Islet cell transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with type 1 diabetes have normal exocrine pancreatic function, making islet cell rather than whole organ transplantation an attractive option. Achieving insulin independence in type 1 diabetes was the perceived goal of islet cell transplantation. The success of the Edmonton group in achieving this in a selected group of type 1 patients has led to renewed optimism that this treatment could eventually replace whole organ pancreas transplantation. However the long-term results of this treatment indicate that insulin independence is lost with time in a significant proportion of patients, although they may retain glycaemic stability. In this context, the indications for islet cell transplantation, which have evolved over the last 5 years, indicate that the patients who benefit most are those who experience severe hypoglycaemic reactions despite optimal insulin therapy. This review will summarise the history of islet cell transplantation, islet isolation techniques, the transplant procedure, immunosuppressive therapy, indications for islet cell transplantation, current clinical trials, the early UK islet cell transplant experience using the Edmonton protocol, and some of the challenges that lie ahead.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".