MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320928737 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101849

Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cerebral ischaemia in thrombolysed patients: insights from the ENCHANTED trial

2023· article· en· W4320928737 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Chen, Menglu Ouyang, Sheila Ong, Luyun Zhang, Guobin Zhang, Candice Delcourt, Grant Mair, Leibo Liu, Laurent Billot, Qiang Li, Xiaoying Chen, Mark Parsons, Joseph P. Broderick, Andrew M. Demchuk, Philip M. Bath, Geoffrey A. Donnan, Christopher Levi, John Chalmers, Richard I. Lindley, Sheila Cristina Ouriques Martins, Octávio Marques Pontes‐Neto, Paula Muñoz Venturelli, Verónica V. Olavarría, Pablo M. Lavados, Thompson Robinson, Joanna M. Wardlaw, Gang Li, Xia Wang, Lili Song, Craig S. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloMedical Research CouncilEuropean Stroke OrganisationNSW Ministry of HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNovo NordiskServierUK Dementia Research InstitutePfizerDaiichi Sankyo EuropeStroke AssociationConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoAlzheimer's SocietyTakeda Pharmaceutical Company
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureThrombolysisStroke (engine)ConfoundingCardiologyCerebral infarctionInternal medicineIschemiaAnesthesiaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Intensive blood pressure lowering may adversely affect evolving cerebral ischaemia. We aimed to determine whether intensive blood pressure lowering altered the size of cerebral infarction in the 2196 patients who participated in the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study, an international randomised controlled trial of intensive (systolic target 130-140 mm Hg within 1 h; maintained for 72 h) or guideline-recommended (systolic target <180 mm Hg) blood pressure management in patients with hypertension (systolic blood pressure >150 mm Hg) after thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke between March 3, 2012 and April 30, 2018. Methods: All available brain imaging were analysed centrally by expert readers. Log-linear regression was used to determine the effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on the size of cerebral infarction, with adjustment for potential confounders. The primary analysis pertained to follow-up computerised tomography (CT) scans done between 24 and 36 h. Sensitivity analysis were undertaken in patients with only a follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and either MRI or CT at 24-36 h, and in patients with any brain imaging done at any time during follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01422616. Findings: There were 1477 (67.3%) patients (mean age 67.7 [12.1] y; male 60%, Asian 65%) with available follow-up brain imaging for analysis, including 635 patients with a CT done at 24-36 h. Mean achieved systolic blood pressures over 1-24 h were 141 mm Hg and 149 mm Hg in the intensive group and guideline group, respectively. There was no effect of intensive blood pressure lowering on the median size (ml) of cerebral infarction on follow-up CT at 24-36 h (0.3 [IQR 0.0-16.6] in the intensive group and 0.9 [0.0-12.5] in the guideline group; log Δmean -0.17, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.43). The results were consistent in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Interpretation: Intensive blood pressure lowering treatment to a systolic target <140 mm Hg within several hours after the onset of symptoms may not increase the size of cerebral infarction in patients who receive thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke of mild to moderate neurological severity. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; UK Stroke Association; UK Dementia Research Institute; Ministry of Health and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil; Ministry for Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs of South Korea; Takeda.

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)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207