Threats to validity of the PESTO perispinal etanercept stroke trial: a document-based clinical trial evaluation.

Authors

Edward Tobinick, Güven Gürbüz

Published in

Expert opinion on biological therapy. Sep 21, 2026. Epub Sep 21, 2026.

Abstract

The PESTO trial's claim to provide Class I evidence that perispinal etanercept does not improve quality of life is precluded by the absence of publicly verifiable trial-wide inclusion/exclusion criteria and by its use of a novel primary responder definition that utilizes a non-accepted scoring pathway, of no established validity or reliability, that was first specified after data collection was completed. PESTO's Statistical Analysis Plan differs from the analysis its operative protocols and registration specify, and no amendment, registry update, or explanation discloses the change. PESTO's published primary quality-of-life measurement is unreliable, and its definitive negative conclusion cannot be relied upon as a statement of what the trial established. Whether the reported estimate would survive the prespecified analysis, the record cannot yet answer. Correction of PESTO's record and conclusions and reclassification of its Class I designation are due now. Further, independent multidisciplinary review, with separate statistical and research-ethics components, is required.

PMID:
42765597
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 21 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.