A global online survey was administered to 69 islet transplantation programs, covering 84 centers and 5 networks. The survey addressed questions on program organization and activity in the 2000... Show moreA global online survey was administered to 69 islet transplantation programs, covering 84 centers and 5 networks. The survey addressed questions on program organization and activity in the 2000-2020 period, including impact on activity of national health care coverage policies. We obtained full data from 55 institutions or networks worldwide and basic activity data from 6 centers. Additional data were obtained from alternative sources. A total of 94 institutions and 5 networks was identified as having performed islet allotransplantation. 4,365 islet allotransplants (2,608 in Europe, 1,475 in North America, 135 in Asia, 119 in Oceania, 28 in South America) were reported in 2,170 patients in the survey period. From 15 centers active at the start of the study period, the number of simultaneously active islet centers peaked at 54, to progressively decrease to 26 having performed islet allotransplants in 2020. Notably, only 16 centers/networks have done >100 islet allotransplants in the survey period. Types of transplants performed differed notably between North America and the rest of the world, in particular with respect to the near-absence of simultaneous islet-kidney transplantation. Absence of heath care coverage has significantly hampered transplant activity in the past years and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Show less
Context: The Igls criteria were developed to provide a consensus definition for outcomes of beta-cell replacement therapy in the treatment of diabetes during a January 2017 workshop sponsored by... Show moreContext: The Igls criteria were developed to provide a consensus definition for outcomes of beta-cell replacement therapy in the treatment of diabetes during a January 2017 workshop sponsored by the International Pancreas & Islet Transplant Association (IPITA) and the European Pancreas & Islet Transplant Association. In July 2019, a symposium at the 17th IPITA World Congress was held to examine the Igls criteria after 2 years in clinical practice, including validation against continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-derived glucose targets, and to propose future refinements that would allow for comparison of outcomes with artificial pancreas system approaches.Evidence acquisition: Utilization of the criteria in various clinical and research settings was illustrated by population as well as individual outcome data of 4 islet and/or pancreas transplant centers. Validation against CGM metrics was conducted in 55 islet transplant recipients followed-up to 10 years from a fifth center.Evidence synthesis: The Igls criteria provided meaningful clinical assessment on an individual patient and treatment group level, allowing for comparison both within and between different beta-cell replacement modalities. Important limitations include the need to account for changes in insulin requirements and C-peptide levels relative to baseline. In islet transplant recipients, CGM glucose time in range improved with each category of increasing beta-cell graft function.Conclusions: Future Igls 2.0 criteria should consider absolute rather than relative levels of insulin use and C-peptide as qualifiers with treatment success based on glucose assessment using CGM metrics on par with assessment of glycated hemoglobin and severe hypoglycemia events. Show less
The First World Consensus Conference on Pancreas Transplantation provided 49 jury deliberations regarding the impact of pancreas transplantation on the treatment of diabetic patients, and 110... Show moreThe First World Consensus Conference on Pancreas Transplantation provided 49 jury deliberations regarding the impact of pancreas transplantation on the treatment of diabetic patients, and 110 experts' recommendations for the practice of pancreas transplantation. The main message from this consensus conference is that both simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) and pancreas transplantation alone can improve long-term patient survival, and all types of pancreas transplantation dramatically improve the quality of life of recipients. Pancreas transplantation may also improve the course of chronic complications of diabetes, depending on their severity. Therefore, the advantages of pancreas transplantation appear to clearly surpass potential disadvantages. Pancreas after kidney transplantation increases the risk of mortality only in the early period after transplantation, but is associated with improved life expectancy thereafter. Additionally, preemptive SPK, when compared to SPK performed in patients undergoing dialysis, appears to be associated with improved outcomes. Time on dialysis has negative prognostic implications in SPK recipients. Increased long-term survival, improvement in the course of diabetic complications, and amelioration of quality of life justify preferential allocation of kidney grafts to SPK recipients. Audience discussions and live voting are available online at the following URL address: . Show less
Piemonti, L.; Andres, A.; Casey, J.; Koning, E. de; Engelse, M.; Hilbrands, R.; ... ; Berney, T. 2021
Allogeneic islet transplantation is a standard of care treatment for patients with labile type 1 diabetes in many countries around the world, including Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, much of... Show moreAllogeneic islet transplantation is a standard of care treatment for patients with labile type 1 diabetes in many countries around the world, including Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, much of continental Europe, and parts of Canada. The United States is now endorsing islet cell treatment for type 1 diabetes, but the FDA has chosen to consider islets as a biologic that requires licensure, making the universal implementation of the procedure in the clinic very challenging and opening the manufacture of islet grafts to private companies. The commercialization of human tissues raises significant legal and ethical issues and ironically leads to a situation where treatments developed as a result of the scientific and economic efforts of academia over several decades become exploited exclusively by for-profit entities. Show less
