TILE pilot trial study protocol: Tinzaparin Lead-in to Prevent the Post-Thrombotic syndrome study protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) is a form of chronic venous insufficiency due to a prior ipsilateral deep venous thrombosis (DVT). This is a frequent complication that develops in 20%-50% of patients after a proximal DVT and is associated with significant healthcare, economic and societal consequences. In the absence of effective and well-tolerated treatment options for established PTS, effective preventative measures are needed. Anticoagulation itself reduces the risk of PTS, and low-molecular-weight heparin may reduce this further through anti-inflammatory properties targeting the initial acute inflammatory phase of DVT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Tinzaparin Lead-In to Prevent the Post-Thrombotic syndrome pilot trial is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label assessor-blinded trial that will randomise patients with first acute symptomatic common femoral or iliac DVT to receive either a 3-week lead-in course of tinzaparin, followed by rivaroxaban (experimental arm) or rivaroxaban alone (control arm). Its primary objectives are to assess: (1) proportion of PTS at 6 months using the Villalta scale and (2) study feasibility, which consists of (a) the proportion of screened patients eligible for the study, (2) the proportion of eligible patients recruited and (c) the proportion of recruited patients adherent to treatment (defined as at least 80% of drug taken). This study will determine the feasibility of a subsequent larger definitive trial. Secondary outcomes include change of quality of life scores, PTS severity, global improvement, patient satisfaction, bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism, leg pain, death and lost to follow-up. Target recruitment will be a total of 60 participants, recruited at 5-6 centres. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Primary ethics approval was received from the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center Research Ethics Board (approval ID 3315). Results of the study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed presentation at scientific conferences and open access publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04794569.
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 | 0.025 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.087 | 0.026 |
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".