MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of low dose tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and maintenance IL‐2 receptor blockade in an islet transplant recipient

2007· article· en· W1562244596 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce Kaplan, Peter West, H. Neeley, Joan Martellotto, Ronak Iqbal, Antonio Gangemi, Betül Hatipoğlu, Enrico Benedetti, José Oberholzer

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Transplantation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDaclizumabImmunosuppressionTacrolimusSirolimusMycophenolic acidRegimenTransplantationIsletGastroenterologyInternal medicineUrologySurgeryInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of dual maintenance therapy with tacrolimus and sirolimus (the Edmonton protocol) has been widely adopted as standard immunosuppression for islet cell transplantation. This immunosuppression regimen has numerous toxicities including renal dysfunction, anemia, and recurrent aphthous ulcers. We present a case of a 63-yr-old Caucasian female who received an isolated islet transplant. Over the first six months post-transplant, the patient developed severe anemia, intractable aphthous ulcers, and renal dysfunction. Islet transplant function was excellent and the patient is insulin-independent since the end of the second month post-transplant. However, because of the above toxicities, a decision was made to change her immunosuppression regimen eight months post-transplant to low dose tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and a monthly maintenance infusion of daclizumab. Since then, her aphthous ulcers have disappeared, renal function has improved, and islet cell function remains stable.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TransplantationSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207