Is Artificial Pancreas project still viable?
Is Artificial Pancreas project still viable when islet transplantation has become possible. See: http://www.islets2012.aigindia.net/
This has been around for several decades, using animal islets in various countries. The number of survivors are small and the possibility of needing more than one surgery is high. I do not who is trying this and I did not read your link, but there is a very small window for those that can have this done, and the failure of these procedures are not worth the risk of costing your life up front.
I'm not a fan of either. I don't believe the AP is that viable until they can get a more accurate cgm. The one I had was often incorrect by a large margin. As for islet cell transplants, typically they require more immunosuppression than a full organ transplant and fail much sooner (average of about 2 years with islets and a decade with the full organ). Don't forget that many specialists in islet transplants still consider taking "less" insulin to be a success. I don't since I would still be on shots or a pump.
I investigated the islets in Edmonton and was even told by them to not do it. I eventually had a full pancreas transplant and it is working well after 4 1/2 years.
Thanks for your inputs and throwing more light on this topic. I further searched and found that in India, Hyderabad, they are doing islet transplant using theracite implantation where the islets are sealed in a small cell and introduced in the body of the patient. due to this, the body will not reject the islets, and the patient wont need immuno suppressants. Please see the extract below from the news site:
"He further said, “Pancreatic islets transplantation can let diabetics live without using insulin injections for about 3-5 years depending on the patient. However, the main problem with this process was immuno-rejection, which can be solved using theracite implantation.”
According to Dr Prasad, theracite implantation means islets are sealed in a small cell and introduced in the body of the patient. As a result of this, the body will not reject the islets. “So, islets can be extracted from donors or patients (with their consent), isolated, cultured and multiplied, in order to use them on diabetic patients, solving their problem on a long-term basis,” added Dr Prasad.
In my mind, it’s not a transplantation vs. an artificial pancreas issue. After hearing of Jeffrey Brewer’s (JDRF CEO) detailed research strategy, it’s clear that there are several viable pathways to cures. I think we have to spend and raise research dollars to support promising technologies that include encapsulated beta cell transplantation, smart insulins and regenerative biology. An artificial pancreas gives PWDs a mechanical therapy that can make T1D life a whole lot easier until a cure is developed. The funny thing is, many people I’ve spoken with would consider a range to target artificial pancreas a cure. Everyone has their own definition of a cure – prevention, reversal of complications, restoration of beta cell function, never having to think about a shot. JDRF is working on all of them.
@red, while many different people have many different definitions of the word “cure”, I can tell you with certainty that people involved in transplant do not use that word. Transplant (of any organ type) is considered another form of treatment and never a “cure”.While technically I no longer have diabetes, I am not cured as one day I will have it again when the organ fails and I certainly do not see the doctor or do labs any less than I used to. And take a lot of meds. It is, however, a very nice form of treatment.