine).17

Worldwide, more than 5,000 heart transplants are performed each year and have a 10-year survival of approximately 50%.18 While intense efforts remain focused on immunological barriers and the long-term impact of immunosuppression, allogeneic heart transplantation remains the only curative therapy for end-stage heart failure. However, the limited number of donor organs precludes the broad application of solid organ transplantation for end-stage (terminal) heart disease. Moreover, it is estimated that as many as 100,000 to 500,000 individuals worldwide could benefit from such therapy.18 This discrepancy between those individuals who need an organ transplant and those who receive such lifesaving therapies is what drives the pursuit of alternative organ sources.

Xenotransplantation and the Use of Gene Edited Organs

The limited supply of donor organs has ignited a longstanding interest and investigation focused on xenotransplantation. The first cardiac xenotransplant was performed in 1964 when an undersized chimpanzee heart was transplanted in a patient with cardiogenic shock and was immediately rejected.19,20,21 Approximately 20 years later, a baboon heart incompatible with the ABO blood type was transplanted into a newborn patient (Baby Fae) who had hypoplastic left heart syndrome (failure) and survived for approximately 20 days.19,20,21,22 These pioneering initiatives provided an important basis for further studies and the engineering of improved xenografts.

The development and use of gene editing technologies in combination with somatic cell nuclear transfer technology provided new opportunities to engineer pig organs for xenotransplantation. The pig is an attractive xenograft source for many reasons as it has a rapid growth phase to physical maturity and has a comparable size, anatomy, and functional (physiological) performance compared to the human heart. Therefore, efforts have further focused on genetic modifications of swine as xenogeneic organ donors (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Genetically engineered pigs as organ sources for xenotransplantation

Genetically engineered pigs as organ sources for xenotransplantation. Using gene disruption and transgenic technologies, juvenile and adult pigs have been engineered and serve as organ sources for xenotransplantation.

There is broad consensus that the most prevalent carbohydrate antigen on pig cells, galactose-α(1,3)-galactose (αGal), should be eliminated since it is recognized by large amounts of preformed natural antibodies in all humans and Old World nonhuman primates (ie, several species of monkeys found in Africa and Asia such as baboons, macaques, etc.).23,24 Many but not all investigators consider other carbohydrate targets of natural antibodies, including N-glycolylneuraminic acid, and a human Sd(a) blood group-like glycan, also important molecules to be eliminated.25,26 Binding of antibodies to these targets leads to activation of complement and coagulation cascades and antibody-mediated rejection of the xenotransplant. This problem can be overcome by inactivating the genes responsible for these antigens: GGTA1 (coding α-1,3-galactosyltransferase), CMAH (coding cytidine monophosphate-N-acetylneuraminic acid hydroxylase), and B4GALNT2/B4GALNT2L (coding β-1,4-N-acetyl-galactosaminyl transferase 2).26 Cells from these triple-knockout (TKO) pigs show very little human natural antibody binding, whereas baboons have more antibodies against TKO pig cells than to GGTA1 knockout cells.27

A complementary strategy is the expression of one or more human complement pathway regulatory proteins (such as human CD46), which block different steps in the activation of the complement cascade. By combining these strategies, hyperacute rejection of pig-to-primate xenografts can be completely controlled.27

Another important issue is the dysregulation of coagulation in the xenotransplanted heart, eventually leading to thrombotic microangiopathy and graft failure. This problem can be mitigated by transgenic expression of human coagulation regulating proteins. Thus far, the most effective approach has been the expression of human thrombomodulin (hTHBD) that, in complex with human thrombin, activates protein C, resulting in a strong anticoagulant function.28 Indeed, hearts from triple-modified pigs (genetically knocking out of αGal and transgenic expression of proteins hCD46 and hTHBD) survived consistently for up to 6 months after orthotopic transplantation into baboons.29,30,31 In addition to genetic modification of the source pigs, cold nonischemic perfusion of the donor hearts, nontoxic immunosuppression of the recipients using CD40-CD154 costimulation blockade, and post-implantation growth control of the xeno-heart using the mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitor temsirolimus were key to this success.32

Additional transgenes, including other complement pathway regulators, human endothelial protein C receptor, human heme oxygenase I, or human CD47 did not provide a significant advantage over this basic combination of a GGTA1 knockout plus expression of hCD46 and hTHBD.33 An additional modification associated with an even longer survival (9 months) in baboons was the knockout of the growth hormone receptor gene (GHR) to prevent excessive growth of the donor heart (although the GHR KO pig heart following xenotransplantation does continue to grow albeit at a slower rate).33,34 However, GHR KO pigs show several alterations, including transient juvenile hypoglycemia, marked obesity, and changes in liver metabolism.35,36

Selection of a genetic background of source pigs, such as miniature swine,37,38,39 which are already the same size as humans, seems preferable. In this case, TKO plus expression of hCD46 and hTHBD may be a sufficient set of genetic modifications for clinical xenotransplantation trials,27,32 although source pigs with much more complex modifications have been generated (such as genetically modified pigs with four genes that have been deleted and transgenic expression of six human proteins).40,41 However, multiple genetic modifications may complicate the breeding of the source pigs and suffer from unexpected new xenoantigens as well as interactions between transgenes or transgene products.42

Successful Nonhuman Primate Studies Provided an Important Foundation for the Transition to Human Patients

The world’s first and second cardiac porcine-human xenotransplantation was undertaken in 2022 and 2023 at the University of Maryland. Separately, two patients with terminal end-stage heart failure and significant comorbidities who were not candidates for other medical or surgical therapies received a porcine cardiac xenograft from a genetically modified pig. These patients received intense immunotherapies and survived up to 2 months following the procedure.40,43,44 While these efforts were successful at demonstrating the feasibility and prevention of hyperacute rejection, these initiatives emphasized the importance of performing a clinical trial in well-evaluated and selected recipients to evaluate the efficacy of xenotransplantation. Moreover, longer-term survival will be necessary before broad application of xenotransplantation can be introduced.

Furthermore, other issues require ongoing investigation, such as the imaging studies that are required to accurately size match the donor xenograft (heart) with the recipient to preclude xenograft failure. In addition, ongoing efforts are focused on the prevention of xenozoonoses by establishing closed swine herds within barrier facilities and routine surveillance screening for more than 100 pathogens (such as porcine cytomegalovirus, porcine herpesvirus, porcine coronaviruses, Hepatitis E virus, and others).2,31,32 In addition, gene editing has been used to disrupt the pol gene of porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs) although no PERV transmission has been detected in nonhuman primate recipients of porcine xenografts.2,32 These surveillance measures of potential pathogens involving the donor xenografts and the recipients will be important as the field of xenotransplantation continues to mature.

Exogenic Pig Organs for Transplantation

An additive concept to make xeno-hearts even more compatible would be the humanization of heart structural components, such as the endothelium.45 This approach, called exogenesis, is based on the formation of interspecies chimeras from host embryos that are genetically engineered to be deficient in the generation (or survival) of one or multiple lineages, thereby creating a niche(s) for donor cells of another species to replace the missing cells (or even organs) (Figure 2).46,47,48 For example, seminal studies were undertaken in two evolutionary-related species to engineer rat-mouse chimeras.49 In this study, Pdx1 null mouse embryos (which completely lacked a pancreas) were complemented at the blastocyst stage by injecting green fluorescent protein (GFP)-labelled rat embryonic stem cells (ESCs). The resulting viable interspecies chimeras developed a normal functioning GFP-labelled rat pancreas in the Pdx1 null recipient. Conversely, in the reverse experiments, Pdx1 null rat embryos injected with GFP-labelled mouse ESCs developed functional rat-sized mouse pancreases. To assess functionality, islets from these mouse-derived pancreases were transplanted into streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice of the ESC-donor strain. Remarkably, the transplanted islets maintained normal host blood glucose levels for over 370 days without immunosuppression.50 These findings provide proof-of-concept evidence for the therapeutic potential of pluripotent stem cell (PSC)-derived organs generated through interspecies organogenesis for rejection-free transplantation.

Figure 2.

Schematic shows strategy for engineering exogenic, human organs in gene edited pigs

Exogenic organs using blastocyst complementation. Schematic highlighting the strategy for engineering exogenic, human organs in gene edited pigs. In this strategy, an entire lineage is deleted and the null porcine embryo is complemented by human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), which populate the vacant niche producing a human organ (ie, heart). Such a strategy could be used to engineer individual exogenic organs (from the patient’s hiPSCs) or an off-the shelf (human leukocyte antigens compatible hiPSCs) version.

Further studies have explored ways to enhance the efficiency of interspecies chimerism. For instance, introducing the anti-apoptotic gene BCL2 into PSCs or utilizing cell competition by employing IGF1 receptor-deficient hosts has been shown to improve chimerism efficiency.48,51,52 These investigations focus on key biological mechanisms, including apoptosis regulation, growth competition, and the development of a cell-competitive niche. These and other important landmark studies provide a foundation for engineering interspecies organs in the pig.

In contrast to the rat and mouse, pigs and humans are evolutionary more distant (ie, more than 90 million years separation). One of the challenges of evolutionary separation is that certain (divergent) species may have barriers for chimera formation of whole organs. The barrier is due to differences in development tempo, gene regulatory networks, and signalling pathways. Nevertheless, pig embryos (E18-19) with human endothelium have been generated by complementing pig blastocysts lacking ETV2, a master regulator of hematoendothelial lineages, with human induced pluripotent stem cells overexpressing the antiapoptotic factor BCL2.45

Another possibility to generate vasculogenesis-impaired porcine host embryos is to knockout the kinase insert domain receptor gene. Recently, hiPSC complementation of pig blastocysts with disrupted MYF5/MYOD/MYF6 genes has proved successful for the generation of growing porcine embryos with human muscle.53 Current attempts focus on the improvement of interspecies chimerism, eg, by inactivating the IGF1R gene in the host embryo.48 Systematic analyses of early porcine heart development should uncover new strategies for improving the efficiency of porcine blastocyst complementation with human stem cells. Another technically and even more demanding approach would be complementation of the respective organ niche at a later developmental stage in utero, or conceptus complementation.52,54 Overall, this approach has tremendous opportunities but will require enhanced understanding of developmental mechanisms and crosstalk between divergent species during organogenesis.

Conclusions

Heart failure is a devastating, terminal disease. The only curative therapy for end-stage heart failure is solid organ transplantation. While allogeneic heart transplantation has acceptable outcomes, this therapy is limited due to the shortage of donor organs. Alternative strategies include xenogeneic and exogenic organ production. Recent studies have demonstrated the feasibility of using genetically engineered porcine xenografts for transplantation into human patients. However, improvements will be required to obtain acceptable survival (≥ 1 year). Basic science studies support the notion that an exogenic approach could be an alternative strategy. Although the exogenesis approach has the potential to generate organs with better compatibility, there is one disadvantage: the whole procedure must be done for each individual organ (unless one is completely humanizing the vasculature), while complete xeno-hearts may be produced by breeding once the right genotype of source pigs has been established, especially if the animals are highly inbred, so that they are relatively uniform.37 Alternatively, the complete humanization of the endothelial lineage and/or vasculature may produce a pig that could be a source for all organs. Future studies will examine these hurdles and others with the aim of establishing a large donor source for patients with end-stage diseases such as heart disease.

Key Points

  • Allogeneic heart transplantation is a curative therapy for end-stage heart failure.

  • The advent of gene editing and somatic cell nuclear transfer technology provides an important platform to genetically modify source pigs for xenotransplantation.

  • Gene edited porcine xenograft organs have been successfully transplanted into patients with end-stage heart failure.

  • Gene editing and blastocyst complementation provide a platform for engineering exogenic organs.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the figure illustrations that were produced by Cynthia Faraday.

Funding Statement

These studies were supported in part by grants from the Leducq Foundation (23CVD01), the National Institutes of Health (R01AI187293), the US Department of Defense (W81XWH-21-1-0606 and W81XWH2020047), and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (CRC-TR 127). Dr. Nakauchi was supported by the NIH (R01DK116944; R01HL147124), Dr. Ralph & Marian Falk Medical Research Trust, the Ludwig Foundation, the Japan Society of the Promotion of Science and the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED).

Contributor Information

Daniel J. Garry, Email: garry@umn.edu.

Daniel Reichart, Email: garry@umn.edu.

Competing Interests

Drs. Daniel J. Garry and Mary G. Garry are cofounders of NorthStar Genomics, LLC. Drs. Eckhard Wolf and Daniel Reichart are cofounders of XTransplant GmbH. David Sachs is a cofounder of Choironex and a Scientific Advisory Board member for ITB-MED. Hiro Nakauchi is a cofounder of Celaid Therapeutics, Ando Therapeutics, and Megakaryon Corp. Dr Joshua Weiner has no competing interest to declare.

References

  • 1.Martin SS, Aday AW, Allen NB, et al. 2025. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2025 Feb 25;151(8):e41-e660. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001303 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Garry DJ, Weiner JI, Greising SM, Garry MG, Sachs DH. Mechanisms and strategies to promote cardiac xenotransplantation. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2022. Nov:172:109-119. doi: 10.1016/j.yjmcc.2022.07.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Canepa M, Anastasia G, Ameri P, et al. Characterization of ischemic etiology in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction randomized clinical trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Intern Med. 2025. Feb 11:S0953-6205(25)00042-1. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2025.02.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wu X, Yang F, Sun L. Computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging of patients with left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertension: A retrospective study. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2023. Dec 31;45(1):2159426. doi: 10.1080/10641963.2022.2159426 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Dash S. Obesity and Cardiometabolic Disease: Insights From Genetic Studies. Can J Cardiol. 2025. Feb 5:S0828-282X(25)00104-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2025.01.034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Chen HHL, Bhat A, Gan GCH, et al. The impact of body mass index on cardiac structure and function in a cohort of obese patients without traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev. 2023. Sep 9:19:200211. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcrp.2023.200211 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wilsbacher L, McNally EM. Genetics of Cardiac Developmental Disorders: Cardiomyocyte Proliferation and Growth and Relevance to Heart Failure. Annu Rev Pathol. 2016. May 23:11:395-419. doi: 10.1146/annurev-pathol-012615-044336 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Montalvo-Ocotoxtle IG, Rojas-Velasco G, Rodríguez-Morales O, et al. Chagas Heart Disease: Beyond a Single Complication, from Asymptomatic Disease to Heart Failure. J Clin Med. 2022. Dec 7;11(24):7262. doi: 10.3390/jcm11247262 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Grubb AF, Greene SJ, Fudim M, Dewald T, Mentz RJ. Drugs of Abuse and Heart Failure. J Card Fail. 2021. Nov;27(11):1260-1275. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2021.05.023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lechner A, Herzig JJ, Kientsch JG, et al. Cardiomyopathy as cause of death in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a longitudinal observational study. ERJ Open Res. 2023. Sep 18;9(5):00176-2023. doi: 10.1183/23120541.00176-2023 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Domengé O, Fayol A, Ladouceur M, et al. Trends in prevalence of major etiologies leading to heart failure in young patients: An integrative review. Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2024. Feb;34(2):80-88. doi: 10.1016/j.tcm.2022.09.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zheng J. Closing the GDMT gap: insights from PHARM-HF A&F on the role of pharmacists in heart failure care. Heart Fail Rev. 2025. Feb 14. doi: 10.1007/s10741-025-10496-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Matsukawa R, Okahara A, Tokutome M, et al. A scoring evaluation for the practical introduction of guideline-directed medical therapy in heart failure patients. ESC Heart Fail. 2023. Dec;10(6):3352-3363. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.14524 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Garry DJ, Goetsch SC, McGrath AJ, Mammen PP. Alternative therapies for orthotopic heart transplantation. Am J Med Sci. 2005. Aug;330(2):88-101. doi: 10.1097/00000441-200508000-00006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Brink JG, Hassoulas J. The first human heart transplant and further advances in cardiac transplantation at Groote Schuur Hospital and the University of Cape Town - with reference to: the operation. A human cardiac transplant: an interim report of a successful operation performed at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2009. Jan-Feb;20(1):31-5 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Calne RY, Rolles K, Thiru S, et al. Cyclosporin A initially as the only immunosuppressant in 34 recipients of cadaveric organs: 32 kidneys, 2 pancreases, and 2 livers. Lancet. 1979. Nov 17;2(8151):1033-6. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(79)92440-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Velleca A, Shullo MA, Dhital K, et al. The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023. May;42(5):e1-e141. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2022.10.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Jacob S, Garg P, Wadiwala I, et al. Strategies for Expanding Donors Pool in Heart Transplantation. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022. Aug 15;23(8):285. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2308285 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Cooper DKC, Ekser B, Tector AJ. A brief history of clinical xenotransplantation. Int J Surg. 2015. Nov;23(Pt B):205-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.06.060 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Shumway SJ, Garry DJ. History of Cardiac Transplantation: Research, Discoveries, and Pioneers. In: Garry DJ, Wilson RF, Vlodaver Z, editors. Congestive Heart Failure and Cardiac Transplantation. Berlin, Germany: Springer International Publishing. 2017. pp. 417-430. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Murthy R, Bajona P, Bhama JK, Cooper DK. Heart Xenotransplantation: Historical Background, Experimental Progress, and Clinical Prospects. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016. Apr;101(4):1605-13. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.10.017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Cooper DKC, Hara H, Banks CA, Cleveland D, Iwase H. The “Baby Fae” baboon heart transplant-Potential cause of rejection. Xenotransplantation. 2019. Jul;26(4):e12511. doi: 10.1111/xen.12511 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Good AH, Cooper DK, Malcolm AJ, et al. Identification of carbohydrate structures that bind human antiporcine antibodies: implications for discordant xenografting in humans. Transplant Proc. 1992. Apr;24(2):559-62. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Sandrin MS, Vaughan HA, Dabkowski PL, McKenzie IF. Anti-pig IgM antibodies in human serum react predominantly with Gal(alpha 1-3)Gal epitopes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993. Dec 1;90(23):11391-5. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.23.11391 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Mohiuddin MM, Singh AK, Corcoran PC, et al. Chimeric 2C10R4 anti-CD40 antibody therapy is critical for long-term survival of GTKO.hCD46.hTBM pig-to-primate cardiac xenograft. Nat Commun. 2016. Apr 5:7:11138. doi: 10.1038/ncomms11138 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Schmoeckel M, Längin M, Reichart B, et al. Current Status of Cardiac Xenotransplantation: Report of a Workshop of the German Heart Transplant Centers, Martinsried, March 3. 2023. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2024. Jun;72(4):273-284. doi: 10.1055/a-2235-8854 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Reichart B, Cooper DKC, Längin M, Tönjes RR, Pierson RN, Wolf E. Cardiac xenotransplantation: from concept to clinic. Cardiovasc Res. 2023. Feb 3;118(18):3499-3516. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvac180 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Cowan PJ, Robson SC. Progress towards overcoming coagulopathy and hemostatic dysfunction associated with xenotransplantation. Int J Surg. 2015. Nov;23(Pt B):296-300. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.07.682 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Längin M, Mayr T, Reichart B, et al. Consistent success in life-supporting porcine cardiac xenotransplantation. Nature. 2018. Dec;564(7736):430-433. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0765-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Reichart B, Längin M, Radan J, et al. Pig-to-non-human primate heart transplantation: The final step toward clinical xenotransplantation? J Heart Lung Transplant. 2020. Aug;39(8):751-757. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2020.05.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wolf E, Reichart B, Moretti A, Laugwitz KL. Designer pigs for xenogeneic heart transplantation and beyond. Dis Model Mech. 2023. May 1;16(5):dmm050177. doi: 10.1242/dmm.050177 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Reichart B, Längin M, Denner J, Schwinzer R, Cowan PJ, Wolf E. Pathways to Clinical Cardiac Xenotransplantation. Transplantation. 2021. Sep 1;105(9):1930-1943. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003588 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Mohiuddin MM, Goerlich CE, Singh AK, et al. Progressive genetic modifications of porcine cardiac xenografts extend survival to 9 months. Xenotransplantation. 2022. May;29(3):e12744. doi: 10.1111/xen.12744 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Hinrichs A, Riedel EO, Klymiuk N, et al. Growth hormone receptor knockout to reduce the size of donor pigs for preclinical xenotransplantation studies. Xenotransplantation. 2021. Mar;28(2):e12664. doi: 10.1111/xen.12664 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hinrichs A, Kessler B, Kurome M, et al. Growth hormone receptor-deficient pigs resemble the pathophysiology of human Laron syndrome and reveal altered activation of signaling cascades in the liver. Mol Metab. 2018. May:11:113-128. doi: 10.1016/j.molmet.2018.03.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Riedel EO, Hinrichs A, Kemter E, et al. Functional changes of the liver in the absence of growth hormone (GH) action - Proteomic and metabolomic insights from a GH receptor deficient pig model. Mol Metab. 2020. Jun:36:100978. doi: 10.1016/j.molmet.2020.100978 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Matar AJ, Sachs DH, Duran-Struuck R. The MHC-characterized Miniature Swine: Lessons Learned From a 40-Year Experience in Transplantation. Transplantation. 2022. May 1;106(5):928-937. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003977 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lange A, Medugorac I, Ali A, et al. Genetic diversity, growth and heart function of Auckland Island pigs, a potential source for organ xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2024. Mar-Apr;31(2):e12858. doi: 10.1111/xen.12858 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Jeong YH, Park CH, Jang GH, et al. Production of multiple transgenic Yucatan miniature pigs expressing human complement regulatory factors, human CD55, CD59, and H-transferase genes. PloS One. 2013. May 21;8(5):e63241. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063241 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Griffith BP, Goerlich CE, Singh AK, et al. Genetically Modified Porcine-to-Human Cardiac Xenotransplantation. New Engl J Med. 2022. Jul 7;387(1):35-44. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2201422. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Yue Y, Xu W, Kan Y, et al. Extensive germline genome engineering in pigs. Nat Biomed Eng. 2021. Feb;5(2):134-143. doi: 10.1038/s41551-020-00613-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Kemter E, Schnieke A, Fischer K, Cowan PJ, Wolf E. Xeno-organ donor pigs with multiple genetic modifications - the more the better? Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2020. Oct:64:60-65. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2020.05.034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mohiuddin MM, Singh AK, Scobie L, et al. Graft dysfunction in compassionate use of genetically engineered pig-to-human cardiac xenotransplantation: a case report. Lancet. 2023. Jul 29;402(10399):397-410. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)00775-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Griffith BP, Grazioli A, Singh AK, et al. Transplantation of a genetically modified porcine heart into a live human. Nat Med. 2025. Feb;31(2):589-598. doi: 10.1038/s41591-024-03429-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Das S, Koyano-Nakagawa N, Gafni O, et al. Generation of human endothelium in pig embryos deficient in ETV2. Nat Biotechnol. 2020. Mar;38(3):297-302. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0373-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Garry DJ, Garry MG. Interspecies Chimeras and the Generation of Humanized Organs. Circ Res. 2019. Jan 4;124(1):23-25. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.118.314189 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Kano M, Mizutani E, Homma S, Masaki H, Nakauchi H. Xenotransplantation and interspecies organogenesis: current status and issues. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022. Aug 5:13:963282. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2022.963282 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Nishimura T, Suchy FP, Bhadury J, Igarashi KJ, Charlesworth CT, Nakauchi H. Generation of Functional Organs Using a Cell-Competitive Niche in Intra- and Inter-species Rodent Chimeras. Cell Stem Cell. 2021. Jan 7;28(1):141-149.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2020.11.019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Kobayashi T, Yamaguchi T, Hamanaka S, et al. Generation of rat pancreas in mouse by interspecific blastocyst injection of pluripotent stem cells. Cell. 2010. Sep 3;142(5):787-99. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.07.039 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Yamaguchi T, Sato H, Kato-Itoh M, et al. Interspecies organogenesis generates autologous functional islets. Nature. 2017. Feb 9;542(7640):191-196. doi: 10.1038/nature21070 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Nagaya M, Uchikura A, Nakano K, et al. Generation of insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor-knockout pigs as a potential system for interspecies organogenesis. Regen Ther. 2024. Sep 11:26:783-791. doi: 10.1016/j.reth.2024.08.025 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Nagano H, Mizuno N, Sato H, et al. Skin graft with dermis and appendages generated in vivo by cell competition. Nat Commun. 2024. Apr 29;15:3366-3378. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-47527-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Maeng G, Das S, Greising SM, et al. Humanized skeletal muscle in MYF5/MYOD/MYF6-null pig embryos. Nat Biomed Eng. 2021. Aug;5(8):805-814. doi: 10.1038/s41551-021-00693-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Rashid T, Kobayashi T, Nakauchi H. Revisiting the flight of Icarus: making human organs from PSCs with large animal chimeras. Cell Stem Cell. 2014. Oct 2;15(4):406-409. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2014.09.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal are provided here courtesy of Methodist DeBakey Heart & Vascular Center

RESOURCES