ArticleKorean journal of ophthalmology : KJO2026
A Comparative Analysis of Pig-to-Rhesus Corneal Xenotransplantation with Various Immunosuppressive Regimens.
Article in Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Xenotransplantation Literature Update: January-June 2026.XenotransplantationReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePrevious studies had made efforts to find the optimal regimens to reduce xenogeneic rejection in corneal xenotransplantation. However, it had not been fully determined which immunosuppressive choice would be optimal for long-term graft survival. We aimed to compare clinical results in wild-type pig-to-rhesus corneal xenotransplantation with various immunosuppressive regimens.
methodsMedical records of 23 Chinese rhesus macaques who had received full-thickness corneal transplantation with wildtype pigs were retrospectively analyzed. They were administered various immunosuppressants including steroid, tacrolimus, anti-CD20 antibody, costimulation blockade (CoB) or their combinations. Graft survival, central corneal thickness, changes in plasma anti-αGal and donor-specific antibodies, aqueous complement levels, and blood effector and memory T/B cell subsets were compared between the groups with different regimens in the follow-up of 6 months.
resultsGraft survival time of anti-CD20 antibody (aCD20), anti-CD40 antibody (aCD40), or anti-CD154 antibody (aCD154)-based regimen group was significantly longer than that of steroid (S) or steroid and tacrolimus (S + T) group. Interferon gamma T cell responses, both anti-αGal immunoglobulin G (IgG) and donor-specific IgG levels, along with complement responses, were effectively managed under both the aCD20 and CoB regimens. Compared with aCD154 group, aCD40 group showed higher donor-specific IgG responses and aqueous C3a level. B and activated B cell concentrations were significantly lower in aCD20 group than in S, S + T, or CoB group.
conclusionsIt suggests that an aCD20-based regimen produces clinical outcomes comparable to those of an aCD154-based regimen in wild-type pig-to-rhesus corneal xenotransplantation, whereas an aCD40-based regimen does not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.