This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 40/2/577    most recent STROKEAHA.108.524330v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Philip, M. Articles by Savitz, S. I. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Philip, M. Articles by Savitz, S. I. Related Collections Animal models of human disease Acute Cerebral Infarction Neuroprotectors

(Stroke. 2009;40:577.)
© 2009 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

Methodological Quality of Animal Studies of Neuroprotective Agents Currently in Phase II/III Acute Ischemic Stroke Trials

Maria Philip, BS; Michael Benatar, MD; Marc Fisher, MD Sean I. Savitz, MD

From the Department of Neurology (M.P., S.I.S.), University of Texas, Houston Medical School; the Department of Neurology (M.B.), Emory University, Atlanta, Ga; and the Department of Neurology (M.F.), University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, Mass.

Correspondence to Sean I. Savitz, MD, Department of Neurology, University of Texas Houston Medical School, Houston, TX 77030. E-mail sean.i.savitz{at}uth.tmc.edu

Background and Purpose— Numerous neuroprotective agents have proven effective in animal stroke studies, but every drug has failed to achieve its primary outcome when brought forward to clinical trials. We analyzed the quality and adequacy of animal studies supporting the efficacy of NXY-059 and other neuroprotective agents that are currently being investigated in phase II/III trials.

Methods— We conducted a systematic search of all neuroprotective drugs in Phase II or III trials and collected data from animal studies of focal cerebral ischemia testing agents systemically administered within 24 hours of occlusion. The methodological rigor of each individual study was evaluated using 5 criteria derived from the STAIR guidelines. The adequacy of the preclinical "package" for each drug was then evaluated by combining the results of all studies for each drug to determine which of a further 5 STAIR criteria were met before moving forward from animal to human studies.

Results— Our search yielded 13 agents of which 10 had published data in peer-reviewed journals. There is substantial within-drug variability in the quality of preclinical studies as well as substantial variation in the completeness of the collective preclinical literature for different drugs. There has been little or no improvement in the quality of animal studies since NXY-059, and current agents have not been subjected to a more complete preclinical evaluation.

Conclusion— There is significant heterogeneity in the quality of animal testing for neuroprotective agents in stroke. Drugs in the post-SAINT era have not been subjected to more thorough preclinical evaluation.

Key Words: focal cerebral ischemia • neuroprotection • quality • animal model

This article has been cited by other articles:

				V. E. O'Collins, G. A. Donnan, M. R. Macleod, and D. W. Howells Scope of Preclinical Testing Versus Quality Control Within Experiments Stroke, July 1, 2009; 40(7): e497 - e497. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Fisher, G. Feuerstein, D. W. Howells, P. D. Hurn, T. A. Kent, S. I. Savitz, E. H. Lo, and for the STAIR Group Update of the Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable Preclinical Recommendations Stroke, June 1, 2009; 40(6): 2244 - 2250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]