Unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the Familial Intracranial Aneurysm and International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms cohorts: differences in multiplicity and location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: Familial predisposition is a recognized nonmodifiable risk factor for the formation and rupture of intracranial aneurysms (IAs). However, data regarding the characteristics of familial IAs are limited. The authors sought to describe familial IAs more fully, and to compare their characteristics with a large cohort of nonfamilial IAs. METHODS: The Familial Intracranial Aneurysm (FIA) study is a multicenter international study with the goal of identifying genetic and other risk factors for formation and rupture of IAs in a highly enriched population. The authors compared the FIA study cohort with the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA) cohort with regard to patient demographic data, IA location, and IA multiplicity. To improve comparability, all patients in the ISUIA who had a family history of IAs or subarachnoid hemorrhage were excluded, as well as all patients in both cohorts who had a ruptured IA prior to study entry. RESULTS: Of 983 patients enrolled in the FIA study with definite or probable IAs, 511 met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. Of the 4059 patients in the ISUIA study, 983 had a previous IA rupture and 657 of the remainder had a positive family history, leaving 2419 individuals in the analysis. Multiplicity was more common in the FIA patients (35.6% vs 27.9%, p<0.001). The FIA patients had a higher proportion of IAs located in the middle cerebral artery (28.6% vs 24.9%), whereas ISUIA patients had a higher proportion of posterior communicating artery IAs (13.7% vs 8.2%, p=0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Heritable structural vulnerability may account for differences in IA multiplicity and location. Important investigations into the underlying genetic mechanisms of IA formation are ongoing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".