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.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.