Safety and efficacy of nerinetide in patients with acute ischaemic stroke enrolled in the early window: a post-hoc meta-analysis of individual patient data from three randomised trials

Michael Tymianski, Michael D Hill, Mayank Goyal, Jim Christenson, Bijoy K Menon, Richard H Swartz, Corey Adams, Kathy Heard, Yatika Kohli
{"title":"Safety and efficacy of nerinetide in patients with acute ischaemic stroke enrolled in the early window: a post-hoc meta-analysis of individual patient data from three randomised trials","authors":"Michael Tymianski, Michael D Hill, Mayank Goyal, Jim Christenson, Bijoy K Menon, Richard H Swartz, Corey Adams, Kathy Heard, Yatika Kohli","doi":"10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00515-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background</h3>In three neuroprotection trials of nerinetide for acute ischaemic stroke, inconclusive results have been reported with respect to the prespecified primary outcome. However, none of the trials faithfully replicated the inclusion criteria of the animal studies that provided the rationale for the clinical trials—ie, treatment within 3 h of stroke onset and selected for reperfusion without previous thrombolysis. We aimed to investigate whether a clinical benefit of nerinetide might be seen in the subgroup of patients enrolled in these three clinical trials who met the criteria used in the animal studies.<h3>Methods</h3>In this post-hoc individual patient data meta-analysis, we pooled data from the ESCAPE-NA1, ESCAPE-NEXT, and FRONTIER trials, which were done at 135 stroke centres in 13 countries (Canada, Australia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA). We included all participants who were enrolled within 3 h of acute ischaemic stroke onset, treated with study drug (nerinetide or placebo; randomised 1:1), and selected for reperfusion with thrombolysis, endovascular thrombectomy, or both. The primary endpoint was the number of responders at day 90, which was defined as people with a favourable outcome as per the primary endpoint prespecified in their respective trial. The primary endpoint was analysed by logistic regression, adjusted for age, stroke severity, and trial.<h3>Findings</h3>Between March 26, 2015, and Jan 31, 2023, 2487 participants were enrolled in the three trials, of whom 690 met criteria for this pooled analysis (389 participants in the nerinetide group and 301 participants in the placebo group). 364 (53%) of 690 participants were men and 326 (47%) were women. The median age of participants was 76 years (IQR 66–83) and median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 17 (11–21). 216 (56%) of 389 participants were responders at day 90 in the nerinetide group compared with 144 (48%) of 301 in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·48, 95% CI 1·07–2·06; p=0·017). 62 (16%) of 389 people in the nerinetide group died compared with 55 (18%) of 301 people in the placebo group (aOR 0·81, 95% CI 0·53–1·24; p=0·34). No safety concerns were identified in either group.<h3>Interpretation</h3>Nerinetide showed a clinically significant benefit over several outcome measures, including the modified Rankin Scale score, the incidence of stroke worsening, and infarction volumes. Neuroprotection with nerinetide might, therefore, be indicated for patients within 3 h of stroke onset and who are selected for reperfusion. These inclusion criteria should be tested in a future trial.<h3>Funding</h3>None.","PeriodicalId":22676,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet Neurology","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00515-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

In three neuroprotection trials of nerinetide for acute ischaemic stroke, inconclusive results have been reported with respect to the prespecified primary outcome. However, none of the trials faithfully replicated the inclusion criteria of the animal studies that provided the rationale for the clinical trials—ie, treatment within 3 h of stroke onset and selected for reperfusion without previous thrombolysis. We aimed to investigate whether a clinical benefit of nerinetide might be seen in the subgroup of patients enrolled in these three clinical trials who met the criteria used in the animal studies.

Methods

In this post-hoc individual patient data meta-analysis, we pooled data from the ESCAPE-NA1, ESCAPE-NEXT, and FRONTIER trials, which were done at 135 stroke centres in 13 countries (Canada, Australia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA). We included all participants who were enrolled within 3 h of acute ischaemic stroke onset, treated with study drug (nerinetide or placebo; randomised 1:1), and selected for reperfusion with thrombolysis, endovascular thrombectomy, or both. The primary endpoint was the number of responders at day 90, which was defined as people with a favourable outcome as per the primary endpoint prespecified in their respective trial. The primary endpoint was analysed by logistic regression, adjusted for age, stroke severity, and trial.

Findings

Between March 26, 2015, and Jan 31, 2023, 2487 participants were enrolled in the three trials, of whom 690 met criteria for this pooled analysis (389 participants in the nerinetide group and 301 participants in the placebo group). 364 (53%) of 690 participants were men and 326 (47%) were women. The median age of participants was 76 years (IQR 66–83) and median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 17 (11–21). 216 (56%) of 389 participants were responders at day 90 in the nerinetide group compared with 144 (48%) of 301 in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·48, 95% CI 1·07–2·06; p=0·017). 62 (16%) of 389 people in the nerinetide group died compared with 55 (18%) of 301 people in the placebo group (aOR 0·81, 95% CI 0·53–1·24; p=0·34). No safety concerns were identified in either group.

Interpretation

Nerinetide showed a clinically significant benefit over several outcome measures, including the modified Rankin Scale score, the incidence of stroke worsening, and infarction volumes. Neuroprotection with nerinetide might, therefore, be indicated for patients within 3 h of stroke onset and who are selected for reperfusion. These inclusion criteria should be tested in a future trial.

Funding

None.
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
早期窗口期入组的急性缺血性脑卒中患者服用奈瑞奈肽的安全性和疗效:对三项随机试验中单个患者数据的事后荟萃分析
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Tom Solomon: world records, academic leadership, and emerging infections Amyloid-related iatrogenic atrophy of the brain: data transparency is an urgent safety priority Encephalitis: a growing global threat Maria Trojano: advocate for real-world multiple sclerosis studies For brain health, one drink a day is not better than none
×
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