Efficacy and safety of short‐term edaravone or nerve growth factor add‐on therapy for alcohol‐related brain damage: A multi‐centre randomised control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To measure the therapeutic effect of an anti-oxidant, edaravone (EDV), or neurotrophic treatment with nerve growth factor (NGF) as an add-on treatment for alcohol-related brain damage (ARBD). DESIGN: Multi-centre, randomised, single-blinded, comparative clinical trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and twenty-two inpatients recruited from seven hospitals in different regions of China, all diagnosed with ARBD and aged 18 to 65 years old; among them, only two were female. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of three treatments for 2 weeks: 40 patients, treatment as usual (TAU: a combination of intramuscular injections of thiamine, intravenous infusions of other B vitamins with vitamin C and oral medication with vitamin E per day); 40, EDV add-on treatment to TAU (intravenous infusion with 30 mg of EDV twice per day); and 42, NGF add-on treatment to TAU (intramuscular injection of 20 μg of NGF per day). The patients underwent follow-up for 24 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the composite score of executive cognitive function in the 2nd week after treatment, which was measured as the mean of the Z scores of the assessments, including the digit symbol substitute test (DSST), digit span memory test-forward (DST-F), digit span memory test-reverse (DST-R) and space span memory test (SSMT). The secondary outcomes were the composite scores at later follow-ups, the score for each component of cognitive function, global cognitive function measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), craving for alcohol and the safety of the therapies. FINDINGS: EDV add-on treatment improved the composite score of executive cognitive function better than TAU in the 2nd week (adjusted mean difference: 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.41; P = 0.008), but NGF add-on treatment did not (adjusted mean difference: 0.07, 95% confidence interval -0.09 to 0.24; P = 0.502). During the follow-up to 24 weeks, EDV add-on treatment improved the composite score of executive cognitive function and DST-R score better than TAU (both P < 0.01). Craving for alcohol was relieved in all three groups. No severe adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: The short-term addition of edaravone to supplementary therapy treatment for alcohol-related brain damage (ARBD) improved executive cognitive function in patients with ARBD.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".