Anna M M Boers1,2,3, Ivo G H Jansen1,2, Scott Brown4, Hester F Lingsma5, Ludo F M Beenen2, Thomas G Devlin6, Luis San Román7, Ji-Hoe Heo8, Marc Ribó9, Mohammed A Almekhlafi10, David S Liebeskind11, Jeanne Teitelbaum12, Patricia Cuadras13, Richard du Mesnil de Rochemont14, Marine Beaumont15, Martin M Brown16, Albert J Yoo17, Geoffrey A Donnan18, Jean Louis Mas19, Catherine Oppenheim20, Richard J Dowling21, Thierry Moulin22, Nelly Agrinier23, Demetrius K Lopes24, Lucía Aja Rodríguez25, Kars C J Compagne26,27, Fahad S Al-Ajlan28, Jeremy Madigan29, Gregory W Albers30, Sebastien Soize31, Jordi Blasco7, Stephen M Davis32, Raul G Nogueira33, Antoni Dávalos34, Bijoy K Menon35, Aad van der Lugt26, Keith W Muir36, Yvo B W E M Roos37, Phil White38, Peter J Mitchell21, Andrew M Demchuk35, Wim H van Zwam39, Tudor G Jovin40, Robert J van Oostenbrugge41, Diederik W J Dippel27, Bruce C V Campbell32, Francis Guillemin23, Serge Bracard42, Michael D Hill35, Mayank Goyal35, Henk A Marquering1,2, Charles B L M Majoie2. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam University Medical Center, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Robotics and Mechatronics, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands. 4. Altair Biostatistics, Mooresville, North Carolina. 5. Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 6. Department of Neurology, Erlanger Hospital, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. 7. Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. 8. Department of Neurology, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea. 9. Department of Neurology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. 10. Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. 11. Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles. 12. Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 13. Department of Radiology, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. 14. Department of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital, University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 15. Inserm CIC-IT 1433, University of Lorraine and University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France. 16. Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom. 17. Division of Neurointervention, Texas Stroke Institute, Dallas. 18. The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Melbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 19. Department of Neurology, Sainte-Anne Hospital and Paris-Descartes University, INSERM U894, Paris, France. 20. Department of Neuroradiology, Sainte-Anne Hospital and Paris-Descartes University, INSERM U894, Paris, France. 21. Department of Radiology, Melbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 22. Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Besançon, University of Franche-Comté, Besançon, France. 23. Inserm, Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy, Université de Lorraine, CIC1433-Epidémiologie Clinique, Nancy, France. 24. Department of Neurological Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois. 25. Neuroradiology Department, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. 26. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 27. Department of Neurology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 28. Department of Neurosciences, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 29. St George's University Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 30. Department of Neurology, Stanford Stroke Center, Palo Alto, California. 31. Department of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Reims, Reims, France. 32. Department of Medicine and Neurology, Melbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 33. Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Radiology, Grady Memorial Hospital, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 34. Department of Neuroscience, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. 35. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 36. Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom. 37. Department of Neurology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 38. Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. 39. Department of Radiology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 40. Stroke Institute, Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 41. Department of Neurology, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 42. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, INSERM U947, University of Lorraine and University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France.
Abstract
Importance: The positive treatment effect of endovascular therapy (EVT) is assumed to be caused by the preservation of brain tissue. It remains unclear to what extent the treatment-related reduction in follow-up infarct volume (FIV) explains the improved functional outcome after EVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Objective: To study whether FIV mediates the relationship between EVT and functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patient data from 7 randomized multicenter trials were pooled. These trials were conducted between December 2010 and April 2015 and included 1764 patients randomly assigned to receive either EVT or standard care (control). Follow-up infarct volume was assessed on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging after stroke onset. Mediation analysis was performed to examine the potential causal chain in which FIV may mediate the relationship between EVT and functional outcome. A total of 1690 patients met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five additional patients were excluded, resulting in a total of 1665 patients, including 821 (49.3%) in the EVT group and 844 (50.7%) in the control group. Data were analyzed from January to June 2017. Main Outcome and Measure: The 90-day functional outcome via the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results: Among 1665 patients, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 68 (57-76) years, and 781 (46.9%) were female. The median (IQR) time to FIV measurement was 30 (24-237) hours. The median (IQR) FIV was 41 (14-120) mL. Patients in the EVT group had significantly smaller FIVs compared with patients in the control group (median [IQR] FIV, 33 [11-99] vs 51 [18-134] mL; P = .007) and lower mRS scores at 90 days (median [IQR] score, 3 [1-4] vs 4 [2-5]). Follow-up infarct volume was a predictor of functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39-0.54; P < .001). Follow-up infarct volume partially mediated the relationship between treatment type with mRS score, as EVT was still significantly associated with functional outcome after adjustment for FIV (adjusted common odds ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.52-3.21; P < .001). Treatment-reduced FIV explained 12% (95% CI, 1-19) of the relationship between EVT and functional outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis, follow-up infarct volume predicted functional outcome; however, a reduced infarct volume after treatment with EVT only explained 12% of the treatment benefit. Follow-up infarct volume as measured on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging is not a valid proxy for estimating treatment effect in phase II and III trials of acute ischemic stroke.
Importance: The positive treatment effect of endovascular therapy (EVT) is assumed to be caused by the preservation of brain tissue. It remains unclear to what extent the treatment-related reduction in follow-up infarct volume (FIV) explains the improved functional outcome after EVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Objective: To study whether FIV mediates the relationship between EVT and functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patient data from 7 randomized multicenter trials were pooled. These trials were conducted between December 2010 and April 2015 and included 1764 patients randomly assigned to receive either EVT or standard care (control). Follow-up infarct volume was assessed on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging after stroke onset. Mediation analysis was performed to examine the potential causal chain in which FIV may mediate the relationship between EVT and functional outcome. A total of 1690 patients met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five additional patients were excluded, resulting in a total of 1665 patients, including 821 (49.3%) in the EVT group and 844 (50.7%) in the control group. Data were analyzed from January to June 2017. Main Outcome and Measure: The 90-day functional outcome via the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results: Among 1665 patients, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 68 (57-76) years, and 781 (46.9%) were female. The median (IQR) time to FIV measurement was 30 (24-237) hours. The median (IQR) FIV was 41 (14-120) mL. Patients in the EVT group had significantly smaller FIVs compared with patients in the control group (median [IQR] FIV, 33 [11-99] vs 51 [18-134] mL; P = .007) and lower mRS scores at 90 days (median [IQR] score, 3 [1-4] vs 4 [2-5]). Follow-up infarct volume was a predictor of functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39-0.54; P < .001). Follow-up infarct volume partially mediated the relationship between treatment type with mRS score, as EVT was still significantly associated with functional outcome after adjustment for FIV (adjusted common odds ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.52-3.21; P < .001). Treatment-reduced FIV explained 12% (95% CI, 1-19) of the relationship between EVT and functional outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis, follow-up infarct volume predicted functional outcome; however, a reduced infarct volume after treatment with EVT only explained 12% of the treatment benefit. Follow-up infarct volume as measured on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging is not a valid proxy for estimating treatment effect in phase II and III trials of acute ischemic stroke.
Authors: Albert J Yoo; Zeshan A Chaudhry; Raul G Nogueira; Michael H Lev; Pamela W Schaefer; Lee H Schwamm; Joshua A Hirsch; R Gilberto González Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: F S Al-Ajlan; A S Al Sultan; P Minhas; Z Assis; M A de Miquel; M Millán; L San Román; A Tomassello; A M Demchuk; T G Jovin; P Cuadras; A Dávalos; M Goyal; B K Menon Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: J H Pexman; P A Barber; M D Hill; R J Sevick; A M Demchuk; M E Hudon; W Y Hu; A M Buchan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Fahad S Al-Ajlan; Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Priyanka Minhas; Farahna Sabiq; Zarina Assis; Robert Willinsky; Walter J Montanera; Jeremy L Rempel; Ashfaq Shuaib; John Thornton; David Williams; Daniel Roy; Alexandre Y Poppe; Tudor G Jovin; Biggya L Sapkota; Blaise W Baxter; Timo Krings; Frank L Silver; Donald F Frei; Christopher Fanale; Donatella Tampieri; Jeanne Teitelbaum; Cheemun Lum; Dar Dowlatshahi; Jai J Shankar; Philip A Barber; Michael D Hill; Bijoy K Menon Journal: Stroke Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Bijoy K Menon; Wim H van Zwam; Diederik W J Dippel; Peter J Mitchell; Andrew M Demchuk; Antoni Dávalos; Charles B L M Majoie; Aad van der Lugt; Maria A de Miquel; Geoffrey A Donnan; Yvo B W E M Roos; Alain Bonafe; Reza Jahan; Hans-Christoph Diener; Lucie A van den Berg; Elad I Levy; Olvert A Berkhemer; Vitor M Pereira; Jeremy Rempel; Mònica Millán; Stephen M Davis; Daniel Roy; John Thornton; Luis San Román; Marc Ribó; Debbie Beumer; Bruce Stouch; Scott Brown; Bruce C V Campbell; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Jeffrey L Saver; Michael D Hill; Tudor G Jovin Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Tudor G Jovin; Angel Chamorro; Erik Cobo; María A de Miquel; Carlos A Molina; Alex Rovira; Luis San Román; Joaquín Serena; Sonia Abilleira; Marc Ribó; Mònica Millán; Xabier Urra; Pere Cardona; Elena López-Cancio; Alejandro Tomasello; Carlos Castaño; Jordi Blasco; Lucía Aja; Laura Dorado; Helena Quesada; Marta Rubiera; María Hernandez-Pérez; Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Rüdiger von Kummer; Miquel Gallofré; Antoni Dávalos Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M Ernst; N D Forkert; L Brehmer; G Thomalla; S Siemonsen; J Fiehler; A Kemmling Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A M Boers; H A Marquering; J J Jochem; N J Besselink; O A Berkhemer; A van der Lugt; L F Beenen; C B Majoie Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Hopin Lee; Aidan G Cashin; Sarah E Lamb; Sally Hopewell; Stijn Vansteelandt; Tyler J VanderWeele; David P MacKinnon; Gemma Mansell; Gary S Collins; Robert M Golub; James H McAuley; A Russell Localio; Ludo van Amelsvoort; Eliseo Guallar; Judith Rijnhart; Kimberley Goldsmith; Amanda J Fairchild; Cara C Lewis; Steven J Kamper; Christopher M Williams; Nicholas Henschke Journal: JAMA Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ronen R Leker; Asaf Honig; Andrei Filioglo; Naaem Simaan; John M Gomori; Jose E Cohen Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: W Taylor Kimberly; Bruce C V Campbell; Felix C Ng; Nawaf Yassi; Gagan Sharma; Scott B Brown; Mayank Goyal; Charles B L M Majoie; Tudor G Jovin; Michael D Hill; Keith W Muir; Jeffrey L Saver; Francis Guillemin; Andrew M Demchuk; Bijoy K Menon; Luis San Roman; David S Liebeskind; Philip White; Diederik W J Dippel; Antoni Davalos; Serge Bracard; Peter J Mitchell; Michael J Wald; Stephen M Davis; Kevin N Sheth Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Eckhard Schlemm; Thies Ingwersen; Alina Königsberg; Florent Boutitie; Martin Ebinger; Matthias Endres; Jochen B Fiebach; Jens Fiehler; Ivana Galinovic; Robin Lemmens; Keith W Muir; Norbert Nighoghossian; Salvador Pedraza; Josep Puig; Claus Z Simonsen; Vincent Thijs; Anke Wouters; Christian Gerloff; Götz Thomalla; Bastian Cheng Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-05-10 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: F Bala; J Ospel; B Mulpur; B J Kim; J Yoo; B K Menon; M Goyal; C Federau; S-I Sohn; M S Hussain; M A Almekhlafi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 4.966
Authors: Andreas Kastrup; Christian Roth; Maria Politi; Maria Alexandrou; Helmut Hildebrandt; Andreas Schröter; Panagiotis Papanagiotou Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Marios-Nikos Psychogios; Peter B Sporns; Johanna Ospel; Aristeidis H Katsanos; Reza Kabiri; Fabian A Flottmann; Bijoy K Menon; Mackenzie Horn; David S Liebeskind; Tristan Honda; Marc Ribo; Manuel Requena Ruiz; Christoph Kabbasch; Thorsten Lichtenstein; Christoph J Maurer; Ansgar Berlis; Victoria Hellstern; Hans Henkes; Markus A Möhlenbruch; Fatih Seker; Marielle S Ernst; Jan Liman; Georgios Tsivgoulis; Alex Brehm Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: J M Ospel; M D Hill; B K Menon; A Demchuk; R McTaggart; R Nogueira; A Poppe; D Haussen; W Qiu; A Mayank; M Almekhlafi; C Zerna; M Joshi; M Jayaraman; D Roy; J Rempel; B Buck; M Tymianski; M Goyal Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-06-24 Impact factor: 4.966