MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405632588 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.124.049246

Dual Antiplatelet Treatment up to 72 Hours After Ischemic Stroke Stratified by Risk Profile: A Post Hoc Analysis

2024· article· en· W4405632588 on OpenAlexaff
Yanli Zhang, Xuan Wang, Ying Gao, Weiqi Chen, S. Claiborne Johnston, Pierre Amarenco, Philip M. Bath, Hongyi Yan, Tingting Wang, Yingying Yang, Qi Zhou, Mengxing Wang, Jing Jing, Chunjuan Wang, Yongjun Wang, Yilong Wang, Yuesong Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersCapital Medical UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineAspirinClopidogrelInternal medicineInterquartile rangeHazard ratioStroke (engine)Post-hoc analysisCardiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Risk profile of recurrence may influence the effect of antiplatelet therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel-aspirin initiated within 72 hours after symptom onset for acute mild stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack stratified by risk profile. METHODS: This is a secondary post hoc analysis of the INSPIRES (Intensive Statin and Antiplatelet Therapy for Acute High-risk Intracranial or Extracranial Atherosclerosis) randomized clinical trial that enrolled patients 35 to 80 years old with acute mild ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack between 2018 and 2022. Patients were stratified into different groups based on the Essen Stroke Risk Score (ESRS) and modified ESRS. The primary efficacy outcome was any new stroke within 90 days. The primary safety outcome was moderate-to-severe bleeding within 90 days. RESULTS: Among 6100 patients (3050 each in the clopidogrel-aspirin group and aspirin group), the median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 57–71 years), and 3915 (64.2%) were male. Clopidogrel-aspirin was associated with a reduced risk of new stroke in patients with an ESRS of <3 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.52–0.86]), but not in those with an ESRS of ≥3 (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.72–1.18]), compared with aspirin ( P interaction =0.07). Similar results were found in patients stratified by modified ESRS (modified ESRS <6 in male and <5 in female: HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.55–0.83]; modified ESRS ≥6 in male and ≥5 in female: HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.82–1.59]; P interaction =0.01). The association between antiplatelet therapy and the moderate-to-severe bleeding did not differ across risk profile subgroups (ESRS of <3: HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.54–3.35]; ESRS of ≥3: HR, 3.21 [95% CI, 1.18–8.78]; P interaction =0.21; modified ESRS of <6 in male and <5 in female: HR, 1.96 [95% CI, 0.88–4.36]; modified ESRS of ≥6 in male and ≥5 in female: HR, 2.27 [95% CI, 0.70–7.39]; P interaction =0.85). CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis of the INSPIRES trial showed that patients with a low level of risk profile assessed by ESRS received greater benefit from clopidogrel-aspirin initiated within 72 hours after symptom onset than aspirin alone. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03635749.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.010
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207