Predictors of Recurrent Stroke After Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source in the RE-SPECT ESUS Trial.

Background We sought to determine recurrent stroke predictors among patients with embolic strokes of undetermined source (ESUS). Methods and Results We applied Cox proportional hazards models to identify clinical features associated with recurrent stroke among participants enrolled in RE-SPECT ESUS (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) trial, an international clinical trial evaluating dabigatran versus aspirin for patients with ESUS. During a median follow-up of 19 months, 384 of 5390 participants had recurrent stroke (annual rate, 4.5%). Multivariable models revealed that stroke or transient ischemic attack before the index event (hazard ratio [HR], 2.27 [95% CI, 1.83-2.82]), creatinine clearance <50 mL/min (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.23-2.32]), male sex (HR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.27-2.02]), and CHA2DS2-VASc ≥4 (HR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.15-2.08] and HR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.21-2.26] for scores of 4 and ≥5, respectively) versus CHA2DS2-VASc of 2 to 3, were independent predictors for recurrent stroke. Conclusions In RE-SPECT ESUS trial, expected risk factors previously linked to other common stroke causes were associated with stroke recurrence. These data help define high-risk groups for subsequent stroke that may be useful for clinicians and for researchers designing trials among patients with ESUS. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Predictors of Atrial Fibrillation Development in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source: An Analysis of the RE-SPECT ESUS Trial.

BACKGROUND: A proportion of patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source have silent atrial fibrillation (AF) or develop AF after the initial evaluation. Better understanding of the risk for development of AF is critical to implement optimal monitoring strategies with the goal of preventing recurrent stroke attributable to underlying AF. The RE-SPECT ESUS trial (Randomized, Double-Blind Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) provides an opportunity to assess predictors for developing AF and associated recurrent stroke. METHODS: RE-SPECT ESUS was a randomized, controlled trial (564 sites, 42 countries) assessing dabigatran versus aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Of 5390 patients enrolled and followed for a median of 19 months, 403 (7.5%) were found to develop AF reported as an adverse event or using cardiac monitoring per standard clinical care. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to define predictors of AF. RESULTS: In the multivariable model, older age (odds ratio for 10-year increase, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.78-2.23]; P<0.001), hypertension (odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.03-1.79]; P=0.0304), diabetes (odds ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.96]; P=0.022), and body mass index (odds ratio for 5-U increase, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.16-1.43]; P<0.001) were independent predictors of AF during the study. In a sensitivity analysis restricted to 1117 patients with baseline NT-proBNP (N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide) measurements, only older age and higher NT-proBNP were significant independent predictors of AF. Performance of several published predictive models was assessed, including HAVOC (AF risk score based on hypertension, age ≥75 years, valvular heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, obesity, congestive heart failure, and coronary artery disease) and CHA2DS2-VASc (stroke risk score based on congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years [doubled], diabetes, previous stroke, transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism [doubled], vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category [female]) scores, and higher scores were associated with higher rates of developing AF. CONCLUSIONS: Besides age, the most important variable, several other factors, including hypertension, higher body mass index, and lack of diabetes, are independent predictors of AF after embolic stroke of undetermined source. When baseline NT-proBNP was available, only older age and elevation of this biomarker were predictive of subsequent AF. Understanding who is at higher risk of developing AF will assist in identifying patients who may benefit from more intense, long-term cardiac monitoring. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure: rationale for and design of the EMPULSE trial.

AIMS: Treatment with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improves outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. There is limited experience with the in-hospital initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with acute HF (AHF) with or without diabetes. EMPULSE is designed to assess the clinical benefit and safety of the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin compared with placebo in patients hospitalized with AHF. METHODS: EMPULSE is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled multinational trial comparing the in-hospital initiation of empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) with placebo. Approximately 500 patients admitted for AHF with dyspnoea, signs of fluid overload, and elevated natriuretic peptides will be randomized 1:1 stratified to HF status (de-novo and decompensated chronic HF) to either empagliflozin or placebo at approximately 165 sites across North America, Europe and Asia. Patients will be enrolled regardless of ejection fraction and diabetes status and will be randomized during hospitalization and after stabilization (between 24 h and 5 days after admission), with treatment continued up to 90 days after initiation. The primary outcome is clinical benefit at 90 days, consisting of a composite of all-cause death, HF events, and ≥5 point change from baseline in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS), assessed using a 'win-ratio' approach. Secondary outcomes include assessments of safety, change in KCCQ-TSS from baseline to 90 days and change in natriuretic peptides from baseline to 30 days. CONCLUSION: The EMPULSE trial will evaluate the clinical benefit and safety of empagliflozin in patients hospitalized for AHF.

Dabigatran or Aspirin in East Asian Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source: RE-SPECT ESUS Subgroup Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We assessed the outcomes of dabigatran versus aspirin in a prespecified subgroup analysis of East Asian patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source in the RE-SPECT ESUS trial (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source). METHODS: Patients with a recent embolic stroke of undetermined source were randomized to dabigatran (150 or 110 mg BID) or aspirin (100 mg QD). The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent stroke; the primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The East Asia cohort was compared with patients from all other countries (non-East Asia cohort). RESULTS: Overall, 988 of 5390 patients (18%) were randomized in East Asia. During a median follow-up of 18.8 months, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrent stroke (hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.41-1.03]) or major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.57-1.91]) in East Asian patients receiving dabigatran versus aspirin. Death from any cause occurred more often in the dabigatran versus the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 3.98 [95% CI, 1.32-12.01]). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment effect of dabigatran versus aspirin was consistent between cohorts, with no apparent superiority for dabigatran over aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Dabigatran vs. Aspirin for Secondary Prevention After Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source　- Japanese Subanalysis of the RE-SPECT ESUS Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The international Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the EfficaCy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients with Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (RE-SPECT ESUS) trial did not demonstrate superiority of dabigatran over aspirin for reduction of recurrent strokes in patients with embolic strokes of undetermined source (ESUS). Based on pre-defined subanalyses, the safety and efficacy of dabigatran vs. aspirin in Japanese patients was assessed.Methods and Results:ESUS patients were randomized to receive either dabigatran (150 or 110 mg twice daily) or aspirin (100 mg once daily). Of 5,390 patients randomized, 594 were Japanese. Most Japanese patients (99.8%) underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging for trial screening, compared to 76.8% of non-Japanese (P<0.0001). In the Japanese cohort, over a 19.4-month median follow-up period, recurrent stroke as the primary outcome occurred in 20/294 patients (4.3%/year) in the dabigatran group and 38/300 (8.3%/year) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.94). Major bleeding occurred in 12 patients (2.5%/year) and 17 patients (3.5%/year), respectively (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.34-1.52). In contrast, in the non-Japanese cohort, recurrent stroke occurred in 4.1%/year and 4.3%/year, respectively, showing no apparent difference in recurrent stroke for dabigatran vs. aspirin (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74-1.14). The P-interaction for treatment and region did not reach statistical significance (P=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Dabigatran was putatively associated with a lower relative risk of recurrent stroke compared with aspirin in Japanese ESUS patients.

Antithrombotic Treatment of Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source: RE-SPECT ESUS Elderly and Renally Impaired Subgroups.

Background and Purpose- The RE-SPECT ESUS trial (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) tested the hypothesis that dabigatran would be superior to aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. This exploratory subgroup analysis investigates the impact of age, renal function (both predefined), and dabigatran dose (post hoc) on the rates of recurrent stroke and major bleeding. Methods- RE-SPECT ESUS was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of dabigatran 150 or 110 mg (for patients aged ≥75 years and/or with creatinine clearance 30 to <50 mL/minute) twice daily compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke. Results- The trial, which enrolled 5390 patients from December 2014 to January 2018, did not demonstrate superiority of dabigatran versus aspirin for prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. However, among the population qualifying for the lower dabigatran dose, the rate of recurrent stroke was reduced with dabigatran versus aspirin (7.4% versus 13.0%; hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.39-0.82]; interaction P=0.01). This was driven mainly by the subgroup aged ≥75 years (7.8% versus 12.4%; hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43-0.94]; interaction P=0.10). Stroke rates tended to be lower with dabigatran versus aspirin with declining renal function. Risks for major bleeding were similar between treatments, irrespective of renal function, but with a trend for lower bleeding rates with dabigatran versus aspirin in older patients. Conclusions- In subgroup analyses of RE-SPECT ESUS, dabigatran reduced the rate of recurrent stroke compared with aspirin in patients qualifying for the lower dose of dabigatran. These results are hypothesis-generating. Aspirin remains the standard antithrombotic treatment for patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Dabigatran for Prevention of Stroke after Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source.

BACKGROUND: Cryptogenic strokes constitute 20 to 30% of ischemic strokes, and most cryptogenic strokes are considered to be embolic and of undetermined source. An earlier randomized trial showed that rivaroxaban is no more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke after a presumed embolic stroke from an undetermined source. Whether dabigatran would be effective in preventing recurrent strokes after this type of stroke was unclear. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg or 110 mg twice daily as compared with aspirin at a dose of 100 mg once daily in patients who had had an embolic stroke of undetermined source. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 5390 patients were enrolled at 564 sites and were randomly assigned to receive dabigatran (2695 patients) or aspirin (2695 patients). During a median follow-up of 19 months, recurrent strokes occurred in 177 patients (6.6%) in the dabigatran group (4.1% per year) and in 207 patients (7.7%) in the aspirin group (4.8% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.03; P = 0.10). Ischemic strokes occurred in 172 patients (4.0% per year) and 203 patients (4.7% per year), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.03). Major bleeding occurred in 77 patients (1.7% per year) in the dabigatran group and in 64 patients (1.4% per year) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.66). Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 70 patients (1.6% per year) and 41 patients (0.9% per year), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a recent history of embolic stroke of undetermined source, dabigatran was not superior to aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke. The incidence of major bleeding was not greater in the dabigatran group than in the aspirin group, but there were more clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events in the dabigatran group. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-SPECT ESUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02239120.).