Porcine Islet Xenotransplantation for the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Porcine Islet Xenotransplantation for the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes 481 Porcine islets as a potential solution to the shortage of human isletsPigs have been the focus of islet xenotransplantation for a number of reasons -they are inexpensive, readily available, breed quickly and produce large litters.Their islets display many morphologic and structural similarities to human islets, and respond to glucose levels in the same physiologic range (Cardona et al., 2007).Porcine insulin differs from human insulin by only one amino acid, and as such has been used clinically to treat patients with type 1 diabetes for many years (Dufrane & Gianello, 2009).Pig donors have many advantages with respect to transplantation: i) they are not exposed to compromising conditions such as comorbidity, brain death and cold ischemic injury as many deceased human donors are; ii) they may be housed in pathogen-free facilities which may allow for an on-demand source of islets with limited risk of pathogen transmission; iii) they may be genetically modified in order to change the expression of proteins, which may ultimately allow for the procurement of less immunogenic tissue (Hering & Walawalker, 2009;Ricordi et al., 1990;Korbutt et al., 1996). The optimal age of the donor pigThree main age groups of donor pigs have been investigated to date -adult, fetal, and neonatal -however, the optimal age is still being debated.Adult pigs are a potential source of tissue, as the isolated islets function well both in vitro and in vivo immediately upon isolation, and the yield is substantial.Ricordi et al. demonstrated that approximately 255,000 islets could be isolated per adult pig pancreas, using a technique modified from the human islet isolation procedure.The final preparation was 85-90% pure and reversed hyperglycemia in nude mice (Ricordi et al., 1990).Adult pig islets, however, do have their disadvantages.They are difficult to isolate and maintain in culture, are fragile, and are more susceptible to ischemic and hypoxic damage than neonatal porcine islets.In addition, they lack growth potential (Smith & Mandel, 2000), which limits their ability to recover from any damage upon transplantation.Adult islets may also be relatively more immunogenic upon transplantation, which may only increase the need for immunosuppression (Bloch et al., 1999).In order to be suitable for clinical transplantation, the pigs must be maintained in a pathogen-free environment until they are of an appropriate age for donation.This can be very costly and logistically very difficult, which can limit the applicability of adult pigs as islet donors.The processing of fetal pig pancreata yield porcine fetal islet-like clusters (FICC), an immature group of cells that is capable of producing insulin.In 1988, a simplified procedure for the procurement of FICC was developed by Korsgren et al., which is a simple procedure that does not require the ductal infusion of collagenase or ficoll gradient separation of islets that is seen in adult islet isolation.Media changes every second day purifies the islets, but the functional ability of the FICC is still poor due to their immaturity.They can be maintained in culture for up to 30 days, and are capable of proliferating, however, in vivo reversal of hyperglycemia in animals can take months (Korsgren et al., 1991).In addition, the yield of FICC per pancreas is low, and an estimated 100 porcine donors would be necessary to transplant one 70-kg patient (Korsgren et al., 1991).A functionally mature islet source with the isolation ease seen in fetal pig donors can be found in neonatal porcine donors.Korbutt et al. developed a protocol in 1996 for the isolation of neonatal porcine islets (NPI), which is easy to perform, with a consistent yield of approximately 50,000 islets per pancreas.The preparation consists of 35% fully
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».