International Trial of the Edmonton Protocol for Islet Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Islet transplantation offers the potential to improve glycemic control in a subgroup of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus who are disabled by refractory hypoglycemia. We conducted an international, multicenter trial to explore the feasibility and reproducibility of islet transplantation with the use of a single common protocol (the Edmonton protocol). METHODS: We enrolled 36 subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus, who underwent islet transplantation at nine international sites. Islets were prepared from pancreases of deceased donors and were transplanted within 2 hours after purification, without culture. The primary end point was defined as insulin independence with adequate glycemic control 1 year after the final transplantation. RESULTS: Of the 36 subjects, 16 (44%) met the primary end point, 10 (28%) had partial function, and 10 (28%) had complete graft loss 1 year after the final transplantation. A total of 21 subjects (58%) attained insulin independence with good glycemic control at any point throughout the trial. Of these subjects, 16 (76%) required insulin again at 2 years; 5 of the 16 subjects who reached the primary end point (31%) remained insulin-independent at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Islet transplantation with the use of the Edmonton protocol can successfully restore long-term endogenous insulin production and glycemic stability in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus and unstable control, but insulin independence is usually not sustainable. Persistent islet function even without insulin independence provides both protection from severe hypoglycemia and improved levels of glycated hemoglobin. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00014911 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
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 | 0.025 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".