This Article Full Text 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 Adams, R. J. Articles by del Zoppo, G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Adams, R. J. Articles by del Zoppo, G.

(Stroke. 1995;26:2216-2218.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.

Articles

Acute Stroke Treatment Trials in the United States

Rethinking Strategies for Success

Robert J. Adams, MD; Marc Fisher, MD; Anthony J. Furlan, MD Gregory del Zoppo, MD

From the Department of Neurology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta (R.J.A.); the Medical Center of Central Massachusetts, Worcester (M.F.); the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Ohio (A.J.F.); and the Department of Molecular and Experimental Medicine, The Scripps Research Institute, San Diego, Calif (G. del Z.).

Correspondence to Robert J. Adams, MD, Department of Neurology, HB 2060, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA 30912-3200. E-mail @emgmhs.mcg.edu.

	Introduction

 
In the recent Humana Lecture,¹ Harold Adams quoted what might be the prevailing sentiment guiding the search for a treatment for acute ischemic stroke: "When we have a treatment for stroke, we will know it." The implicit assumption is that there is a treatment that will dramatically improve acute stroke outcome. The current approach to finding a treatment for ischemic stroke is based on single-agent trials, sponsored mainly by pharmaceutical companies, that may produce a "winner," to be followed by a "therapeutic cocktail" to combat the complex events set in motion by cerebral ischemia. Progress in ischemic stroke treatment trials over the last two decades has included improved statistical design, radically shortened entry windows, standardized rating instruments, and shared sponsorship between industry and government. We wish to raise concerns about the current approach to testing new stroke treatments and the impact that changes in healthcare delivery in the United States may have on the conduct of acute stroke trials. The success of clinical research in the treatment of acute stroke depends not only on trial design but on local, regional, and national factors that determine the environment in which acute stroke care is provided and that affect the feasibility of trial execution. In this editorial, we present some of the important issues facing those who design and implement acute stroke treatment studies. Our opinions pertain primarily to the medical environment in the United States. Our goal is to stimulate discussion and suggest a forum for the critical evaluation of trial . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. R. Levine and M. Gorman "Telestroke" : The Application of Telemedicine for Stroke Stroke, February 1, 1999; 30(2): 464 - 469. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. S. Pessin, H. P. Adams Jr, R. J. Adams, M. Fisher, A. J. Furlan, W. Hacke, E. C. Haley, M. F. Hazinski Jr, C. M. Helgason, R. T. Higashida, et al. Acute Interventions Stroke, July 1, 1997; 28(7): 1518 - 1521. [Full Text]

				P. J. Dorman and P. A.G. Sandercock Considerations in the Design of Clinical Trials of Neuroprotective Therapy in Acute Stroke Stroke, September 1, 1996; 27(9): 1507 - 1515. [Full Text]