26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Improvement in Outcomes of Clinical Islet Transplantation: 1999–2010

      research-article
      , MS 1 , , MD 2 , , MD 3 , , MD 4 , , MPH 1 , , PHD 5 , , MD 6 , , MD 7 , , MD 8 , , MD 9 , , MD, PHD 10 , , MD 11 , , MD 12 , , PHD 3 , , PHD, MRCP 13 , , MD, PHD 12 , , MD, PHD 14 , , MD, PHD 14 , , MD, PHD 7 , , MD, PHD 15 , , MD, PHD 16 , , MD 17 , , MD 18 , , MD, PHD 19 , , MD, PHD 2 , , MD, PHD 20 , , MD 21 , , MD 22 , , MD, PHD 23 , , PHARMD 24 , , MD, PHD 18 , , MD, PHD 25 , , MD 7 , , MD, PHD 10 , , MD 4 , , MD, PHD 13
      Diabetes Care
      American Diabetes Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          OBJECTIVE

          To describe trends of primary efficacy and safety outcomes of islet transplantation in type 1 diabetes recipients with severe hypoglycemia from the Collaborative Islet Transplant Registry (CITR) from 1999 to 2010.

          RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

          A total of 677 islet transplant-alone or islet-after-kidney recipients with type 1 diabetes in the CITR were analyzed for five primary efficacy outcomes and overall safety to identify any differences by early (1999–2002), mid (2003–2006), or recent (2007–2010) transplant era based on annual follow-up to 5 years.

          RESULTS

          Insulin independence at 3 years after transplant improved from 27% in the early era (1999–2002, n = 214) to 37% in the mid (2003–2006, n = 255) and to 44% in the most recent era (2007–2010, n = 208; P = 0.006 for years-by-era; P = 0.01 for era alone). C-peptide ≥0.3 ng/mL, indicative of islet graft function, was retained longer in the most recent era ( P < 0.001). Reduction of HbA 1c and resolution of severe hypoglycemia exhibited enduring long-term effects. Fasting blood glucose stabilization also showed improvements in the most recent era. There were also modest reductions in the occurrence of adverse events. The islet reinfusion rate was lower: 48% by 1 year in 2007–2010 vs. 60–65% in 1999–2006 ( P < 0.01). Recipients that ever achieved insulin-independence experienced longer duration of islet graft function ( P < 0.001).

          CONCLUSIONS

          The CITR shows improvement in primary efficacy and safety outcomes of islet transplantation in recipients who received transplants in 2007–2010 compared with those in 1999–2006, with fewer islet infusions and adverse events per recipient.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Five-year follow-up after clinical islet transplantation.

          Islet transplantation can restore endogenous beta-cell function to subjects with type 1 diabetes. Sixty-five patients received an islet transplant in Edmonton as of 1 November 2004. Their mean age was 42.9 +/- 1.2 years, their mean duration of diabetes was 27.1 +/- 1.3 years, and 57% were women. The main indication was problematic hypoglycemia. Forty-four patients completed the islet transplant as defined by insulin independence, and three further patients received >16,000 islet equivalents (IE)/kg but remained on insulin and are deemed complete. Those who became insulin independent received a total of 799,912 +/- 30,220 IE (11,910 +/- 469 IE/kg). Five subjects became insulin independent after one transplant. Fifty-two patients had two transplants, and 11 subjects had three transplants. In the completed patients, 5-year follow-up reveals that the majority ( approximately 80%) have C-peptide present post-islet transplant, but only a minority ( approximately 10%) maintain insulin independence. The median duration of insulin independence was 15 months (interquartile range 6.2-25.5). The HbA(1c) (A1C) level was well controlled in those off insulin (6.4% [6.1-6.7]) and in those back on insulin but C-peptide positive (6.7% [5.9-7.5]) and higher in those who lost all graft function (9.0% [6.7-9.3]) (P < 0.05). Those who resumed insulin therapy did not appear more insulin resistant compared with those off insulin and required half their pretransplant daily dose of insulin but had a lower increment of C-peptide to a standard meal challenge (0.44 +/- 0.06 vs. 0.76 +/- 0.06 nmol/l, P < 0.001). The Hypoglycemic score and lability index both improved significantly posttransplant. In the 128 procedures performed, bleeding occurred in 15 and branch portal vein thrombosis in 5 subjects. Complications of immunosuppressive therapy included mouth ulcers, diarrhea, anemia, and ovarian cysts. Of the 47 completed patients, 4 required retinal laser photocoagulation or vitrectomy and 5 patients with microalbuminuria developed macroproteinuria. The need for multiple antihypertensive medications increased from 6% pretransplant to 42% posttransplant, while the use of statin therapy increased from 23 to 83% posttransplant. There was no change in the neurothesiometer scores pre- versus posttransplant. In conclusion, islet transplantation can relieve glucose instability and problems with hypoglycemia. C-peptide secretion was maintained in the majority of subjects for up to 5 years, although most reverted to using some insulin. The results, though promising, still point to the need for further progress in the availability of transplantable islets, improving islet engraftment, preserving islet function, and reducing toxic immunosuppression.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Structural and functional abnormalities in the islets isolated from type 2 diabetic subjects.

            Type 2 diabetic subjects manifest both disordered insulin action and abnormalities in their pancreatic islet cells. Whether the latter represents a primary defect or is a consequence of the former is unknown. To examine the beta-cell mass and function of islets from type 2 diabetic patients directly, we isolated islets from pancreata of type 2 diabetic cadaveric donors (n = 14) and compared them with islets from normal donors (n = 14) matched for age, BMI, and cold ischemia time. The total recovered islet mass from type 2 diabetic pancreata was significantly less than that from nondiabetic control subjects (256,260 islet equivalents [2,588 IEq/g pancreas] versus 597,569 islet equivalents [6,037 IEq/g pancreas]). Type 2 diabetic islets were also noted to be smaller on average, and histologically, islets from diabetic patients contained a higher proportion of glucagon-producing alpha-cells. In vitro study of islet function from diabetic patients revealed an abnormal glucose-stimulated insulin release response in perifusion assays. In addition, in comparison with normal islets, an equivalent number of type 2 diabetic islets failed to reverse hyperglycemia when transplanted to immunodeficient diabetic mice. These results provide direct evidence for abnormalities in the islets of type 2 diabetic patients that may contribute to the pathogenesis of the disease.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Assessment of the severity of hypoglycemia and glycemic lability in type 1 diabetic subjects undergoing islet transplantation.

              Currently, the major indications for solitary islet transplantation are recurrent severe hypoglycemia and labile glucose control. Quantifying these problems remains subjective. We have developed a scoring system for both hypoglycemia and glycemic lability, established normative data, and used them in patients who have undergone islet transplantation. A composite hypoglycemic score (HYPO score) was devised based on the frequency, severity, and degree of unawareness of the hypoglycemia. In addition, using 4 weeks of glucose records, a lability index (LI) was calculated based on the change in glucose levels over time and compared with a clinical assessment of glycemic lability. A mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE) was also calculated based on 2 consecutive days of seven readings each day. These scores were determined in 100 randomly selected subjects with type 1 diabetes from our general clinic to serve as a control group and in patients before and after islet transplantation. The mean age of the control diabetic subjects was 38.4 +/- 1.3 years (+/-SE), with a duration of diabetes of 21.5 +/- 1.1 years. The median HYPO score in the control subjects was 143 (25th to 75th interquartile range: 46-423). The LI in the diabetic control subjects was 223 (25th to 75th interquartile range: 130-329 mmol/l(2)/h.week(-1)). The LI correlated much more closely than the MAGE with the clinical assessment of lability. A HYPO score of > or = 1,047 (90th percentile) or an LI > or = 433 mmol/l(2)/h.week(-1) (90th percentile) indicated serious problems with hypoglycemia or glycemic lability, respectively. The islet transplant patients (n = 51) were 42.1 +/- 1.4 years old, with a duration of diabetes of 25.7 +/- 1.4 years. Islet transplant patients had a mean HYPO score of 1,234 +/- 184 pretransplant, which was significantly higher than that of the control subjects (P < 0.001), which became negligible posttransplantation with the elimination of hypoglycemia. The median LI pretransplant was 497 mmol/l(2)/h.week(-1) (25th to 75th interquartile range: 330-692), significantly higher than that of control subjects (P < 0.001), and fell to 40 (25th to 75th interquartile range: 14-83) within a month after the final transplant. In those who had lost graft function, the LI rose again. The HYPO score and LI provide measures of the extent of problems with hypoglycemia and glycemic lability, respectively, complement the clinical assessment of the problems with glucose control before islet transplantation, and will allow comparison of selection of subjects for transplants between centers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Diabetes Care
                Diabetes Care
                diacare
                dcare
                Diabetes Care
                Diabetes Care
                American Diabetes Association
                0149-5992
                1935-5548
                July 2012
                12 June 2012
                : 35
                : 7
                : 1436-1445
                Affiliations
                [1] 1The EMMES Corporation, Rockville, Maryland
                [2] 2Department of Surgery, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
                [3] 3Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology/Diabetes/Metabolism, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
                [4] 4Schultze Diabetes Institute and Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
                [5] 5Islet Processing Laboratory, Institute of Biomedical Science, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
                [6] 6Department of Surgery, Division of Transplant Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
                [7] 7Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
                [8] 8Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Southern Illinois University, Springfield, Illinois
                [9] 9Department of Transplant Services, University of Texas, Southwest Medical School, Dallas, Texas
                [10] 10Department of General and Endocrine Surgery, Lille University, Lille, France
                [11] 11Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation and Visceral Surgery, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland
                [12] 12Department of Internal Medicine, San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
                [13] 13Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
                [14] 14Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California
                [15] 15Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois
                [16] 16Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology & Metabolism, City of Hope, Duarte, California
                [17] 17 MGH Diabetes Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
                [18] 18Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
                [19] 19Department of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
                [20] 20Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
                [21] 21Diabetes Program, Benaroya Research Institute, Seattle, Washington
                [22] 22Department of Endocrinology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
                [23] 23Department of Transplantation Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
                [24] 24Division of Transplantation Surgery, Weill-Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
                [25] 25Department of Medicine, St. Vincent’s Institute, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Franca B. Barton, fbarton@ 123456emmes.com .
                Article
                0063
                10.2337/dc12-0063
                3379615
                22723582
                3247f782-5d17-474d-8953-9b4db7cc9e6b
                © 2012 by the American Diabetes Association.

                Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

                History
                : 10 January 2012
                : 26 April 2012
                Categories
                Original Research
                Diabetes Care Symposium

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                Endocrinology & Diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article