Tenecteplase or alteplase for acute ischemic stroke beyond 4.5 hours of last known well. A pooled analysis of the TETRIS and EVATRISP registries.

IF 8.7 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Clémence Liegeois, Valerian Altersberger, Gaspard Gerschenfeld, Stéphane Olindo, Alexander Salerno, Mirjam R Heldner, Nicolas Martinez-Majander, Henrik Gensicke, Stefano Forlivesi, Gian Marco De Marchis, Nicolas Chausson, Petra Cimflova, Fernando Pico, Pierre Seners, Jiyoon Baik, Cristina Hobeanu, Tolga D Dittrich, Gaultier Marnat, Didier Smadja, Sami Curtze, Andrea Zini, Alexandra Maury, Davide Strambo, Sonia Alamowitch, Stefan Engelter, Guillaume Turc
{"title":"Tenecteplase or alteplase for acute ischemic stroke beyond 4.5 hours of last known well. A pooled analysis of the TETRIS and EVATRISP registries.","authors":"Clémence Liegeois, Valerian Altersberger, Gaspard Gerschenfeld, Stéphane Olindo, Alexander Salerno, Mirjam R Heldner, Nicolas Martinez-Majander, Henrik Gensicke, Stefano Forlivesi, Gian Marco De Marchis, Nicolas Chausson, Petra Cimflova, Fernando Pico, Pierre Seners, Jiyoon Baik, Cristina Hobeanu, Tolga D Dittrich, Gaultier Marnat, Didier Smadja, Sami Curtze, Andrea Zini, Alexandra Maury, Davide Strambo, Sonia Alamowitch, Stefan Engelter, Guillaume Turc","doi":"10.1177/17474930251385744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background-Intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase within 4.5hrs after ischemic stroke is non-inferior to alteplase. However, it is uncertain whether this is also true in patients last known to be well more than 4.5hrs before treatment initiation (LKW >4.5hrs). We aimed to compare tenecteplase and alteplase in this population using data from two large multicenter registries.Methods-Pooled retrospective analysis of acute stroke patients LKW >4.5hrs treated with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg (TETRIS registry) or alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (EVATRISP registry plus 4 French centers participating in TETRIS) based on the results of MRI or perfusion CT. Excellent functional outcome at 3 months (mRS 0-1) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were mRS 0-2, shift analysis of the mRS, any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, and death. Propensity score overlap weighting (PSOW) was used to account for imbalance in baseline characteristics.Results-897 patients (tenecteplase: n=419; alteplase: n=478) were included between 2015 and 2024 (mean age: 74 [IQR:64-84]; median NIHSS 11 [6-17]; unknown stroke onset in 777 [86.6%] patients). At 3 months, mRS 0-1 was achieved in 138 (32.9%) and 178 (37.2%) patients treated with tenecteplase and alteplase, respectively (crude OR 0.83 [95%CI 0.63-1.09]; PSOW-OR 0.92 [95%CI 0.66-1.30]). Compared with alteplase, tenecteplase was not significantly associated with mRS 0-2 (PSOW-OR 0.78 [95%CI 0.56-1.08]) or better functional outcome over the whole range of the mRS (PSOW-common OR 0.83 [95%CI 0.62-1.11]). Tenecteplase was associated with significantly higher odds of any ICH (PSOW-OR: 1.79 [95%CI 1.25-2.57]), but not sICH (PSOW-OR 1.12 [95%CI 0.61-2.05]).Conclusions-The functional outcomes of patients LKW >4.5hrs treated with tenecteplase or alteplase did not significantly differ in this pooled analysis of two observational registries. However, the direction of the associations did not favor tenecteplase over alteplase and therefore more comparative studies -ideally randomized- are needed before routinely switching to tenecteplase in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":14442,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Stroke","volume":" ","pages":"17474930251385744"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930251385744","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background-Intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase within 4.5hrs after ischemic stroke is non-inferior to alteplase. However, it is uncertain whether this is also true in patients last known to be well more than 4.5hrs before treatment initiation (LKW >4.5hrs). We aimed to compare tenecteplase and alteplase in this population using data from two large multicenter registries.Methods-Pooled retrospective analysis of acute stroke patients LKW >4.5hrs treated with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg (TETRIS registry) or alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (EVATRISP registry plus 4 French centers participating in TETRIS) based on the results of MRI or perfusion CT. Excellent functional outcome at 3 months (mRS 0-1) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were mRS 0-2, shift analysis of the mRS, any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, and death. Propensity score overlap weighting (PSOW) was used to account for imbalance in baseline characteristics.Results-897 patients (tenecteplase: n=419; alteplase: n=478) were included between 2015 and 2024 (mean age: 74 [IQR:64-84]; median NIHSS 11 [6-17]; unknown stroke onset in 777 [86.6%] patients). At 3 months, mRS 0-1 was achieved in 138 (32.9%) and 178 (37.2%) patients treated with tenecteplase and alteplase, respectively (crude OR 0.83 [95%CI 0.63-1.09]; PSOW-OR 0.92 [95%CI 0.66-1.30]). Compared with alteplase, tenecteplase was not significantly associated with mRS 0-2 (PSOW-OR 0.78 [95%CI 0.56-1.08]) or better functional outcome over the whole range of the mRS (PSOW-common OR 0.83 [95%CI 0.62-1.11]). Tenecteplase was associated with significantly higher odds of any ICH (PSOW-OR: 1.79 [95%CI 1.25-2.57]), but not sICH (PSOW-OR 1.12 [95%CI 0.61-2.05]).Conclusions-The functional outcomes of patients LKW >4.5hrs treated with tenecteplase or alteplase did not significantly differ in this pooled analysis of two observational registries. However, the direction of the associations did not favor tenecteplase over alteplase and therefore more comparative studies -ideally randomized- are needed before routinely switching to tenecteplase in this population.

替奈普酶或阿替普酶治疗急性缺血性卒中超过4.5小时已为人所知。俄罗斯方块和EVATRISP登记的汇总分析。
背景:缺血性卒中后4.5小时内静脉溶栓使用替普酶的效果不逊于阿替普酶。然而,尚不确定在治疗开始前最后已知超过4.5小时的患者中是否也是如此(LKW >4.5小时)。我们的目的是比较tenecteplase和alteplase在这一人群中的应用,使用来自两个大型多中心注册中心的数据。方法:基于MRI或灌注CT结果,对急性脑卒中患者LKW >4.5h接受替奈普酶0.25 mg/kg (TETRIS注册)或阿替普酶0.9 mg/kg (EVATRISP注册加4个法国中心参与TETRIS)治疗的患者进行汇总回顾性分析。3个月时良好的功能结局(mRS 0-1)是主要结局。次要结局是mRS 0-2、mRS移位分析、颅内出血(ICH)、症状性ICH和死亡。倾向得分重叠加权(PSOW)用于解释基线特征的不平衡。结果:2015 - 2024年间纳入897例患者(替奈普酶:n=419;阿替普酶:n=478),平均年龄74岁[IQR:64-84],中位NIHSS 11[6-17], 777例(86.6%)患者卒中发病不详。3个月时,分别有138例(32.9%)和178例(37.2%)患者接受替奈普酶和阿替普酶治疗,mRS为0-1(粗OR为0.83 [95%CI 0.63-1.09]; PSOW-OR为0.92 [95%CI 0.66-1.30])。与阿替普酶相比,tenecteplase与mRS 0-2 (PSOW-OR 0.78 [95%CI 0.56-1.08])或整个mRS范围内更好的功能结局无显著相关性(PSOW-common or 0.83 [95%CI 0.62-1.11])。Tenecteplase与脑出血的发生率显著升高相关(psoe - or: 1.79 [95%CI 1.25-2.57]),但与脑出血无关(psoe - or: 1.12 [95%CI 0.61-2.05])。结论:在两项观察性研究的汇总分析中,接受替奈普酶或阿替普酶治疗的LKW bb0 4.5小时患者的功能结局没有显著差异。然而,这些关联的方向并不偏向于替奈普酶而不是阿替普酶,因此在该人群常规改用替奈普酶之前,需要进行更多的比较研究——理想情况下是随机的。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Stroke
International Journal of Stroke 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
13.90
自引率
6.00%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Stroke is a welcome addition to the international stroke journal landscape in that it concentrates on the clinical aspects of stroke with basic science contributions in areas of clinical interest. Reviews of current topics are broadly based to encompass not only recent advances of global interest but also those which may be more important in certain regions and the journal regularly features items of news interest from all parts of the world. To facilitate the international nature of the journal, our Associate Editors from Europe, Asia, North America and South America coordinate segments of the journal.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信