REDUCED- VS STANDARD-INTENSITY IV THROMBOLYSIS IN ACUTE ISCHEMIC STROKE AMONG ADULTS ≥ 80 YEARS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
Main Article Content
Keywords
Acute ischemic stroke; thrombolysis; alteplase; Tenecteplase; elderly; octogenarians; meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: Optimal thrombolytic dosing for very elderly patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) remains uncertain. While standard-dose alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) is globally established, low-dose regimens (0.6 mg/kg) are often used in Asia to reduce hemorrhagic risk. Tenecteplase (TNK), particularly at 0.25 mg/kg, is emerging as a potential alternative, but evidence in patients aged ≥ 80 years is limited.1–6
Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (databases: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP; 1995–Aug 2025). Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative cohorts of AIS
patients aged ≥ 80 years treated with intravenous alteplase or Tenecteplase. Primary outcomes were functional independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0–2 at 90 days) and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 for RCTs and ROBINS-I for cohorts. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed where subgroup data were available; otherwise, results were narratively synthesized.
Results: From 524 records, 62 full texts were reviewed, and 7 studies were
included. Only one study provided quantitative ≥ 80-specific data.3 In a multicenter cohort of octogenarians, standard-dose alteplase achieved higher rates of functional independence than low-dose (34.8% vs 22.2%; RR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42–0.97) with comparable sICH rates. The ENCHANTED trial demonstrated reduced sICH with low-dose alteplase but failed to confirm non-inferiority for efficacy, with no interaction by age ≥ 80.1,2 Trials of Tenecteplase indicated that
0.40 mg/kg conferred no clinical benefit and increased bleeding risk,4 whereas
0.25 mg/kg appeared non-inferior to standard-dose alteplase and safer than higher TNK dosing.5,6,8–10
Conclusions: For AIS patients aged ≥ 80 years, standard-dose alteplase provides superior functional outcomes compared with low-dose, though with persistent bleeding concerns. Tenecteplase at 0.25 mg/kg represents a promising alternative, balancing efficacy, safety, and practical advantages.7,9–14 However, evidence remains limited, with few ≥80-specific RCTs and heterogeneity in sICH definitions. Dedicated age-specific trials, pooled IPD meta-analyses, and large- scale registries are urgently needed to guide thrombolysis decisions in this high- risk population.
References
2. Wang, X., Robinson, T. G., Lee, T. H., et al. (2017). Low-dose vs standard-dose alteplase: Secondary analysis of the ENCHANTED trial. JAMA Neurology, 74(5), 552–560.
3. Chao, A. C., Liu, C. K., Chen, C. H., et al. (2019). Low-dose versus standard-dose alteplase in octogenarians with acute ischemic stroke: A multicenter prospective cohort study. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 396, 78–84.
4. Campbell, B. C. V., Mitchell, P. J., Churilov, L., et al. (2020). Tenecteplase versus alteplase before thrombectomy for ischemic stroke: EXTEND-IA TNK part 2 trial. JAMA, 323(13), 1257–1265.
5. Xiong, Y., Zhang, M., Li, H., et al. (2025). Tenecteplase versus alteplase in elderly patients aged ≥80 years with acute ischemic stroke: A pooled analysis. Stroke & Vascular Neurology.
6. Wang, L., Zhao, J., Gupta, V., et al. (2024). Comprehensive review of tenecteplase dosing strategies in acute ischemic stroke. Journal of the American Heart Association, 13(15), e033210.
7. Potla, N., & Ganti, L. (2022). Tenecteplase vs alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review. International Journal of Emergency Medicine, 15, 1.
8. Palaiodimou, L., Tsivgoulis, G., Katsanos, A. H., et al. (2024). Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) versus tissue plasminogen activator: Updated meta-analysis of randomized trials in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke.
9. Zhang, X., Wan, T., Chen, J., Liu, L., et al. (2023). Tenecteplase versus alteplase for patients with acute ischemic stroke: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Aging, 15, 14889–14899.
10. Bala, F., MacIsaac, R. L., Hill, M. D., et al. (2023). Safety and efficacy of tenecteplase compared with alteplase in acute ischemic stroke. JAMA Neurology, 80(1), 45–53.
11. Rose, D., Chen, Y., Liang, P., et al. (2023). Complications of intravenous tenecteplase versus alteplase in acute ischemic stroke: A comparative safety analysis. Stroke, 54(8), e300–e308.
12. Singh, N., Menon, B. K., Dmytriw, A. A., et al. (2023). Replacing alteplase with tenecteplase: Is the time ripe? Journal of Stroke, 25(1), 72–80.
13. Sjögren, V., Xu, Z., Bouri, S., et al. (2023). Feasibility of switching from alteplase to tenecteplase: Implementation lessons from a multi-center pilot. Stroke, 54(11), e450–e457.
14. Waseem, M. H., Patel, J., Clarke, K. S., et al. (2025). Comparative efficacy and safety of different tenecteplase doses for acute ischemic stroke: Network meta-analysis of 13 randomized trials. Stroke, 56(2), 210–220.
