Tenecteplase versus alteplase in treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a randomized non-inferiority trial
Xingshan Zhao,Yidan Zhu,Zheng Zhang,Guizhou Tao,Haiyan Xu,Guanchang Cheng,Wen Gao,Liping Ma,Liping Qi,Xiaoyan Yan,Haibo Wang,Qingde Xia,Yuwang Yang,Wanke Li,Juwen Rong,Limei Wang,Yutian Ding,Qiang Guo,Wanjun Dang,Chen Yao,Qin Yang,Runlin Gao,Yangfeng Wu,Shubin Qiao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/cm9.0000000000002731
IF: 6.133
2023-06-02
Chinese Medical Journal
Abstract: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 (NCT02835534).
medicine, general & internal