Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator plus eptifibatide versus recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator alone in acute ischemic stroke: propensity score-matched post hoc analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Combined Approach to Lysis Utilizing Eptifibatide and rt-PA in Acute Ischemic Stroke-Enhanced Regimen (CLEAR-ER) trial demonstrated safety of recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (r-tPA) plus eptifibatide in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). CLEAR-ER randomized AIS patients (5:1) to 0.6 mg/kg r-tPA plus eptifibatide versus standard r-tPA (0.9 mg/kg). Interventional Management of Stroke III randomized AIS patients to r-tPA plus endovascular therapy versus standard r-tPA. Albumin in Acute Stroke Part 2 randomized patients to albumin±r-tPA versus saline±r-tPA. Our aim was to compare outcomes in CLEAR-ER combination arm patients to propensity score-matched r-tPA only subjects in Albumin in Acute Stroke Part 2 and Interventional Management of Stroke III.

METHODS: The primary outcome was 90-day severity-adjusted modified Rankin score (mRS) dichotomization based on baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mRS dichotomization as excellent (mRS, 0-1); mRS dichotomization as favorable (mRS, 0-2); and nonparametric analysis of the ordinal mRS.

RESULTS: Eighty-five combination arm CLEAR-ER subjects were matched with 169 Albumin in Acute Stroke Part 2 and Interventional Management of Stroke III trials' r-tPA only patients (controls). Median age in CLEAR-ER and control subjects was 68years; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in the CLEAR-ER subjects was 11 and in control subjects 12. At 90 days, CLEAR-ER subjects had a nonsignificantly greater proportion of patients with favorable outcomes (45% versus 36%; unadjusted relative risks, 1.24; 95% confidence intervals, 0.91-1.69; P=0.18). Secondary outcomes were 52% versus 34% excellent outcomes (relative risks, 1.51; 95% confidence intervals, 1.13-2.02; P=0.007); 60% versus 53% favorable outcome (relative risks, 1.13; 95% confidence intervals, 0.90-1.41; P=0.31); and ordinal Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel P=0.10.

CONCLUSION: r-tPA plus eptifibatide showed a favorable direction of effect that was consistent across multiple approaches for AIS outcome evaluation. A phase III trial to establish the efficacy of r-tPA plus eptifibatide for improving AIS outcomes is warranted.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app