Cytoprotection for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Critical Appraisal of Recent Clinical Trials

Several phase III clinical trials testing cytoprotective approaches have recently been completed, and many of these studies report a clinical benefit. Reviewing the outcomes of these trials in light of their specific designs reveals intriguing results. Trials designed with shorter treatment time windows (≤24 hours) and featuring high rates of recanalization therapies predominantly show neutral outcomes, that is, no therapeutic benefit. Studies using later time points (>24 hours to 14 days) and often enrolling patients in whom recanalization is not or only infrequently established show clear treatment effects. These results challenge our current understanding of cytoprotective approaches, which are believed to primarily target the penumbra as the key to therapeutic success. The reasons for this are unclear. They may include other, potentially unknown mechanisms of action that improve clinical outcome even when applied within longer time windows rather than exerting acute cytoprotection. Here, we discuss such potential mechanisms, to what extent they could explain the results of recent cytoprotection trials, and review consequences for future translational and clinical research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Stroke
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.126.055936
Primary Topic
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cytoprotection for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Critical Appraisal of Recent Clinical Trials

Johannes Boltze, Marc Fisher, Magdy H. Selim, Ajay K. Wakhloo
Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
article

Cytoprotection for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Critical Appraisal of Recent Clinical Trials

Johannes Boltze, Marc Fisher, Magdy H. Selim, Ajay K. Wakhloo
article en

Abstract

Several phase III clinical trials testing cytoprotective approaches have recently been completed, and many of these studies report a clinical benefit. Reviewing the outcomes of these trials in light of their specific designs reveals intriguing results. Trials designed with shorter treatment time windows (≤24 hours) and featuring high rates of recanalization therapies predominantly show neutral outcomes, that is, no therapeutic benefit. Studies using later time points (>24 hours to 14 days) and often enrolling patients in whom recanalization is not or only infrequently established show clear treatment effects. These results challenge our current understanding of cytoprotective approaches, which are believed to primarily target the penumbra as the key to therapeutic success. The reasons for this are unclear. They may include other, potentially unknown mechanisms of action that improve clinical outcome even when applied within longer time windows rather than exerting acute cytoprotection. Here, we discuss such potential mechanisms, to what extent they could explain the results of recent cytoprotection trials, and review consequences for future translational and clinical research.

StrokeVol. 57(11)
Tufts University (US), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US), Harvard University (US), University of Warwick (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon