Tenecteplase for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in the extended time window: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Outcome data regarding the administration of tenecteplase (TNK) to acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients presenting in the extended time window are limited. Objectives: We aimed to assess the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of TNK at a dose of 0.25 mg/kg for AIS treatment in the extended time window. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted including all available randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) that compared TNK 0.25 mg/kg versus no thrombolysis in AIS patients presenting in the extended time window (>4.5 h after last-seen-well or witnessed onset). Data sources and methods: Eligible studies were identified by searching Medline, Scopus, and international conference abstracts. The predefined efficacy outcomes of interest were 3-month excellent functional outcome [defined as the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ⩽1; primary outcome], 3-month good functional outcome (mRS ⩽ 2), 3-month reduced disability (⩾1-point reduction across all mRS scores). We determined symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), any ICH and 3-month mortality as safety endpoints. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and common odds ratios (cORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Three RCTs were included comprising 556 patients treated with TNK versus 560 controls. TNK 0.25 mg/kg was associated with a higher likelihood of 3-month excellent functional outcome compared to controls (RR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.01–1.36; I 2 = 0%), whereas there was no difference regarding good functional outcome (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.94–1.17; I 2 = 0%) and reduced disability (adjusted cOR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.92–1.40; I 2 = 0%) at 3 months. The risks of sICH (RR = 1.67; 95% CI = 0.70–4.00; I 2 = 0%), any ICH (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.90–1.29; I 2 = 0%) and 3-month mortality (RR = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.81–1.49; I 2 = 0%) were similar between the groups. Conclusion: Based on data from three RCTs showing increased efficacy and a favorable safety profile of TNK in the treatment of AIS in the extended time window, continuing efforts of ongoing RCTs in the field are clearly supported. Trial registration: PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42023448707.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".