Tenecteplase versus alteplase for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Tenecteplase, a modified variant of alteplase with greater fibrin specificity and longer plasma half-life, may have better efficacy and safety than alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We aimed to compare the benefits and risks of tenecteplase versus alteplase in the treatment of AIS. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched up to 10 February 2023 for randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of tenecteplase versus alteplase in the treatment of AIS. The primary outcome was functional outcome at 90 days, and secondary outcomes including the symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (SICH), and major neurological improvement. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the different dosage of tenecteplase. RESULTS: Ten studies with a total of 5123 patients were analysed in this meta-analysis. Overall, no significant difference between tenecteplase and alteplase was observed for functional outcome at 90 days (excellent: OR 1.08, 95%CI 0.93-1.26, I2 = 26%; good: OR 1.04, 95%CI 0.83-1.30, I2 = 56%; poor: OR 0.95, 95%CI 0.75-1.21, I2 = 31%), SICH (OR 1.12, 95%CI 0.79-1.59, I2 = 0%), and early major neurological improvement (OR 1.26, 95%CI 0.80-1.96, I2 = 65%). The subgroup analysis suggested that the 0.25 mg/kg dose of tenecteplase had potentially greater efficacy and lower symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage risk compared with 0.25 mg/kg dose tenecteplase. CONCLUSIONS: Among AIS patients, there was no significant difference on clinical outcomes between tenecteplase and alteplase. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that 0.25 mg/kg doses of tenecteplase were more beneficial than 0.4 mg/kg doses of tenecteplase. Further studies are required to identify the optimal dosage of tenecteplase.

Randomized controlled trials exploring comparative efficacy and safety of tenecteplase and alteplase have been yielding inconsistent results on various outcomes and merit the conduction of a meta-analysis to adequately answer these questions.Analysis of evidence from randomized studies suggests that tenecteplase is as safe as alteplase for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke and tenecteplase is potentially associated with more favourable outcomes.Tenecteplase at 0.25 mg/kg dose is more efficacious and at least as safe as alteplase for stroke thrombolysis.

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.).

Sex-Based Analysis of Workflow and Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated With Alteplase Versus Tenecteplase.

BACKGROUND: Understanding sex differences in stroke care is important in reducing potential disparities. Our objective was to explore sex differences in workflow efficiency, treatment efficacy, and safety in the AcT trial (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase). METHODS: AcT was a multicenter, registry-linked randomized noninferiority trial comparing tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) with alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) in acute ischemic stroke within 4.5 hours of onset. In this post hoc analysis, baseline characteristics, workflow times, successful reperfusion (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score ≥2b), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-1), and 90-day mortality were compared by sex. Mixed-effects regression analysis was used adjusting for age, stroke severity, and occlusion site for outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1577 patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis (2019-2022), 755 (47.9%) were women. Women were older (median, 77 [68-86] years in women versus 70 [59-79] years in men) and had a higher proportion of severe strokes (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score >15; 32.4% versus 24.9%) and large vessel occlusions (28.7% versus 21.5%) compared with men. All workflow times were comparable between sexes. Women were less likely to achieve functional independence (31.7% versus 39.8%; unadjusted relative risk, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.91]) and had higher mortality (17.7% versus 13.3%; unadjusted relative risk, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.06-1.69]). Adjusted analysis showed no difference in outcomes between sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in prognostic factors of age, stroke severity, and occlusion site largely accounted for higher functional dependence and mortality in women. No sex disparities were apparent in workflow quality indicators. Given the integration of the AcT trial into clinical practice, these results provide reassurance that no major sex biases are apparent in acute stroke management throughout participating Canadian centers. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03889249.

Quality of Life After Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Results From the AcT Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence from thrombolysis trials indicates the noninferiority of intravenous tenecteplase to intravenous alteplase with respect to good functional outcomes in patients with acute stroke. We examined whether the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of patients with acute stroke differs by the type of thrombolysis treatment received. In addition, we examined the association between the modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 and HRQOL and patient-reported return to prebaseline stroke functioning at 90 days. METHODS: Data were from all patients included in the AcT trial (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase), a pragmatic, registry-linked randomized trial comparing tenecteplase with alteplase. HRQOL at 90-day post-randomization was assessed using the 5-item EuroQOL questionnaire (EQ5D), which consists of 5 items and a visual analog scale (VAS). EQ5D index values were estimated from the EQ5D items using the time tradeoff approach based on Canadian norms. Tobit regression and quantile regression models were used to evaluate the adjusted effect of tenecteplase versus alteplase treatment on the EQ5D index values and VAS score, respectively. The association between return to prebaseline stroke functioning and the modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 and HRQOL was quantified using correlation coefficient (r) with 95% CI. RESULTS: Of 1577 included in the intention-to-treat analysis patients, 1503 (95.3%) had complete data on the EQ5D. Of this, 769 (51.2%) were administered tenecteplase and 717 (47.7%) were female. The mean EQ5D VAS score and EQ5D index values were not significantly higher for those who received intravenous tenecteplase compared with those who received intravenous alteplase (P=0.10). Older age (P<0.01), more severe stroke assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (P<0.01), and longer stroke onset-to-needle time (P=0.004) were associated with lower EQ5D index and VAS scores. There was a strong association (r, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.81-0.89]) between patient-reported return to prebaseline functioning and modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 Similarly, there was a moderate association between return to prebaseline functioning and EQ5D index (r, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.40-0.49]) and EQ5D VAS scores (r, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.37-0.46]). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no differential effect of thrombolysis type on patient-reported global HRQOL and EQ 5D-5L index values in patients with acute stroke, sex- and age-related differences in HRQOL were noted in this study. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03889249.

Intra-arterial tenecteplase during thrombectomy for acute stroke (BRETIS-TNK II): rationale and design.

BACKGROUND: Our recent pilot study suggests intra-arterial tenecteplase (TNK) during the first pass of endovascular treatment (EVT) seems safe, may increase first-pass reperfusion and good outcome in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) patients with large-vessel occlusion (LVO). AIMS: To determine the efficacy and safety of intra-arterial TNK administration during EVT in AIS-LVO patients presenting up to 24 hours from symptom onset. SAMPLE SIZE ESTIMATES: A maximum of 380 patients are required to test the superiority hypothesis with 80% power according to a two-side 0.05 level of significance, stratified by age, gender, baseline systolic blood pressure, prestroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS), baseline National Institute of Health stroke scale, baseline ASPECTS, time from onset to groin puncture, intravenous thrombolysis before EVT, stroke territory and stroke aetiology. DESIGN: Intra-arterial TNK during thrombectomy for acute stroke (BRETIS-TNK II) study is a prospective, randomised, adaptive enrichment, open-label, blinded end point, multicentre study. Eligible AIS-LVO patients are randomly assigned into the experimental group and control group with a ratio of 1:1. The experimental group will be treated with intra-arterial infusion of TNK during EVT. The control group will be treated with standard EVT. OUTCOME: The primary end point is a favourable outcome, defined as an mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days. The primary safety end point is symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage within 48 hours, which is defined as an increase in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≥4 points as a result of the intracranial haemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: The results of BRETIS-TNK II will provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of intra-arterial TNK administration during EVT in AIS patients with LVO.

Rationale and design of Tenecteplase Reperfusion Therapy in Acute Ischaemic Cerebrovascular Events III (TRACE III): a randomised, phase III, open-label, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recombinant human TNK tissue-type plasminogen activator (rhTNK-tPA) was not inferior to alteplase for ischaemic stroke within 4.5 hours. Our study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of rhTNK-tPA in patients who had an ischaemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion (LVO) of anterior circulation beyond 4.5 hours. METHODS AND DESIGN: Tenecteplase Reperfusion Therapy in Acute Ischaemic Cerebrovascular Events-III (TRACE III) is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blind endpoint, controlled clinical trial. Patients who had an ischaemic stroke due to anterior circulation LVO (internal carotid artery, middle cerebral artery M1 and M2 segments) within 4.5-24 hours from last known well (including wake-up stroke and no witness stroke) and with salvageable tissue (ischaemic core volume <70 mL, mismatch ratio ≥1.8 and mismatch volume ≥15 mL) based on CT perfusion or MRI perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) were included and randomised to rhTNK-tPA 0.25 mg/kg (single bolus) to a maximum of 25 mg or standard medical therapy. Specially, we will exclude patients who are intended for direct thrombectomy. All will be followed up for 90 days. STUDY OUTCOMES: Primary efficacy outcome is modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤1 at 90 days. Secondary efficacy outcomes include ordinal distribution of mRS at 90 days, major neurological improvement defined by a decrease ≥8 points compared with the initial deficit or a score ≤1 on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at 72 hours, mRS score ≤2 at 90 days, the rate of improvement on Tmax >6 s at 24 hours and NIHSS score change from baseline at 7 days. Safety outcomes are symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage within 36 hours and mortality at 90 days. DISCUSSION: TRACE III will provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of rhTNK-tPA in patients who had an ischaemic strokes due to anterior circulation LVO beyond 4.5 hours. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05141305.

Comparative safety of tenecteplase vs alteplase for acute ischemic stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Tenecteplase has been compared to alteplase in acute stroke randomized trials, with similar outcomes and safety measures, but higher doses of tenecteplase have been associated with higher hemorrhage rates in some studies. Limited data are available on the safety of tenecteplase outside of clinical trials. METHODS: We examined the safety measures of intracranial hemorrhage, angioedema, and serious extracranial adverse events in a 21-hospital integrated healthcare system that switched from alteplase (0.9 mg/kg, maximum dose 90 mg) to tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg, maximum dose 25 mg) for acute ischemic stroke. RESULTS: Among 3,689 subjects, no significant differences were seen between tenecteplase and alteplase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), parenchymal hemorrhage, or volume of parenchymal hemorrhage. Symptomatic hemorrhage (sICH) was not different between the two agents: sICH by NINDS criteria was 2.0 % for alteplase vs 2.3 % for tenecteplase (P = 0.57), and sICH by SITS criteria was 0.8 % vs 1.1 % (P = 0.39). Adjusted logistic regression models also showed no differences between tenecteplase and alteplase: the odds ratio for tenecteplase (vs alteplase) modeling sICH by NINDS criteria was 0.9 (95 % CI 0.33 - 2.46, P = 0.83) and the odds ratio for tenecteplase modeling sICH by SITS criteria was 1.12 (95 % CI 0.25 - 5.07, P = 0.89). Rates of angioedema and serious extracranial adverse events were low and did not differ between tenecteplase and alteplase. Elapsed door-to-needle times showed a small improvement after the switch to tenecteplase (51.8 % treated in under 30 min with tenecteplase vs 43.5 % with alteplase, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In use outside of clinical trials, complication rates are similar between tenecteplase and alteplase. In the context of a stroke telemedicine program, the rates of hemorrhage observed with either agent were lower than expected based on prior trials and registry data. The more easily prepared tenecteplase was associated with a lower door-to-needle time.

A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to using tenecteplase to treat acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Tenecteplase (TNK) is emerging as an alternative to alteplase (ALT) for thrombolytic treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Compared to ALT, TNK has a longer half-life, shorter administration time, lower cost, and similarly high efficacy in treating large vessel occlusion. Nevertheless, there are barriers to adopting TNK as a treatment for AIS. This study aimed to identify thematic barriers and facilitators to adopting TNK as an alternative to ALT as a thrombolytic for eligible AIS patients. METHODS: Qualitative research methodology using hermeneutic cycling and purposive sampling was used to interview four stroke clinicians in Texas. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Enrollment was complete when saturation was reached. All members of the research team participated in content analysis during each cycle and in thematic analysis after saturation. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted between November 2022 and February 2023 with stroke center representatives from centers that either had successfully adopted TNK, or had not yet adopted TNK. Three themes and eight sub-themes were identified. The theme "Evidence" had three sub-themes: Pro-Con Balance, Fundamental Knowledge, and Pharmacotherapeutics. The theme "Process Flow" had four subthemes: Proactive, Reflective self-doubt, Change Process Barriers, and Parameter Barriers. The theme "Consensus" had one sub-theme: Getting Buy-In. CONCLUSION: Clinicians experience remarkably similar barriers and facilitators to adopting TNK. The results lead to a hypothesis that providing evidence to support a practice change, and identifying key change processes, will help clinicians achieve consensus across teams that need to 'buy in' to adopting TNK for AIS treatment.

Comparing adverse events of tenecteplase and alteplase: a real-world analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to monitor, identify, and compare the adverse events (AEs) related to tenecteplase and alteplase, with the objective of exploring the potential safety of tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and guiding its use to enhance patient safety. METHODS: In order to evaluate the disproportionality of AEs associated with tenecteplase and alteplase in real-world data, four algorithms (ROR, PRR, BCPNN, EBGM) were utilized as measures to detect signals of AEs related to both drugs. Subsequently, Breslow-Day statistical analysis was applied to compare the RORs of the main system organ classes (SOCs) and key preferred terms (PTs) between tenecteplase and alteplase. RESULTS: A statistical analysis was performed utilizing data gleaned from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, encompassing 19,514,140 case reports from 2004Q1 to 2023Q1. There were 1,004 cases where tenecteplase was reported as the primary suspected (PS) and 2,363 tenecteplase-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs) at the PTs level were identified, the two data of alteplase were 10,945 and 25,266, respectively. The occurrence of drug-induced ADRs was analyzed across 27 organ systems, The analysis revealed several expected ADRs, such as Haemorrhage, Hypersensitivity which were consistent with the two drug-labels. It is of note that the signal strengths of 'death,' 'ventricular fibrillation,' 'cardiogenic shock' and 'pneumonia aspiration' at the PT level were markedly higher for tenecteplase than for alteplase, whereas the signal strength of 'angioedema' at the PT level was significantly higher for alteplase in comparison to tenecteplase. Additionally, unexpected significant ADRs associated with ocular adverse reactions and pneumonia aspiration at the PT level were identified, indicating potential AEs not currently mentioned in the drug instructions. CONCLUSION: This study identified and compared signals of ADRs associated with tenecteplase and alteplase, although tenecteplase is as effective as alteplase and has advantages such as ease of use and affordability, it cannot replace alteplase in the treatment of AIS until its safety profile is fully recognized. Additionally, previously unreported ocular ADRs and pneumonia were identified, providing valuable insights into the relationship between ADRs and the use of these thrombolytic drugs. These findings underscore the importance of continuous monitoring and effective detection of AEs to ultimately enhance the safety of AIS patients undergoing thrombolytic therapy.

Tenecteplase versus alteplase for patients with acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Tenecteplase (TNK), a newer fibrinolytic agent with greater fibrin specificity and longer half-life than alteplase, may has practical advantages over alteplase in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) thrombolysis. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare different doses of TNK (0.1, 0.25, 0.4 mg/kg) and alteplase in acute ischemic stroke patients. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and https://clinicaltrials.gov/ for RCTs comparing TNK with alteplase in this population eligible for thrombolysis. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess study quality. Random-effects or fixed-effects meta-analysis models were used for evaluating all outcomes. Total 10 RCTs with 5097 patients were included. Compared with alteplase, TNK at doses of 0.25 mg/kg may associated with the greatest odds to achieve 90-day excellent independence (mRS score ≤1), but there were no significant differences between other doses of TNK (0.1 mg/kg and 0.4 mg/kg) and alteplase. Among secondary outcomes, no significant differences were found in functional outcome (mRS score ≤2) and mortality at 90 days between any dose of TNK and alteplase. Compared with alteplase, TNK was effective at doses of 0.1 mg/kg and 0.25 mg/kg without increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), but patients treated with TNK 0.4 mg/kg showed increased odds of sICH. In conclusion, compared with alteplase, intravenous thrombolysis with TNK at dose of 0.25 mg/kg has a better efficacy and similar safety profile and is a reasonable option for patients with AIS.

Effect of Time to Thrombolysis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Treated With Tenecteplase Compared to Alteplase: Analysis From the AcT Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The AcT (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase) randomized controlled trial showed that tenecteplase is noninferior to alteplase in treating patients with acute ischemic stroke within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. The effect of time to treatment on clinical outcomes with alteplase is well known; however, the nature of this relationship is yet to be described with tenecteplase. We assessed whether the association of time to thrombolysis treatment with clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke differs by whether they receive intravenous tenecteplase versus alteplase. METHODS: Patients included were from AcT, a pragmatic, registry-linked, phase 3 randomized controlled trial comparing intravenous tenecteplase to alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Eligible patients were >18 years old, with disabling neurological deficits, presenting within 4.5 hours of symptom onset, and eligible for thrombolysis. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 at 90 days. Safety outcomes included 24-hour symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and 90-day mortality rates. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to assess the following: (a) the association of stroke symptom onset to needle time; (b) door (hospital arrival) to needle time with outcomes; and (c) if these associations were modified by type of thrombolytic administered (tenecteplase versus alteplase), after adjusting for age, sex, baseline stroke severity, and site of intracranial occlusion. RESULTS: Of the 1538 patients included in this analysis, 1146 (74.5%; 591 tenecteplase and 555 alteplase) presented within 3 hours versus 392 (25.5%; 196: TNK and 196 alteplase) who presented within 3 to 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Baseline patient characteristics in the 0 to 3 hours versus 3- to 4.5-hour time window were similar, except patients in the 3- to 4.5-hour window had lower median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Severity Scale (10 versus 7, respectively) and lower proportion of patients with large vessel occlusion on baseline CT angiography (26.9% versus 18.7%, respectively). Type of thrombolytic agent (tenecteplase versus alteplase) did not modify the association between continuous onset to needle time (Pinteraction=0.161) or door-to-needle time (Pinteraction=0.972) and primary clinical outcome. Irrespective of the thrombolytic agent used, each 30-minute reduction in onset to needle time was associated with a 1.8% increase while every 10 minutes reduction in door-to-needle time was associated with a 0.2% increase in the probability of achieving 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of time to tenecteplase administration on clinical outcomes is like that of alteplase, with faster administration resulting in better clinical outcomes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03889249.

Tenecteplase, 0.4 mg/kg, in Moderate and Severe Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Pooled Analysis of NOR-TEST and NOR-TEST 2A.

Background The optimal dose of tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke remains to be defined. We present a pooled analysis of the 2 NOR-TESTs (Norwegian Tenecteplase Stroke Trials) exploring the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase, 0.4 mg/kg. Methods and Results We retrospectively reviewed 2 PROBE (Prospective Randomized Open, Blinded End-point) trials, NOR-TEST and NOR-TEST 2A. Patients were randomized to either tenecteplase, 0.4 mg/kg, or alteplase, 0.9 mg/kg. The primary end point was favorable functional outcome at 3 months (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-1) or return to baseline if prestroke modified Rankin Scale score was 2. Secondary end points included favorable functional and clinical outcome and safety data. The pooled analysis includes patients with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥6 from both trials and an additional post hoc analysis of patients with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≤5 from NOR-TEST. The per-protocol analysis contains 483 patients, of whom 235 were assigned to tenecteplase and 248 were assigned to alteplase. In per-protocol analysis, functional outcome was better in the alteplase arm with cutoff modified Rankin Scale score of 2 (odds ratio [OR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.33-0.80]; P=0.003) and expressed by ordinal shift analysis (OR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.17-2.28]; P=0.004). Mortality at 3 months was higher in the tenecteplase arm (OR, 2.48 [95% CI, 1.20-5.10]; P=0.01). Mortality and intracranial hemorrhage rates were higher in the severe stroke group randomized to tenecteplase, whereas these rates were similar for alteplase and tenecteplase in moderate and mild stroke. Conclusions Tenecteplase, 0.4 mg/kg, is unsafe in moderate and severe stroke, and the risk of death and intracranial hemorrhage probably increases with stroke severity. A lower tenecteplase dose should be tested in future trials. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01949948, NCT03854500.

Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in comparison to alteplase in acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Alteplase is the standard medical therapy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients who present within 4.5 h of symptom onset. Tenecteplase is a modified alteplase variant with pharmacological and practical advantages over alteplase. Many trials have investigated the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase against alteplase. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase to alteplase across randomized controlled trials. METHOD: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were used to search the related articles until February 20, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effectiveness and safety of tenecteplase against alteplase for AIS patients were included. Screening, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction were performed following PRISMA guidelines. Data were pooled using a random-effect model. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were included, with a total of 5123 patients. There was no significant difference between the two interventions in modified rankin scale 0-1 (mRS 0-1) (RR= 1.04, 95% CI [0.99-1.10], P = 0.11, I2 =0%) and early neurological improvement (RR= 1.06, 95% CI [0.97-1.15], P = 0.21, I2 =35). There was no difference in the rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (RR= 1.18, 95% CI [0.84-1.65], P = 0.35, I2 = 0%). Tenecteplase was associated with significantly higher complete recanalization rate compared to alteplase (RR= 1.17, 95% CI [1.00-1.36], P = 0.05, I2 =0%). For large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients assigned to tenecteplase, there was a significant improvement in mRS 0-1 (RR= 1.28, 95% CI [1.07-1.52], P = 0.006, I2 =0%). CONCLUSION: Based on our meta-analysis, tenecteplase has similar efficacy and safety to alteplase, with a more promising effect in patients with LVO.

The efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase versus alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the available evidence on the efficacy and safety outcomes of intravenous tenecteplase (TNK) compared with intravenous alteplase(ALT) for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: The MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Springer, Web of Science, Cochrane Collaboration database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database, and Wanfang database were comprehensively searched for RCTs regarding the effects of TNK versus ALT among AIS patients in these English and Chinese electronic databases from inception dates to August 1, 2022. This meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines. Two reviewers independently retrieved RCTs and extracted relevant information. The methodological quality of the included trials was estimated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The pooled analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. The primary outcome was functional outcome on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) (range 0 to 5) and mortality at 90 days. The secondary outcomes included successful recanalization, early neurologic improvement < 48 h, any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and symptomatic ICH. The follow-up time of all studies was at least 3 months. RESULTS: A total of nine RCTs involving 1958 patients in TNK group and 1731 patients in ALT group were finally included. For the efficacy outcomes, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of mRS score 0 ~ 2 (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.88-1.13; P = 0.96), mRS score 0 ~ 1 (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.96-1.10; P = 0.36), successful recanalization (RR 1.25; 95% CI 0.88-1.76; P = 0.21), and early neurologic improvement < 48 h (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.92-1.26; P = 0.37). Similar results were seen for the safety outcomes, which have no statistical differences in terms of any ICH (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.72-1.41; P = 0.96), symptomatic ICH (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.81-1.76; P = 0.37), and mortality at 90 days (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.83-1.19; P = 0.94). CONCLUSION: Overall, the efficacy and safety outcomes of intravenous thrombolysis with TNK versus ALT for AIS were not statistically different. However, TNK at a dose of 0.25 mg/kg may be a reasonable alternative to ALT for thrombolysis.

Advances in the management of acute ischemic stroke.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to summarize the therapeutic advances and evidence in the medical management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Recent evidence comparing the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase (TNK) with alteplase for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in AIS will be highlighted. Recent advances and evidence on improving micro-circulation following endovascular procedures and neuroprotection will be reviewed. RECENT FINDINGS: A significant number of randomized control studies now support the use of tenecteplase for IVT in AIS. TNK 0.25 mg/kg single bolus is as effective and well tolerated as alteplase 0.9 mg/kg infusion for IVT in AIS. Evidence from randomized control trials (RCTs) has shown effective and well tolerated expansion of the therapeutic window of IVT in the wake-up stroke and up to 9 h after last seen well, using advanced neuroimaging with computed tomography perfusion/MRI. Early evidence suggests that intra-arterial alteplase may help improve microcirculation in patients with large vessel occlusion following successful thrombectomy. However, more trials are required to confirm the results. Similarly, early evidence from a recent RCT showed that remote ischemic conditioning confers potential neuroprotection and improves outcomes in AIS. SUMMARY: Converging evidence has demonstrated that for patients with ischemic stroke presenting at under 4.5 h from the onset, TNK is comparable to alteplase. These data along with the practical advantages of TNK have resulted in a shift to replace intravenous TNK as the standard for thrombolysis. Ongoing studies of IVT with TNK are focussed on defining the optimal dose, expanding the time window with multimodal imaging and defining the role of thrombolysis for bridging patients with stroke due to large vessel occlusion.

Comparative efficacy and safety of tenecteplase and alteplase in acute ischemic stroke: A pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Studies on tenecteplase have been yielding mixed results for several important outcomes at different doses, thus hampering objective guideline recommendations in acute ischemic stroke management. This meta-analysis stratifies doses in order to refine our interpretation of outcomes and quantify the benefits and harms of tenecteplase at different doses. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and reference lists of the included articles were systematically searched. Several efficacy and safety outcomes were pooled and reported as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Network meta-analysis was used to find the optimal dose of tenecteplase. Meta-regression was run to investigate the impact of baseline NIHSS scores on functional outcomes and mortality. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials with a total of 4140 patients were included. 2166 (52.32%) patients were enrolled in the tenecteplase group and 1974 (47.68%) in the alteplase group. Tenecteplase at 0.25 mg/kg dose demonstrated significant improvement in excellent functional outcome at 3 months (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04-1.26), and early neurological improvement (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.03-2.26). There was no statistically significant difference between tenecteplase and alteplase in terms of good functional outcome, intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), and 90-day mortality at any dose. Meta-regression demonstrated superior tenecteplase efficacy with increasing stroke severity, however, the results were statistically nonsignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Tenecteplase at 0.25 mg/kg dose is more efficacious and at least as safe as alteplase for stroke thrombolysis. Newer analyses need to focus on direct comparison of tenecteplase doses and whether tenecteplase is efficacious at longer needle times.

Outcomes with IV tenecteplase and IV alteplase for acute ischemic stroke with or without thrombectomy in real-world settings in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although many stroke centers in United States are using intravenous (IV) tenecteplase (TNK) for acute ischemic stroke patients, there is paucity of comparative data between IV TNK and IV alteplase from real-world settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the data from 122 healthcare facilities in Cerner Real World Data and included patients admitted between February 2016 to April 2022 to determine the effect of IV TNK (compared with IV alteplase) on occurrence of two outcomes in acute ischemic stroke patients stratified by use of thrombectomy: non-routine discharge or death, and intracranial hemorrhage after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Among 30,643 acute ischemic stroke patients analyzed, 29,480 (96.2%) and 1,163 (3.8%) patients received IV alteplase and IV TNK, respectively. The proportion of patients who received thrombectomy was significantly higher among patients who received IV TNK compared with those who received IV alteplase (16.7% versus 11.0%, p<0.001). Occurrence of intracranial hemorrhage was more common among patients treated with IV TNK in acute ischemic stroke patients who did not receive thrombectomy (7.9% versus 5.1%, p<0.001) but not in those who received thrombectomy (20.1% versus 16.8%, p = 0.234). In the logistic regression analysis, patients treated with IV TNK who did not receive thrombectomy were at higher risk of intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.34, 95% CI 1.05-1.72, p = 0.02) after adjusting for age (age strata), gender, race/ethnicity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, hyperlipidemia, malignancy, nicotine dependence, previous ischemic stroke, previous transient ischemic attack, previous intracerebral hemorrhage, previous subarachnoid hemorrhage, previous acute myocardial infarction, atherosclerosis of aorta, previous AKI, congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and hospital type, aphasia, hemiplegia, neglect, somnolence, stupor and coma, dysphagia, and homonymous hemianopsia. There was no difference in the rate of non-routine discharge or death between patients treated with IV TNK and those treated with IV alteplase in the multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of real-world data, IV TNK was associated with higher rates of intracranial hemorrhage compared with IV alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke who did not undergo thrombectomy.

Tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke: Review of the literature and expert consensus from the French Neurovascular Society.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous alteplase is the only thrombolytic treatment approved for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Although no randomized controlled trial (RCT) has shown the superiority of tenecteplase over alteplase in AIS, tenecteplase is increasingly used off-label in Stroke Units. The purpose of the present work was to provide an up-to-date set of expert consensus statements on the use of tenecteplase in AIS. METHODS: Members of the working group were selected by the French Neurovascular Society. RCTs comparing tenecteplase and alteplase in the treatment of AIS were reviewed. Recent meta-analysis and real-life experience data on tenecteplase published until 30th October 2021 were also analyzed. After a description of the available data, we tried to answer the subsequent questions about the use of tenecteplase in AIS: What dosage of tenecteplase should be preferred? How effective is tenecteplase for cerebral artery recanalization? What is the clinical effectiveness of tenecteplase? What is the therapeutic safety of tenecteplase? What are the benefits associated with tenecteplase ease of use? Then expert consensus statements for tenecteplase use were submitted. In October 2021 the working group was asked to review and revise the manuscript. In November 2021, the current version of the manuscript was approved. EXPERT CONSENSUS: A set of three expert consensus statements for the use of tenecteplase within 4.5hours of symptom onset in AIS patients were issued: (1) It is reasonable to use tenecteplase 0.25mg/kg when mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is planned. (2) Tenecteplase 0.25mg/kg can be used as an alternative to alteplase 0.9mg/kg in patients with medium- or small-vessel occlusion not retrievable with MT. (3) Tenecteplase 0.25mg/kg could be considered as an alternative to alteplase 0.9mg/kg in patients without vessel occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: These expert consensus statements could provide a framework to guide the clinical decision-making process for the use of tenecteplase according to admission characteristics of AIS patients. However, existing data are limited, requiring inclusions in ongoing RCTs or real-life registries.

Major Bleeding Postadministration of Tenecteplase Versus Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Tenecteplase is a genetically engineered fibrinolytic with growing interest in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Compared to alteplase, tenecteplase is effective for neurologic improvement following ischemic stroke in patients with large vessel occlusions who are eligible for thrombectomy and for mild ischemic strokes with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of 0 to 5. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine if safety outcomes are different in patients receiving tenecteplase and alteplase for acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: This retrospective cohort reviewed all patients who received alteplase or tenecteplase from January 2019 to December 2020. Patients admitted before April 28, 2020, received alteplase intravenous bolus over 1 minute followed by an infusion over 1 hour, for a total of 0.9 mg/kg. Patients admitted after this date received tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg as an intravenous bolus over 5 to 10 seconds. Any patient transferring from an outside facility was excluded. The primary outcome was major bleeding. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in major bleeding between alteplase and tenecteplase (40 [18%] vs 21 [18.1%], P = 0.985). There was no significant difference in all-cause inpatient mortality for alteplase versus tenecteplase (10 [5%] vs 5 [4%], P = 0.934) or in adverse events between the groups (22 [9%] vs 14 [12%], P = 0.541) for alteplase and tenecteplase, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Tenecteplase had similar rates of major bleeding versus alteplase and may be a reasonable alternative in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke.

Safety and efficacy of tenecteplase in patients with wake-up stroke assessed by non-contrast CT (TWIST): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence supports the use of intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase in patients with wake-up stroke selected with MRI or perfusion imaging and is recommended in clinical guidelines. However, access to advanced imaging techniques is often scarce. We aimed to determine whether thrombolytic treatment with intravenous tenecteplase given within 4·5 h of awakening improves functional outcome in patients with ischaemic wake-up stroke selected using non-contrast CT. METHODS: TWIST was an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial with blinded endpoint assessment, conducted at 77 hospitals in ten countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older with acute ischaemic stroke symptoms upon awakening, limb weakness, a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of 3 or higher or aphasia, a non-contrast CT examination of the head, and the ability to receive tenecteplase within 4·5 h of awakening. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either a single intravenous bolus of tenecteplase 0·25 mg per kg of bodyweight (maximum 25 mg) or control (no thrombolysis) using a central, web-based, computer-generated randomisation schedule. Trained research personnel, who conducted telephone interviews at 90 days (follow-up), were masked to treatment allocation. Clinical assessments were performed on day 1 (at baseline) and day 7 of hospital admission (or at discharge, whichever occurred first). The primary outcome was functional outcome assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days and analysed using ordinal logistic regression in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2014-000096-80), ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03181360), and ISRCTN (10601890). FINDINGS: From June 12, 2017, to Sept 30, 2021, 578 of the required 600 patients were enrolled (288 randomly assigned to the tenecteplase group and 290 to the control group [intention-to-treat population]). The median age of participants was 73·7 years (IQR 65·9-81·1). 332 (57%) of 578 participants were male and 246 (43%) were female. Treatment with tenecteplase was not associated with better functional outcome, according to mRS score at 90 days (adjusted OR 1·18, 95% CI 0·88-1·58; p=0·27). Mortality at 90 days did not significantly differ between treatment groups (28 [10%] patients in the tenecteplase group and 23 [8%] in the control group; adjusted HR 1·29, 95% CI 0·74-2·26; p=0·37). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred in six (2%) patients in the tenecteplase group versus three (1%) in the control group (adjusted OR 2·17, 95% CI 0·53-8·87; p=0·28), whereas any intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (11%) versus 30 (10%) patients (adjusted OR 1·14, 0·67-1·94; p=0·64). INTERPRETATION: In patients with wake-up stroke selected with non-contrast CT, treatment with tenecteplase was not associated with better functional outcome at 90 days. The number of symptomatic haemorrhages and any intracranial haemorrhages in both treatment groups was similar to findings from previous trials of wake-up stroke patients selected using advanced imaging. Current evidence does not support treatment with tenecteplase in patients selected with non-contrast CT. FUNDING: Norwegian Clinical Research Therapy in the Specialist Health Services Programme, the Swiss Heart Foundation, the British Heart Foundation, and the Norwegian National Association for Public Health.