MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399901622 · doi:10.1097/txd.0000000000001667

Evaluating Islet Cell Isolation and Transplantation From Donors Following Medical Assistance in Dying

2024· article· en· W4399901622 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Parente, Kevin Verhoeff, Tatsuya Kin, Joshua Hefler, Braulio A. Marfil‐Garza, Norberto Sánchez-Fernández, Anna Lam, James Lyon, Doug O’Gorman, Khaled Dajani, Blaire Anderson, David L. Bigam, Patrick E. MacDonald, A. M. James Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation Direct · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIsolation (microbiology)IsletTransplantationIslet cell transplantationIntensive care medicineImmunologyInternal medicineBioinformaticsInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Limited information is available regarding outcomes of islet cell isolation (ICI) and transplantation (ITx) using medical assistance in dying (MAiD) donors. We aimed to assess the feasibility and outcomes of ICI and ITx in MAiD donors. Methods. ICI and ITx from MAiD were compared with donation after circulatory death (DCD) type III between 2016 and 2023. Differences of isolated islet equivalents (IEQs), numeric viability and other quantitative in vitro metabolic measures were assessed. Results. Overall, 81 ICIs were available of whom 34 (42%) and 47 (58%) from MAiD and DCD-III, respectively. There were no differences of pancreas and digested tissue weight and islets viability among the 2 groups; however, cold ischemic time was longer in MAiD (11.5 versus 9.1 h; P = 0.021). The IEQ ( P < 0.001) and percent trapped ( P < 0.001) were higher in the DCD-III; however, MAiD islets demonstrated a higher purity ( P = 0.020). Overall, 15 ITx were performed of whom 3 (8.8%) and 12 (25.5%) from MAiD and DCD-III, respectively ( P = 0.056). Patients had a median fasting C-peptide of 0.51 ng/mL (interquartile range, 0.30–0.76 nmol/L), with no differences between groups (MAiD = 0.52 versus DCD-III = 0.51; P = 0.718). The median HbA1c was 6.2% (interquartile range, 5.7%–7%) (MAiD = 6.3% versus DCD-III = 6.1%; P = 0.815) and BETA2 scores (MAiD = 7.4 versus DCD-III = 12.8; P = 0.229) did not differ. Conclusions. ICI from MAiD donor pancreas may be successfully transplanted with comparable outcomes to DCD-III and may be used for research. These results justify additional efforts to consider MAiD as another valuable source of grafts for ITx. Further multicenter studies and larger clinical experience are needed to validate our findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantation DirectSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207