Deans' stroke musings

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain!Just think of all the trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 493 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.
My back ground story is here:

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Neuroprotective Antibody Shows No Significant Impact on Walking After a Stroke

Using the subjective NIHSS to determine functional improvements is total stupidity. No discrimination whatsoever. As noted by this research. But Appeal to authority and appeal to antiquity are probably why this is still being used

The NIH Stroke Scale Has Limited Utility in Accurate Daily Monitoring of Neurologic Status

Neuroprotective Antibody Shows No Significant Impact on Walking After a Stroke
February 28, 2017
By Alex Morrisson
HOUSTON, Tex -- February 28, 2017 -- An attempt to use an antibody to protect against nerve damage and improve patients’ walking ability after a stroke did not appear to improve outcomes, according to a study presented here at the 2017 International Stroke Conference (ISC).
Steven Cramer, MD, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, California, and colleagues tested whether the investigative compound known as GSK249320 would be better than placebo in improving motor function among patients diagnosed with acute stroke, as measured by the 90-day National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score.
The NIHSS score among the 65 patients assigned to GSK249320 was 4 compared with an average score of 4 among the 68 patients in the trial who were assigned to receive placebo.
The researchers did note that GSK249320 did slowly reduce the levels of myelin-associated glycoprotein, a substance believed to inhibit the protective effect of myelin on nerves that affect motor function.
However, “GSK249320, administered intravenously and initiated within 72 hours of stroke onset, demonstrated no improvement on gait velocity compared with placebo,” the authors reported.
The study had been stopped early for futility upon the recommendation of the Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB).
Dr. Cramer suggested there were a number of possibilities that GSK249320 failed to produce its desired effect including using too low a dose, reliance on pharmacokinetics of animal species, and that the drug just doesn’t work in the arena of acute stroke.
The patients were selected after being diagnosed with radiology-confirmed supratentorial ischaemic stroke and had been treated within 24 hours to 72 hour. All patients had NIHSS scores of 3 to 21 and had impaired gait of less than 0.8 meters per second.
Funding for this study was provided by GlaxoSmithKline.
[Presentation title: A Phase IIb Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of GSK24932O for Stroke Recovery. Abstract 8]

No comments:

Post a Comment