Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37662339›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023

Harsh Parikh, Haoqi Sun, Rajesh Amerineni, Eric S Rosenthal, Alexander Volfovsky, Cynthia Rudin, M Brandon Westover, Sahar F Zafar

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Harsh ParikhBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Neurology.
Haoqi SunBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Neurology.
Rajesh AmerineniMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Neurology.
Eric S RosenthalMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Neurology.
Alexander VolfovskyDuke University, Department of Computer Science.
Cynthia RudinDuke University, Department of Computer Science.
M Brandon WestoverBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Neurology.
Sahar F ZafarMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Neurology.

Funding

Multimodal Network Connectivity Architecture (MOCA) of the Brain and its Role in the Recovery of Consciousness in Comatose Cardiac Arrest PatientsR01NS102574 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI GREER, DAVID MATTHEW, WU, ONA · 2018 to 2022
$3.4M
Investigation of Sleep in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU-SLEEP)R01NS102190 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI WESTOVER, MICHAEL BRANDON · 2018 to 2022
$3.2M
Big Data and Deep Learning for the Interictal-Ictal-Injury ContiuumR01NS107291 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI WESTOVER, MICHAEL BRANDON · 2018 to 2022
$2.8M
Optimizing anti-epileptic drug treatment in acute brain injuryK23NS114201 · NINDS · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI ZAFAR, SAHAR F · 2019 to 2023
$1.0M
NINDS NIH HHS K23 NS114201NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS102190NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS102574NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS107291
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Epileptiform activity (EA) worsens outcomes in patients with acute brain injuries (e.g., aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage [aSAH]). Randomized trials (RCTs) assessing anti-seizure interventions are needed. Due to scant drug efficacy data and ethical reservations with placebo utilization, RCTs are lacking or hindered by design constraints. We used a pharmacological model-guided simulator to design and determine feasibility of RCTs evaluating EA treatment. Methods: In a single-center cohort of adults (age >18) with aSAH and EA, we employed a mechanistic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic framework to model treatment response using observational data. We subsequently simulated RCTs for levetiracetam and propofol, each with three treatment arms mirroring clinical practice and an additional placebo arm. Using our framework we simulated EA trajectories across treatment arms. We predicted discharge modified Rankin Scale as a function of baseline covariates, EA burden, and drug doses using a double machine learning model learned from observational data. Differences in outcomes across arms were used to estimate the required sample size. Results: Sample sizes ranged from 500 for levetiracetam 7 mg/kg vs placebo, to >4000 for levetiracetam 15 vs. 7 mg/kg to achieve 80% power (5% type I error). For propofol 1mg/kg/hr vs. placebo 1200 participants were needed. Simulations comparing propofol at varying doses did not reach 80% power even at samples >1200. Interpretation: Our simulations using drug efficacy show sample sizes are infeasible, even for potentially unethical placebo-control trials. We highlight the strength of simulations with observational data to inform the null hypotheses and assess feasibility of future trials of EA treatment.

Identifiers

PMID37662339
PMCPMC10473786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.