Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Comprehensive Review of Mechanism, Efficacy, and Evolving Treatment Paradigms

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

Abstract

Alteplase, a recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA), remains a cornerstone of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) management. While its efficacy in improving neurological outcomes within the established treatment window is well-documented, ongoing research continues to refine its utilization and explore expanded therapeutic possibilities. This review delves into the mechanism of action of alteplase, its administration protocols, efficacy windows, contraindications, and associated side effects. We critically evaluate the comparative effectiveness of alteplase relative to newer thrombolytics, particularly tenecteplase, and analyze the implications of recent studies investigating extended treatment windows, especially in the context of advanced neuroimaging. Furthermore, we delineate the specific stroke subtypes where alteplase demonstrates limited or no benefit, emphasizing the importance of accurate stroke diagnosis and patient selection for optimal outcomes. Finally, we will discuss the crucial role of imaging in extending the treatment window in this complex area of stroke treatment.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

1. Introduction

Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a leading cause of mortality and long-term disability worldwide [1]. Rapid restoration of cerebral blood flow to the ischemic penumbra is the primary goal of acute stroke management, and intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase has been the standard of care for eligible patients since its approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1996 [2]. Alteplase, a recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA), initiates fibrinolysis by converting plasminogen to plasmin, leading to the dissolution of the thrombus occluding the cerebral artery. Despite its proven efficacy, alteplase use is constrained by a narrow therapeutic time window and the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). These limitations have spurred ongoing research to optimize alteplase administration, identify patients most likely to benefit, and explore alternative or adjunctive therapies. This review provides a comprehensive overview of alteplase in AIS, encompassing its mechanism of action, administration protocols, efficacy, safety profile, comparative effectiveness, and the evolving landscape of thrombolytic therapy.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

2. Mechanism of Action

Alteplase is a serine protease that acts as a tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA). Its primary mechanism involves binding to fibrin within a thrombus, facilitating the conversion of plasminogen to plasmin [3]. Plasmin, a potent enzyme, then degrades fibrin, the main structural component of blood clots, leading to thrombolysis and restoration of blood flow. The activation of plasminogen by alteplase is significantly enhanced in the presence of fibrin, which explains its relative specificity for clot-bound plasminogen compared to circulating plasminogen [4]. This mechanism is crucial in limiting systemic activation of the coagulation cascade, thereby reducing the risk of bleeding complications.

However, the specificity of alteplase for clot-bound plasminogen is not absolute. In some cases, circulating plasminogen can still be activated, leading to a systemic lytic state and increasing the risk of bleeding. Furthermore, alteplase can interact with other components of the coagulation system, such as platelets, contributing to the risk of hemorrhage. The interaction with platelets may be exacerbated by the presence of antiplatelet agents, frequently used in patients at risk of vascular events. Understanding these complex interactions is crucial for optimizing alteplase administration and mitigating potential adverse effects.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

3. Administration Protocols and Efficacy Windows

The standard alteplase dose for AIS is 0.9 mg/kg (maximum 90 mg), with 10% of the total dose administered as an initial intravenous bolus over 1-2 minutes, followed by the remaining 90% infused over 60 minutes [5]. The infusion must be commenced within 4.5 hours of stroke symptom onset, based on the findings of pivotal clinical trials such as the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) rt-PA Stroke Study and the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS) III [2, 6].

The NINDS study established the benefit of alteplase within 3 hours of symptom onset, demonstrating improved neurological outcomes at 3 months compared to placebo. ECASS III extended the treatment window to 4.5 hours, showing a similar benefit with alteplase, albeit with a slightly increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. A critical aspect of determining eligibility for alteplase within the 4.5-hour window is accurate assessment of the time of stroke onset. This can be challenging in patients with wake-up strokes or those unable to provide a reliable history.

Recent advancements in neuroimaging have opened avenues for extending the treatment window beyond 4.5 hours in carefully selected patients. The DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials demonstrated that patients with salvageable brain tissue, as determined by advanced imaging techniques such as perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) or diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) mismatch, could benefit from alteplase even up to 24 hours after stroke onset [7, 8]. These trials highlight the importance of individualizing treatment decisions based on the presence of a substantial penumbra and the absence of a large established infarct core. The key criteria for eligibility for extended-window thrombolysis often include: clinical-core mismatch defined by imaging, a patient’s clinical presentation relative to the extent of the infarct, and the time since stroke onset. It’s also important to note that not all patients with a clinical-core mismatch will benefit, and careful consideration of the risks and benefits is still required.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

4. Contraindications and Safety Profile

Alteplase is associated with several contraindications, both absolute and relative, which must be carefully considered before administration. Absolute contraindications include: active internal bleeding, known bleeding diathesis, intracranial neoplasm, recent intracranial or intraspinal surgery or trauma, history of intracranial hemorrhage, suspected aortic dissection, and acute pericarditis [9]. Severe uncontrolled hypertension (systolic blood pressure >185 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure >110 mmHg despite treatment) is also considered an absolute contraindication until blood pressure is adequately controlled.

Relative contraindications include: recent major surgery or trauma, recent gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding, recent arterial puncture at a noncompressible site, pregnancy, and advanced age [9]. The decision to administer alteplase in the presence of relative contraindications requires careful clinical judgment, weighing the potential benefits against the risks of bleeding complications.

The most feared complication of alteplase is symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), defined as any hemorrhage associated with a neurological deterioration of ≥4 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) or leading to death [10]. The incidence of sICH varies across studies, ranging from approximately 2% to 8%, and is influenced by factors such as age, stroke severity, blood pressure control, and the presence of other risk factors. Other potential side effects of alteplase include angioedema, systemic bleeding, and allergic reactions.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

5. Comparison to Other Thrombolytics

While alteplase remains the most widely used thrombolytic agent for AIS, other agents, such as tenecteplase and reteplase, have been investigated as potential alternatives. Tenecteplase, a genetically engineered variant of alteplase, has several theoretical advantages, including a longer half-life, greater fibrin specificity, and resistance to plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) [11]. These properties allow for a single bolus administration, potentially simplifying administration and improving ease of use.

Several clinical trials have compared tenecteplase to alteplase in AIS. The NOR-TEST trial suggested that tenecteplase (0.4 mg/kg) was non-inferior to alteplase in patients with minor stroke or those ineligible for mechanical thrombectomy [12]. The EXTEND-IA TNK Part 1 trial demonstrated that tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) was superior to alteplase in achieving early reperfusion in patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke eligible for mechanical thrombectomy [13]. The ATTEST 2 trial and others have supported these findings and showed that tenecteplase (0.25mg/kg) could lead to a higher percentage of successful reperfusion and better outcomes, particularly in patients with large vessel occlusions who were eligible for endovascular therapy.

Based on these findings, tenecteplase has emerged as a promising alternative to alteplase, particularly for patients with LVO stroke who are candidates for mechanical thrombectomy. Its ease of administration and potential for improved reperfusion rates make it an attractive option, although further research is needed to fully elucidate its safety and efficacy compared to alteplase in diverse patient populations and across different stroke subtypes. It is also worth noting that the cost of tenecteplase is typically higher than that of alteplase, which may influence its adoption in certain healthcare settings.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

6. Implications of Recent Studies Suggesting Extended Treatment Windows

The DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials have significantly altered the landscape of acute stroke management by demonstrating the potential for benefit with alteplase in carefully selected patients up to 24 hours after stroke onset. These trials utilized advanced neuroimaging techniques to identify patients with a clinical-core mismatch, indicating the presence of a substantial penumbra and the potential for tissue salvage with reperfusion [7, 8].

The DAWN trial included patients with stroke onset between 6 and 24 hours who had a severe clinical deficit relative to their infarct core size on imaging. The DEFUSE 3 trial enrolled patients with stroke onset between 6 and 16 hours who had a favorable penumbral pattern on perfusion imaging. Both trials showed that alteplase administration within these extended time windows resulted in improved functional outcomes compared to placebo. These trials have led to changes in guidelines and clinical practice, with many centers now incorporating advanced imaging protocols to identify patients who may be eligible for extended-window thrombolysis. However, several important considerations must be taken into account when implementing these findings in clinical practice.

First, the selection criteria used in the DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials were highly specific, and careful adherence to these criteria is essential to ensure patient safety and maximize the potential for benefit. Second, the availability of advanced neuroimaging techniques, such as perfusion-weighted imaging, may be limited in some centers. Third, the logistical challenges of performing advanced imaging and administering alteplase within an extended time window can be significant. Finally, it’s essential to remember that extending the thrombolysis window is only effective in specific subgroups of patients and careful patient selection based on advanced imaging criteria is paramount to ensure efficacy.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

7. Stroke Subtypes Where Alteplase May Not Be Effective

While alteplase is generally effective for acute ischemic stroke caused by thromboembolic occlusion of cerebral arteries, its efficacy is limited in certain stroke subtypes. For example, in patients with stroke due to small vessel occlusion (lacunar stroke), the benefits of alteplase may be less pronounced [14]. Lacunar strokes typically result from occlusion of small penetrating arteries and often have a more benign clinical course compared to large vessel occlusions. Furthermore, the risk of hemorrhage with alteplase may outweigh the potential benefits in this patient population. Further studies are needed to look at this area.

Similarly, alteplase is not effective for non-ischemic strokes, such as hemorrhagic stroke or subarachnoid hemorrhage. In fact, administering alteplase in these situations can be catastrophic, leading to significant worsening of the hemorrhage and increased mortality. Accurate differentiation between ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke is therefore essential before initiating thrombolytic therapy, typically achieved through non-contrast computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain. The main imaging modality used is non-contrast CT, but in special cases, a MRI may be required. The key is to identify the stroke type to provide suitable treatment.

Another area where alteplase’s efficacy is limited is in patients with stroke secondary to arterial dissection. In these cases, the underlying pathology is a tear in the arterial wall, leading to thrombus formation and subsequent distal embolization. While alteplase may dissolve the thrombus, it does not address the underlying arterial dissection, and further embolization may occur. In patients with arterial dissection, alternative treatment strategies, such as anticoagulation or endovascular intervention, may be more appropriate.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

8. The Role of Imaging in Extending the Treatment Window

The integration of advanced neuroimaging techniques, such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI), has revolutionized the management of acute ischemic stroke, particularly in the context of extending the thrombolysis treatment window. These imaging modalities provide critical information about the extent of irreversible ischemic core and the potentially salvageable penumbra, allowing for more precise patient selection for thrombolytic therapy [15].

DWI identifies areas of acute infarction based on restricted water diffusion, reflecting cytotoxic edema and irreversible tissue damage. PWI, on the other hand, assesses cerebral blood flow and identifies regions of hypoperfusion, representing the ischemic penumbra. The mismatch between DWI and PWI, where the area of hypoperfusion significantly exceeds the area of established infarction, indicates the presence of salvageable brain tissue and suggests that the patient may benefit from reperfusion therapy, even beyond the traditional 4.5-hour window.

In the DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials, the use of DWI-PWI mismatch was crucial in identifying patients who benefited from alteplase administration up to 24 hours after stroke onset. These trials demonstrated that patients with a favorable mismatch pattern had significantly better functional outcomes compared to placebo, while those without a mismatch pattern did not benefit from thrombolysis. In clinical practice, the use of DWI-PWI mismatch requires specialized imaging equipment and expertise in image interpretation. However, the potential benefits of extending the treatment window and improving patient outcomes justify the investment in these advanced imaging capabilities.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

9. Conclusion

Alteplase remains a crucial therapeutic agent in the management of acute ischemic stroke. Its efficacy within the established treatment window is well-documented, and ongoing research continues to refine its utilization and explore expanded therapeutic possibilities. The DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials have demonstrated the potential for benefit with alteplase in carefully selected patients up to 24 hours after stroke onset, highlighting the importance of advanced neuroimaging in identifying patients with salvageable brain tissue. While newer thrombolytic agents, such as tenecteplase, offer potential advantages in terms of ease of administration and reperfusion rates, further research is needed to fully elucidate their safety and efficacy compared to alteplase. Accurate stroke diagnosis, careful patient selection, and adherence to established protocols are essential for optimizing alteplase administration and improving outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke. In the future, more trials will need to focus on the use of imaging to extend the treatment window for thrombolysis, but this needs to be done carefully and with strict adherence to established protocols.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

References

[1] Benjamin EJ, Virani SS, Callaway CW, Chamberlain AM, Chang AR, Cheng S, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2018 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2018;137(12):e67-e492.

[2] National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(24):1581-7.

[3] Lijnen HR, Collen D. Tissue-type plasminogen activator. Thromb Haemost. 1993;70(5):758-69.

[4] Collen D, Lijnen HR. Basic and clinical aspects of fibrinolysis. Blood. 1991;78(12):3114-24.

[5] del Zoppo GJ, Saver JL, Jauch EC, Adams HP Jr. Expansion of the time window for treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2009;40(8):2945-8.

[6] Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, Brozman M, Dávalos A, Guidetti D, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(13):1317-29.

[7] Albers GW, Marks MP, Kemp S, Christensen S, Tsai JP, Ortega-Gutierrez S, et al. Thrombectomy for Stroke at 6 to 16 Hours with Selection by Perfusion Imaging. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(8):708-18.

[8] Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, Bonafe A, Budzik RF, Cognard C, et al. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 Hours after Stroke with a Mismatch between Deficit and Infarct. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(1):11-21.

[9] Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, Adeoye OM, Bambauer JK, Billimoria AL, et al. 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2018;49(3):e46-e110.

[10] Wahlgren N, Ahmed N, Dávalos A, Ford GA, Grond M, Hacke W, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST): an observational study. Lancet. 2007;369(9558):275-82.

[11] Ward R, Brogden RN. Tenecteplase: a review of its use in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2003;3(3):195-213.

[12] Logallo N, Novotny V, Assmus J, Kvistad CE, Thommessen B, Idnani A, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase for management of acute ischaemic stroke (NOR-TEST): a phase 3, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint trial. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(10):781-8.

[13] Campbell BCV, Mitchell PJ, Tudorovic M, Kleinig TJ, Yan B, Dewey HM, et al. Tenecteplase versus Alteplase before Thrombectomy for Ischemic Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(17):1573-82.

[14] Sandercock PA, Wardlaw JM, Lindley RI, Dennis M, Cohen G, Murray G, et al. The benefits and harms of intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator within 6 h of acute ischaemic stroke (the Third International Stroke Trial [IST3]): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9814):524-33.

[15] Davis SM, Donnan GA, Parsons MW, Levi C, Butcher KS, Peeters A, et al. Imaging selection and endovascular treatment for ischaemic stroke. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(9):773-86.