RESCUE: A Proof-of-Concept Trial with Adjunct RNS60 Treatment Shows Safety, Reduced Infarct Growth, and Numerical Improvement in all Prespecified Efficacy Endpoints in Participants with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Supurna Ghosh1, Jordan Dubow1, Jocelyn Sutherland1, Grayson Baird2, Wendy Smith2, David Chiu3, Wayne Clark4, Christopher Favilla5, Sameer Ansari6, Andreas Kalmes1, Jarrad Mock7, Douglas Cook8, Tracy Madsen9, Tracy Madsen9, Mahesh Jayaraman2, Krisztina Moldovan2, Radmehr Torabi2, David Liebeskind10, Ryan McTaggart2
1Revalesio, 2Rhode Island Hospital, 3Houston Methodist Hospital, 4Oregon Health Sciences Univ, 5University of Pennsylvania, 6Northwestern University, 7Revalesio Corporation, 8Queen's University, 9Brown University, 10University of California at Los Angeles
Objective:
Testing RNS60 as a new adjunctive cytoprotective therapy for acute ischemic stroke.
Background:
RNS60 is an experimental cytoprotective drug that showed significant therapeutic promise in rodent and primate models of ischemic stroke. RESCUE aimed to test adjunctive treatment with RNS60 in subjects with large vessel occlusion and acute ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular thrombectomy.
Design/Methods:
The multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, Phase 2 study enrolled 82 participants, randomized for age, NIHSS, and ASPECTS to a 48-hour infusion with RNS60 0.5 mL/kg/h, RNS60 1 mL/kg/h, or placebo 1 mL/kg/h (1:1:1). Participants were followed for 90 days with safety as primary objective. The primary efficacy endpoints included dichotomized day-90 mRS, infarct volume at 48 hours, BI, EQ-5D-5L on day-90, and NIHSS at multiple time points.
Results:
The study met its primary endpoint of safety and mortality, with similar rates of SAEs and lower numbers of deaths in the RNS60 groups compared to placebo. The RNS60 1 mL/kg/h group performed numerically better than placebo in all prespecified endpoints and had a 50% reduced infarct growth at 48 hours post-EVT (p<.05). On Day 90, RNS60 1 mL/kg/h demonstrated i) a 16% higher number of subjects with mRS 0-2 (OR 3.7, p=.36), ii) a higher number of subjects with BI ≥ 95 (71% on RNS60 1 mL/kg/h vs. 43% on placebo; OR 5.8, p=.13), iii) improved EQ-5D-5L index score (0.74 ± 0.13 on RNS60 1 mL/kg/h vs. 0.58 ± 0.13 on placebo; p=.09) and iv) improved NIHSS score at each pre-specified time point.
Conclusions:
Adjunct treatment with RNS60 was generally safe and well tolerated, significantly reduced infarct growth, and demonstrated numerical improvement in all efficacy outcomes compared to placebo. Although not all differences are statistically significant in the context of limited power, these differences and odds ratios reflect a large, clinically meaningful difference. A Phase 3 study is in development.
Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff.