MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949022656 · doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.04.054

Early blood-brain barrier dysfunction predicts neurological outcome following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

2019· article· en· W2949022656 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Svetlana Lublinsky, Sebastian Major, Vasilis Kola, Viktor Horst, Edgar Santos, Johannes Platz, Oliver Sakowitz, Michael Scheel, Christian Dohmen, Rudolf Graf, Hartmut Vatter, Stefan Wolf, Peter Vajkoczy, Ilan Shelef, Johannes Woitzik, Peter Martus, Jens P. Dreier, Alon Friedman

Bibliographic record

VenueEBioMedicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCenter for Stroke Research BerlinIsrael Science FoundationBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean Commission
KeywordsSubarachnoid hemorrhageMedicineBlood–brain barrierDiseasePathologyInternal medicineCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Disease progression and delayed neurological complications are common after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). We explored the potential of quantitative blood-brain barrier (BBB) imaging to predict disease progression and neurological outcome. METHODS: Data were collected as part of the Co-Operative Studies of Brain Injury Depolarizations (COSBID). We analyzed retrospectively, blinded and semi-automatically magnetic resonance images from 124 aSAH patients scanned at 4 time points (24-48 h, 6-8 days, 12-15 days and 6-12 months) after the initial hemorrhage. Volume of brain with apparent pathology and/or BBB dysfunction (BBBD), subarachnoid space and lateral ventricles were measured. Neurological status on admission was assessed using the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies and Rosen-Macdonald scores. Outcome at ≥6 months was assessed using the extended Glasgow outcome scale and disease course (progressive or non-progressive based on imaging-detected loss of normal brain tissue in consecutive scans). Logistic regression was used to define biomarkers that best predict outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to assess accuracy of outcome prediction models. FINDINGS: In the present cohort, 63% of patients had progressive and 37% non-progressive disease course. Progressive course was associated with worse outcome at ≥6 months (sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 97%). Brain volume with BBBD was significantly larger in patients with progressive course already 24-48 h after admission (2.23 (1.23-3.17) folds, median with 95%CI), and persisted at all time points. The highest probability of a BBB-disrupted voxel to become pathological was found at a distance of ≤1 cm from the brain with apparent pathology (0·284 (0·122-0·594), p < 0·001, median with 95%CI). A multivariate logistic regression model revealed power for BBBD in combination with RMS at 24-48 h in predicting outcome (ROC area under the curve = 0·829, p < 0·001). INTERPRETATION: We suggest that early identification of BBBD may serve as a key predictive biomarker for neurological outcome in aSAH. FUND: Dr. Dreier was supported by grants from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (DFG DR 323/5-1 and DFG DR 323/10-1), the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) Center for Stroke Research Berlin 01 EO 0801 and FP7 no 602150 CENTER-TBI. Dr. Friedman was supported by grants from Israel Science Foundation and Canada Institute for Health Research (CIHR). Dr. Friedman was supported by grants from European Union's Seventh Framework Program (FP7/2007-2013; grant #602102).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations80
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEBioMedicineSame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207