The liver is the most tolerogenic solid organ — it can be spontaneously accepted without immunosuppression in rodents and pigs and can shield co-transplanted organs in humans — yet the cellular and molecular mechanisms responsible for this 'liver tolerizing effect' remain obscure. A 2018 rhesus-monkey liver-transplantation study showed that the normal liver is enriched for both memory T cells and putatively suppressive populations (CD4+FoxP3+ regulatory T cells, CD8+CD28− cells, myeloid-derived suppressor cells), and that donor-reactive memory T cells accumulate dramatically in grafts rejected after immunosuppression withdrawal — but the analysis was descriptive, combining phenotyping with an ex vivo donor-specific IFNγ ELISPOT and graft histopathology rather than any in vivo functional test. The open problem is to convert this descriptive map into a causal, in vivo account in the nonhuman-primate liver-transplant setting: which intrahepatic regulatory populations actually mediate donor-specific suppression, what signals recruit and retain donor-reactive memory T cells in rejecting grafts, and whether modulating these pathways can reproducibly induce donor-specific tolerance without maintenance immunosuppression. Later work through 2026 — a failed mixed-chimerism tolerance protocol (2020), an anti-ICAM-1 regimen yielding long survival but chronic rejection (2021), and mechanistic dissection still confined to rodents (2023–2026) — confirms every facet remains open.

Background

Liver transplantation (LT) is the definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease, but recipients normally require life-long immunosuppression (IS), whose complications — infection, malignancy, and renal toxicity — limit long-term survival. Uniquely among solid organs, the liver displays a striking 'tolerizing effect': liver allografts (organs transplanted between genetically different individuals of the same species) can be accepted spontaneously, sometimes indefinitely, without any immunosuppression in mice and pigs, even across major histocompatibility complex (MHC, the highly polymorphic antigen-presentation molecules that trigger graft rejection) barriers, and in humans a liver transplanted together with a kidney or heart can reduce rejection of the other organ. A minority of human LT recipients even develop 'operational tolerance' — stable graft function after complete IS withdrawal. Why the liver, alone among organs, behaves this way has remained a central puzzle of transplant immunology for decades.

The candidate effector architecture is twofold. On the suppressive side, the healthy liver is enriched for immunoregulatory populations: CD4+ forkhead box P3+ (FoxP3+) regulatory T cells (Tregs, a thymus- or peripherally derived T-cell lineage that actively suppresses other immune cells), CD8+CD28− T-suppressor cells (a CD8 T-cell subset lacking the CD28 costimulatory receptor, reported to inhibit T-helper responses), and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs, a heterogeneous immature-myeloid population capable of suppressing T-cell activation), along with tolerogenic macrophages, dendritic cells, and liver sinusoidal endothelial cells. On the aggressive side, the liver is also a reservoir of memory T cells — T cells that have previously responded to antigens (including infections) and persist as long-lived, rapidly reactivatable cells, classically subdivided by chemokine-receptor and homing markers into central-memory and effector-memory subsets. Alloreactive memory T cells are regarded as a principal barrier to tolerance induction in transplantation, because they respond to donor antigen without needing naive-priming in secondary lymphoid organs and are relatively resistant to standard immunosuppressants.

Nonhuman-primate (NHP) models — rhesus and cynomolgus macaques — are the accepted preclinical gatekeeper for tolerance strategies before human trials: unlike rodents, NHP livers are uniformly rejected without IS, mirroring the clinical setting. In the source study (Kim et al., 2018), the Seoul National University group performed five ABO-compatible orthotopic (in the native liver's position) liver transplantations in rhesus monkeys, withdrew IS, and compared immune-cell subsets by flow cytometry across normal livers, rejected grafts, spleen, lymph nodes, and blood. They found that the normal liver holds far more memory CD4/CD8 T cells, Tregs, CD8+CD28− cells, and MDSCs than lymphoid organs or blood, and that after rejection, memory CD4/CD8 T cells — especially effector-memory cells — increased dramatically in all tissues while naive cells fell. The study was descriptive: it established which candidate populations reside in the liver and how they shift at rejection, and it added an ex vivo donor-specific IFNγ ELISPOT and graft immunohistochemistry/histopathology, but it could not test in vivo whether any of them functionally causes tolerance or rejection, nor identify the trafficking and differentiation programs or recruitment signals involved. Its discussion states plainly that the mechanisms responsible for the 'liver tolerizing effect' remain obscure and that tolerance regimens built on this rhesus model are a goal, not an achievement.

Problem Statement

The problem is to give a causal, in vivo mechanistic account of the liver tolerizing effect at the nonhuman-primate liver-transplantation level — the level at which the phenomenon is clinically relevant yet currently unexplained. Its linked facets are: (i) functional identification — of the liver-enriched regulatory populations observed in the rhesus model (CD4+FoxP3+ Tregs, CD8+CD28− suppressor cells, MDSCs, and other intrahepatic myeloid/regulatory subsets), determine which actually mediate donor-specific immunosuppression in vivo during the response to a liver allograft, rather than merely residing in the liver; (ii) trafficking and recruitment — establish how naive, central-memory and effector-memory T-cell subsets interact, traffic, and differentiate to produce either tolerance or rejection after liver transplantation, and identify the molecular signals (adhesion and chemokine-axis molecules, inflammatory mediators) that recruit or retain donor-reactive memory T cells in the graft at rejection; and (iii) translation — determine whether deliberate modulation of the pathways identified in (i) and (ii) can reproducibly induce donor-specific tolerance in the NHP LT model, meaning stable graft acceptance after withdrawal of maintenance immunosuppression with demonstrable donor-specific unresponsiveness while preserving immunity to third-party antigens. These facets share one objective: an explanation of the liver tolerizing effect rigorous enough to found a tolerance-induction regimen; resolving any one facet alone, without the connected account, would not close the problem.

References

  1. Kim H, Kim H, Lee SK, Jin XL, Kim TJ, Park C, Lee JI, Kim HS, Hong SK, Yoon KC, Ahn SW, Lee KB, Yi NJ, Yang J, Lee KW, Hawthorne WJ, Suh KS. Memory T cells are significantly increased in rejected liver allografts of rhesus monkeys. Liver Transplantation. 2018;24(2):256-268. doi:10.1002/lt.24983. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.24983
  2. Chaudhry S, Kato Y, Weiner J, Alonso-Guallart P, Baker S, Woodland DC 4th, Lefkowitch JH, Duran-Struuck R, Sondermeijer HP, Zitsman J, Sears ML, Wu A, Karolewski B, Houck PJ, Martinez M, Kato T, Sykes M, Griesemer AD. Transient-mixed chimerism with nonmyeloablative conditioning does not induce liver allograft tolerance in nonhuman primates. Transplantation. 2020;104(8):1580-1590. doi:10.1097/TP.0000000000003263. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000003263
  3. Hong SK, Han D, Lee SK, Kim J, Hwang ES, Kim H, Lee JI, Hong K, Han ES, Cho JH, Lee JM, Choi Y, Lee KW, Yi NJ, Yang J, Suh KS. Short-term therapy with anti-ICAM-1 monoclonal antibody induced long-term liver allograft survival in nonhuman primates. American Journal of Transplantation. 2021;21(9):2978-2991. doi:10.1111/ajt.16486. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.16486
  4. Cvetkovski F, Hexham JM, Berglund E. Strategies for liver transplantation tolerance. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(5):2253. doi:10.3390/ijms22052253. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22052253
  5. Que W, Ueta H, Hu X, Morita-Nakagawa M, Fujino M, Ueda D, Tokuda N, Huang W, Guo WZ, Zhong L, Li XK. Temporal and spatial dynamics of immune cells in spontaneous liver transplant tolerance. iScience. 2023;26(9):107691. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.107691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107691
  6. Tomofuji K, Cloonan DJ, Coe TM, Bourgeois O, Matheson R, Karadagi A, Kharga A, Tomosugi T, Markmann JF, Kimura S. Allogeneic liver transplantation in nonhuman primates: surgical technique with stable postoperative outcomes. Transplantation Direct. 2025;11(7):e1832. doi:10.1097/TXD.0000000000001832. https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001832
  7. Zhou L, Zhao Y, Wang J, Chen Q, Jia YN, Pan LC, Wang HX, Yang HW, He Q, Li XL, Lang R, Du GS. Rapamycin-modified novel tolerogenic dendritic cells induce liver graft tolerance through MHC-II+CD8+ regulatory T cells. Hepatology Communications. 2026;10(5):e0942. doi:10.1097/HC9.0000000000000942. https://doi.org/10.1097/HC9.0000000000000942