Long-Term Follow-Up of the Edmonton Protocol of Islet Transplantation in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the long-term follow-up of the efficacy and safety of islet transplantation in seven type 1 diabetic subjects from the United States enrolled in the multicenter international Edmonton Protocol who had persistent islet function after completion of the Edmonton Protocol. Subjects were followed up to 12 years with serial testing for sustained islet allograft function as measured by C-peptide. All seven subjects demonstrated continued islet function longer than a decade from the time of first islet transplantation. One subject remained insulin independent without the need for diabetic medications or supplemental transplants. One subject who was insulin-independent for over 8 years experienced graft failure 10.9 years after the first islet transplant. The remaining six subjects demonstrated continued islet function upon trial completion, although three had received a supplemental islet transplant each. At trial completion, five subjects were receiving insulin and two remained insulin independent, although one was treated with liraglutide. The median hemoglobin A1c was 6.3% (45 mmol/mol). All subjects experienced progressive decline in the C-peptide/glucose ratio. No patients experienced severe hypoglycemia, opportunistic infection, or lymphoma. Thus, although the rate and duration of insulin independence was low, the Edmonton Protocol was safe in the long term. Alternative approaches to islet transplantation are under investigation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".