MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long-Term Insulin-Independence After Allogeneic Islet Transplantation for Type 1 Diabetes: Over the 10-Year Mark

2008· article· en· W2058734603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thierry Berney, Sylvie Ferrari‐Lacraz, Léo H. Bühler, José Oberholzer, Nicola Marangon, Jan Philippé, Jean Villard, Philippe Morel

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIsletTerm (time)TransplantationType 2 diabetesIndependence (probability theory)Diabetes mellitusInsulinType 1 diabetesInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results of islet of Langerhans transplantation have markedly improved in recent years, but most patients still lose insulin independence in the long-term. We report herein the longest (over 11 years) case of insulin independence after allogeneic islet transplantation. The subject had a 27-year history of type 1 diabetes and received a single islet-after-kidney graft of 8800 islet equivalents (IEQ)/kg, pooled from 2 donors. Insulin was discontinued by 3 months posttransplant and the patient has remained off insulin ever since. Yearly follow-up studies have revealed normal metabolic control, including normal oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Reasons for success may involve choice of immunosuppression, low metabolic demand and low immune responsiveness as suggested by an excellent HLA matching and a high count of circulating regulatory T cells. This observation is so far an exceptional case, but clearly demonstrates the validity of the concept that long-term insulin independence after allogeneic islet transplantation is an achievable target.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations76
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of TransplantationSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207