Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Effect of Combined Treatment with MLC601 (NeuroAiDTM) and Rehabilitation on Post-Stroke Recovery: The CHIMES and CHIMES-E Studies||Authors:||Suwanwela N.C.
De Silva H.A.
|Issue Date:||2018||Publisher:||S. Karger AG||Citation:||Suwanwela N.C., Chen C.L.H., Lee C.F., Young S.H., Tay S.S., Umapathi T., Lao A.Y., Gan H.H., Baroque A.C., Navarro J.C., Chang H.M., Advincula J.M., Muengtaweepongsa S., Chan B.P.L., Chua C.L., Wijekoon N., De Silva H.A., Hiyadan J.H.B., Wong K.S.L., Poungvarin N., Eow G.B., Venketasubramanian N. (2018). Effect of Combined Treatment with MLC601 (NeuroAiDTM) and Rehabilitation on Post-Stroke Recovery: The CHIMES and CHIMES-E Studies. Cerebrovascular Diseases 46 (1-2) : 82-88. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1159/000492625||Abstract:||Background and Purpose: MLC601 has been shown in preclinical studies to enhance neurorestorative mechanisms after stroke. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess whether combining MLC601 and rehabilitation has an effect on improving functional outcomes after stroke. Methods: Data from the CHInese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke (CHIMES) and CHIMES-Extension (CHIMES-E) studies were analyzed. CHIMES-E was a 24-month follow-up study of subjects included in CHIMES, a multi-centre, double-blind placebo-controlled trial which randomized subjects with acute ischemic stroke, to either MLC601 or placebo for 3 months in addition to standard stroke treatment and rehabilitation. Subjects were stratified according to whether they received or did not receive persistent rehabilitation up to month (M)3 (non- randomized allocation) and by treatment group. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and Barthel Index were assessed at month (M) 3, M6, M12, M18, and M24. Results: Of 880 subjects in CHIMES-E, data on rehabilitation at M3 were available in 807 (91.7%, mean age 61.8 ± 11.3 years, 36% female). After adjusting for prognostic factors of poor outcome (age, sex, pre-stroke mRS, baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, and stroke onset-to-study-treatment time), subjects who received persistent rehabilitation showed consistently higher treatment effect in favor of MLC601 for all time points on mRS 0-1 dichotomy analysis (ORs 1.85 at M3, 2.18 at M6, 2.42 at M12, 1.94 at M18, 1.87 at M24), mRS ordinal analysis (ORs 1.37 at M3, 1.40 at M6, 1.53 at M12, 1.50 at M18, 1.38 at M24), and BI ?95 dichotomy analysis (ORs 1.39 at M3, 1.95 at M6, 1.56 at M12, 1.56 at M18, 1.46 at M24) compared to those who did not receive persistent rehabilitation. Conclusions: More subjects on MLC601 improved to functional independence compared to placebo among subjects receiving persistent rehabilitation up to M3. The larger treatment effect of MLC601 was sustained over 2 years which supports the hypothesis that MLC601 combined with rehabilitation might have beneficial and sustained effects on neuro-repair processes after stroke. There is a need for more data on the effect of combining rehabilitation programs with stroke recovery treatments. © 2018 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.||Source Title:||Cerebrovascular Diseases||URI:||http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/152184||ISSN:||10159770||DOI:||10.1159/000492625|
|Appears in Collections:||Elements|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
|000492625.pdf||281.32 kB||Adobe PDF|
checked on Apr 24, 2019
checked on Apr 20, 2019
checked on Apr 20, 2019
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.