Outcomes of Recipients With Pancreas Transplant Alone Who Develop End-Stage Renal Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recipients of pancreas transplant alone (PTA) may be at increased risk for developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The survival experience of PTA recipients developing ESRD has not been described. Furthermore, the relative survival of these patients as compared to diabetics on chronic dialysis is unknown. We studied all adult PTA recipients from January 1, 1990 to September 1, 2008 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Each PTA recipient developing ESRD was matched to 10 diabetics on chronic dialysis from the United States Renal Data System. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to determine the relation between ESRD and mortality among PTA recipients, and the relation between PTA and mortality among diabetics on chronic dialysis. There were 1597 PTA recipients in the study, of which 207 developed ESRD. Those with ESRD had a threefold increase in mortality versus those without (adjusted hazard ratio 3.28 [95% confidence interval: 2.27, 4.76]). There was no significant difference in the risk of death among PTA recipients with ESRD versus diabetics on dialysis. PTA recipients developing ESRD are three times more likely to die than PTA recipients without ESRD; however, the risk of death in these patients was similar to diabetics on chronic dialysis without PTA.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".