Intravenous Ancrod for Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Approved treatment options for acute ischemic stroke in the United States and Canada are limited at present to intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator, but bleeding complications, including intracranial hemorrhage, are a recognized complication. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the defibrinogenating agent ancrod in patients with acute ischemic stroke. DESIGN: The Stroke Treatment with Ancrod Trial (STAT), a randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between August 1993 and January 1998. SETTING: Forty-eight centers, primarily community hospitals, in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: A total of 500 patients with an acute or progressing ischemic neurological deficit were enrolled and included in the intent-to-treat analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ancrod (n=248) or placebo (n =252) as a continuous 72-hour intravenous infusion beginning within 3 hours of stroke onset, followed by infusions lasting approximately 1 hour at 96 and 120 hours. The ancrod regimen was designed to decrease plasma fibrinogen levels to 1.18 to 2.03 micromol/L. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy end point was functional status, with favorable functional status defined as survival to day 90 with a Barthel Index of 95 or more or at least the prestroke value, compared by treatment group. Primary safety variables included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and mortality. RESULTS: Favorable functional status was achieved by more patients in the ancrod group (42.2%) than in the placebo group (34.4%; P=.04) by the prespecified covariate-adjusted analysis. Mortality was not different between treatment groups (at 90 days, 25.4% for the ancrod group and 23% for the placebo group; P=.62), and the proportion of severely disabled patients was less in the ancrod group than in the placebo group (11.8% vs 19.8%; P=.01). The favorable functional status observed with ancrod vs placebo was consistent in all subgroups defined for age, stroke severity, sex, prestroke disability, and time to treatment (< or = 3 or > 3 hours after stroke onset). There was a trend toward more symptomatic intracranial hemorrhages in the ancrod group vs placebo (5.2% vs 2.0%; P=.06), as well as a significant increase in asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhages (19.0% vs 10.7%; P=.01). CONCLUSION: In this study, ancrod had a favorable benefit-risk profile for patients with acute ischemic 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".