Abstract W P12: Baseline Predictors of the Malignant Collateral Profile in IMS III
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Collateral circulation has repeatedly been cited as a decisive factor in successful angiographic and clinical outcomes after endovascular therapy, offering rational selection criteria. Identifying patients with a malignant collateral profile, portending poor outcome, would greatly enhance decision-making in acute stroke. We analyzed the IMS III dataset to delineate baseline predictors of poor angiographic collaterals. Methods: Collateral grade was prospectively evaluated by the angiography core lab in IMS III. Poor collaterals or a malignant collateral profile was defined as ASITN grade 0-1. Baseline clinical, laboratory and non-contrast CT variables were evaluated in univariate and multivariable logistic regression as predictors of the malignant collateral profile. Results: 278 patients (mean age 65.3±12.6 years, 54% women, median NIHSS 17 (IQR 13-20) had collateral grading assessed at angiography. Malignant collaterals (ASITN 0-1) were noted in 77/278 (28%). Univariate analyses revealed that only history of HTN (88.3 vs. 71.0%, p=0.004), CHF (17.6 vs.8.0%, p=0.040), admission DBP (89±24 vs. 81±17 (mm Hg, mean±SD), p=0.002), NIHSS>19 (40.3 vs. 28.4%, p=0.080), distal arterial occlusion location (p=0.002) and ASPECTS 0-4 (24.7 vs. 9.4%, p=0.002) were associated with malignant collaterals. Time from stroke onset to angiography was unrelated to collateral grade. Predictors in multivariable analyses included ASPECTS 0-4 (OR 3.72, 95%CI (1.60-8.66), p=0.002), HTN (OR 2.33, 95%CI (1.01-5.38), p=0.047), NIHSS>19 (OR 2.26, 95%CI (1.16-4.40), p=0.017), distal arterial occlusion (OR 2.08, 95%CI (1.43-3.04), p<0.001) and higher admission DBP (OR 1.02 per mm Hg, 95%CI (1.00-1.03), p=0.035). When ASPECTS 5-10, only NIHSS>19 (OR 2.81, 95%CI (1.35-5.86), p=0.006) and distal arterial occlusion (OR 2.58, 95%CI (1.70-3.92), p<0.001) predicted malignant collaterals. Conclusions: Elevated diastolic blood pressure, history of hypertension, NIHSS>19, lower ASPECTS and distal arterial occlusion are strong predictors of the malignant collateral profile. Future studies should validate and implement a concomitant risk score for triage of acute stroke patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".