Intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase for minor ischaemic stroke: a secondary analysis of the AcT randomised clinical trial.

IF 2.6 1区 医学 Journal of Investigative Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-31 DOI:10.1136/svn-2023-002828
Radhika Nair, Nishita Singh, Mahesh Kate, Negar Asdaghi, Robert Sarmiento, Fouzi Bala, Shelagh B Coutts, MacKenzie Horn, Alexandre Y Poppe, Heather Williams, Ayoola Ademola, Ibrahim Alhabli, Faysal Benali, Houman Khosravani, Gary Hunter, Aleksander Tkach, Herbert Alejandro Manosalva Alzate, Aleksandra Pikula, Thalia Field, Anurag Trivedi, Dar Dowlatshahi, Luciana Catanese, Ashfaq Shuaib, Andrew Demchuk, Tolulope Sajobi, Mohammed A Almekhlafi, Richard H Swartz, Bijoy Menon, Brian H Buck
{"title":"Intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase for minor ischaemic stroke: a secondary analysis of the AcT randomised clinical trial.","authors":"Radhika Nair, Nishita Singh, Mahesh Kate, Negar Asdaghi, Robert Sarmiento, Fouzi Bala, Shelagh B Coutts, MacKenzie Horn, Alexandre Y Poppe, Heather Williams, Ayoola Ademola, Ibrahim Alhabli, Faysal Benali, Houman Khosravani, Gary Hunter, Aleksander Tkach, Herbert Alejandro Manosalva Alzate, Aleksandra Pikula, Thalia Field, Anurag Trivedi, Dar Dowlatshahi, Luciana Catanese, Ashfaq Shuaib, Andrew Demchuk, Tolulope Sajobi, Mohammed A Almekhlafi, Richard H Swartz, Bijoy Menon, Brian H Buck","doi":"10.1136/svn-2023-002828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In ischaemic stroke, minor deficits (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) ≤5) at presentation are common but often progress, leaving patients with significant disability. We compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase versus alteplase in patients who had a minor stroke enrolled in the Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke (AcT) trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The AcT trial included individuals with ischaemic stroke, aged >18 years, who were eligible for standard-of-care intravenous thrombolysis. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to intravenous tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) or alteplase (0.9 mg/kg). Patients with minor deficits pre-thrombolysis were included in this post-hoc exploratory analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients with a modified Rankin Score (mRS) of 0-1 at 90-120 days. Safety outcomes included mortality and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 378 patients enrolled in AcT with an NIHSS of ≤5, the median age was 71 years, 39.7% were women; 194 (51.3%) received tenecteplase and 184 (48.7%) alteplase. The primary outcome (mRS score 0-1) occurred in 100 participants (51.8%) in the tenecteplase group and 86 (47.5 %) in the alteplase group (adjusted risk ratio (RR) 1.14 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.40)). There were no significant differences in the rates of sICH (2.9% in tenecteplase vs 3.3% in alteplase group, unadjusted RR 0.79 (0.24 to 2.54)) and death within 90 days (5.5% in tenecteplase vs 11% in alteplase group, adjusted HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.02)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this post-hoc analysis of patients with minor stroke enrolled in the AcT trial, safety and efficacy outcomes with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg were not different from alteplase 0.9 mg/kg.</p>","PeriodicalId":48733,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2023-002828","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In ischaemic stroke, minor deficits (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) ≤5) at presentation are common but often progress, leaving patients with significant disability. We compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase versus alteplase in patients who had a minor stroke enrolled in the Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke (AcT) trial.

Methods: The AcT trial included individuals with ischaemic stroke, aged >18 years, who were eligible for standard-of-care intravenous thrombolysis. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to intravenous tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) or alteplase (0.9 mg/kg). Patients with minor deficits pre-thrombolysis were included in this post-hoc exploratory analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients with a modified Rankin Score (mRS) of 0-1 at 90-120 days. Safety outcomes included mortality and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH).

Results: Of the 378 patients enrolled in AcT with an NIHSS of ≤5, the median age was 71 years, 39.7% were women; 194 (51.3%) received tenecteplase and 184 (48.7%) alteplase. The primary outcome (mRS score 0-1) occurred in 100 participants (51.8%) in the tenecteplase group and 86 (47.5 %) in the alteplase group (adjusted risk ratio (RR) 1.14 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.40)). There were no significant differences in the rates of sICH (2.9% in tenecteplase vs 3.3% in alteplase group, unadjusted RR 0.79 (0.24 to 2.54)) and death within 90 days (5.5% in tenecteplase vs 11% in alteplase group, adjusted HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.02)).

Conclusion: In this post-hoc analysis of patients with minor stroke enrolled in the AcT trial, safety and efficacy outcomes with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg were not different from alteplase 0.9 mg/kg.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
静脉注射替奈普酶与阿替普酶治疗轻微缺血性中风的比较:AcT 随机临床试验的二次分析。
背景:缺血性脑卒中患者在发病时出现轻微功能障碍(美国国立卫生研究院脑卒中量表(NIHSS)≤5)很常见,但病情往往会发展,导致患者严重残疾。我们对参加急性缺血性卒中患者阿替普酶与替尼肽酶(AcT)试验的轻微卒中患者进行了替尼肽酶静脉溶栓与阿替普酶静脉溶栓的疗效和安全性比较:AcT试验包括年龄大于18岁、符合标准静脉溶栓治疗条件的缺血性脑卒中患者。参与者按 1:1 随机分配到静脉注射替奈普酶(0.25 毫克/千克)或阿替普酶(0.9 毫克/千克)。溶栓前有轻微功能障碍的患者也被纳入了这项事后探索性分析。主要疗效指标是90-120天时改良Rankin评分(mRS)为0-1的患者比例。安全性结果包括死亡率和症状性颅内出血(sICH):在378名NIHSS≤5的AcT患者中,中位年龄为71岁,39.7%为女性;194人(51.3%)接受了替奈普酶治疗,184人(48.7%)接受了阿替普酶治疗。tenecteplase组有100人(51.8%)出现主要结果(mRS评分0-1),阿替普酶组有86人(47.5%)出现主要结果(调整后风险比(RR)1.14(95% CI 0.92-1.40))。sICH发生率(替奈替普酶组2.9%对阿替普酶组3.3%,未调整RR为0.79(0.24至2.54))和90天内死亡率(替奈替普酶组5.5%对阿替普酶组11%,调整HR为0.99(95% CI 0.96至1.02))无明显差异:结论:在这项对参加 AcT 试验的轻微脑卒中患者进行的事后分析中,替奈普酶 0.25 mg/kg 与阿替普酶 0.9 mg/kg 的安全性和有效性结果没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Investigative Medicine
Journal of Investigative Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNALMEDICINE, RESE-MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Journal of Investigative Medicine (JIM) is the official publication of the American Federation for Medical Research. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes high-quality original articles and reviews in the areas of basic, clinical, and translational medical research. JIM publishes on all topics and specialty areas that are critical to the conduct of the entire spectrum of biomedical research: from the translation of clinical observations at the bedside, to basic and animal research to clinical research and the implementation of innovative medical care.
期刊最新文献
Association between Life's Essential 8 and Cerebral Small Vessel Disease. Treatment practice of vasospasm during endovascular thrombectomy: an international survey. Low-intensity focused ultrasound stimulation promotes stroke recovery via astrocytic HMGB1 and CAMK2N1 in mice. Real-world analysis of two ischaemic stroke and TIA systolic blood pressure goals on 12-month mortality and recurrent vascular events. Safety and efficacy of glibenclamide on cerebral oedema following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1