Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical data suggest sex differences in mechanisms of cerebral ischemic injury. This might result in differential outcomes of putative neuroprotectants by sex, though little systematic data is available to assess this.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of multicenter randomized controlled trials published from January 1980-June 2022 enrolling >100 subjects and testing neuroprotectants in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). For each trial, reported treatment effect by sex was extracted. When published results by sex were not available, we contacted individual authors to attempt to retrieve these data.
RESULTS: We identified 59 publications reporting 64 trials that met inclusion criteria. Of these, data on treatment effect by sex were published for 14/64 trials. Unpublished data for an additional 5 trials were obtained from trial investigators (19/64, or 29.7%). Two trials (one testing uric acid and one dexborneol) reported treatment benefit in women but not men. Pooled analysis of six trials of tirilazad reported worse treatment outcomes in women and no effect in men. No clear difference was apparent in the other trials.
CONCLUSIONS: Most trials did not report treatment effect by sex. Of those that did, there was little evidence of systematic sex differences in treatment response.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of multicenter randomized controlled trials published from January 1980-June 2022 enrolling >100 subjects and testing neuroprotectants in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). For each trial, reported treatment effect by sex was extracted. When published results by sex were not available, we contacted individual authors to attempt to retrieve these data.
RESULTS: We identified 59 publications reporting 64 trials that met inclusion criteria. Of these, data on treatment effect by sex were published for 14/64 trials. Unpublished data for an additional 5 trials were obtained from trial investigators (19/64, or 29.7%). Two trials (one testing uric acid and one dexborneol) reported treatment benefit in women but not men. Pooled analysis of six trials of tirilazad reported worse treatment outcomes in women and no effect in men. No clear difference was apparent in the other trials.
CONCLUSIONS: Most trials did not report treatment effect by sex. Of those that did, there was little evidence of systematic sex differences in treatment response.
摘要：
背景：临床前数据提示脑缺血损伤机制存在性别差异。这可能导致假定的神经保护剂按性别的不同结果，尽管几乎没有系统的数据来评估这一点。
方法：我们对1980年1月至2022年6月发表的多中心随机对照试验进行了系统评价，纳入>100名受试者并测试了急性缺血性卒中（AIS）的神经保护剂。每次审判,提取按性别报告的治疗效果。当按性别公布的结果不可用时，我们联系了个别作者试图检索这些数据.
结果：我们确定了59篇报告64项试验符合纳入标准的出版物。其中,14/64项试验公布了按性别分列的治疗效果数据.另外5项试验的未发表数据来自试验研究者（19/64，即29.7%）。两项试验（一项测试尿酸和一项右旋冰片）报告了女性而非男性的治疗益处。对6项替里拉扎试验的汇总分析报告，女性治疗结果较差，男性无影响。在其他试验中没有明显差异。
结论：大多数试验未按性别报告治疗效果。在那些做过的人中，几乎没有证据表明治疗反应存在系统性性别差异.
方法：我们对1980年1月至2022年6月发表的多中心随机对照试验进行了系统评价，纳入>100名受试者并测试了急性缺血性卒中（AIS）的神经保护剂。每次审判,提取按性别报告的治疗效果。当按性别公布的结果不可用时，我们联系了个别作者试图检索这些数据.
结果：我们确定了59篇报告64项试验符合纳入标准的出版物。其中,14/64项试验公布了按性别分列的治疗效果数据.另外5项试验的未发表数据来自试验研究者（19/64，即29.7%）。两项试验（一项测试尿酸和一项右旋冰片）报告了女性而非男性的治疗益处。对6项替里拉扎试验的汇总分析报告，女性治疗结果较差，男性无影响。在其他试验中没有明显差异。
结论：大多数试验未按性别报告治疗效果。在那些做过的人中，几乎没有证据表明治疗反应存在系统性性别差异.
