The Effects of Lifarizine in Acute Cerebral Infarction: A Pilot Safety Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Lifarizine is a novel ion channel modulator which is neuroprotective in experimental global and focal ischemia, at doses that have minimal systemic vascular effects. This was a preliminary efficacy and safety study of lifarizine in human stroke. Methods: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study, subjects with symptoms and signs of first ischemic stroke were randomized to receive lifarizine (250 µg/kg, i.v. stat. plus 60 mg b.d. orally for 5 days) or matching placebo, after stratification for age (21–74 or ≥: 75 years) and for time since stroke onset (<6 or 6–12 h). Primary end points were safety of lifarizine and functional outcome at 13 weeks, using the modified Barthel Index and the Rankin Scale. Secondary measures included the National Institutes of Health and Canadian Neurological scales. Results: Of 147 patients recruited, 117 were evaluated for efficacy analysis. Lifarizine was well tolerated; a single seizure was attributed to active treatment. Biochemical and hematological indices were unchanged. Blood pressure fell over the study period, particularly in the lifarizine group. All-patient mortality during the 3-month study was 12/75 (16%) for lifarizine and 17/72 (24%) for placebo; amongst evaluable patients, mortality was 9/63 (14%) for lifarizine and 13/54 (24%) for placebo. At 13 weeks, the improvement in functional independence in the lifarizine group versus the placebo group was 16% greater by the Rankin Scale, p = 0.52, and 11% greater by the Barthel score, p = 0.55. Conclusions: Lifarizine was well tolerated. Mortality and functional assessment data showed favorable trends. Further studies are justified to examine the efficacy of lifarizine in acute stroke.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".