The study was supported by Novartis.

Vitamin D, a fat-soluble prohormone, has wide-ranging roles in the regulation of many physiological processes through their interactions with the vitamin D receptors (VDR). It plays a major role in bones and calcium metabolism. Vitamin D deficiency is not uncommon and it has been associated with many health-related issues, including skeletal and non-skeletal complications. The association of low vitamin D and cardiovascular diseases and risk factors has been explored in both animal and human studies. However, studies and trials on the effect of vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular risk factors and hypertension are conflicting with inconsistent results. Therefore, large, well-powered randomized controlled trials are warranted. If successful, supplementation with easy and low-cost vitamin D can impact our health positively. Here, we summarized the evidence for the association of vitamin D, cardiovascular diseases and risk factors, including coronary artery diseases, stroke, and hypertension, and mortality, with special consideration to resistant hypertension.

Tenecteplase is a genetically mutated variant of alteplase with superior pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. However, its efficacy and safety in acute ischemic strokes are limited. Hence, we conducted a study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase compared with alteplase in acute ischemic stroke. Electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing tenecteplase with alteplase in acute ischemic stroke patients eligible for thrombolysis. We evaluated various efficacy and safety outcomes using random-effects models for both pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses along with meta-regression analyses. We included 5 RCTs with a total of 1585 patients. Compared with alteplase, tenecteplase treatment was associated with significantly greater complete recanalization (odd ratio [OR] 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-3.87; p = 0.04) and early neurological improvement (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.01-2.03; p = 0.05). There were no differences between the two thrombolytics in terms of excellent recovery (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-1; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.95-1.44; p = 0.13), functional independence (mRS 0-2; OR 1.24; 95% CI 0.78-1.98), poor recovery (mRS 4-6; OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.49-1.25; p = 0.31), complete/partial recanalization (OR 1.51; 95% CI 0.70-3.26; p = 0.30), any intracerebral hemorrhage (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.56-1.17; p = 0.26), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.52-1.83; p = 0.94), or mortality (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.54-1.26; p = 0.38). In network meta-analysis, there were better efficacy and imaging-based outcomes with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg without increased risk of safety outcomes. Our results demonstrate that in acute ischemic stroke, thrombolysis with tenecteplase is at least as effective and safe as alteplase.