Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for acute ischemic stroke: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties and is known to mobilize stem cells, it may be useful in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. We sought to examine the feasibility, safety and efficacy of using G-CSF to treat acute stroke. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, blinded controlled trial involving 10 patients with acute cerebral infarction (middle cerebral artery territory as documented by the admission MRI) who presented within 7 days of onset and whose scores on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) were between 9 and 20. Patients were assigned to either G-CSF therapy or usual care. The G-CSF group (n = 7) received subcutaneous G-CSF injections (15 microg/kg per day) for 5 days. The primary outcome was percentage changes between baseline and 12-month follow-up in mean group scores on 4 clinical scales: the NIHSS, European Stroke Scale (ESS), ESS Motor Subscale (EMS) and Barthel Index (BI). We also assessed neurologic functioning using PET to measure cerebral uptake of fluorodeoxyglucose in the cortical areas surrounding the ischemic core. RESULTS: All of the patients completed the 5-day course of treatment, and none were lost to follow-up. No severe adverse effects were seen in patients receiving G-CSF. There was greater improvement in neurologic functioning between baseline and 12-month follow-up in the G-CSF group than in the control group (NIHSS: 59% change in the mean G-CSF group score v. 36% in the mean control group score, ESS: 33% v. 20%, EMS: 106% v. 58%, BI: 120% v. 60%). Although at 12 months there was no difference between the 2 groups in cerebral uptake of fluorodeoxyglucose in the ischemic core, uptake in the area surrounding the core was significantly improved in the G-CSF group compared with the control group. There was positive correlation between metabolic activity and EMS score following simple linear correlation analysis. INTERPRETATION: Our preliminary evidence suggests that using G-CSF as therapy for acute stroke is safe and feasible and leads to improved neurologic outcomes.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".