C-REGS2—A multinational, high-quality comparative effectiveness study of Cerebrolysin in moderate acute ischemic stroke
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The main objective of the Cerebrolysin REGistry Study in Stroke 2 (C-REGS2) was to systematically record the routine clinical use of Cerebrolysin in patients with moderate ischemic stroke (IS) following the principles of a prospective controlled effectiveness study (CES) to compare its effectiveness in terms of functional recovery to patients treated with standard therapy alone. METHODS: C-REGS2 used an open-label, prospective controlled comparative effectiveness design aligning with the Target Trial Emulation Framework (TTEF) and the GRACE principles for high-quality observational studies based on the principles of high-quality comparative effectiveness research (HQCER) to capture treatment effects in clinical practice. The study was conducted in 16 countries worldwide between April 2018 and April 2024. Moderate IS was defined as baseline NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 8-15. Treatment modalities and concomitant medications were according to local standards. The methodology included rigorous pre-specified analysis and tight risk-based centralized monitoring, to ensure minimal enrollment bias, maximize data quality and overall reliability of trial results. The compared patient groups were standardized using a restricted cohort design and non-parametric multilevel stratification following the Good Research for Comparative Effectiveness (GRACE) principles. The primary endpoint was ordinal analysis of the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days after stroke onset. Secondary endpoints were the ordinal NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at day 21 and 90 after stroke onset, the ordinal mRS at 21 days after IS, the proportion of patients with excellent recovery (mRS 0-1) as well as the proportion of patients with functional independence (mRS 0-2) at 90 days after stroke onset and the ordinal analysis of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale at 90 days after IS. RESULTS: Out of 1865 enrolled patients, the target population (TP) comprised 1769 patients (1021 Cerebrolysin-treated and 748 controls). The median NIHSS at baseline was 10.0. Median Cerebrolysin dose was 30 ml, median treatment duration was 10 days. Cerebrolysin was superior to standard therapy in the primary endpoint independently to prior thrombolysis (MW 0.6157; confidence interval (CI) 0.5910-0.6404; P < 0.0001) as well as in all secondary endpoints: mRS at day 21 (MW 0.6065, 95% CI 0.5811-0.6319, P < 0.0001), NIHSS at day 21 (MW 0.5792; 95% CI 0.5576-0.6008; P < 0.0001) and NIHSS at day 90 (MW 0.5781; CI 0.5561-0.6002; P < 0.0001). Additional pre-specified secondary endpoints (proportion of patients with excellent recovery and functional independence) showed moderate superiority for Cerebrolysin. The ordinal MoCA showed superiority for Cerebrolysin in the TP (MW 0.5530; CI 0.5282-0.5778; P < 0.0001) with more pronounced effects in the subgroup with cognitive impairments at baseline (Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) ⩾ 3.3). No differences in safety measures were recorded. The study is notable for its robust data integrity, with valid entries of 90.9% for the primary 90 day mRS assessment with multilevel case mix standardization and an overall dropout rate to the final visit of only 5.7%. CONCLUSION: The results of the C-REGS2 study showed the effectiveness and safety of Cerebrolysin treatment for moderate acute IS in real-world clinical practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».