RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The benefit of intravenous alteplase in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is time-dependent. Tenecteplase is non-inferior to alteplase among patients with AIS. We aimed to delineate the association of the stroke onset to treatment time (OTT) with tenecteplase compared with alteplase on therapeutic benefit and clinical risks. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of the Tenecteplase Reperfusion therapy in Acute ischaemic Cerebrovascular Events-2 an open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferior trial. A total of 1430 AIS within 4.5 hours onset at 53 sites in China from 12 June 2021 to 29 May 2022 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg or alteplase 0.9 mg/kg. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of participants with a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-1 at 90 days. A post hoc subgroup analysis was conducted with the OTT divided into three intervals (0-90 min, 91-180 min and 181-270 min). The primary safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage within 36 hours post-thrombolytic treatment. RESULTS: Treatment was initiated within 270 min of stroke onset in 1412 patients who were randomly allocated to either tenecteplase (n=707) or alteplase (n=705). The OR of primary efficacy outcome was similar as OTT increased (p=0.84). Adjusted odds of an excellent functional outcome were 0.99 (95% CI 0.37 to 2.67) for 0-90 min, 1.23 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.71) for 91-180 min and 1.21 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.65) for 181-270 min. All were in favour of the tenecteplase group. Meta-analysis of 2949 patients yielded a pooled risk difference of 5.54 (95% CI -0.18 to 11.26; p=0.82) in favour of tenecteplase for more than 180 min and 1.77 (95% CI -2.66 to 6.20; p=0.58) for 0-180 min. CONCLUSIONS: In AIS patients who were treated with either tenecteplase or alteplase within 4.5 hours onset, there was no difference observed in the efficacy and safety between the two groups at the three different OTT time intervals.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Reteplase is the third generation of alternative thrombolytic agent. We hypothesis that reteplase will be non-inferior to alteplase in achieving excellent functional outcome at 90 days among eligible patients with acute ischaemic stroke. METHODS AND DESIGN: Reteplase versus alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke within 4.5 hours (RAISE) trial is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE), controlled phase 3 non-inferiority trial. A total of 1412 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either reteplase at a dose of 18 mg+ 18 mg or alteplase 0.9 mg/kg at a ratio of 1:1. An independent data monitoring committee will review the trail's progress and safety data. STUDY OUTCOMES: The primary efficacy outcome of this study is proportion of individuals attaining an excellent functional outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-1 at 90 days. The secondary efficacy outcomes encompass favourable functional outcome defined as mRS 0-2, major neurological improvement on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, ordinal distribution of mRS and Barthel Index score of at least 95 points at 90 days. The primary safety outcomes are symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at 36 hours within 90 days. DISCUSSION: The RAISE trial will provide crucial insights into the selection of thrombolytic agents for stroke thrombolysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05295173.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in replacing alteplase with tenecteplase as the preferred thrombolytic treatment for patients with acute ischaemic stroke. We aimed to establish the non-inferiority of tenecteplase to alteplase for these patients. METHODS: In this multicentre, prospective, open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial, adults with an acute ischaemic stroke who were eligible for standard intravenous thrombolysis but ineligible for endovascular thrombectomy were enrolled from 53 centres in China and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous tenecteplase (0·25 mg/kg, maximum dose of 25 mg) or intravenous alteplase (0·9 mg/kg, maximum dose of 90 mg). Participants had to be able to receive treatment within 4·5 h of stroke, have a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of no more than 1 before enrolment, and have a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 5-25. Patients and treating clinicians were not masked to group assignment; clinicians evaluating outcomes were masked to treatment type. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of participants who had a mRS score of 0-1 at 90 days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned participants who received the allocated thrombolytic), with a non-inferiority margin of 0·937 for the risk ratio (RR). The primary safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage within 36 h, assessed in all participants who received study drug and had a safety assessment available. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04797013, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between June 12, 2021, and May 29, 2022, 1430 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to tenecteplase (n=716) or alteplase (n=714). Six patients assigned to tenecteplase and seven to alteplase did not receive study product, and five participants in the tenecteplase group and 11 in the alteplase group were lost to follow-up at 90 days. The primary outcome in the modified intention-to-treat population occurred in 439 (62%) of 705 in the tenecteplase group versus 405 (58%) of 696 in the alteplase group (RR 1·07, 95% CI 0·98-1·16). The lower limit of the RR's 95% CI was greater than the non-inferiority margin. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage within 36 h was observed in 15 (2%) of 711 in the tenecteplase group and 13 (2%) of 706 in the alteplase group (RR 1·18, 95% CI 0·56-2·50). Mortality within 90 days occurred in 46 (7%) individuals in the tenecteplase group versus 35 (5%) in the alteplase group (RR 1·31, 95% CI 0·86-2·01). INTERPRETATION: Tenecteplase was non-inferior to alteplase in people with ischaemic stroke who were eligible for standard intravenous thrombolytic but ineligible for or refused endovascular thrombectomy. FUNDING: National Science and Technology Major Project, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Natural Science Foundation of China, and China Shijiazhuang Pharmaceutical Company Recomgen Pharmaceutical (Guangzhou).
