Pancreatic islet transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No formulation of exogenous insulin available to date has yet been able to mimic the physiological nictemeral rhythms of this hormone, and despite all engineering advancements, the theoretical proposal of developing a mechanical replacement for pancreatic beta cell still has not been reached. Thus, the replacement of beta cells through pancreas and pancreatic islet transplantation are the only concrete alternatives for re-establishing the endogenous insulin secretion in type 1 diabetic patients. Since only 1 to 1.5% of the pancreatic mass corresponds to endocrine tissue, pancreatic islets transplantation arises as a natural alternative. Data from the International Islet Transplant Registry (ITR) from 1983 to December 2000 document a total of 493 transplants performed around the world, with progressively worse rates of post-transplant insulin independence. In 2000, the "Edmonton Protocol" introduced several modifications to the transplantation procedure, such as the use of a steroid-free immunosuppression regimen and transplantation of a mean islet mass of 11,000 islet equivalents per kilogram, which significantly improved 1-year outcomes. Although the results of a 5-year follow-up in 65 patients demonstrated improvement in glycemic instability in a significant portion of them, only 7.5% of the patients have reached insulin independence, indicating the need of further advances in the preservation of the function of transplanted islet. In addition to the scarcity of organs available for transplantation, islets transplantation still faces major challenges, specially those related to cell loss during the process of islet isolation and the losses related to the graft site, apoptosis, allorejection, autoimmunity, and immunosuppression. The main strategies to optimize islet transplantation aim at improving all these aspects. CONCLUSION: Human islet transplantation should be regarded as an intervention that can decrease the frequency of severe hypoglycemic episodes and improve glycemic control in selected patient for whom benefits of 4-5 years duration would be very valuable. Its limitations, however, indicate that the procedure in its current format is not suitable for all patients with type 1 diabetes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.018 |
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".