MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890801676 · doi:10.1177/1747493018798550

Diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth occurs despite recanalization in acute ischemic stroke: Implications for future treatment trials

2018· article· en· W2890801676 on OpenAlexafffund
Rani Gupta Sah, Christopher D. d’Esterre, Michael D. Hill, Moiz Hafeez, Sana Tariq, Nils D. Forkert, Richard Frayne, Andrew M. Demchuk, Mayank Goyal, Philip A. Barber

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersHealth Research BoardHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeThrombolysisStroke (engine)LesionMagnetic resonance imagingCerebral infarctionDiffusion MRIInfarctionEffective diffusion coefficientRadiologyIschemiaInternal medicineSurgeryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A proportion of patients presenting with acute small ischemic strokes have poor functional outcomes, even following rapid recanalization treatment. AIMS: Infarct growth may occur even after successful recanalization and could represent an appropriate endpoint for future stroke therapy trials. METHODS: Magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging lesion volumes were obtained at 5 h (initial posttreatment) and 24 h (follow-up) after acute stroke treatment for n = 33 in ischemic stroke patients. Sample sizes per arm (90% power, 30% effect size) for diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth between initial and 24 h, early change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale between pre- and 24 h, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale at 24 h, and diffusion-weighted imaging lesion volume at 24 h were estimated to power a placebo-controlled stroke therapy trial. RESULTS: For patients with poor recanalization (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction <2 a; modified arterial occlusion lesion = 0-2) (n = 11), the median diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth was 8.1 (interquartile range: 4.5, 22.4) ml and with good recanalization (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction =2 b or 3; modified arterial occlusion lesion = 3) (n = 22), the median diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth was 10.0 (interquartile range: 6.0, 28.2) ml ( P = 0.749). When considering a 30% effect size, the sample size required per arm to achieve significance in an acute stroke study would be: (1) N = 49 for the diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth between initial posttreatment and follow-up time points, (2) N = 65 for the change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale between admission and 24 h, (3) N = 259 for the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale at 24 h, and (4) N = 256 for diffusion-weighted imaging volume at 24 h. CONCLUSION: Despite best efforts to recanalize the ischemic brain, early diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth still occurs. Treatment trials in stroke should consider early diffusion-weighted imaging lesion growth as a surrogate outcome measure to significantly reduce sample sizes.

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)0.107
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1070.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207