Islets Transplantation at a Crossroads - Need for Urgent Regulatory Update in the United States: Perspective Presented During the Scientific Sessions 2021 at the American Diabetes Association Congress

Clinical islet allotransplantation has been successfully regulated as tissue/organ for transplantation in number of countries and is recognized as a safe and efficacious therapy for selected patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, in the United States, the FDA considers pancreatic islets as a biologic drug, and islet transplantation has not yet shifted from the experimental to the clinical arena for last 20 years. In order to transplant islets, the FDA requires a valid Biological License Application (BLA) in place. The BLA process is costly and lengthy. However, despite the application of drug manufacturing technology and regulations, the final islet product sterility and potency cannot be confirmed, even when islets meet all the predetermined release criteria. Therefore, further regulation of islets as drugs is obsolete and will continue to hinder clinical application of islet transplantation in the US. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network together with the United Network for Organ Sharing have developed separately from the FDA and BLA regulatory framework for human organs under the Human Resources & Services Administration to assure safety and efficacy of transplantation. Based on similar biologic characteristics of islets and human organs, we propose inclusion of islets into the existing regulatory framework for organs for transplantation, along with continued FDA oversight for islet processing, as it is for other cell/tissue products exempt from BLA. This approach would reassure islet quality, efficacy and access for Americans with diabetes to this effective procedure

The demise of islet allotransplantation in the United States: A call for an urgent regulatory update

Islet allotransplantation in the United States (US) is facing an imminent demise. Despite nearly three decades of progress in the field, an archaic regulatory framework has stymied US clinical practice. Current regulations do not reflect the state-of-the-art in clinical or technical practices. In the US, islets are considered biologic drugs and “more than minimally manipulated” human cell and tissue products (HCT/Ps). In contrast, across the world, human islets are appropriately defined as “minimally manipulated tissue” and not regulated as a drug, which has led to islet allotransplantation (allo-ITx) becoming a standard-of-care procedure for selected patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This regulatory distinction impedes patient access to islets for transplantation in the US. As a result only 11 patients underwent allo-ITx in the US between 2016 and 2019, and all as investigational procedures in the settings of a clinical trials. Herein, we describe the current regulations pertaining to islet transplantation in the United States. We explore the progress which has been made in the field and demonstrate why the regulatory framework must be updated to both better reflect our current clinical practice and to deal with upcoming challenges. We propose specific updates to current regulations which are required for the renaissance of ethical, safe, effective, and affordable allo-ITx in the United States

Islet preparation purity is overestimated, and less pure fractions have lower post-culture viability before clinical allotransplantation

Background. Replacement of β-cells with the use of isolated islet allotransplantation (IT) is an emerging therapy for type 1 diabetics with hypoglycemia unawareness. The current standard protocol calls for a 36-72-hour culture period before IT. We examined 13 clinical islet preparations with ≥2 purity fractions to determine the effect of culture on viability. Methods. After standard islet isolation and purification, pure islet fractions were placed at 37°C with 5% CO2 for 12-24 hours and subsequently moved to 22°C, whereas less pure fractions were cultured at 22°C for the entire duration. Culture density was targeted at a range of 100-200 islet equivalents (IEQ)/cm2 adjusted for purity. Islets were assessed for purity (dithizone staining), quantity (pellet volume and DNA), and viability (oxygen consumption rate normalized to DNA content [OCR/DNA] and membrane integrity). Results. Results indicated that purity was overestimated, especially in less pure fractions. This was evidenced by significantly larger observed pellet sizes than expected and tissue amount as quantified with the use of a dsDNA assay when available. Less pure fractions showed significantly lower OCR/DNA and membrane integrity compared with pure. The difference in viability between the 2 purity fractions may be due to a variety of reasons, including hypoxia, nutrient deficiency, toxic metabolite accumulation, and/or proteolytic enzymes released by acinar tissue impurities that are not neutralized by human serum albumin in the culture media. Conclusions. Current clinical islet culture protocols should be examined further, especially for less pure fractions, to ensure the maintenance of viability before transplantation. Even though relatively small, the difference in viability is important because the amount of dead or dying tissue introduced into recipients may be dramatically increased, especially with less pure preparations. © 2014 by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Assessment of pain associated with chronic pancreatitis: An international consensus guideline

Pain is the most common symptom in chronic pancreatitis (CP) with a major impact on quality of life. Few validated questionnaires to assess pain in CP exist, and the lack of consensus negatively impacts clinical management, research and meta-analysis. This guideline aims to review generic pain questionnaires for their usability in CP, to outline how pain assessment can be modified by confounding factors and pain types, to assess the value of additional measures such as quality of life, mental health and quantitative sensory testing, and finally to review pain assessment questionnaires used specifically in CP. A systematic review was done to answer 27 questions that followed the PICO (Population; Intervention; Comparator; Outcome) template. Quality of evidence of the statements was judged by Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. The manuscript was sent for review to 36 experts from various disciplines and continents in a multi-stage Delphi process, and finally reviewed by patient representatives. Main findings were that generic pain instruments are valid in most settings, but aspects of pain are specific for CP (including in children), and instruments have to account for the wide phenotypic variability and development of sensitization of the central nervous system. Side effects to treatment and placebo effects shall also be considered. Some multidimensional questionnaires are validated for CP and are recommended together with assessment of quality of life and psychiatric co-morbidities. This guideline will result in more homogeneous and comprehensive pain assessment to potentially improve management of painful CP. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of IAP and EPC. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

A Worldwide Survey of Activities and Practices in Clinical Islet of Langerhans Transplantation

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 2000-2020 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

A worldwide survey of activities and practices in clinical islet of Langerhans Transplantation

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 2000-2020 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.Nephrolog