Premium
Anti‐Galα1‐3Gal IgM and IgG antibody levels in sera of humans and old world non‐human primates
Author(s) -
Teranishi Katsuhito,
Manez Rafael,
Awwad Michel,
Cooper David K. C.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
xenotransplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.052
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1399-3089
pISSN - 0908-665X
DOI - 10.1034/j.1399-3089.2002.1o058.x
Subject(s) - xenotransplantation , antibody , primate , immunology , non human primate , biology , complement system , haplorhini , immunoglobulin g , immunoadsorption , transplantation , medicine , virus , neuroscience , evolutionary biology
Organs transplanted from pig to primate are rejected within minutes or hours by an antibody‐dependent, complement‐mediated mechanism [hyperacute rejection (HAR)]. Even after depletion of anti‐Galα1‐3Gal (Gal) antibody (Ab), for example by extracorporeal immunoadsorption, return of natural Ab is believed to be a major factor in the initiation of acute humoral xenograft rejection. Various non‐human primates are used as recipients of pig organs in experimental discordant xenotransplantation (XTx) models. However, anti‐Gal IgM and IgG levels in non‐human primates may differ from those in humans. Serum levels of anti‐Gal IgM and IgG were measured by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in humans (n=14), chimpanzees (n=8), baboons (n=214), cynomolgus monkeys (n=29), rhesus monkeys (n=23) and Japanese monkeys (n=6). The mean level of anti‐Gal IgM was significantly higher in chimpanzees than in other groups, while in rhesus monkeys it was significantly lower than in other groups, except baboons and Japanese monkeys. The mean human anti‐Gal IgG level was higher than in other groups and this difference reached statistical significance except with regard to chimpanzees. The mean anti‐Gal IgG level in baboons was significantly lower than that in humans, chimpanzees and cynomolgus monkeys. The measured differences in anti‐Gal IgM and IgG levels may affect the kinetics of Ab removal and rate of return in different species, and thus may have relevance for translating work in non‐human primate models to the clinical setting.