MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2254856943 · doi:10.1161/str.43.suppl_1.a43

Abstract 43: Effect of Clazosentan on Clinical Outcome After Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage and Endovascular Coiling: Results of the CONSCIOUS-3 Study

2012· article· en· W2254856943 on OpenAlexaff
Robert L. Macdonald, Randall T. Higashida, Emanuela Keller, Stephan A. Mayer, Andrew Molyneux, Andreas Raabe, Peter Vajkoczy, Isabel Wanke, Doris Bach, Aline Frey, Pegah Nowbakht, Sébastiên Roux, Neal F. Kassell

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubarachnoid hemorrhageEndovascular coilingGlasgow Outcome ScaleClinical endpointVasospasmEndothelin receptor antagonistPlaceboAnesthesiaRandomized controlled trialOdds ratioAneurysmInternal medicineSurgeryAntagonistEndovascular treatmentGlasgow Coma ScalePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: In CONSCIOUS-1, clazosentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist, significantly and dose-dependently reduced angiographic vasospasm (VSP) after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). CONSCIOUS-3 aimed to assess whether clazosentan improves VSP-related morbidity/all cause mortality after aSAH. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients included in the study were 18-75 years old with SAH due to ruptured saccular aneurysm secured by endovascular coiling, any thick clot and WFNS grades I-IV prior to coiling procedure. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to intravenous clazosentan (5 or 15 mg/h) or placebo for ≤2 weeks. The primary composite endpoint (all-cause mortality; VSP-related new cerebral infarcts; delayed ischemic neurological deficit [DIND] due to VSP; rescue therapy in the presence of confirmed angiographic VSP) was evaluated 6 weeks post-aSAH and assessed centrally by a blinded critical events committee, with significance determined using logistic regression adjusted for WFNS. The main secondary endpoint was the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE; dichotomized) at week 12. Results: CONSCIOUS-3 was halted prematurely following nonsignificant results from the parallel CONSCIOUS-2 clipping study. There were 571 treated patients (placebo n=189, clazosentan 5 mg/h n=194, clazosentan 15 mg/h n=188). The primary endpoint occurred in 27% of the placebo group compared with 24% and 15% in the 5 and 15 mg/h clazosentan groups, respectively; significant improvement was seen with 15 mg/h clazosentan (odds ratio [OR] 0.474, 95% CI 28-82%; p=0.007) but not 5 mg/h (OR 0.786, 95% CI 48-129%; p=0.340). DIND decreased with increasing clazosentan dose (placebo 21%; clazosentan 5 mg/h 18%; clazosentan 15 mg/h 10%). VSP-related new cerebral infarct occurred in 13%, 16% and 7% in the placebo, clazosentan 5 and 15 mg/h groups, respectively. A 3-fold greater use of rescue therapy was seen in patients receiving placebo (21%) compared with 15 mg/h clazosentan (7%). Poor functional outcome (GOSE score ≤4) occurred in 24% of patients in the placebo group compared with 25% (OR 0.918, 95% CI 55-154%; p=0.748) and 28% (OR 1.337, 95% CI 80-223%; p=0.266) in the clazosentan 5 and 15 mg/h groups, respectively. At week 12, mortality rates were 6%, 4% and 6% with placebo, clazosentan 5 and 15 mg/h, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events of specific interest were lung complications (21%, 36%, 37%), anemia (10%, 13%, 13%) and hypotension (7%, 11%, 16%) in the placebo, clazosentan 5 and 15 mg/h groups, respectively. Conclusions: Clazosentan (15 mg/h) significantly reduced mortality/VSP-related morbidity; however, no significant effect on GOSE occurred, possibly due to greater use of rescue therapy with placebo. Pulmonary complications, anemia and hypotension were more common in patients receiving clazosentan.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications→French-language works237,207→