Evidence mapPaperPMID 39553396Full record

ReviewFrontiers in transplantation2024

Status of islet transplantation and innovations to sustainable outcomes: novel sites, cell sources, and drug delivery strategies.

Jordan M Wong, Andrew R Pepper

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jordan M WongDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Andrew R PepperDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Islet transplantation (ITx) is an effective means to restore physiologic glycemic regulation in those living with type 1 diabetes; however, there are a handful of barriers that prevent the broad application of this functionally curative procedure. The restricted cell supply, requisite for life-long toxic immunosuppression, and significant immediate and gradual graft attrition limits the procedure to only those living with brittle diabetes. While intraportal ITx is the primary clinical site, portal vein-specific factors including low oxygen tension and the instant blood-mediated inflammatory reaction are detrimental to initial engraftment and long-term function. These factors among others prevent the procedure from granting recipients long-term insulin independence. Herein, we provide an overview of the status and limitations of ITx, and novel innovations that address the shortcomings presented. Despite the marked progress highlighted in the review from as early as the initial islet tissue transplantation in 1893, ongoing efforts to improve the procedure efficacy and success are also explored. Progress in identifying unlimited cell sources, more favourable transplant sites, and novel drug delivery strategies all work to broaden ITx application and reduce adverse outcomes. Exploring combination of these approaches may uncover synergies that can further advance the field of ITx in providing sustainable functional cures. Finally, the potential of biomaterial strategies to facilitate immune evasion and local immune modulation are featured and may underpin successful application in alternative transplant sites.

Indexed as

alternative sitebiomaterialsdiabetesimmunosuppressionislet transplantation

Identifiers

PMID39553396
PMCPMC11565603

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.