MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2224700701

Acute thromboscintigraphy with (99m)Tc-apcitide: results of the phase 3 multicenter clinical trial comparing 99mTc-apcitide scintigraphy with contrast venography for imaging acute DVT. Multicenter Trial Investigators.

2000· article· en· W2224700701 on OpenAlexaff
Raymond Taillefer, S. L. Edell, Grant Innes, John Lister‐James

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVenographyScintigraphyNuclear medicineRadiologyThrombosisClinical trialMulticenter trialTechnetiumMulticenter studyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trial
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: (99m)Tc-apcitide (formerly known as (99m)Tc-P280) is a radiolabeled peptide that binds with high affinity and specificity to the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptors expressed on the activated platelets that are involved in acute thrombosis. The purpose of the phase 3 multicenter clinical trials was to compare (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigraphy with contrast venography for imaging acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT). METHODS: A total of 280 patients were enrolled in 2 clinical trials conducted in North America and Europe. Patients were to be within 10 d of onset of signs and symptoms of acute DVT or within 10 d of surgery associated with a high risk of DVT. (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigraphy and contrast venography were to be performed within 36 h. Planar scintigraphic images were obtained at 10, 60, and 120-180 min after injection. (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigrams and contrast venograms were read with masking and also by the institutional investigators. RESULTS: Of a total of 243 patients who were evaluable, 61.7% were receiving heparin at the time of imaging. Masked reading of (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigraphy, compared with masked reading of contrast venography, had a sensitivity, specificity, and agreement of 73.4%, 67.5%, and 69.1%, respectively, which met the prospectively defined target efficacy endpoint in both trials. Institutional reading of (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigraphy, compared with institutional reading of contrast venography, had a sensitivity, specificity, and agreement of 75.5%, 72.8%, and 74.0%, respectively. However, the entire trial population included patients with a history of DVT who may have had old, nonacute venous thrombi that could confound the venography results. Therefore, data from patients having no history of DVT or pulmonary embolism and who presented within 3 d of onset of signs and symptoms (n = 63), i.e., patients for whom a venogram would be expected to be positive only if acute DVT were present, also were analyzed as a subset. In these patients, institutional reading of (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigraphy, compared with institutional reading of contrast venography, had a sensitivity, specificity, and agreement of 90.6%, 83.9%, and 87.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: (99m)Tc-apcitide scintigraphy is a new diagnostic modality that is highly sensitive for imaging acute DVT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207