Dataset Information

Tenecteplase Versus Reteplase in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is the leading cause of death throughout the world. One of the standard approaches to treatment of AMI is fibrinolysis. The study was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy of tenecteplase versus reteplase through network meta-analysis for AMI. Randomized trials were comprehensively searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Web of Science using appropriate strategies. Quality assessment was done for the papers. The primary and secondary end-points were mortality, TIMI grade 3 flow at 90 min, death or non-fatal stroke, infarction, total stroke and major bleeding. Odds ratios (OR) were computed (95% confidence intervals). After screening 27325 records, eight articles were included with total patients of 49875 to the meta-analysis. Indirect comparison of tenecteplase vs. reteplase showed no significant differences in the risk of mortality (OR = 0.98, p > 0.05), TIMI grade 3 flow at 90 min (OR = 0.77, p > 0.05), death or non-fatal stroke (OR = 1.04, p > 0.05), infarction (OR = 1.11, p > 0.05), total stroke (OR = 2.71, p > 0.05), and major bleeding (OR = 0.81, p > 0.05) (all p > 0.05). Indirect comparison suggests similar efficacy and safety of tenecteplase and reteplase. Hence, the use of each one of the two medicines depends on price, facility, and accessibility of the medicine.

SUBMITTER: Zia-Behbahani M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6934957 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tenecteplase Versus Reteplase in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Zia-Behbahani Majid M Hossein Hossein H Kojuri Javad J Salesi Mahmood M Mojtaba Mojtaba M Keshavarz Khosro K

Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR 20190101 3

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is the leading cause of death throughout the world. One of the standard approaches to treatment of AMI is fibrinolysis. The study was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy of tenecteplase versus reteplase through network meta-analysis for AMI. Randomized trials were comprehensively searched in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Web of Science using appropriate strategies. Quality assessment was done for the papers. The primary and secondary end-points w ...[more]

PMID: 32641969

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA phase II trial on recombinant human tenecteplase tissue-type plasminogen activator (rhTNK-tPA) has previously shown its preliminary efficacy in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. This study was designed as a pivotal postmarketing trial to compare its efficacy and safety with rrecombinant human tissue-type plasminogen activator alteplase (rt-PA) in Chinese patients with STEMI.MethodsIn this multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients with acute STEMI were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an intravenous bolus of 16 mg rhTNK-tPA or an intravenous bolus of 8 mg rt-PA followed by an infusion of 42 mg in 90 min. The primary endpoint was recanalization defined by thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade 2 or 3. The secondary endpoint was clinically justified recanalization. Other endpoints included 30-day major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and safety endpoints.ResultsFrom July 2016 to September 2019, 767 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive rhTNK-tPA ( n = 384) or rt-PA ( n = 383). Among them, 369 patients had coronary angiography data on TIMI flow, and 711 patients had data on clinically justified recanalization. Both used a -15% difference as the non-inferiority efficacy margin. In comparison to rt-PA, both the proportion of patients with TIMI grade 2 or 3 flow (78.3% [148/189] vs. 81.7% [147/180]; differences: -3.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -11.5%, 4.8%) and clinically justified recanalization (85.4% [305/357] vs. 85.9% [304/354]; difference: -0.5%; 95% CI: -5.6%, 4.7%) in the rhTNK-tPA group were non-inferior. The occurrence of 30-day MACCEs (10.2% [39/384] vs. 11.0% [42/383]; hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.61, 1.50) did not differ significantly between groups. No safety outcomes significantly differed between groups.ConclusionrhTNK-tPA was non-inferior to rt-PA in the effect of improving recanalization of the infarct-related artery, a validated surrogate of clinical outcomes, among Chinese patients with acute STEMI.Trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT02835534).

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal dose of tenecteplase vs. alteplase for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) has yet to be established. Therefore, we included the latest randomized controlled trials (RCT) to assess the efficacy and safety of different doses of tenecteplase vs. alteplase for AIS within 4.5 hours of symptom onset.MethodsLiterature was searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and clinical trial registries until February 12, 2023. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) were estimated using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Treatments were ranked based on efficacy and safety using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).ResultsEleven RCTs with 5,475 patients were included. Tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg and alteplase 0.9 mg/kg had significantly higher rates of excellent functional outcome (tenecteplase: OR, 1.85; 95% CrI, 1.44-2.37; alteplase: OR, 1.60; 95% CrI, 1.29-1.97) and good functional outcome (tenecteplase: OR, 1.54; 95% CrI, 1.19-1.98; alteplase: OR, 1.40; 95% CrI, 1.14-1.74) than placebo, despite an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Furthermore, the NMA (OR, 1.16; 95% CrI, 1.01-1.33) and the pairwise meta-analysis (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.02-1.33; P = 0.03) indicated that tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg was superior to alteplase 0.9 mg/kg in excellent functional outcome. Alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (OR, 2.54; 95% CrI, 1.45-8.08) significantly increased the risk of any intracranial hemorrhage compared with placebo. SUCRA results demonstrated that tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg ranked first and tenecteplase 0.4 mg/kg ranked last in efficacy outcomes.ConclusionsThe NMA indicated that tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg and alteplase 0.9 mg/kg are safe and significantly improve clinical outcomes in patients with AIS within 4.5 h of symptom onset. Furthermore, tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg provides more benefit and has the potential to replace alteplase 0.9 mg/kg in AIS treatment.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/index.php, identifier: CRD42022343948.

Project description:We aimed to summarize the evidence from randomized clinical trials studies examining the efficacy of ischemic postconditioning (IPost) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction.The study was a systematic review and critical appraisal, with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.We searched the literature. A total of 21 randomized clinical trials were identified. Both fixed effect and random effects models were used to synthesize the results of individual studies. Heterogeneity between studies was examined by subgroup and random effects meta-regression analyses, considering ptient-related and study-level variables. Publication bias, or "small-study effect", was evaluated.Substantial heterogeneity was present. The random effects model pooled estimate for the outcome infarct size assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance was estimated by the standardized mean difference (SMD) =-0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.34 to 0.21, ie, no effect of IPost. For the end point infarct size, estimated by biomarkers of myocardial necrosis, an overall pooled effect was SMD =-0.58, 95% CI: -0.96 to -0.19. This effect disappeared in powered and nonbiased studies (SMD =0.03, 95% CI: -0.48 to 0.55). Finally, for the outcome left ventricular ejection fraction, SMD =0.47 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.74. Unfortunately, selection bias (small-study effect) was present. For this outcome, the meta-regression showed that both presence of hypertension and the inclusion of nonbiased studies explained 28.3% of the heterogeneity among the studies. Simulation by the "trim and fill" method, which controlled for selection bias using random effects model, diluted the effect (SMD =0.17 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.48). No effects by IPost on ST-segment resolution or on the majority of adverse clinical events were observed during follow up, except the incidence of congestive heart failure was found.Evidence from this study suggests no cardioprotection from IPost, on surrogate and the majority of clinical end points. A possible beneficial effect on the incidence of congestive heart failure needs to be replicated by a large clinical trial.

Dataset Information

Tenecteplase Versus Reteplase in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Publications

Tenecteplase Versus Reteplase in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets