A237 IntraCranial atherosclerosis related large-vessel occlusion treated with urgent stenting – a pragmatic, international, multicentre, randomized trial (ICARUS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Whether rescue stenting (RS) of failed reperfusion after endovascular therapy (EVT) due to intracranial atherosclerosis disease (ICAD) in acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusions (LVO) is beneficial remains a matter of debate. As these patients suffer from substantial morbidity and mortality, randomized-controlled evidence is warranted. Aim of Study The primary objective is to determine whether patients experiencing an AIS due to an ICAD related LVO and failed reperfusion after up to 3 EVT passes have superior functional outcome (measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days) when treated with RS compared to patients treated with EVT alone. Secondary objectives are to study causes of mortality, dependency, cognitive function, and quality of life. Method The trial is conducted at over 50 academic tertiary care centres in Europe to evaluate RS in patients with LVO and failed reperfusion due to ICAD. Up to four hundred ninety-eight LVO patients with failed reperfusion due to ICAD will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo RS or continuation of EVT. Outcomes will be evaluated at 24 hours, discharge, 90 days and 365 days after the stroke. Main safety outcome will be symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results ICARUS started recruitment in March 2025 and until now 1 patient has been recruited. We estimate to finish recruitment by March 2028. Conclusion ICARUS will provide evidence for the effects of RS in LVO stroke patients with failed reperfusion due to ICAD. ClinicalTrials gov Identifier:NCT06472336 Current trial status (14 April 2025): 1/498 patients randomised Conflict of Interest No
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".