Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40755872›Full record

ArticleTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2025

Comparative Analysis of Islet Auto-Transplantation Outcome Classification Systems: Evaluating Concordance, Feasibility, and a Data-Driven Approach.

Davide Catarinella, Paola Magistretti, Raffaella Melzi, Alessia Mercalli, Stefano Tentori, Chiara Gremizzi, Vera Paloschi, Simona Sala, Libera Valla, Francesca Aleotti and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Davide CatarinellaClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Paola MagistrettiDiabetes Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Raffaella MelziDiabetes Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Alessia MercalliDiabetes Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Stefano TentoriClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Chiara GremizziClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Vera PaloschiClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Simona SalaClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Libera VallaDiabetes Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Francesca AleottiPancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Sabrina CostaDiabetes Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Francesco De CobelliDepartment of Radiology, Experimental Imaging Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Rossana CaldaraClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Lorenzo PiemontiClinic Unit of Regenerative Medicine and Organ Transplants, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A standardized approach to assessing islet autotransplantation outcomes is crucial for evaluating graft function and guiding clinical decisions. This study compares the performance of existing classification systems-Milan, Minneapolis, Chicago, Leicester, Igls, and a novel Data-Driven approach-by evaluating their ability to differentiate transplant outcomes using metabolic and insulin secretion parameters. Our analysis shows strong concordance among Milan, Minneapolis, Chicago, and Igls, primarily due to minor variations in C-peptide thresholds. The Leicester and Data-Driven systems, however, exhibit greater divergence, with the Leicester system simplifying assessment by excluding severe hypoglycemic events and HbA1c, and the Data-Driven approach offering a more dynamic framework without predefined thresholds. Fasting C-peptide levels emerged as a highly reliable predictor of graft function, with the arginine test proving more effective than Mixed Meal Tolerance Test for additional evaluation. The Data-Driven approach provided superior stratification of outcomes, highlighting the importance of residual insulin secretion in metabolic control. These findings suggest that refining classification systems, particularly by considering insulin sensitivity and residual secretion, could enhance long-term patient monitoring and improve our understanding of beta-cell replacement therapies. Further validation across diverse cohorts is essential for broader clinical adoption.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1Islets of Langerhans TransplantationAdultC-PeptideFeasibility StudiesFemaleGlycated HemoglobinGraft SurvivalHumansInsulinInsulin SecretionMaleMiddle AgedTransplantation, AutologousTreatment OutcomeC-PeptideGlycated HemoglobinInsulinclassification systemsC-peptidegraft functioninsulin secretionislet autotransplantation

Identifiers

PMID40755872
PMCPMC12313549

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.