Insulin Independence Following Isolated Islet Transplantation and Single Islet Infusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To restore islet function in patients whose labile diabetes subjected them to frequent dangerous episodes of hypoglycemic unawareness, and to determine whether multiple transplants are always required to achieve insulin independence. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The recent report by the Edmonton group documenting restoration of insulin independence by islet transplantation in seven consecutive patients with type 1 diabetes differed from previous worldwide experience of only sporadic success. In the Edmonton patients, the transplanted islet mass critical for success was approximately more than 9,000 IEq/kg of recipient body weight and required two or three separate transplants of islets isolated from two to four cadaveric donors. Whether the success of the Edmonton group can be recapitulated by others, and whether repeated transplants using multiple donors will be a universal requirement for success have not been reported. METHODS: The authors report their treatment with islet transplantation of nine patients whose labile type 1 diabetes was characterized by frequent episodes of dangerous hypoglycemia. RESULTS: In each of the seven patients who have completed the treatment protocol (i.e., one or if necessary a second islet transplant), insulin independence has been achieved. In five of the seven patients only a single infusion of islets was required. To date, only one recipient has subsequently lost graft function, after an initially successful transplant. This patient suffered recurrent hyperglycemia 9 months after the transplant. CONCLUSIONS: This report confirms the efficacy of the Edmonton immunosuppressive regimen and indicates that insulin independence can often be achieved by a single transplant of sufficient islet mass.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".