European stroke journal · 2025
Off-label thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke patients: Frequencies and outcome compared to on-label and no treatment.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mohrbach Désirée, Wagner Lora, Nolte Christian H, Ebinger Martin, Lorenz-Meyer Irina, Rohrpasser-Napierkowski Ira, Harmel Peter, Hagemann Georg, Mackert Bruno-Marcel, Koennecke Hans-Christian, Siegerink Bob, Audebert Heinrich J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is not approved for acute ischemic stroke in certain patient groups due to in- and exclusion criteria from mostly early clinical trials. In a real-life setting, we analyzed frequencies, outcomes and complications of off-label-IVT compared to on-label-IVT and no IVT to contribute to rational decision-making regarding patient selection for IVT.
METHODS: Patients in the Berlin Specific Acute Therapy in Ischemic or hAemorrhagic stroke with Long-term follow-up registry were divided into three groups (on-label, off-label, non-IVT-treated). Off-label criteria were age > 80 years, time from onset >4.5 h, mild (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] < 5) or severe (NIHSS > 25) stroke, and a history of prior stroke and diabetes mellitus, as those criteria applied during the study period. Outcomes of interest were the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), in-hospital- and 90-day-mortality. After multiple imputation, we performed multivariable logistic regression to calculate adjusted common odds ratios (cOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for mRS and risk ratios for secondary outcome measures.
RESULTS: We analyzed 1875 on-label, 2881 off-label, and 4639 non-treated patients. The most common off-label-criteria were mild symptoms (44.6%) and older age (33.6%). Off-label-treated patients had no worse functional outcome when compared to on-label-treated patients (cOR 0.89, CI 0.78-1.02), but better outcome compared to non-treated patients (cOR 0.83, CI 0.76-0.91). No associations were found for sICH or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a beneficial effect of off-label treatment in clinical practice, which warrants further investigation into treatment in relevant subgroups and an extension of the product license.
METHODS: Patients in the Berlin Specific Acute Therapy in Ischemic or hAemorrhagic stroke with Long-term follow-up registry were divided into three groups (on-label, off-label, non-IVT-treated). Off-label criteria were age > 80 years, time from onset >4.5 h, mild (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] < 5) or severe (NIHSS > 25) stroke, and a history of prior stroke and diabetes mellitus, as those criteria applied during the study period. Outcomes of interest were the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), in-hospital- and 90-day-mortality. After multiple imputation, we performed multivariable logistic regression to calculate adjusted common odds ratios (cOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for mRS and risk ratios for secondary outcome measures.
RESULTS: We analyzed 1875 on-label, 2881 off-label, and 4639 non-treated patients. The most common off-label-criteria were mild symptoms (44.6%) and older age (33.6%). Off-label-treated patients had no worse functional outcome when compared to on-label-treated patients (cOR 0.89, CI 0.78-1.02), but better outcome compared to non-treated patients (cOR 0.83, CI 0.76-0.91). No associations were found for sICH or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a beneficial effect of off-label treatment in clinical practice, which warrants further investigation into treatment in relevant subgroups and an extension of the product license.