MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413902833 · doi:10.1002/brb3.70791

Efficacy and Safety of Tenecteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2025· review· en· W4413902833 on OpenAlexaff
Zaryab Bacha, Javeria Javed, Maheen Sheraz, Muhammad Abdullah Ali, Mamur Khan, Sufyan Shahid, Asad Iqbal, Mehwish Qasim, Abdullah Afridi, Fathimathul Henna, Mazhar Ali Shah, Raheel Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain and Behavior · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsContinental (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTenecteplaseMedicineOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisInternal medicineStroke (engine)Fibrinolytic agentTissue plasminogen activatorThrombolysisMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Introduction Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is the most common type of stroke, with increasing incidence and significant healthcare costs. Tenecteplase (TNK), a modified variant of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), offers advantages such as a longer half‐life and single‐bolus administration. This meta‐analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of TNK compared to non‐thrombolytic management in AIS to guide clinical decision‐making. Methodology A comprehensive literature search across major databases identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tenecteplase with non‐thrombolytic care in ischemic stroke. Data extraction and bias assessment were conducted independently, using RoB 2.0 and the GRADE framework. Meta‐analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1, applying random‐effects models and assessing heterogeneity with the I 2 statistic. Results This meta‐analysis included seven studies with 3266 patients and found no significant difference between tenecteplase and standard medical care in terms of the mRS score at 90 days (mean difference = −0.16, p = 0.58), functional independence (mRS 0–2 at 90 days) (odds ratio = 1.07, p = 0.51), and reperfusion (TICI 2b‐3 at 24 h) (odds ratio = 1.33, p = 0.39). However, tenecteplase was associated with significantly higher mRS 0–1 at 90 days (odds ratio = 1.22, p = 0.01), better recanalization at 24 h (odds ratio = 3.28, p = 0.04), and improved NIHSS scores at 7 days (mean difference = −0.71, p = 0.003). On the downside, tenecteplase showed a significantly higher incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) within 36 h (odds ratio = 2.24, p = 0.04) and any ICH (odds ratio = 1.40, p = 0.04), with no significant differences in mortality at 90 days (odds ratio = 1.18, p = 0.33) or stroke recurrence (odds ratio = 1.23, p = 0.55) and Barthel Index Score (odds ratio = 1.09, p = 0.69) and quality of life. Serious adverse events were slightly higher in the tenecteplase group but did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio = 1.18, p = 0.23). Conclusion Tenecteplase improves early neurological recovery and recanalization and provides excellent functional outcomes in acute ischemic stroke. However, it is associated with a higher risk of symptomatic and overall intracranial hemorrhage. Mortality, stroke recurrence, and overall functional independence remain unaffected.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0380.007
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain and BehaviorSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207