Minocycline in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Minocycline is under investigation as a neurovascular protective agent for stroke. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetic, anti-inflammatory, and safety profile of minocycline after intracerebral hemorrhage. METHODS: This study was a single-site, randomized controlled trial of minocycline conducted from 2013 to 2016. Adults ≥18 years with primary intracerebral hemorrhage who could have study drug administered within 24 hours of onset were included. Patients received 400 mg of intravenous minocycline, followed by 400 mg minocycline oral daily for 4 days. Serum concentrations of minocycline after the last oral dose and biomarkers were sampled to determine the peak concentration, half-life, and anti-inflammatory profile. RESULTS: was estimated to be at least 6 hours in this cohort. The elimination half-life (available on 7 patients) was 17.5 hours (SD±3.5). No differences were observed in inflammatory biomarkers, hematoma volume, or perihematomal edema. Concentrations remained at neuroprotective levels (>3 mg/L) throughout the dosing interval in 5 of 7 patients. CONCLUSIONS: In intracerebral hemorrhage, a 400 mg dose of minocycline was safe and achieved neuroprotective serum concentrations. However, oral administration led to delayed absorption in these critically ill patients and should not be used when rapid, high concentrations are desired. Given the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of minocycline in intracerebral hemorrhage and promising data in the treatment of ischemic stroke, intravenous minocycline is an excellent candidate for a prehospital treatment trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01805895.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".