MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4319006515 · doi:10.1161/str.54.suppl_1.wp126

Abstract WP126: Predictors Of Intracranial Hemorrhage Volume Expansion In Patients Receiving Factor Xa Inhibitors In The Annexa-4 Trial

2023· article· en· W4319006515 on OpenAlexaff
Mauricio Concha, Lizhen Hu, MacKenzie Horn, Tomoyuki Ohara, Juliet Nakamya, Jan Beyer, Askan Shoamanesh, Alexander T. Cohen, Per Ladenvall, Stuart J. Connolly, Andrew M. Demchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHematomaRivaroxabanLogistic regressionGlasgow Coma ScaleInternal medicineApixabanStroke (engine)Intracerebral hemorrhageAnesthesiaSurgeryAtrial fibrillationWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Andexanet, a specific reversal agent for FXa inhibitors, showed an effective hemostasis in 82% of patients with major bleeding in the ANNEXA-4 trial. However, little is known about the predictors associated with hematoma expansion in patients with FXa inhibitor-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICrH) receiving andexanet. Methods: ANNEXA-4 was a prospective, single-arm, open-label study of andexanet in patients with acute major bleeding within 18h after taking a FXa inhibitor. Hematoma volumes at baseline and 12h after andexanet treatment were measured utilizing a computerized-assisted volumetric method. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of baseline clinical and non-clinical parameters were performed to identify factors predictive of different volumes of hematoma expansion. Results: A total of 305 patients with both baseline and follow-up imaging were included (mean age 80 years; 60.2% with intracerebral hemorrhage; 55.4% taking apixaban; 32.5% taking rivaroxaban). Overall median baseline hematoma volume was 10.4 mls (IQR 2.7-28.1) and time from symptom onset to baseline CT was 3.3h (1.5-6.8). Mean baseline anti-FXa activity levels were 148 ng/mL (SD 107.5). In follow up scans, 48 cases (15.7%) showed evidence of ICrH expansion ≥6 mls. Utilizing a four category ICrH Expansion Scale as the dependent variable, ordinal logistic regression identified Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.97), baseline ICrH volume (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.04) and time from symptom onset to CT (OR 0.73 (0.53-0.99) as significant predictors of ICrH expansion. Baseline anti-FXA activity (OR 1.54; 95% CI 0.95-2.51; p value 0.08) and multiple compartment ICrH (OR 2.32; 95% CI 0.98-5.51; p value 0.06) showed trend as predictors of ICrH expansion. ICrH expansion dichotomized by ≥6 mls or <6 mls as dependent variable, identified similar predictors of ICrH expansion. Conclusions: Shorter time from onset of symptoms to CT, lower GCS score and larger hematoma volumes at presentation increased the probability of ICrH expansion in FXa-associated ICrH treated with andexanet. These findings can inform the eligibility criteria of clinical trials targeting hemostatic efficacy in patients with FXa-associated ICrH.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→