Addressing Concerns toward Xenotransplantation

Hurst, Daniel J.; Padilla, Lluz; Paris, Wayne; Cooper, David K.C.; Cleveland, David C.

doi:10.22541/au.163251090.02639401/v1

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, detailed empirical data based upon religious viewpoints are lacking. Nevertheless, descriptive analysis on how Catholic [30–32], Protestant [33], Jewish [34, 35], Sunni [36, 37] and Shia Islam [38], and Hindu [39] faith groups may approach xenotransplantation, much of which expresses an openness toward xenotransplantation, has been published. Much less is known about how adherents to certain other religious/philosophical traditions—such as Buddhism, Jainism, Shinto, Sikhism—view xenotransplantation.…”

Section: Review Of Current Public Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of public engagement in clinical xenotransplantation

Hurst,

Cooper

2024

Health Care Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past several decades, significant scientific progress in xenotransplantation has brought the field to the threshold of clinical trials. In the past 3 years in the United States, experimental pig kidney and heart xenotransplantation have been performed on human subjects recently declared dead by neurological criteria (decedents). In addition, two pig heart transplants have been carried out in living patients under the United States Food and Drug Administration's expanded access guidelines. However, though there has been a flurry of activity there remain unanswered questions regarding how the public views xenotransplantation, what concerns may exist, and how to address these concerns in a meaningful way. This paper aims to underscore the importance of public engagement in xenotransplantation, emphasizing the ongoing need for studies to assess public opinions. The current evidence on public engagement studies is reviewed and gaps in our understanding are identified. We propose practical steps to advance this field. Additional studies to determine the extent of racial/ethnic differences in attitudes to xenotransplantation should be conducted. Empirical and descriptive analysis of certain religious viewpoints—especially minority faiths—would be valuable. As public engagement is an important aspect of public acceptance of novel research that is accompanied by risk, we suggest that xenotransplantation biotechnology companies might consider leading the way in funding this research.

show abstract