Trends in Acute Ischemic Stroke Trials Through the 20th Century

Background and Purpose— The advent of controlled clinical trials revolutionized clinical medicine over the course of the 20th century. The objective of this study was to quantitatively characterize developments in clinical trial methodology over time in the field of acute ischemic stroke. Methods— All controlled trials targeting acute ischemic stroke with a final report in English were identified through MEDLINE and international trial registries. Data regarding trial design, implementation, and results were extracted. A formal 100-point scale was used to rate trial quality. Results— A total of 178 controlled acute stroke trials were identified, encompassing 73 949 patients. Eighty-eight trials involved neuroprotective agents, 59 rheological/antithrombotic agents, 26 agents with both neuroprotective and rheological/antithrombotic effects, and 5 a nonpharmacological intervention. Only 3 trials met conventional criteria for a positive outcome. Between the 1950s and 1990s, the number of trials per decade increased from 3 to 99, and mean trial sample size increased from 38 (median, 26) to 661 (median, 113). During 1980–1999, median time window allowed for enrollment decreased per half decade from 48 to 12 hours. Reported pharmaceutical sponsorship increased substantially over time, from 38% before 1970 to 68% in the 1990s. Trial quality improved substantially from a median score of 12 in the 1950s to 72 in the 1990s. Conclusions— Accelerating trends in acute stroke controlled trials include growth in number, sample size, and quality, and reduction in entry time window. These changes reflect an increased understanding of the pathophysiology of acute stroke, the imperative for treatment initiation within a critical time window, and more sophisticated trial design.

[1]  D. Barer Interpretation of IST and CAST stroke trials , 1997, The Lancet.

[2]  W. Koroshetz,et al.  Should thrombolytic therapy be the first-line treatment for acute ischemic stroke? Thrombolysis--not a panacea for ischemic stroke. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  K. Lees Cerestat and other NMDA antagonists in ischemic stroke , 1997, Neurology.

[4]  C. Bulpitt Randomised Controlled Clinical Trials , 1983, Developments in Biostatistics and Epidemiology.

[5]  G Bréart,et al.  From the Cochrane Library , 2000, Revue d'epidemiologie et de sante publique.

[6]  P Sandercock,et al.  Reports of randomized trials in acute stroke, 1955 to 1995. What proportions were commercially sponsored? , 1999, Stroke.

[7]  R. Collins,et al.  Interpretation of IST and CAST stroke trials , 1997, The Lancet.

[8]  J. Zivin Factors determining the therapeutic window for stroke , 1998, Neurology.

[9]  J. Marler,et al.  Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. , 1989, Stroke.

[10]  F. Mahoney,et al.  FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION: THE BARTHEL INDEX. , 2018, Maryland state medical journal.

[11]  Peter Sandercock,et al.  The International Stroke Trial (IST): a randomised trial of aspirin, subcutaneous heparin, both, or neither among 19 435 patients with acute ischaemic stroke , 1997, The Lancet.

[12]  D. Liebeskind,et al.  Acute ischemic stroke trials. , 2001, Stroke.

[13]  Joseph P. Broderick,et al.  Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. , 1995 .

[14]  K. Lees,et al.  Duration of neuroprotective treatment for ischemic stroke. , 1998, Stroke.

[15]  P. Easterbrook,et al.  Publication bias in clinical research , 1991, The Lancet.

[16]  Zheng-Ming Chen,et al.  CAST: randomised placebo-controlled trial of early aspirin use in 20 000 patients with acute ischaemic stroke , 1997, The Lancet.

[17]  R. Higashida,et al.  Intra-arterial Prourokinase for Acute Ischemic Stroke: The PROACT II Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 1999 .

[18]  V. Torri,et al.  Quality, evolution, and clinical implications of randomized, controlled trials on the treatment of lung cancer. A lost opportunity for meta-analysis. , 1989, JAMA.

[19]  G. Marchal,et al.  PET imaging of cerebral perfusion and oxygen consumption in acute ischaemic stroke: relation to outcome , 1993, The Lancet.

[20]  The Ottawa Stroke Trials Registry Collaborative Group and the development of the Ottawa Stroke Trials Registry (OSTR). , 1994, Controlled clinical trials.

[21]  T C Chalmers,et al.  Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I: Control of bias and comparison with large co-operative trials. , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  P. Sandercock What Questions Can Large, Simple Trials Answer? , 1998, Cerebrovascular Diseases.

[23]  George Davey Smith,et al.  meta-analysis bias in location and selection of studies , 1998 .

[24]  Koroshetz Wj,et al.  Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  D. Moher,et al.  Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews , 1996, The Lancet.

[26]  A. Cohen Interpretation of IST and CAST stroke trials. International Stroke Trial. Chinese Acute Stroke Trial. , 1997, Lancet.

[27]  P. Bath,et al.  Quality of full and final publications reporting acute stroke trials: a systematic review. , 1998, Stroke.

[28]  K. Lees,et al.  Safety and tolerability of GV150526 (a glycine site antagonist at the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor) in patients with acute stroke. , 1999, Stroke.

[29]  P. Dorman,et al.  Recently Developed Neuroprotective Therapies for Acute Stroke , 1996 .

[30]  D. Wade,et al.  Outcome measures in acute stroke trials: a systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice. , 2000, Stroke.

[31]  Q E Whiting-O'Keefe,et al.  Controlled clinical trials. , 1983, The American journal of medicine.

[32]  Richard Smith,et al.  An amnesty for unpublished trials , 1997, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[33]  K. Dickersin,et al.  Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. , 1992, JAMA.

[34]  P Sandercock,et al.  The Cochrane Collaboration Stroke Review Group. Meeting the need for systematic reviews in stroke care. , 1995, Stroke.

[35]  C D Naylor,et al.  Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[36]  I. Olkin,et al.  Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. , 1996, JAMA.

[37]  D. Moher,et al.  Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. , 1994, JAMA.

[38]  P. Fayers,et al.  Thirty years of Medical Research Council randomized trials in solid tumours. , 1997, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[39]  C. Warlow,et al.  Systematic review of evidence on thrombolytic therapy for acute ischaemic stroke , 1997, The Lancet.

[40]  J D Emerson,et al.  An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trials. , 1990, Controlled clinical trials.

[41]  P. Dorman,et al.  Considerations in the design of clinical trials of neuroprotective therapy in acute stroke. , 1996, Stroke.

[42]  A. Ahuja,et al.  Low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke , 1995 .

[43]  K. Dickersin,et al.  Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis. , 1994 .