Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
    • Video Abstracts
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • Complement Biology and Therapeutics (May 2025)
    • Evolving insights into MASLD and MASH pathogenesis and treatment (Apr 2025)
    • Microbiome in Health and Disease (Feb 2025)
    • Substance Use Disorders (Oct 2024)
    • Clonal Hematopoiesis (Oct 2024)
    • Sex Differences in Medicine (Sep 2024)
    • Vascular Malformations (Apr 2024)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Editorials
    • Commentaries
    • Editor's notes
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
    • 100th anniversary
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Video Abstracts
  • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Editorials
  • Commentaries
  • Editor's notes
  • Reviews
  • Viewpoints
  • 100th anniversary
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

Differential immune responses to α-gal epitopes on xenografts and allografts: implications for accommodation in xenotransplantation
Masahiro Tanemura, … , Anita S. Chong, Uri Galili
Masahiro Tanemura, … , Anita S. Chong, Uri Galili
Published February 1, 2000
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 2000;105(3):301-310. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI7358.
View: Text | PDF
Article Article has an altmetric score of 3

Differential immune responses to α-gal epitopes on xenografts and allografts: implications for accommodation in xenotransplantation

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Xenograft recipients produce large amounts of high-affinity anti-Gal IgG in response to Galα1-3Galβ1- 4GlcNAc-R (α-gal) epitopes on the graft. In contrast, ABO-mismatched allograft recipients undergo “accommodation,” a state of very weak immune response to ABO antigens. These differences in anti-carbohydrate immune response were studied in α1,3galactosyltransferase knock-out mice. Pig kidney membranes administered to these mice elicited extensive production of anti-Gal IgG, whereas allogeneic kidney membranes expressing α-gal epitopes elicited only a weak anti-Gal IgM response. Anti-Gal IgG response to xenograft membranes depended on helper T cell activation and was inhibited by anti-CD40L antibody. These T cells were activated by xenopeptides and not by α-gal epitopes. Moreover, allogeneic cell membranes manipulated to express xenoproteins also induced anti-Gal IgG response. Xenoglycoproteins with α-gal epitopes are processed by anti-Gal B cells. Xenopeptides presented by these cells activate a large repertoire of helper T cells required for the differentiation of anti-Gal B cells into cells secreting anti-Gal IgG. Alloglycoproteins with α- gal epitopes have very few immunogenic peptides and fail to activate helper T cells. Similarly, ineffective helper T-cell activation prevents a strong immune response to blood group antigens in ABO-mismatched allograft recipients, thus enabling the development of accommodation.

Authors

Masahiro Tanemura, Dengping Yin, Anita S. Chong, Uri Galili

×

Usage data is cumulative from May 2024 through May 2025.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 344 80
PDF 53 17
Figure 288 10
Citation downloads 53 0
Totals 738 107
Total Views 845
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2025 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts

Referenced in 7 patents
32 readers on Mendeley
See more details