Background: and Purpose The safety and efficacy of tenecteplase in patients with ischemic stroke due to medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) are not well studied. We aimed to compare tenecteplase with alteplase in stroke due to MeVO. Methods: Patients with baseline M2-middle cerebral artery (MCA), M3/M4-MCA, P2/P3/P4-posterior cerebral artery (PCA), A2/A3/A4-anterior cerebral artery (ACA) occlusions from the Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase (AcT) trial were included. Primary outcome was the proportion of 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–1. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mRS 0–2, ordinal mRS, mortality, quality of life measures (EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level, EuroQol visual analog scale), and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Initial and final successful reperfusion were reported in patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Results: Among 1,558 patients with available baseline computed tomography angiography; 455 (29.2%) had MeVO of which 27.5% (125/455) were proximal M2; 16.3% (74/455) were distal M2; 35.2% (160/455) were M3/M4; 7.5% (34/455) were A2/A3/A4; and 13.6% (62/455) were P2/P3/P4 occlusions. EVT was performed in 87/455 (19.1%) patients. mRS 0–1 at 90 days was achieved in 37.9% in the tenecteplase versus 34.7% in the alteplase group (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–1.25). Rates of 90-day mRS 0–2, sICH, and mortality were similar in both groups. No statistical difference was noted in initial successful reperfusion rates (13.0% vs. 7.5%) among the 87 patients who underwent endovascular thrombectomy. However, final successful reperfusion was higher in the tenecteplase group (71.7% vs. 60.0%, aRR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04–1.61). Conclusion Intravenous tenecteplase had comparable safety, functional outcomes and quality of life compared to intravenous alteplase among patients with MeVO. Among those treated with EVT, tenecteplase was associated with higher successful reperfusion rates than alteplase.

Background: and Purpose In the ESCAPE-NA1 (Efficacy and Safety of Nerinetide for the Treatment of Acute Ischaemic Stroke) trial, treatment with nerinetide was associated with improved outcomes in patients who did not receive intravenous alteplase. We compared the effect of nerinetide on clinical outcomes in patients without concurrent intravenous alteplase treatment within different patient subgroups. Methods: ESCAPE-NA1 was a multicenter randomized trial in which acute stroke patients with baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) >4 undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) were randomized to intravenous nerinetide or placebo. The primary outcome was independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0–2) at 90 days. We assessed baseline, clinical, and imaging variables as predictors of outcome and for evidence of treatment effect modification. We constructed two multivariable models using variables known prior to randomization and variables known immediately post-EVT procedure to provide adjusted estimates of effect. We assessed for evidence of treatment effect modification using multiplicative interaction terms within each model. Results: Four hundred forty-six patients were included in the analysis. Clinical outcomes were better in patients randomized to the nerinetide arm (mRS 0–2: 59.4% vs. 49.8%). There was possible treatment effect modification by ASPECTS score; patients with ASPECTS 8–10 showed a larger treatment effect compared to those with lower ASPECTS score. Younger age, lower NIHSS score, lower baseline serum glucose, absence of atrial fibrillation at baseline, higher ASPECTS score, middle cerebral artery (vs. internal carotid artery) occlusion, use of conscious or no sedation (vs. general anesthesia), and faster treatment were all predictors of favorable outcome. Conclusion Patients in the nerinetide arm who were not treated with concurrent alteplase showed improved clinical outcomes and the treatment effect was larger among patients with favorable ASPECTS profiles.

Background: and Purpose In the ESCAPE-NA1 (Efficacy and Safety of Nerinetide for the Treatment of Acute Ischaemic Stroke) trial, treatment with nerinetide was associated with improved outcomes in patients who did not receive intravenous alteplase. We compared the effect of nerinetide on clinical outcomes in patients without concurrent intravenous alteplase treatment within different patient subgroups. Methods: ESCAPE-NA1 was a multicenter randomized trial in which acute stroke patients with baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) >4 undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) were randomized to intravenous nerinetide or placebo. The primary outcome was independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0–2) at 90 days. We assessed baseline, clinical, and imaging variables as predictors of outcome and for evidence of treatment effect modification. We constructed two multivariable models using variables known prior to randomization and variables known immediately post-EVT procedure to provide adjusted estimates of effect. We assessed for evidence of treatment effect modification using multiplicative interaction terms within each model. Results: Four hundred forty-six patients were included in the analysis. Clinical outcomes were better in patients randomized to the nerinetide arm (mRS 0–2: 59.4% vs. 49.8%). There was possible treatment effect modification by ASPECTS score; patients with ASPECTS 8–10 showed a larger treatment effect compared to those with lower ASPECTS score. Younger age, lower NIHSS score, lower baseline serum glucose, absence of atrial fibrillation at baseline, higher ASPECTS score, middle cerebral artery (vs. internal carotid artery) occlusion, use of conscious or no sedation (vs. general anesthesia), and faster treatment were all predictors of favorable outcome. Conclusion Patients in the nerinetide arm who were not treated with concurrent alteplase showed improved clinical outcomes and the treatment effect was larger among patients with favorable ASPECTS profiles.

Background: and Purpose In the ESCAPE-NA1 (Efficacy and Safety of Nerinetide for the Treatment of Acute Ischaemic Stroke) trial, treatment with nerinetide was associated with improved outcomes in patients who did not receive intravenous alteplase. We compared the effect of nerinetide on clinical outcomes in patients without concurrent intravenous alteplase treatment within different patient subgroups. Methods: ESCAPE-NA1 was a multicenter randomized trial in which acute stroke patients with baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) >4 undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) were randomized to intravenous nerinetide or placebo. The primary outcome was independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0–2) at 90 days. We assessed baseline, clinical, and imaging variables as predictors of outcome and for evidence of treatment effect modification. We constructed two multivariable models using variables known prior to randomization and variables known immediately post-EVT procedure to provide adjusted estimates of effect. We assessed for evidence of treatment effect modification using multiplicative interaction terms within each model. Results: Four hundred forty-six patients were included in the analysis. Clinical outcomes were better in patients randomized to the nerinetide arm (mRS 0–2: 59.4% vs. 49.8%). There was possible treatment effect modification by ASPECTS score; patients with ASPECTS 8–10 showed a larger treatment effect compared to those with lower ASPECTS score. Younger age, lower NIHSS score, lower baseline serum glucose, absence of atrial fibrillation at baseline, higher ASPECTS score, middle cerebral artery (vs. internal carotid artery) occlusion, use of conscious or no sedation (vs. general anesthesia), and faster treatment were all predictors of favorable outcome. Conclusion Patients in the nerinetide arm who were not treated with concurrent alteplase showed improved clinical outcomes and the treatment effect was larger among patients with favorable ASPECTS profiles.