Sustained Islet Allograft Function After Peritransplant Treatment Using Exenatide With and Without Everolimus
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Islet transplantation represents now a feasible therapeutical option for selected patients with brittle type 1 diabetes mellitus. Islet graft function has progressively improved over time with a success rate in some centers similar to that of whole pancreas transplantation. The first phases after transplantation appear to be critical. Transplanted islets are exposed to an inflammatory reaction1 that, together with glucotoxicity2 in the case of suboptimal glycemic control results in significant reduction of cellular vitality. For these reasons, different protocols of recipient treatment were proposed, such as anti-inflammatory drugs3 or long-acting glucagon-like peptide 1 analogues to improve insulin secretion and overall metabolic balance.4 The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors in particular have a significant anti-inflammatory effect; in comparison to sirolimus, everolimus proved to have a most potent effect, higher bioavailability, and a shorter half-life.5 Ten patients affected by type 1 diabetes mellitus (7 with brittle diabetes and 3 already under immunosuppression therapy for a previous kidney transplantation) were treated for 1 month after intrahepatic islet allotransplantation with low-dose exenatide 5 μg twice/day and 6 of them with everolimus 3 mg 12 hours before and 12 to 18 hours after the first islet transplantation, too. The immunosuppression therapy included induction with polyclonal ALG (or Basiliximab in the case of islet after kidney recipient or of a second islet transplant) and maintenance with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. They received 1 or 2 (in 5 patients) islet infusions with a mean of 9.700 ± 3.200 Islet Equivalent/kg body weight. Follow-up lasted from 12 to 69 months (mean, 45 ± 12 months; total patient-months, 450). No primary nonfunction was reported. At least a partial function (HbA1c <52 mmol and C-peptide >0.3 ng/ml) was obtained within 3 months after transplantation, and in 9 of 10 patients, this function was maintained up to the last available follow-up (Figure 1). One patient lost partial function after 3 months, in parallel with a rapid increase of antiglutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies immune titer (up to 160 IU/mL). Eight of 10 patients obtained insulin independence, and 5 of them are to date still insulin-free at last follow-up. Four of these patients were of the group treated with everolimus. Side effects of the procedures include 2 intraabdominal hematomas, 1 requesting surgical drainage, 2 thrombosis in branches of portal or mesenteric vein, 2 hemorrhages requiring transfusion, 9 infections (cytomegalovirus infection reactivation in 5), and 1 skin basalioma. Islet transplantation stabilized chronic diabetic complications with 2 exceptions: in 1 case, a progression of retinopathy and in another case worsening of gastroparesis was observed. No hypoglycemic episodes were reported in all the 9 patients with graft function.FIGURE 1: A, The follow up in individual patients. Time 0 is time to last procedure (first or second in the case of 2 transplants). Complete insulin independence is represented by white column, partial graft function (partial insulin need, HbA1c < 52 mmol and C-peptide >0.3 ng/ml) by gray column, graft failure by black column. Patients 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 10 received everolimus treatment. B, The HbA1c and c-peptide values of 9 recipients with still graft function are represented during different time period follow up. Values are median and interquartile range (25 and 75).In this pilot study in a small cohort of patients, a peritransplant pharmacological treatment targeting inflammation and metabolic demand in addition to immunosuppression apparently improved overall islet graft function in the medium-term follow-up. Indeed, these data are limited to only a small subset of subjects with uncontrolled comparisons, and therefore, it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions. In the whole, these data offer the rationale for further larger controlled study.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 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 | 0,001 |
| 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».