ArticleStroke and vascular neurology2025
Rationale and Study Design to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Minocycline in Patients with Moderate to Severe Acute Ischaemic Stroke (EMPHASIS).
Article in Stroke and vascular neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07338175 (Efficacy and Safety of Minocycline in Patients With Acute Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Efficacy and Safety of Minocycline in Patients With Acute Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group, Phase III Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Neurointerventional Advances in 2025.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Targeting microglial C1q alleviates blood-brain barrier disruption in the thalamus after cortical infarction.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2026Article
- Role of transforming growth factorβ in neurovascular unit during cerebral small vessel disease.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInflammation and blood-brain barrier disruption may contribute to the pathogenesis of ischaemic stroke. Minocycline was shown to exert anti-inflammatory effects by attenuating microglial activation and protecting blood-brain barrier in preclinical studies. Previous small-scale clinical studies have suggested that minocycline may have a potential beneficial effect on prognosis in acute ischaemic stroke. However, the efficacy and safety of minocycline in patients with acute ischaemic stroke need to be further confirmed. STUDY
aimsWe designed the study, Efficacy and Safety of Minocycline in Patients with Moderate to Severe Acute Ischaemic Stroke (EMPHASIS), to evaluate the effect of minocycline in improving the functional outcome and the drug safety in patients with acute ischaemic stroke.
methodsThe EMPHASIS study is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial aiming to recruit patients with acute ischaemic stroke. Patients who had ischaemic stroke within 72 hours of onset, a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score between 4 and 25 and Ia≤1 (moderate-to-severe) will be randomly allocated to either minocycline or placebo groups in a 1:1 ratio. Patients will receive minocycline (or placebo) with a loading dose of 200 mg, and subsequent 100 mg every 12 hours for 4 days. All patients will receive routine guideline-based treatment. The primary efficacy outcome is an excellent functional outcome assessed by the proportion of modified Rankin Scale score of 0-1 at 90±7 days. The main safety outcomes include the number of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at 24±2 hours and 6±1 days. DISCUSSION: The EMPHASIS trial is the first phase III trial to investigate whether minocycline is effective and safe in improving functional outcome at 90 days in patients with moderate-to-severe acute ischaemic stroke. The data generated may provide valuable evidence of a potential anti-inflammation treatment for ischaemic stroke.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.