Introduction
Decades of acute stroke research have come to an
unanimous conclusion: “Everything works in animals, but nothing works in
people” (1–3).
This so called “translational roadblock” between successful animal
studies and neutral clinical trials was usually attributed to conceptual
weaknesses (4–7).
Nonetheless, we hypothesized that intrinsic pathophysiological
differences between rodents and humans, i.e., differences in infarct
evolution, contribute to translational failures of neuroprotective
stroke drugs.
Most animal studies use models of transient middle
cerebral artery occlusion (tMCAO). The pharmacological neuroprotective
treatment is usually initiated after reperfusion and neuroprotective
efficacy is determined by infarct volume assessment (4).
This implies that post-reperfusion infarct volume growth is the
therapeutic target of neuroprotection in animal studies. Thus, the
question arises if and to what extend infarct volume growth is present
in human stroke patients. Considering the huge treatment effects of
recanalizing therapies, we hypothesized that so called neuroprotective
agents can have only limited additional value after complete
endovascular recanalization in the majority of patients.
Here, we compare the infarct evolution in rodents with
and without neuroprotective treatments with that in human stroke
patients with and without successful thrombectomy, and we illustrate why
the concept of neuroprotection requires a thorough selection of
suitable stroke patients in the clinical setting.
Methods
Data sources
For animal data, we systematically searched Pubmed from
the beginning until July 2020 using the terms MRI AND stroke AND animal
model AND infarct volume or MRI AND stroke AND rodent AND infarct volume
or MRI AND stroke AND mouse AND infarct volume or MRI AND stroke AND
rat AND infarct volume. For clinical data, we used a large cohort of
stroke patients admitted to the University Hospital Bern (Inselspital)
between January 2012 and July 2017.
Study selection and data extraction of animal studies
We included rodent studies that (a) used either transient
middle cerebral artery occlusion (tMCAO) or permanent middle cerebral
artery occlusion (pMCAO) for stroke induction and (b) provided at least
two sequential MRI scans for infarct volume assessment. The first MRI
scan had to be after reperfusion but no later than 6 h after stroke
onset. The second scan had to be one or two days later. A detailed
description of study selection criteria of the systematic review and
data extraction is provided in the Supplementary methods. A PRISMA Checklist is also provided in the Supplementary methods.
Data analysis of animal studies
Delayed infarct volume growth was determined by the
change in mean infarct sizes between time point 1 and 2 per study [(mean
volume at t2/mean volume at t1) × 100–100%].
Selection of stroke patients and documentation of clinical findings
We used a cohort of consecutive stroke patients with
clinically suspected large vessel occlusion, who received a primary MRI
scan upon admission and at least one follow up-scan one or two days
later. We decided to use MRI scans upon admission as baseline scans,
because MRI immediately after reperfusion is generally scarce. If
compared to MRI scans immediately after reperfusion, MRI scans upon
admission overestimate the infarct volume growth rather than
underestimate it due to potential infarct volume growth between first
scan and successful thrombectomy. In our analyses, a TICI 2b or TICI 3
thrombectomy was regarded as a successful recanalization, thus
reflecting the condition in animals with tMCAO, while a TICI 0 to TICI
2a thrombectomy was regarded as an unsuccessful recanalization, thus
reflecting the condition in animals with pMCAO. We acknowledge the
crucial distinction between recanalization and reperfusion; while
recanalization refers to the reopening of the occluded vessel,
reperfusion denotes the restoration of blood flow to the affected
downstream tissue, which may not automatically ensue following
successful recanalization due to various pathophysiological factors.
Data analysis of stroke patients
Infarct evolution in human stroke patients was determined
on an individual level by (volume at time point 2/volume at time point
1) × 100–100%. A linear mixed model with random intercepts per patient
was conducted to assess the association of time with ln of infarct size.
An overall regression line given by the fixed effects of the mixed
model is shown in the plot.
Results
Characteristics of included studies and study subjects
Our preclinical meta-analyses included 50 studies from 32
different research groups with 676 animals. A PRISMA flow chart is
provided in Figure 1. A table including study details of all studies is provided in the Supplementary Table S1.
Our analysis of infarct growth in stroke patients
included 107 patients. The mean age was 69 years, the mean NIHSS upon
admission was 10, and the mean duration from symptom onset to groin
puncture was 5 h.
Infarct growth is the target of neuroprotection in animal stroke,
but stroke patients with successful recanalization do not offer this
target
To analyze the temporal dynamics of infarct volume
progression in animal stroke, we identified stroke studies providing at
least two sequential MRI scans, with a first scan within the first six
hours after transient middle cerebral artery occlusion and a second scan
one or two days later. Among all studies that matched the inclusion
criteria as detailed above, 84% reported increasing infarct volumes in
untreated animals over the first two days after tMCAO. In untreated
animals, the median infarct growth over the first two days after tMCAO
was 74% (Figures 2A,B).
We next analyzed the effects of neuroprotective
treatments on infarct volume progression in animal stroke. To this end,
we searched the above data set for studies, in which the effectiveness
of neuroprotective treatments was investigated by sequential MRI scans.
As expected, our results confirm a powerful treatment effect of
neuroprotectants in animal stroke: In treated animals, there was only a
small median infarct growth of 23% in the first two days after stroke (Figures 2C,D).
Compared to untreated animals, neuroprotective treatments reduced
infarct growth to less than a third. These data clarify that delayed
infarct growth is the target of neuroprotective treatments in animal
stroke.
Considering that neuroprotective treatments with
powerful effects in animals have always failed in large clinical trials,
we hypothesized that delayed infarct growth might simply not occur in
human stroke patients with transient large vessel occlusion. In other
words, stroke patients might just not offer a target for
neuroprotection. To verify this hypothesis, we used a large dataset of
119 consecutive stroke patients with clinically suspected large vessel
occlusion, who were admitted to the Inselspital Bern and received a
primary MRI scan upon admission and at least one follow up-scan one or
two days later. Among these 119 patients, 51 patients had a TICI 2b or
TICI 3 thrombectomy, indicating almost complete reperfusion. In these
patients, the median infarct volume increase was only 2% (Figures 2E,F).
Altogether, these findings confirm our intriguing
hypothesis that there is no relevant infarct growth after successful
recanalization of large artery stroke in human stroke patients, i.e.,
these patients have no target for neuroprotection.
Infarct growth depends on ischemia duration and recanalization success
Next, we examined to which extent infarct growth depends
ischemia duration. Our rodent data suggest a linear relationship between
infarct growth and ischemia duration (Figures 3A,B).
Regardless of the duration of ischemia, rodents benefited from
neuroprotective therapy: With a tMCAO duration of 30–60 min, the median
infarct volume growth was reduced from 48% to-16%, with a tMCAO duration
of 90–95 min, the median infarct volume growth was reduced from 76 to
32%, and with an ischemia duration of > = 120 min, the median infarct
volume growth was reduced from 89 to 21% (Figures 3C,D).
In accordance with our animal data, our human data also show an
increase in infarct growth depending on the duration of ischemia (Figures 3E,F).
After permanent MCAO, rodents exhibited a median infarct volume growth of 68% (Figures 4A,B). This was reduced to 42% with neuroprotective therapy (Figures 4C,D). Importantly, stroke patients with unsuccessful recanalization (TICI 0-2a) had a meaningful infarct volume growth of 145% (Figures 4E,F).
In summary, these data demonstrate that infarct volume growth depends
on recanalization success and ischemia duration. Patients with either
very late recanalization or unsuccessful recanalization may benefit from
neuroprotective therapies.
Discussion
Our key findings are: first, there is significant
infarct volume growth after transient large vessel occlusion in animal
stroke models. Second, this delayed infarct volume growth is the target
of neuroprotective treatments in animal stroke. Third, most stroke
patients with large vessel occlusion have no infarct growth after
successful recanalization, i.e., these patients have no target for
neuroprotection. Fourth, patients with either very late or unsuccessful
recanalization experience meaningful infarct growth, thus offering a
potential target for neuroprotection.
Our finding of negligible infarct growth in stroke
patients is in line with observations from a recent multicenter clinical
trial on the effect of remote ischemic perconditioning on brain
infarction growth within the first 24 h after stroke onset (8).
In this trial, more than 90% of patients received a recanalizing
treatment, infarct volume growth was negligible (34% and 36%) and remote
ischemic perconditioning did not have an additional treatment effect (8). Two other studies showed more pronounced infarct volume growth, which appears conflicting at a first glance (9, 10).
However, these studies enrolled patients from 2008 until 2013 and from
2011 until 2019, respectively, so that a large proportion of patients
were treated with fist-generation devices, which are associated with a
higher risk of secondary injury due to thrombus fragmentation and
endothelial damage (9, 10).
In those patients treated with stent-retrievers, only 14% had
substantial infarct volume growth (defined as infarct expansion
>11.6 mL) (9).
The rapid expansion of Endovascular Therapy (EVT)
facilities and the success of these interventions underscore the
relevance of our findings. Our study shows minimal infarct growth in
patients with successful recanalization, highlighting the narrowing
window for neuroprotective strategies as EVT becomes more prevalent.
This shift challenges the translation of neuroprotection from animal
models to clinical practice. In light of EVT advancements, our results
emphasize the urgent need to adapt neuroprotective research within this
new context. Future studies should focus on optimizing neuroprotective
approaches in tandem with EVT, underscoring the importance of
integrating preclinical and clinical research to enhance stroke
treatment efficacy.
It has to be noted that infarct volume growth might be
underestimated in our cohort, because we included only patients who were
amenable to receive a primary MRI scan, thus excluding unstable
patients with a higher likelihood of delayed infarct growth. On the
other hand, we used MRI scans upon admission as baseline scans, which,
if compared to MRI scans immediately after reperfusion, may overestimate
the infarct volume increase due to infarct growth between first scan
and successful thrombectomy.
One limitation is that our study focused on large vessel
occlusions, and our findings may not directly apply to small infarcts.
The rationale for focusing on large occlusions is that the successful
neuroprotection studies in rodents primarily used the tMCAO model of
stroke, which corresponds to a proximal occlusion of the middle cerebral
artery with successful recanalization (i.e., TICI 2b or TICI 3) in
human stroke patients. By focusing on large vessel occlusions, we aim to
achieve the best possible comparability between animal models and the
clinical situation. We acknowledge a limitation in our comparative
analysis stemming from the differing criteria for inclusion and
assessment between the clinical and preclinical studies. Specifically,
while the clinical studies included patients based on successful
reperfusion, defined as TICI 2b-3 reperfusion, the animal studies were
selected based on successful recanalization without consistent
evaluation of effective reperfusion. This discrepancy may contribute to
the observed differences in infarct volume growth between the animal
models and clinical outcomes. The potential for less effective
reperfusion in the animal models despite successful recanalization
highlights a critical area for future research and underscores the
necessity of rigorous reperfusion assessment in preclinical stroke
models. This limitation underscores the complexity of directly comparing
preclinical and clinical outcomes and emphasizes the importance of
considering the nuances of reperfusion quality in translational stroke
research. To better reflect the clinical situation in animal models,
some other authors have proposed the establishment of large animal
models of stroke. However, besides ethical concerns, there are also
purely scientific doubts about whether this can truly achieve better
translation, because studies with large animal models tend to have a
small sample sizes and heterogeneous results, so that significant
findings are difficult to obtain. Furthermore, the future implementation
of preclinical multicenter studies will not be feasible with large
animal models, as only a few centers with very heterogeneous research
focuses have the capability to conduct large animal studies.
While the intraluminal filament model of MCAO is widely
accepted and extensively used in preclinical stroke research, we
acknowledge its limitations, including variability in the type of
filament used and the intravascular events it induces, which may not
fully replicate the complex nature of human stroke.
Previously, we identified methodological weaknesses and
publication bias as major culprits for the observed efficacy decline of
neuroprotective treatments from experimental studies to Phase 3 trials (4).
Here, we approached this topic from another perspective and uncovered a
fundamental difference in infarct evolution between rodents and humans.
How can we explain such wide deviation in infarct evolution between
rodents and humans? There are neuroanatomical variations in collateral
systems and the proportions between gray matter and white matter (11).
For instance, a complete circle of Willis is present in only 10% of
C57Bl/6 J mice and Wistar rats were shown to possess particularly thin
posterior communicating arteries (12, 13).
Insufficient collateral blood supply and limited ability for remodeling
after arterial occlusion may thus add to reduced ischemic tolerance and
accelerated ischemic cell death in rodents compared to patients.
Further, differences in the proportions between grey and white matter
volumes may influence vulnerability to delayed ischemic cell death.
Notably, the percentage of white matter accounts for 60% in humans, but
decreases to 10% in mice (14).
Altogether, these differences in neuroanatomical and biochemical
prerequisites between species may at least partially explain unequal
ischemic vulnerability.
In conclusion, our study reveals a meaningful
pathophysiologic difference between animal stroke models and stroke
patients: Animals have a huge infarct growth after transient middle
cerebal artery occlusion (tMCAO), whereas stroke patients with large
vessel occlusion do not have a meaningful infarct growth after
successful thrombectomy. Assuming that infarct growth is the target of
neuroprotection in animal stroke studies, most stroke patients just do
not offer a target for neuroprotection after successful thrombectomy.