Hematoma Expansion and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Factor-Xa Inhibitor–Related Atraumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage Treated Within the ANNEXA-4 Trial Versus Real-World Usual Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It is unestablished whether andexanet alfa, compared with guideline-based usual care including prothrombin complex concentrates, is associated with reduced hematoma expansion (HE) and mortality in patients with factor-Xa inhibitor-related intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We compared the occurrence of HE and clinical outcomes in patients treated either with andexanet alfa or with usual care during the acute phase of factor-Xa inhibitor-related ICH. METHODS: Data were extracted from the multicenter, prospective, single-arm ANNEXA-4 trial (Andexanet Alfa, a Novel Antidote to the Anticoagulation Effects of Factor Xa Inhibitors) and a multicenter observational cohort study, RETRACE-II (German-Wide Multicenter Analysis of Oral Anticoagulant-Associated Intracerebral Hemorrhage - Part Two). HE was based on computed tomography scans performed within 36 hours from baseline imaging. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was performed to adjust for baseline comorbidities and ICH severity. Patients presenting with atraumatic ICH while receiving apixaban or rivaroxaban within 18 hours of admission were included. Patients with secondary ICH or not fulfilling the inclusion criteria for the ANNEXA-4 trial were excluded. We compared ANNEXA-4 patients, who received andexanet alfa for hemostatic treatment, with RETRACE-II patients who were treated with usual care, primarily administration of prothrombin complex concentrates. Primary outcome was rate of HE defined as relative increase of ≥35%. Secondary outcomes comprised mean absolute change in hematoma volume, as well as in-hospital mortality and functional outcome. RESULTS: =0.005), with a reduction in mean overall hematoma volume change of 7 mL. There were no statistically significant differences among in-hospital mortality or functional outcomes. Sensitivity analysis including only usual care patients receiving prothrombin complex concentrates demonstrated consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with usual care, andexanet alfa was associated with a lower rate of HE in atraumatic factor-Xa inhibitor-related ICH, however, without translating into significantly improved clinical outcomes. A comparative trial is needed to confirm the benefit on limiting HE and to explore clinical outcomes across patient subgroups and by time to treatment. Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02329327 and NCT03093233.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".