Sitagliptin plus pantoprazole can restore but not maintain insulin independence after clinical islet transplantation: results of a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims Resuming insulin use due to waning function is common after islet transplantation. Animal studies suggest that gastrointestinal hormones, including gastrin and incretins may increase β–cell mass. We tested the hypothesis that pantoprazole plus sitagliptin, would restore insulin independence in islet transplant recipients with early graft insufficiency and determined whether this would persist after a 3–month washout. Methods Single‐centre, uncontrolled, open label study of sitagliptin 100 mg daily plus pantoprazole 40 mg twice daily for 6 months. Results After 6 months of treatment, two of eight participants (25%) achieved the primary endpoint, defined as HbA1C < 42 mmol/mol (6%), fasting plasma glucose < 7.0 mmol, C–peptide > 0.5 nmol and no insulin use. There was a significant reduction in mean insulin dose, but no change in HbA1C or weight. There were no changes in the acute insulin response to arginine, the mixed meal tolerance test or blinded continuous glucose monitoring. After the washout, no participants met the primary endpoint and HbA1C increased from 45 ± 8 mmol/mol (6.3 ± 0.7%) to 51 ± 6 mmol/mol (6.8 ± 0.6%) (P < 0.05). Two participants had mild–moderate transient gastrointestinal side effects. There were no episodes of hypoglycaemia. Conclusions Sitagliptin plus pantoprazole is well tolerated and safe and may restore insulin independence in some islet transplant recipients with early graft insufficiency, but this was not sustained when treatment was withdrawn. A larger, controlled trial is required to confirm the effectiveness of this combination to achieve insulin independence and to confidently exclude any persistent benefit for graft function. (Clinical Trials Registry No.: NCT00768651)
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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; 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".