Good laboratory practice: preventing introduction of bias at the bench

Background and Purpose—As a research community, we have failed to demonstrate that drugs which show substantial efficacy in animal models of cerebral ischemia can also improve outcome in human stroke. Summary of Review—Accumulating evidence suggests this may be due, at least in part, to problems in the design, conduct and reporting of animal experiments which create a systematic bias resulting in the overstatement of neuroprotective efficacy. Conclusions—Here, we set out a series of measures to reduce bias in the design, conduct and reporting of animal experiments modeling human stroke.

Systematic reviews as a tool for planning and interpreting trials

Background Systematic reviews followed by ameta-analysis are carried out in medical research to combine the results of two or more related studies. Stroke trials have struggled to show beneficial effects and meta-analysis should be used more widely throughout the research process to either speed up the development of useful interventions, or halt more quickly research with hazardous or ineffective interventions. Summary of review. This review summarises the clinical research process and illustrates how and when systematic reviews may be used throughout the development programme. Meta-analyses should be performed after observational studies, preclinical studies in experimental stroke, and after phase I, II, and III clinical trials and phase IV clinical surveillance studies. Although meta-analyses most commonly work with summary data, they may be performed to assess relationships between variables (meta-regression) and, ideally, should utilise individual patient data. Meta-analysis techniques may alsoworkwith ordered categorical outcome data (ordinal meta-analysis) and be used to perform indirect comparisons where original trial data do not exist. Conclusion Systematic review/meta-analyses are powerful tools in medical research and should be used throughout the development of all stroke and other interventions

Relationship between hyperacute blood pressure and outcome after ischemic stroke: data from the VISTA Collaboration

Background and Purpose—High blood pressure (BP) is associated independently with poor outcome after acute ischemic stroke, although in most analyses “baseline” BP was measured 24 hours or more postictus, and not during the hyperacute period. Methods—Analyses included 1722 patients in hyperacute trials (recruitment 8 hours) from the Virtual Stroke International Stroke Trial Archive (VISTA) Collaboration. Data on BP at enrolment and after 1, 2, 16, 24, 48, and 72 hours, neurological impairment at 7 days (NIHSS), and functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin scale) were assessed using logistic regression models, adjusted for confounding variables; results are for 10-mm Hg change in BP. Results—Mean time to enrolment was 3.7 hours (range 1.0 to 7.9). High systolic BP (SBP) was significantly associated with increased neurological impairment (odds ratio, OR 1.06, 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.12), and poor functional outcome; odds ratios for both increased with later BP measurements made at up to 24 hours poststroke. Smaller (versus larger) declines in SBP over the first 24 hours were significantly associated with poor NIHSS scores (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.27) and functional outcome (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.34). A large variability in SBP was also associated with poor functional outcome. Conclusions—High SBP and large variability in SBP in the hyperacute stages of ischemic stroke are associated with increased neurological impairment and poor functional outcome, as are small falls in SBP over the first 24 hours.