Expanding the Treatable Imaging Profile in Patients With Large Ischemic Stroke: Subanalysis From a Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the boundary of the ischemic core volume in patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) versus those receiving medical management to determine the minimum optimal size for favorable treatment outcomes. METHODS: This is a prespecified substudy of the RESCUE-Japan LIMIT (Recovery by Endovascular Salvage for Cerebral Ultra-Acute Embolism-Japan Large Ischemic Core Trial). Patients with large vessel occlusion were enrolled between November 2018 and September 2021 with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of at least 6 on admission and an Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score value of 3 to 5. We investigated the correlation between optimal quantified ischemic core volume, assessed solely using magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging, and functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score, 0–3) at 90 days by predictive marginal plots. Final infarct volume and safety outcomes (symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and mortality) were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 203 cases, 168 patients (85 in the EVT group versus 83 in the medical management group) were included. The median (interquartile range) core volume was 94 (65–160) mL in patients with EVT and 115 (71–141) mL in the medical management group ( P =0.72). The predictive marginal probabilities of the 2 groups intersected at 128 mL for estimating functional outcomes. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and mortality within 90 days had overlay margins through all core volumes in both groups. The median final infarct volume (interquartile range) was smaller in the EVT group (142 [80–223] mL versus 211 [123–289] mL in the medical management group; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this prespecified analysis of a randomized clinical trial involving patients with large ischemic strokes, patients with an estimated core volume of up to 128 mL on diffusion-weighted imaging benefit from EVT. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03702413.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".