Aspirin Responsiveness at a Dose of 80 mg and Its Impact on Birth Weight when Used in Twin Pregnancies: The GAP Pilot Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Daily aspirin, started in the first trimester of pregnancy, is commonly used for the prevention of preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction in multiple gestation. However, the optimal dose remains controversial and the evidence for the use of aspirin in multiple pregnancies is scarce. We aimed to estimate the impact of 80 mg of aspirin in twin pregnancies. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a pilot double-blind randomized trial of women with twin pregnancies recruited between 8 and 14 weeks of gestation. Fifty participants (25 in each group) were randomized to 80 mg of aspirin daily at bedtime or a placebo from randomization until 36 weeks of gestation. Primary and secondary outcomes included the birth weight of live infants, preeclampsia, and aspirin responsiveness evaluated by a platelet aggregation test (platelet function assay [PFA]-100). RESULTS: = 0.49). Most importantly,16 of 24 participants who received aspirin (67%; 95% CI: 45-84%) had a normal PFA-100 test at 22 to 23 weeks, including the two cases of preeclampsia, suggesting that the majority of the participants were nonresponsive to 80 mg of aspirin. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the majority of women with twin pregnancies showed a lack of response to a daily dose of 80 mg of aspirin according to the PFA-100 test, compared with the expected 29% of nonresponsiveness in singleton pregnancies. A daily dose of 80 mg of aspirin is likely to be insufficient for the prevention of preeclampsia and other placenta-mediated complications in twin pregnancies. KEY POINTS: · Most women with twin pregnancies are nonresponsive to a daily dose of 80-mg aspirin.. · An 80 mg aspirin dose is insufficient to prevent placenta-mediated complications in twin pregnancies.. · Randomized trials using 100 to 160 mg of aspirin in twin pregnancies are needed..
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".