ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Effects of intravenous human albumin, enteral cilostazol, and combination therapy on the reduction of delayed cerebral ischemia in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) and cerebral infarction remain major causes of disability and death after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Enteral cilostazol and intravenous (IV) 25% human albumin have each been investigated as candidate therapies targeting potentially overlapping DCI mechanisms. Objective: This article aims to estimate the plausible effects of albumin, cilostazol, and combination therapy on reducing DCI after aSAH using Bayesian prior-predictive simulation and factorial component-effect decomposition. Methods: We defined four treatment classes: control, albumin-only, cilostazol-only, and combination therapy. The primary endpoint was the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Common Data Elements-defined DCI (CDE-d-DCI) on computed tomography on days 10 to 14. A prior-predictive Monte Carlo model used a control DCI-risk prior centered on the Cilostazol Albumin Treatment in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (CATS) protocol-planning value of 31%, a cilostazol prior anchored to randomized-trial meta-analysis estimates, and an albumin prior informed by the Albumin in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (ALISAH) dose-escalation data with wider uncertainty because ALISAH was uncontrolled. No observed CATS outcomes were analyzed. External consistency, control-prior sensitivity, weaker albumin priors, correlated-prior structures, and factorial component effects were evaluated. Results: Under base-case priors, median absolute risk reductions (ARRs) versus control were 9.1 percentage points for albumin (90% simulation interval, -3.3 to 18.1; prior-predictive probability of ARR > 0, 89.8%), 18.1 percentage points for cilostazol (11.0 to 25.4; 99.9%), and 21.7 percentage points for combination therapy (12.4 to 29.9; 99.8%). Although combination therapy had the largest projected reduction versus control, the incremental benefit of adding albumin to cilostazol was small and uncertain (3.5 percentage points; -3.0 to 8.9), and the additive interaction was also uncertain (-5.5 percentage points; -11.9 to 2.8). Illustrative two-group sample sizes were 343, 76, and 49 participants per group for albumin, cilostazol, and combination therapy, respectively, versus control. Conclusion: These simulations provide planning-level projections and do not establish efficacy. The findings support continued randomized evaluation of cilostazol and albumin, with concurrent single-agent, combination, and control arms to estimate component effects and interaction effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.