MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235709477 · doi:10.1161/str.32.suppl_1.323-c

Neuroprotection in Acute Ischaemic Stroke

2001· article· en· W4235709477 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Ladurner

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuroprotectionPlaceboCerebrolysinStroke (engine)Internal medicineModified Rankin ScaleNeurologyClinical trialAnesthesiaIschemiaIschemic stroke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

41 Aim: This multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of an adjuvant administration of Cerebrolysin ® (CERE) in patients suffering from acute ischaemic stroke. Methods: Patients with a first acute ischaemic stroke of the middle cerebral artery were randomised to IV therapy either with placebo (n=68) or with CERE 50ml/day (n=78), for 21 days. Both groups were treated also with acetylsalicylic acid 250mg/day PO and pentoxifylline 300mg/day IV. Treatment was initiated within 24h (mean 12.9±8.1h) after onset of first symptoms. Patients were investigated on treatment days 1, 3, 7, 21 and a follow-up investigation was carried out 3 months after start of treatment. Clinical outcome was recorded on the Canadian Neurological Scale (CNS), Barthel Index (BI) and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI). CERE is a peptide preparation with proven neuroprotective (calpain and caspase inhibitor) and neurotrophic action, produced by a standardised enzymatic breakdown of lipid-free brain proteins. Results: Patients in the CERE group showed a significant improvement in motor functions (CNS, section A1) at the end of therapy (t-test p<0.05) when compared to the placebo group. CERE patients treated within 6 hours after onset of stroke showed a significant improvement in the CGI in the acute treatment phase (t-test p<0.05; CERE n=16, placebo n=14). In the subgroup of patients with a right-sided stroke, CERE patients had a significantly better performance in the BI than placebo patients (Mantel-Haenszel test p<0.001). CERE and placebo were well tolerated and safe. Three patients died in the placebo group, and 2 patients in the CERE group. Conclusion: CERE seems to be an effective adjuvant treatment for acute ischaemic stroke. Motor functions were significantly better, and subgroup evaluation showed that early CERE treatment was related to improved clinical outcome. Adjuvant CERE demonstrated a fast onset of action and offered the possibility for an accelerated rehabilitation probably due to its neuroprotective effect. Large clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207