Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33274312›Full record

ArticleTH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis2020

Revacept, an Inhibitor of Platelet Adhesion in Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: Design and Rationale of a Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial.

Klaus Gröschel, Timo Uphaus, Ian Loftus, Holger Poppert, Hans Christoph Diener, Jenny Zobel, Götz Münch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Klaus GröschelDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0244-6116
Timo UphausDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Ian LoftusDepartment of Vascular Surgery, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Holger PoppertDepartment of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Hans Christoph DienerInstitute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Medical Faculty of the University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Jenny ZobeladvanceCOR, Munich, Germany.
Götz MünchadvanceCOR, Munich, Germany.
advanceCOR (Germany) · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DESt George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBTUM Klinikum · DEUniversity of Duisburg-Essen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with stroke or transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) and internal carotid artery stenosis harbor an increased risk of recurrent stroke especially within 2 weeks after the first event. In addition, the revascularization procedure itself (carotid endarterectomy [CEA] or carotid artery stenting [CAS]) is associated with both clinically apparent and silent brain infarctions, mainly caused by the embolic nature of the ruptured carotid plaque. The glycoprotein VI (GPVI) fusion protein Revacept is a highly specific antithrombotic drug without direct inhibition of systemic platelet function that might reduce periprocedural distal embolization from the vulnerable ruptured plaque located at the internal carotid artery. By shielding collagen at the site of vascular injury, Revacept inhibits plaque-mediated platelet adhesion and aggregation, while not directly affecting systemic hemostasis. In this phase II study, 158 patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis with recent TIA or stroke were randomized to receive a single dose of either Revacept (40 or 120 mg) or placebo. All patients were on standard secondary preventive therapy (statins and platelet inhibition) and underwent CEA, CAS, or best medical therapy according to current guidelines. The efficacy of Revacept was evaluated by exploratory assessment of new diffusion-weighted imaging lesions on magnetic resonance imaging after the revascularization procedure; a combination of cardiovascular events (ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, TIA, myocardial infarction, or coronary intervention) and bleeding complications served to assess clinically critical patients' outcome and safety. This exploratory phase II randomized, double-blind clinical trial provides valuable insights on the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of Revacept in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

Indexed as

carotid stenosisplatelet inhibitorRevaceptstroketransient ischemic attack

Identifiers

PMID33274312
PMCPMC7704244
OpenAlexW3109712420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.