Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 680

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Randomized Trial of Tenecteplase versus Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Parsons, Mark, Spratt, Neil, Bivard, Andrew, Campbell, Bruce, Chung, Kong, Miteff, Ferdinand, O'Brien, Bill, Bladin, Christopher, McElduff, Patrick, Allen, Chris, Bateman, Grant, Donnan, Geoffrey, Davis, Stephen, Levi, Christopher·2012·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intravenous alteplase is the only approved treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Tenecteplase, a genetically engineered mutant tissue plasminogen activator, is an alternative thrombolytic agent. METHODS: In this phase 2B trial, we randomly assigned 75 patients to receive alteplase (0.9 mg per kilogram of body weight) or tenecteplase (0.1 mg per kilogram or 0.25 mg per kilogram) less than 6 hours after the onset of ischemic stroke. To favor the selection of patients most likely to benefit from thrombolytic therapy, the eligibility criteria were a perfusion lesion at least 20% greater than the infarct core on computed tomographic (CT) perfusion imaging at baseline and an associated vessel occlusion on CT angiography. The coprimary end points were the proportion of the perfusion lesion that was reperfused at 24 hours on perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and the extent of clinical improvement at 24 hours as assessed on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS, a 42-point scale on which higher scores indicate more severe neurologic deficits). RESULTS: The three treatment groups each comprised 25 patients. The mean (±SD) NIHSS score at baseline for all patients was 14.4±2.6, and the time to treatment was 2.9±0.8 hours. Together, the two tenecteplase groups had greater reperfusion (P=0.004) and clinical improvement (P<0.001) at 24 hours than the alteplase group. There were no significant between-group differences in intracranial bleeding or other serious adverse events. The higher dose of tenecteplase (0.25 mg per kilogram) was superior to the lower dose and to alteplase for all efficacy outcomes, including absence of serious disability at 90 days (in 72% of patients, vs. 40% with alteplase; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Tenecteplase was associated with significantly better reperfusion and clinical outcomes than alteplase in patients with stroke who were selected on the basis of CT perfusion imaging. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12608000466347.).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1109842

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 680

Metadata

Authors
Parsons, M., Spratt, N., Bivard, A., Campbell, B., Chung, K., Miteff, F., O'Brien, B., Bladin, C., McElduff, P., Allen, C., Bateman, G., Donnan, G., Davis, S., & Levi, C.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2012-03-22
Volume
366
Issue
12
Pages
1099-1107
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1972869299
Cited by
680
References
1
FWCI
42.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Randomized Trial of Tenecteplase versus Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1109842
The paper
Parsons, M., Spratt, N., Bivard, A., Campbell, B., Chung, K., Miteff, F., O'Brien, B., Bladin, C., McElduff, P., Allen, C., Bateman, G., Donnan, G., Davis, S., & Levi, C. (2012). A Randomized Trial of Tenecteplase versus Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1109842

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.