Engineering Organs, Hopes and Hybridity: Considerations on the Social Potentialities of Xenotransplantation

Overview

Journal Med Humanit

Specialty Medical Ethics

Date 2025 Feb 24

PMID 39993842

Authors

Johannes Kogel

Peta S Cook

Nik Brown

Amy Clare

Megan H Glick

Kristofer Hansson

Markus Idvall

Susanne Lundin

Mike Michael

Sofie A Rogvi

Lesley A Sharp

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The development of replacing human organs with those from genetically modified pigs holds immense potential for alleviating the shortage of organs necessary for patients in need of transplants. This medical advancement is also accompanied by significant social changes, including the emergence of a bioeconomy, new modes of biotechnology governance, altered human-animal relations and increased public engagement. Some aspects, such as the impact on the transplant allocation system, effects on clinical practice and healthcare provision, global trajectories and most importantly the consequences for patients and their families remain unpredictable. Given that xenotransplantation occurs within a societal context and its success or failure will not be confined to technical feasibility alone, it is essential to engage a social sciences perspective to highlight the social implications and emphasise the importance of social research in accompanying future developments.

References

Rubaltelli E, Burra P, Sartorato V, Canova D, Germani G, Tomat S . Strengthening acceptance for xenotransplantation: the case of attraction effect. Xenotransplantation. 2008; 15(3):159-63. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3089.2008.00474.x. View

Haddow G . 'Dirty pigs' and the xenotransplantation paradox. Med Humanit. 2021; 47(4):417-424. PMC: 8639932. DOI: 10.1136/medhum-2021-012187. View

Montgomery R, Griesemer A, Segev D, Sommer P . The decedent model: A new paradigm for de-risking high stakes clinical trials like xenotransplantation. Am J Transplant. 2024; 24(4):526-532. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajt.2024.01.035. View

Lundin S, Idvall M . Attitudes of Swedes to marginal donors and xenotransplantation. J Med Ethics. 2003; 29(3):186-92. PMC: 1733734. DOI: 10.1136/jme.29.3.186. View

Ravelingien A . The world is my patient: a discussion of Martine Rothblatt's Your Life or Mine: How geoethics can resolve the conflict between public and private interests in xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2005; 12(2):88-90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3089.2004.00201.x. View

Sobbrio P, Jorqui M . An overview of the role of society and risk in xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2014; 21(6):523-32. DOI: 10.1111/xen.12120. View

Teran-Escandon D, Teran-Ortiz L, Ormsby-Jenkins C, Evia-Viscarra M, White D, Valdes-Gonzalez-Salas R . Psychosocial aspects of xenotransplantation: survey in adolescent recipients of porcine islet cells. Transplant Proc. 2005; 37(1):521-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.01.001. View

Michael M, Brown N . Scientific citizenships: self-representations of xenotransplantation's publics. Sci Cult (Lond). 2005; 14(1):39-57. DOI: 10.1080/09505430500041769. View

Casal P, Williams A . Human iPSC-Chimera Xenotransplantation and the Non-Identity Problem. J Clin Med. 2019; 8(1). PMC: 6352083. DOI: 10.3390/jcm8010095. View

10.

Sharp L . Organ transplantation as a transformative experience: anthropological insights into the restructuring of the self. Med Anthropol Q. 1995; 9(3):357-89. DOI: 10.1525/maq.1995.9.3.02a00050. View

11.

Idvall M . The xenotransplantation narratives of nine type 1 diabetic patients with renal failure. Xenotransplantation. 2006; 13(6):509-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3089.2006.00352_4.x. View

12.

Jagdale A, Cooper D, Iwase H, Gaston R . Chronic dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease: Relevance to kidney xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2018; 26(2):e12471. PMC: 6476633. DOI: 10.1111/xen.12471. View

13.

Kranenburg L, Kerssens C, IJzermans J, Zuidema W, Weimar W, Busschbach J . Reluctant acceptance of xenotransplantation in kidney patients on the waiting list for transplantation. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 61(8):1828-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.03.035. View

14.

Padilla L, Hurst D, Jang K, Rosales J, Sorabella R, Cleveland D . Racial differences in attitudes to clinical pig organ Xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation. 2020; 28(2):e12656. DOI: 10.1111/xen.12656. View

15.

Kemter E, Schnieke A, Fischer K, Cowan P, Wolf E . Xeno-organ donor pigs with multiple genetic modifications - the more the better?. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2020; 64:60-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.gde.2020.05.034. View

16.

Kogel J, Thiersch S, Ludwig B, Seissler J, Marckmann G . What does it take to consent to islet cell xenotransplantation?: Insights from an interview study with type 1 diabetes patients and review of the literature. BMC Med Ethics. 2021; 22(1):37. PMC: 8015214. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00607-5. View

17.

Coe T, Markmann J, Rickert C . Current status of porcine islet xenotransplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2020; 25(5):449-456. PMC: 8279426. DOI: 10.1097/MOT.0000000000000794. View

18.

Entwistle J, Sade R, Drake D . Clinical xenotransplantation seems close: Ethical issues persist. Artif Organs. 2022; 46(6):987-994. DOI: 10.1111/aor.14255. View

19.

Park C, Jones M, Kaplan S, Koller F, Wilder J, Boulware L . A scoping review of inequities in access to organ transplant in the United States. Int J Equity Health. 2022; 21(1):22. PMC: 8841123. DOI: 10.1186/s12939-021-01616-x. View

20.

Hurst D, Padilla L, Cooper D, Paris W . Factors influencing attitudes toward xenotransplantation clinical trials: A report of focus group studies. Xenotransplantation. 2021; 28(4):e12684. DOI: 10.1111/xen.12684. View