No abstract

Background and Purpose: There is an unmet need for a more effective thrombolytic agent in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) management. Various studies and meta-analysis suggest tenecteplase (TNK) as non-inferior over alteplase (rTPA). The present single-center study compares biosimilar TNK and rTPA in a tertiary care setting. Methods: Data of patients who presented with AIS and underwent intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) were recruited retrospectively from January 2018 to July 2021. Primary efficacy outcome was a modified Rankin score (mRS) at 90 days dichotomized at < = 2. Qualitative and quantitative variables were assessed using Chi-square test and Student's t-test, respectively. Results: A total of 160 patients, 103 in the rTPA and 57 in TNK group, were analyzed. The baseline characteristics were well matched apart from hypertension. Large artery atherosclerosis was the most frequent subtype of stroke among the two groups. Good functional outcome was seen in 47.92% of patients TNK and 64.77% of patients in rTPA group (p = 0.069). No difference was seen in the rates of any ICH (p = 0.29) and mortality at 3 months (p = 0.32) among the two groups. Conclusion: This present study observed no difference in the efficacy and safety between biosimilar TNK and rTPA. Our findings are in concordance with published trials showing equivalence between the two molecules.

Background: One of the major challenges is to deliver adequate health care in rural India, where more than two-thirds of India's population lives. There is a severe shortage of specialists in rural areas with one of the world's lowest physician/population ratios. There is only one neurologist per 1.25 million population. Stroke rehabilitation is virtually nonexistent in most district hospitals. Two innovative solutions include training physicians in district hospitals to diagnose and manage acute stroke ('Stroke physician model') and using a low-cost Telestroke model. We will be assessing the efficacy of these models through a cluster-randomized trial with a standard of care database maintained simultaneously in tertiary nodal centers with neurologists. Methods: SMART INDIA is a multicenter, open-label cluster-randomized trial with the hospital as a unit of randomization. The study will include district hospitals from the different states of India. We plan to enroll 22 district hospitals where a general physician manages the emergency without the services of a neurologist. These units (hospitals) will be randomized into either of two interventions using computer-generated random sequences with allocation concealment. Blinding of patients and clinicians will not be possible. The outcome assessment will be conducted by the blinded central adjudication team. The study includes 12 expert centers involved in the Telestroke arm by providing neurologists and telerehabilitation round the clock for attending calls. These centers will also be the training hub for “stroke physicians” where they will be given intensive short-term training for the management of acute stroke. There will be a preintervention data collection (1 month), followed by the intervention model implementation (3 months). Outcomes: The primary outcome will be the composite score (percentage) of performance of acute stroke care bundle assessed at 1 and 3 months after the intervention. The highest score (100%) will be achieved if all the eligible patients receive the standard stroke care bundle. The study will have an open-label extension for 3 more months. Conclusion: SMART INDIA assesses whether the low-cost Telestroke model is superior to the stroke physician model in achieving acute stroke care delivery. The results of this study can be utilized in national programs for stroke and can be a role model for stroke care delivery in low- and middle-Income countries. (CTRI/2021/11/038196)

No abstract

No abstract