HERMES-24 Score Derivation and Validation for Simple and Robust Outcome Prediction After Large Vessel Occlusion Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians need simple and highly predictive prognostic scores to assist practical decision-making. We aimed to develop a simple outcome prediction score applied 24 hours after anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke treatment with endovascular thrombectomy and validate it in patients treated both with and without endovascular thrombectomy. METHODS: Using the HERMES (Highly Effective Reperfusion Evaluated in Multiple Endovascular Stroke Trials) collaboration data set (n=1764), patients in the endovascular thrombectomy arm were divided randomly into a derivation cohort (n=430) and a validation cohort (n=441). From a set of candidate predictors, logistic regression modeling using forward variable selection was used to select a model that was both parsimonious and highly predictive for modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤2 at 90 days. The score was validated in validation cohort, control arm (n=893), and external validation cohorts from the ESCAPE-NA1 (Efficacy and Safety of Nerinetide for the Treatment of Acute Ischaemic Stroke; n=1066) and INTERRSeCT (Identifying New Approaches to Optimize Thrombus Characterization for Predicting Early Recanalization and Reperfusion With IV Alteplase and Other Treatments Using Serial CT Angiography; n=614). RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, we selected 2 significant predictors of mRS ≤2 (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score at 24 hours and age [ß-coefficient, 0.34 and 0.06]) and derived the HERMES-24 score: age (years)/10+National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score at 24 hours. The HERMES-24 score was highly predictive for mRS ≤2 (c-statistic 0.907 [95% CI, 0.879-0.935]) in the derivation cohort. In the validation cohort and the control arm, the HERMES-24 score predicts mRS ≤2 (c-statistic, 0.914 [95% CI, 0.886-0.944] and 0.909 [95% CI, 0.887-0.930]). Observed provability of mRS ≤2 ranged between 3.1% and 3.4% when HERMES-24 score ≥25, while it ranged between 90.6% and 93.0% when HERMES-24 score <10 in the derivation cohort, validation cohort, and control arm. The HERMES-24 score also showed c-statistics of 0.894 and 0.889 for mRS ≤2 in the ESCAPE-NA1 and INTERRSeCT populations. CONCLUSIONS: The post-treatment HERMES-24 score is a simple validated score that predicts a 3-month outcome after anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke regardless of intervention, which helps prognostic discussion with families on day 2.

Anticoagulation Use and Endovascular Thrombectomy in Patients with Large Core Stroke: A Secondary Analysis of the SELECT2 Trial.

Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) safety and efficacy in patients with large core infarcts receiving oral anticoagulants (OAC) are unknown. In the SELECT2 trial (NCT03876457), 29 of 180 (16%; vitamin K antagonists 15, direct OACs 14) EVT, and 18 of 172 (10%; vitamin K antagonists 3, direct OACs 15) medical management (MM) patients reported OAC use at baseline. EVT was not associated with better clinical outcomes in the OAC group (EVT 6 [4-6] vs MM 5 [4-6], adjusted generalized odds ratio 0.89 [0.53-1.50]), but demonstrated significantly better outcomes in patients without OAC (EVT 4 [3-6] vs MM 5 [4-6], adjusted generalized odds ratio 1.87 [1.45-2.40], p = 0.02). The OAC group had higher comorbidities, including atrial fibrillation (70% vs 17%), congestive heart failure (28% vs 10%), and hypertension (87% vs 72%), suggesting increased frailty. However, the results were consistent after adjustment for these comorbidities, and was similar regardless of the type of OACs used. Whereas any hemorrhage rates were higher in the OAC group receiving EVT (86% in OAC vs 70% in no OAC), no parenchymal hemorrhage or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were observed with OAC use in both the EVT and MM arms. Although we did not find evidence that the effect was due to excess hemorrhage or confounded by underlying cardiac disease or older age, OAC use alone should not exclude patients from receiving EVT. Baseline comorbidities and ischemic injury extent should be considered while making individualized treatment decisions. ANN NEUROL 2024.

External Validation of a Model for Persistent Perfusion Deficit in Patients With Incomplete Reperfusion After Thrombectomy: EXTEND-PROCEED.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We recently developed a model (PROCEED) that predicts the occurrence of persistent perfusion deficit (PPD) at 24 hours in patients with incomplete angiographic reperfusion after thrombectomy. This study aims to externally validate the PROCEED model using prospectively acquired multicenter data. METHODS: Individual patient data for external validation were obtained from the Endovascular Therapy for Ischemic Stroke with Perfusion-Imaging Selection, Tenecteplase versus Alteplase Before Endovascular Therapy for Ischemic Stroke part 1 and 2 trials, and a prospective cohort of the Medical University of Graz. The model's primary outcome was the occurrence of PPD, defined as a focal, wedge-shaped perfusion delay on 24-hour follow-up perfusion imaging that corresponds to the capillary phase deficit on last angiographic series in patients with

Tenecteplase for Ischemic Stroke at 4.5 to 24 Hours without Thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: Tenecteplase is an effective thrombolytic agent for eligible patients with stroke who are treated within 4.5 hours after the onset of stroke. However, data regarding the effectiveness of tenecteplase beyond 4.5 hours are limited. METHODS: In a trial conducted in China, we randomly assigned patients with large-vessel occlusion of the middle cerebral artery or internal carotid artery who had salvageable brain tissue as identified on perfusion imaging and who did not have access to endovascular thrombectomy to receive tenecteplase (at a dose of 0.25 mg per kilogram of body weight; maximum dose, 25 mg) or standard medical treatment 4.5 to 24 hours after the time that the patient was last known to be well (including after stroke on awakening and unwitnessed stroke). The primary outcome was the absence of disability, which was defined as a score of 0 or 1 on the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability), at day 90. The key safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and death. RESULTS: A total of 516 patients were enrolled; 264 were randomly assigned to receive tenecteplase and 252 to receive standard medical treatment. Less than 2% of the patients (4 in the tenecteplase group and 5 in the standard-treatment group) underwent rescue endovascular thrombectomy. Treatment with tenecteplase resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a modified Rankin scale score of 0 or 1 at 90 days than standard medical treatment (33.0% vs. 24.2%; relative rate, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 1.81; P = 0.03). Mortality at 90 days was 13.3% with tenecteplase and 13.1% with standard medical treatment, and the incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 36 hours after treatment was 3.0% and 0.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving Chinese patients with ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion, most of whom did not undergo endovascular thrombectomy, treatment with tenecteplase administered 4.5 to 24 hours after stroke onset resulted in less disability and similar survival as compared with standard medical treatment, and the incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage appeared to be higher. (Funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China and others; TRACE-III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05141305.).

Tenecteplase versus alteplase for thrombolysis in patients selected by use of perfusion imaging within 4·5 h of onset of ischaemic stroke (TASTE): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous tenecteplase increases reperfusion in patients with salvageable brain tissue on perfusion imaging and might have advantages over alteplase as a thrombolytic for ischaemic stroke. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of tenecteplase versus alteplase on clinical outcomes in patients selected by use of perfusion imaging. METHODS: This international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, clinical non-inferiority trial enrolled patients from 35 hospitals in eight countries. Participants were aged 18 years or older, within 4·5 h of ischaemic stroke onset or last known well, were not being considered for endovascular thrombectomy, and met target mismatch criteria on brain perfusion imaging. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of a centralised web server with randomly permuted blocks to intravenous tenecteplase (0·25 mg/kg) or alteplase (0·90 mg/kg). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients without disability (modified Rankin Scale 0-1) at 3 months, assessed via masked review in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. We aimed to recruit 832 participants to yield 90% power (one-sided alpha=0·025) to detect a risk difference of 0·08, with an absolute non-inferiority margin of -0·03. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12613000243718, and the European Union Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT Number 2015-002657-36, and it is completed. FINDINGS: Recruitment ceased early following the announcement of other trial results showing non-inferiority of tenecteplase versus alteplase. Between March 21, 2014, and Oct 20, 2023, 680 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to tenecteplase (n=339) and alteplase (n=341), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (multiple imputation was used to account for missing primary outcome data for five patients). Protocol violations occurred in 74 participants, thus the per-protocol population comprised 601 people (295 in the tenecteplase group and 306 in the alteplase group). Participants had a median age of 74 years (IQR 63-82), baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 7 (4-11), and 260 (38%) were female. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 191 (57%) of 335 participants allocated to tenecteplase and 188 (55%) of 340 participants allocated to alteplase (standardised risk difference [SRD]=0·03 [95% CI -0·033 to 0·10], one-tailed pnon-inferiority=0·031). In the per-protocol analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 173 (59%) of 295 participants allocated to tenecteplase and 171 (56%) of 306 participants allocated to alteplase (SRD 0·05 [-0·02 to 0·12], one-tailed pnon-inferiority=0·01). Nine (3%) of 337 patients in the tenecteplase group and six (2%) of 340 in the alteplase group had symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (unadjusted risk difference=0·01 [95% CI -0·01 to 0·03]) and 23 (7%) of 335 and 15 (4%) of 340 died within 90 days of starting treatment (SRD 0·02 [95% CI -0·02 to 0·05]). INTERPRETATION: The findings in our study provide further evidence to strengthen the assertion of the non-inferiority of tenecteplase to alteplase, specifically when perfusion imaging has been used to identify reperfusion-eligible stroke patients. Although non-inferiority was achieved in the per-protocol population, it was not reached in the intention-to-treat analysis, possibly due to sample size limtations. Nonetheless, large-scale implementation of perfusion CT to assist in patient selection for intravenous thrombolysis in the early time window was shown to be feasible. FUNDING: Australian National Health Medical Research Council; Boehringer Ingelheim.

Tenecteplase versus alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in the elderly patients: a post hoc analysis of the TRACE-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The benefit-risk profile of tenecteplase in the elderly patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is uncertain. We sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase compared with alteplase for AIS patients aged ≥80 years. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Tenecteplase Reperfusion Therapy in Acute Ischaemic Cerebrovascular Events-2 Trial, a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority clinical trial. Disabling AIS patients aged ≥80 years who initiated intravenous thrombolytics within 4.5 hours of symptom onset were enrolled from June 2021 to May 2022 across 53 centres in China and were randomly allocated to receive 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase or 0.9 mg/kg alteplase. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of participants with a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-1 at 90 days. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) within 36 hours was the safety outcome. RESULTS: Of 137 participants, mRS 0-1 at 90 days occurred in 37 (49.3%) of 75 in the tenecteplase group vs 20 (33.9%) of 59 in the alteplase group (risk ratio (RR) 1.47, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.23). sICH within 36 hours was observed in 3 (4.0%) of 76 in the tenecteplase group and two (3.3%) of 61 in the alteplase group (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.20 to 8.41). CONCLUSIONS: The risk-benefit profile of tenecteplase thrombolysis was preserved in the elderly patients, which lends further support to intravenous 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase as an alternative to alteplase in these patients.

Tenecteplase versus standard of care for minor ischaemic stroke with proven occlusion (TEMPO-2): a randomised, open label, phase 3 superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with minor ischaemic stroke and intracranial occlusion are at increased risk of poor outcomes. Intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase might improve outcomes in this population. We aimed to test the superiority of intravenous tenecteplase over non-thrombolytic standard of care in patients with minor ischaemic stroke and intracranial occlusion or focal perfusion abnormality. METHODS: In this multicentre, prospective, parallel group, open label with blinded outcome assessment, randomised controlled trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) were included at 48 hospitals in Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Singapore, Spain, and the UK. Eligible patients with minor acute ischaemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 0-5) and intracranial occlusion or focal perfusion abnormality were enrolled within 12 h from stroke onset. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a minimal sufficient balance algorithm to intravenous tenecteplase (0·25 mg/kg) or non-thrombolytic standard of care (control). Primary outcome was a return to baseline functioning on pre-morbid modified Rankin Scale score in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (all patients randomly assigned to a treatment group and who did not withdraw consent to participate) assessed at 90 days. Safety outcomes were reported in the ITT population and included symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02398656, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: The trial was stopped early for futility. Between April 27, 2015, and Jan 19, 2024, 886 patients were enrolled; 369 (42%) were female and 517 (58%) were male. 454 (51%) were assigned to control and 432 (49%) to intravenous tenecteplase. The primary outcome occurred in 338 (75%) of 452 patients in the control group and 309 (72%) of 432 in the tenecteplase group (risk ratio [RR] 0·96, 95% CI 0·88-1·04, p=0·29). More patients died in the tenecteplase group (20 deaths [5%]) than in the control group (five deaths [1%]; adjusted hazard ratio 3·8; 95% CI 1·4-10·2, p=0·0085). There were eight (2%) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhages in the tenecteplase group versus two (<1%) in the control group (RR 4·2; 95% CI 0·9-19·7, p=0·059). INTERPRETATION: There was no benefit and possible harm from treatment with intravenous tenecteplase. Patients with minor stroke and intracranial occlusion should not be routinely treated with intravenous thrombolysis. FUNDING: Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the British Heart Foundation.

Learning together for better health using an evidence-based Learning Health System framework: a case study in stroke.

BACKGROUND: In the context of expanding digital health tools, the health system is ready for Learning Health System (LHS) models. These models, with proper governance and stakeholder engagement, enable the integration of digital infrastructure to provide feedback to all relevant parties including clinicians and consumers on performance against best practice standards, as well as fostering innovation and aligning healthcare with patient needs. The LHS literature primarily includes opinion or consensus-based frameworks and lacks validation or evidence of benefit. Our aim was to outline a rigorously codesigned, evidence-based LHS framework and present a national case study of an LHS-aligned national stroke program that has delivered clinical benefit. MAIN TEXT: Current core components of a LHS involve capturing evidence from communities and stakeholders (quadrant 1), integrating evidence from research findings (quadrant 2), leveraging evidence from data and practice (quadrant 3), and generating evidence from implementation (quadrant 4) for iterative system-level improvement. The Australian Stroke program was selected as the case study as it provides an exemplar of how an iterative LHS works in practice at a national level encompassing and integrating evidence from all four LHS quadrants. Using this case study, we demonstrate how to apply evidence-based processes to healthcare improvement and embed real-world research for optimising healthcare improvement. We emphasize the transition from research as an endpoint, to research as an enabler and a solution for impact in healthcare improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The Australian Stroke program has nationally improved stroke care since 2007, showcasing the value of integrated LHS-aligned approaches for tangible impact on outcomes. This LHS case study is a practical example for other health conditions and settings to follow suit.

Tranexamic acid versus placebo in individuals with intracerebral haemorrhage treated within 2 h of symptom onset (STOP-MSU): an international, double-blind, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid, an antifibrinolytic agent, might attenuate haematoma growth after an intracerebral haemorrhage. We aimed to determine whether treatment with intravenous tranexamic acid within 2 h of an intracerebral haemorrhage would reduce haematoma growth compared with placebo. METHODS: STOP-MSU was an investigator-led, double-blind, randomised, phase 2 trial conducted at 24 hospitals and one mobile stroke unit in Australia, Finland, New Zealand, Taiwan, and Viet Nam. Eligible participants had acute spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage confirmed on non-contrast CT, were aged 18 years or older, and could be treated with the investigational product within 2 h of stroke onset. Using randomly permuted blocks (block size of 4) and a concealed pre-randomised assignment procedure, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous tranexamic acid (1 g over 10 min followed by 1 g over 8 h) or placebo (saline; matched dosing regimen) commencing within 2 h of symptom onset. Participants, investigators, and treating teams were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was haematoma growth, defined as either at least 33% relative growth or at least 6 mL absolute growth on CT at 24 h (target range 18-30 h) from the baseline CT. The analysis was conducted within the estimand framework with primary analyses adhering to the intention-to-treat principle. The primary endpoint and secondary safety endpoints (mortality at days 7 and 90 and major thromboembolic events at day 90) were assessed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment groups who did not withdraw consent to use any data. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03385928, and the trial is now complete. FINDINGS: Between March 19, 2018, and Feb 27, 2023, 202 participants were recruited, of whom one withdrew consent for any data use. The remaining 201 participants were randomly assigned to either placebo (n=98) or tranexamic acid (n=103; intention-to-treat population). Median age was 66 years (IQR 55-77), and 82 (41%) were female and 119 (59%) were male; no data on race or ethnicity were collected. CT scans at baseline or follow-up were missing or of inadequate quality in three participants (one in the placebo group and two in the tranexamic acid group), and were considered missing at random. Haematoma growth occurred in 37 (38%) of 97 assessable participants in the placebo group and 43 (43%) of 101 assessable participants in the tranexamic acid group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·31 [95% CI 0·72 to 2·40], p=0·37). Major thromboembolic events occurred in one (1%) of 98 participants in the placebo group and three (3%) of 103 in the tranexamic acid group (risk difference 0·02 [95% CI -0·02 to 0·06]). By 7 days, eight (8%) participants in the placebo group and eight (8%) in the tranexamic acid group had died (aOR 1·08 [95% CI 0·35 to 3·35]) and by 90 days, 15 (15%) participants in the placebo group and 19 (18%) in the tranexamic acid group had died (aOR 1·61 [95% CI 0·65 to 3·98]). INTERPRETATION: Intravenous tranexamic acid did not reduce haematoma growth when administered within 2 h of intracerebral haemorrhage symptom onset. There were no observed effects on other imaging endpoints, functional outcome, or safety. Based on our results, tranexamic acid should not be used routinely in primary intracerebral haemorrhage, although results of ongoing phase 3 trials will add further context to these findings. FUNDING: Australian Government Medical Research Future Fund.

Endovascular thrombectomy with versus without intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The benefit and safety of intravenous thrombolysis before endovascular thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by basilar artery occlusion (BAO) remains unclear. This article aims to investigate the clinical outcomes and safety of endovascular thrombectomy with versus without intravenous thrombolysis in acute BAO stroke patients. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant literature pertaining to patients with acute BAO who underwent endovascular thrombectomy alone or intravenous thrombolysis bridging with endovascular thrombectomy (bridging therapy), until January 10, 2024. The primary outcome was functional independence, defined as a score of 0-2 on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. The safety outcome was mortality at 90 days and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 48 h. Effect sizes were computed as risk ratio (RR) with random-effect models. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023462293). RESULTS: A total of 528 articles were obtained through the search and articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. Finally, 2 RCTs and 10 cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings revealed that the endovascular thrombectomy alone group had a lower rate of functional independence compared to the bridging therapy group (29% vs 38%; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.88, p < 0.001), lower independent ambulation (39% vs 45%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.98, p = 0.01), and higher mortality (36% vs 28%, RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37, p = 0.001). However, no differences were detected in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between the two groups (6% vs 4%; RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.74-1.71, p = 0.58). CONCLUSION: Intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy seemed to led to better functional independence, independent ambulation, and lower risk of mortality without increasing the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage compared to endovascular thrombectomy alone. However, given the non-randomized nature of this study, further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Association of Time to Thrombolysis With Early Reperfusion After Alteplase and Tenecteplase in Patients With Large Vessel Occlusion.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Early treatment with intravenous alteplase increases the probability of lytic-induced reperfusion in large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients. The relationship of tenecteplase-induced reperfusion and the timing of thrombolytic administration has not been explored. In this study, we performed a comparative analysis of tenecteplase and alteplase reperfusion rates and assessed their relationship to the time of thrombolytic administration. METHODS: Patients who were initially treated with a thrombolytic within 4.5 hours of symptom onset were pooled from the Royal Melbourne Stroke Registry, EXTEND-IA, EXTEND-IA TNK, and EXTEND-IA TNK part 2 trials. The primary outcome, thrombolytic-induced reperfusion, was defined as the absence of retrievable thrombus or >50% reperfusion at initial angiographic assessment (or repeat CT perfusion/angiography). We compared the treatment effect of tenecteplase and alteplase through fixed-effects Poisson regression modelling. RESULTS: Among 846 patients included in the primary analysis, early reperfusion was observed in 173 (20%) patients (tenecteplase: 98/470 [21%], onset-to-thrombolytic time: 132 minutes [interquartile range (IQR): 99-170], and thrombolytic-to-assessment time: 61 minutes [IQR: 39-96]; alteplase: 75/376 [19%], onset-to-thrombolytic time: 143 minutes [IQR: 105-180], thrombolytic-to-assessment time: 92 minutes [IQR: 63-144]). Earlier onset-to-thrombolytic administration times were associated with an increased probability of thrombolytic-induced reperfusion in patients treated with either tenecteplase (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.05 per 15 minutes [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.12] or alteplase (aRR 1.06 per 15 minutes [95% CI 1.00-1.13]). Tenecteplase remained associated with higher rates of reperfusion vs alteplase after adjustment for onset-to-thrombolytic time, occlusion site, thrombolytic-to-assessment time, and study as a fixed effect, (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.41 [95% CI 1.02-1.93]). No significant treatment-by-time interaction was observed (p = 0.87). DISCUSSION: In patients with LVO presenting within 4.5 hours of symptom onset, earlier thrombolytic administration increased successful reperfusion rates. Compared with alteplase, tenecteplase was associated with a higher probability of lytic-induced reperfusion, independent of onset-to-lytic administration times. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02388061, NCT03340493. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that among patients with LVO receiving a thrombolytic, reperfusion was more likely with tenecteplase than alteplase.

What Is a Meaningful Difference When Using Infarct Volume as the Primary Outcome?: Results From the HERMES Database.

BACKGROUND: Ischemic stroke lesion volume at follow-up is an important surrogate outcome for acute stroke trials. We aimed to assess which differences in 48-hour lesion volume translate into meaningful clinical differences. METHODS: We used pooled data from 7 trials investigating the efficacy of endovascular treatment for anterior circulation large vessel occlusion in acute ischemic stroke. We assessed 48-hour lesion volume follow-up computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. The primary outcome was a good functional outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores of 0 to 2. We performed multivariable logistic regression to predict the probability of achieving mRS scores of 0 to 2 and determined the differences in 48-hour lesion volume that correspond to a change of 1%, 5%, and 10% in the adjusted probability of achieving mRS scores of 0 to 2. RESULTS: In total, 1665/1766 (94.2%) patients (median age, 68 [interquartile range, 57-76] years, 781 [46.9%] female) had information on follow-up ischemic lesion volume. Computed tomography was used for follow-up imaging in 83% of patients. The median 48-hour lesion volume was 41 (interquartile range, 14-120) mL. We observed a linear relationship between 48-hour lesion volume and mRS scores of 0 to 2 for adjusted probabilities between 65% and 20%/volumes <80 mL, although the curve sloped off for lower mRS scores of 0-2 probabilities/higher volumes. The median differences in 48-hour lesion volume associated with a 1%, 5%, and 10% increase in the probability of mRS scores of 0 to 2 for volumes <80 mL were 2 (interquartile range, 2-3), 10 (9-11), and 20 (18-23) mL, respectively. We found comparable associations when assessing computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging separately. CONCLUSIONS: A difference of 2, 10, and 20 mL in 48-hour lesion volume, respectively, is associated with a 1%, 5%, and 10% absolute increase in the probability of achieving good functional outcome. These results can inform the design of future stroke trials that use 48-hour lesion volume as the primary outcome.

Remote Ischemic Conditioning With Medical Management or Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a low-cost, accessible, and noninvasive neuroprotective treatment strategy, but its efficacy and safety in acute ischemic stroke are controversial. With the publication of several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the recent results of the RESIST trial, it may be possible to identify the patient population that may (or may not) benefit from RIC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of RIC in patients with ischemic stroke receiving different treatments by pooling data of all randomized controlled studies to date. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Elsevier, and Web of Science databases to obtain articles in all languages from inception until May 25, 2023. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at the specified endpoint time in the trial. The secondary outcomes were change in NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and recurrence of stroke events. The safety outcomes were cardiovascular events, cerebral hemorrhage, and mortality. The quality of articles was evaluated through the Cochrane risk assessment tool. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023430073). RESULTS: There were 7,657 patients from 22 RCTs included. Compared with the control group, patients who received RIC did not have improved mRS functional outcomes, regardless of whether they received medical management, reperfusion therapy with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), or mechanical thrombectomy (MT). In the medical management group, patients who received RIC had decreased incidence of stroke recurrence (risk ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.92, p = 0.02) and lower follow-up NIHSS score by 1.72 points compared with the control group (p < 0.00001). There was no increased risk of adverse events including death or cerebral hemorrhage in the IVT or medical management group. DISCUSSION: In patients with ischemic stroke who are not eligible for reperfusion therapy, RIC did not affect mRS functional outcomes but significantly improved the NIHSS score at the follow-up endpoint and reduced stroke recurrence, without increasing the risk of cerebral hemorrhage or death. In patients who received IVT or MT, the benefit of RIC was not observed.

Endovascular Thrombectomy Treatment Effect in Direct vs Transferred Patients With Large Ischemic Strokes: A Prespecified Analysis of the SELECT2 Trial.

Importance: Patients with large ischemic core stroke have poor clinical outcomes and are frequently not considered for interfacility transfer for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Objective: To assess EVT treatment effects in transferred vs directly presenting patients and to evaluate the association between transfer times and neuroimaging changes with EVT clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis of the SELECT2 trial, which evaluated EVT vs medical management (MM) in patients with large ischemic stroke, evaluated adults aged 18 to 85 years with acute ischemic stroke due to occlusion of the internal carotid or middle cerebral artery (M1 segment) as well as an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) of 3 to 5, core of 50 mL or greater on imaging, or both. Patients were enrolled between October 2019 and September 2022 from 31 EVT-capable centers in the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Data were analyzed from August 2023 to January 2024. Interventions: EVT vs MM. Main Outcomes and Measures: Functional outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days with blinded adjudication. Results: A total of 958 patients were screened and 606 patients were excluded. Of 352 enrolled patients, 145 (41.2%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 66.5 (58-75) years. A total of 211 patients (59.9%) were transfers, while 141 (40.1%) presented directly. The median (IQR) transfer time was 178 (136-230) minutes. The median (IQR) ASPECTS decreased from the referring hospital (5 [4-7]) to an EVT-capable center (4 [3-5]). Thrombectomy treatment effect was observed in both directly presenting patients (adjusted generalized odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.42-2.86) and transferred patients (adjusted generalized OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11-2.03) without heterogeneity (P for interaction = .14). Treatment effect point estimates favored EVT among 82 transferred patients with a referral hospital ASPECTS of 5 or less (44 received EVT; adjusted generalized OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.89-2.58). ASPECTS loss was associated with numerically worse EVT outcomes (adjusted generalized OR per 1-ASPECTS point loss, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.02). EVT treatment effect estimates were lower in patients with transfer times of 3 hours or more (adjusted generalized OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.73-1.80). Conclusions and Relevance: Both directly presenting and transferred patients with large ischemic stroke in the SELECT2 trial benefited from EVT, including those with low ASPECTS at referring hospitals. However, the association of EVT with better functional outcomes was numerically better in patients presenting directly to EVT-capable centers. Prolonged transfer times and evolution of ischemic change were associated with worse EVT outcomes. These findings emphasize the need for rapid identification of patients suitable for transfer and expedited transport. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03876457.

Tenecteplase for Stroke at 4.5 to 24 Hours with Perfusion-Imaging Selection.

BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic agents, including tenecteplase, are generally used within 4.5 hours after the onset of stroke symptoms. Information on whether tenecteplase confers benefit beyond 4.5 hours is limited. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with ischemic stroke to compare tenecteplase (0.25 mg per kilogram of body weight, up to 25 mg) with placebo administered 4.5 to 24 hours after the time that the patient was last known to be well. Patients had to have evidence of occlusion of the middle cerebral artery or internal carotid artery and salvageable tissue as determined on perfusion imaging. The primary outcome was the ordinal score on the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability and a score of 6 indicating death) at day 90. Safety outcomes included death and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 458 patients, 77.3% of whom subsequently underwent thrombectomy; 228 patients were assigned to receive tenecteplase, and 230 to receive placebo. The median time between the time the patient was last known to be well and randomization was approximately 12 hours in the tenecteplase group and approximately 13 hours in the placebo group. The median score on the modified Rankin scale at 90 days was 3 in each group. The adjusted common odds ratio for the distribution of scores on the modified Rankin scale at 90 days for tenecteplase as compared with placebo was 1.13 (95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.57; P = 0.45). In the safety population, mortality at 90 days was 19.7% in the tenecteplase group and 18.2% in the placebo group, and the incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was 3.2% and 2.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Tenecteplase therapy that was initiated 4.5 to 24 hours after stroke onset in patients with occlusions of the middle cerebral artery or internal carotid artery, most of whom had undergone endovascular thrombectomy, did not result in better clinical outcomes than those with placebo. The incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was similar in the two groups. (Funded by Genentech; TIMELESS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785678.).