Key result
Age-adjusting the mCTA-ACE score may improve functional outcome prediction after endovascular therapy.
Why the study?
An age-adjustment of the mCTA-ACE score may provide a more individualized prediction of functional outcomes after endovascular therapy to help patient selection, particularly where access is limited.
Does the age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score improve prediction of functional outcomes compared to the original score in patients undergoing endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke?
Observational (n=368)
Does the age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score improve prediction of functional outcomes compared to the original score in patients undergoing endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke?
p-value: p=<0.01
Age-adjustment of the mCTA-ACE score significantly improves the prediction of functional independence at 90-120 days in patients undergoing endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke.
BACKGROUND: Both age and ischemic core volume are strong predictors of outcomes after endovascular therapy. We previously developed and reported the ASPECTS and the multiphase CTA collateral extent (mCTA-ACE) score, which combines early ischemic changes on NCCT and the extent of leptomeningeal filling on multiphase CTA, and showed that it was associated with outcomes after EVT. The aim of this study was to refine the mCTA-ACE score through age adjustment and external validation. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of endovascular therapy-treated patients from the AcT (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase) trial. The mCTA-ACE score was calculated as the baseline ASPECTS plus a 10-point mCTA collateral score, corresponding to ASPECTS regions M2–M6 graded as poor (0), moderate (1), or normal (2). From the mixed-effect logistic regression for mRS ≤2 at 90–120 days, the relative regression coefficient of age to mCTA-ACE score was used to derive the age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score. The prediction ability of age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score was validated in a reduced model from the PRove-IT (Precise and Rapid Assessment of Collaterals Using Multi-Phase CTA in the Triage of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke for IA Therapy). RESULTS: Of 1577 patients in the intention-to-treat population in the AcT trial, 368 who underwent endovascular therapy and had assessable imaging were included (179 men, median age 73 years). In multivariable analysis, mCTA-ACE score and age were independently associated with mRS ≤2 (coefficients: 0.15 and −0.05, respectively); then the age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score was derived as: mCTA-ACE score − age/3. The age-adjusted score showed superior predictive performance compared with the original mCTA-ACE score for mRS ≤2 (c-statistic 0.72 vs. 0.65, p <0.01). The c-statistics of age-adjusted and original mCTA-ACE scores for mRS ≤2 were 0.79 and 0.68, respectively (p <0.01, DeLong’s test) in the PRove-IT population who underwent endovascular therapy (n=261; 124 men, median age 73 years). CONCLUSIONS: An age-adjustment of the mCTA-ACE score may provide a more individualized prediction of functional outcomes after endovascular therapy, which helps patient selection, particularly in settings with limited access to endovascular therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tanaka et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Acute ischemic stroke (n=368). Age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score vs. Original mCTA-ACE score was evaluated on mRS ≤2 at 90-120 days (p=<0.01). The age-adjusted mCTA-ACE score showed superior predictive performance for mRS ≤2 compared with the original score in both derivation (c-statistic 0.72 vs. 0.65) and validation (0.79 vs. 0.68) cohorts.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: