Chinese medical journal · 2023
Tenecteplase versus alteplase in treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: A randomized non-inferiority trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеEquivalence TrialСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zhao Xingshan, Zhu Yidan, Zhang Zheng, Tao Guizhou, Xu Haiyan, Cheng Guanchang, Gao Wen, Ma Liping, Qi Liping, Yan Xiaoyan, Wang Haibo, Xia Qingde, Yang Yuwang, Li Wanke, Rong Juwen, Wang Limei, Ding Yutian, Guo Qiang, Dang Wanjun, Yao Chen, Yang Qin, Gao Runlin, Wu Yangfeng, Qiao Shubin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A 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.
METHODS: In 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.
RESULTS: From 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.
CONCLUSION: rhTNK-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 REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT02835534).
METHODS: In 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.
RESULTS: From 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.
CONCLUSION: rhTNK-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 REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT02835534).