Application of desirability of outcome ranking to the milking in non-vigorous infants trial.

OBJECTIVES: Neonatal trials have traditionally used binary composite short-term (such as death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia) or longer-term (such as death or severe neurodevelopmental impairment) outcomes. We applied the Desirability Of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) method to rank the overall patient outcome by best (no morbidities) to worst (death). STUDY DESIGN: Using a completed large multicenter trial (Milking In Non-Vigorous Infants [MINVI]) of umbilical cord milking (UCM) vs. early cord clamping (ECC), we applied the DOOR methodology to neonatal outcomes. Six outcomes were chosen and ranked: no interventions or NICU admission (most desirable); received initial cardiorespiratory support at birth; neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission for predefined criteria; mild hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE); moderate to severe HIE; and death (least desirable). RESULTS: 1524 non-vigorous newborns born between 35 and 42 weeks' gestation had data for analysis. The DOOR distribution was different between the UCM and ECC arms, with a significantly greater probability (55.8 % [95 % CI 53.1-58.5 %; p < 0.0001]) of a randomly selected neonate having a more desirable outcome if they were in the UCM arm. DOOR probabilities of averting individual adverse outcomes such as NICU admission for predefined criteria (52.8 %; 95%CI 50.5-55.1 %) and cardiorespiratory support (54.0 %; 95%CI 51.6-56.4 %) were significantly higher among those in the UCM group. CONCLUSION: DOOR provides an overall assessment of the benefits and harms with greater insight than typical binary composite measures to clinicians and parents when evaluating an intervention. Future neonatal trials should consider the a priori use of the DOOR methodology to evaluate trial outcomes.

Interlaboratory comparison of Pseudomonas aeruginosa phage susceptibility testing.

Standardized approaches to phage susceptibility testing (PST) are essential to inform selection of phages for study in patients with bacterial infections. There is no reference standard for assessing bacterial susceptibility to phage. We compared agreement between PST performed at three centers: two centers using a liquid assay standardized between the sites with the third, a plaque assay. Four Pseudomonas aeruginosa phages: PaWRA01ø11 (EPa11), PaWRA01ø39 (EPa39), PaWRA02ø83 (EPa83), PaWRA02ø87 (EPa87), and a cocktail of all four phages were tested against 145 P. aeruginosa isolates. Comparisons were made within measurements at the two sites performing the liquid assay and between these two sites. Agreement was assessed based on coverage probability (CP8), total deviation index, concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), measurement accuracy, and precision. For the liquid assay, there was satisfactory agreement among triplicate measurements made on different days at site 1, and high agreement based on accuracy and precision between duplicate measurements made on the same run at site 2. There was fair accuracy between measurements of the two sites performing the liquid assay, with CCCs below 0.6 for all phages tested. When compared to the plaque assay (performed once at site 3), there was less agreement between results of the liquid and plaque assays than between the two sites performing the liquid assay. Similar findings to the larger group were noted in the subset of 46 P. aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis. Results of this study suggest that reproducibility of PST methods needs further development.

Priorities and Progress in Gram-negative Bacterial Infection Research by the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group.

Addressing the treatment and prevention of antibacterial-resistant gram-negative bacterial infections is a priority area of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG). The ARLG has conducted a series of observational studies to define the clinical and molecular global epidemiology of carbapenem-resistant and ceftriaxone-resistant Enterobacterales, carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, with the goal of optimizing the design and execution of interventional studies. One ongoing ARLG study aims to better understand the impact of fluoroquinolone-resistant gram-negative gut bacteria in neutropenic patients, which threatens to undermine the effectiveness of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in these vulnerable patients. The ARLG has conducted pharmacokinetic studies to inform the optimal dosing of antibiotics that are important in the treatment of drug-resistant gram-negative bacteria, including oral fosfomycin, intravenous minocycline, and a combination of intravenous ceftazidime-avibactam and aztreonam. In addition, randomized clinical trials have assessed the safety and efficacy of step-down oral fosfomycin for complicated urinary tract infections and single-dose intravenous phage therapy for adult patients with cystic fibrosis who are chronically colonized with P. aeruginosa in their respiratory tract. Thus, the focus of investigation in the ARLG has evolved from improving understanding of drug-resistant gram-negative bacterial infections to positively affecting clinical care for affected patients through a combination of interventional pharmacokinetic and clinical studies, a focus that will be maintained moving forward.

The Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group: Scientific Advancements and Future Directions.

In this overview, we describe important contributions from the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) to patient care, clinical trials design, and mentorship while outlining future priorities. The ARLG research agenda is focused on 3 key areas: gram-positive infections, gram-negative infections, and diagnostics. The ARLG has developed an innovative approach to clinical trials design, the desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR), which uses an ordinal measure of global outcome to assess both benefits and harms. DOOR was initially applied to observational studies to determine optimal dosing of vancomycin for methicillin-resistant Staphylcococcus aureus bacteremia and the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam versus colistin for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales infection. DOOR is being successfully applied to the analysis of interventional trials and, in collaboration with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for use in registrational trials. In the area of diagnostics, the ARLG developed Master Protocol for Evaluating Multiple Infection Diagnostics (MASTERMIND), an innovative design that allows simultaneous testing of multiple diagnostic platforms in a single study. This approach will be used to compare molecular assays for the identification of fluoroquinolone-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae (MASTER GC) and to compare rapid diagnostic tests for bloodstream infections. The ARLG has initiated a first-in-kind randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in participants with cystic fibrosis who are chronically colonized with Pseudomonas aeruginosa to assess the pharmacokinetics and antimicrobial activity of bacteriophage therapy. Finally, an engaged and highly trained workforce is critical for continued and future success against antimicrobial drug resistance. Thus, the ARLG has developed a robust mentoring program targeted to each stage of research training to attract and retain investigators in the field of antimicrobial resistance research.

Efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus placebo to treat lower respiratory tract infections associated with low procalcitonin: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Lower respiratory tract infections are frequently treated with antibiotics, despite a viral cause in many cases. It remains unknown whether low procalcitonin concentrations can identify patients with lower respiratory tract infection who are unlikely to benefit from antibiotics. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus placebo to treat lower respiratory tract infections in patients with low procalcitonin. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at five health centres in the USA. Adults aged 18 years or older with clinically suspected non-pneumonia lower respiratory tract infection and symptom duration from 24 h to 28 days were eligible for enrolment. Participants with a procalcitonin concentration of 0·25 ng/mL or less were randomly assigned (1:1), in blocks of four with stratification by site, to receive over-encapsulated oral azithromycin 250 mg or matching placebo (two capsules on day 1 followed by one capsule daily for 4 days). Participants, non-study clinical providers, investigators, and study coordinators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was efficacy of azithromycin versus placebo in terms of clinical improvement at day 5 in the intention-to-treat population. The non-inferiority margin was -12·5%. Solicited adverse events (abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhoea, allergic reaction, or yeast infections) were recorded as a secondary outcome. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03341273. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2017, and March 9, 2020, 691 patients were assessed for eligibility and 499 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive azithromycin (n=249) or placebo (n=250). Clinical improvement at day 5 was observed in 148 (63%, 95% CI 54 to 71) of 238 participants with full data in the placebo group and 155 (69%, 61 to 77) of 227 participants with full data in the azithromycin group in the intention-to-treat analysis (between-group difference -6%, 95% CI -15 to 2). The 95% CI for the difference did not meet the non-inferiority margin. Solicited adverse events and the severity of solicited adverse events were not significantly different between groups at day 5, except for increased abdominal pain associated with azithromycin (47 [23%, 95% CI 18 to 29] of 204 participants) compared with placebo (35 [16%, 12 to 21] of 221; between-group difference -7% [95% CI -15 to 0]; p=0·066). INTERPRETATION: Placebo was not non-inferior to azithromycin in terms of clinical improvement at day 5 in adults with lower respiratory tract infection and a low procalcitonin concentration. After accounting for both the rates of clinical improvement and solicited adverse events at day 5, it is unclear whether antibiotics are indicated for patients with lower respiratory tract infection and a low procalcitonin concentration. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, bioMérieux.

Safety and microbiological activity of phage therapy in persons with cystic fibrosis colonized with Pseudomonas aeruginosa: study protocol for a phase 1b/2, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Bacteriophages (phages) are a promising anti-infective option for human disease. Major gaps remain in understanding their potential utility. METHODS: This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of a single dose of intravenous phage in approximately 72 clinically stable adult cystic fibrosis volunteers recruited from up to 20 US sites with Pseudomonas aeruginosa airway colonization. The single dose of phage consists of a mixture of four anti-pseudomonal phages. Six sentinel participants will be sequentially enrolled with dose escalation of the phage mixture by one log10 beginning with 4 × 107 plaque-forming units in an unblinded stage 1. If no serious adverse events related to the study product are identified, the trial will proceed to a double-blinded stage 2. In stage 2a, 32 participants will be randomly assigned to one of three phage dosages or placebo in a 1:1:1:1 allocation. An interim analysis will be performed to determine the phage dosage with the most favorable safety and microbiological activity profile to inform phage dosing in stage 2b. During stage 2b, up to 32 additional volunteers will be randomized 1:1 to the phage or placebo arm. Primary outcomes include (1) the number of grade 2 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events, (2) change in log10 P. aeruginosa total colony counts in sputum, and (3) the probability of a randomly selected subject having a more favorable outcome ranking if assigned to receive phage therapy versus placebo. Exploratory outcomes include (1) sputum and serum phage pharmacokinetics, (2) the impact of phage on lung function, (3) the proportion of P. aeruginosa isolates susceptible to the phage mixture before and after study product administration, and (4) changes in quality of life. DISCUSSION: This trial will investigate the activity of phages in reducing P. aeruginosa colony counts and provide insights into the safety profile of phage therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05453578. Registered on 12 July 2022.

Prospective Validation of a Rapid Host Gene Expression Test to Discriminate Bacterial From Viral Respiratory Infection.

Importance: Bacterial and viral causes of acute respiratory illness (ARI) are difficult to clinically distinguish, resulting in the inappropriate use of antibacterial therapy. The use of a host gene expression-based test that is able to discriminate bacterial from viral infection in less than 1 hour may improve care and antimicrobial stewardship. Objective: To validate the host response bacterial/viral (HR-B/V) test and assess its ability to accurately differentiate bacterial from viral infection among patients with ARI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective multicenter diagnostic study enrolled 755 children and adults with febrile ARI of 7 or fewer days' duration from 10 US emergency departments. Participants were enrolled from October 3, 2014, to September 1, 2019, followed by additional enrollment of patients with COVID-19 from March 20 to December 3, 2020. Clinical adjudication of enrolled participants identified 616 individuals as having bacterial or viral infection. The primary analysis cohort included 334 participants with high-confidence reference adjudications (based on adjudicator concordance and the presence of an identified pathogen confirmed by microbiological testing). A secondary analysis of the entire cohort of 616 participants included cases with low-confidence reference adjudications (based on adjudicator discordance or the absence of an identified pathogen in microbiological testing). Thirty-three participants with COVID-19 were included post hoc. Interventions: The HR-B/V test quantified the expression of 45 host messenger RNAs in approximately 45 minutes to derive a probability of bacterial infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Performance characteristics for the HR-B/V test compared with clinical adjudication were reported as either bacterial or viral infection or categorized into 4 likelihood groups (viral very likely [probability score <0.19], viral likely [probability score of 0.19-0.40], bacterial likely [probability score of 0.41-0.73], and bacterial very likely [probability score >0.73]) and compared with procalcitonin measurement. Results: Among 755 enrolled participants, the median age was 26 years (IQR, 16-52 years); 360 participants (47.7%) were female, and 395 (52.3%) were male. A total of 13 participants (1.7%) were American Indian, 13 (1.7%) were Asian, 368 (48.7%) were Black, 131 (17.4%) were Hispanic, 3 (0.4%) were Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 297 (39.3%) were White, and 60 (7.9%) were of unspecified race and/or ethnicity. In the primary analysis involving 334 participants, the HR-B/V test had sensitivity of 89.8% (95% CI, 77.8%-96.2%), specificity of 82.1% (95% CI, 77.4%-86.6%), and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97.9% (95% CI, 95.3%-99.1%) for bacterial infection. In comparison, the sensitivity of procalcitonin measurement was 28.6% (95% CI, 16.2%-40.9%; P < .001), the specificity was 87.0% (95% CI, 82.7%-90.7%; P = .006), and the NPV was 87.6% (95% CI, 85.5%-89.5%; P < .001). When stratified into likelihood groups, the HR-B/V test had an NPV of 98.9% (95% CI, 96.1%-100%) for bacterial infection in the viral very likely group and a positive predictive value of 63.4% (95% CI, 47.2%-77.9%) for bacterial infection in the bacterial very likely group. The HR-B/V test correctly identified 30 of 33 participants (90.9%) with acute COVID-19 as having a viral infection. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the HR-B/V test accurately discriminated bacterial from viral infection among patients with febrile ARI and was superior to procalcitonin measurement. The findings suggest that an accurate point-of-need host response test with high NPV may offer an opportunity to improve antibiotic stewardship and patient outcomes.

Ticagrelor and Aspirin or Aspirin Alone in Acute Ischemic Stroke or TIA.

BACKGROUND: Trials have evaluated the use of clopidogrel and aspirin to prevent stroke after an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). In a previous trial, ticagrelor was not better than aspirin in preventing vascular events or death after stroke or TIA. The effect of the combination of ticagrelor and aspirin on prevention of stroke has not been well studied. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial involving patients who had had a mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke, with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of 5 or less (range, 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating more severe stroke), or TIA and who were not undergoing thrombolysis or thrombectomy. The patients were assigned within 24 hours after symptom onset, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive a 30-day regimen of either ticagrelor (180-mg loading dose followed by 90 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (300 to 325 mg on the first day followed by 75 to 100 mg daily) or matching placebo plus aspirin. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke or death within 30 days. Secondary outcomes were first subsequent ischemic stroke and the incidence of disability within 30 days. The primary safety outcome was severe bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 11,016 patients underwent randomization (5523 in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and 5493 in the aspirin group). A primary-outcome event occurred in 303 patients (5.5%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 362 patients (6.6%) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.96; P = 0.02). Ischemic stroke occurred in 276 patients (5.0%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 345 patients (6.3%) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.93; P = 0.004). The incidence of disability did not differ significantly between the two groups. Severe bleeding occurred in 28 patients (0.5%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 7 patients (0.1%) in the aspirin group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke (NIHSS score ≤5) or TIA who were not undergoing intravenous or endovascular thrombolysis, the risk of the composite of stroke or death within 30 days was lower with ticagrelor-aspirin than with aspirin alone, but the incidence of disability did not differ significantly between the two groups. Severe bleeding was more frequent with ticagrelor. (Funded by AstraZeneca; THALES ClinicalTrial.gov number, NCT03354429.).

Ticagrelor Versus Aspirin in Acute Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Ticagrelor is an effective antiplatelet therapy among patients with atherosclerotic disease and, therefore, could be more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events among patients with embolic stroke of unknown source (ESUS), which includes patients with ipsilateral stenosis <50% and aortic arch atherosclerosis. METHODS: We randomized 13 199 patients with a noncardioembolic, nonsevere ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack to ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by 90 mg twice daily for days 2-90) or aspirin (300 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg daily for days 2-90) within 24 hours of symptom onset. In all patients, investigators informed on the presence of ipsilateral stenosis ≥50%, small deep infarct <15 mm, and on cardiac source of embolism detected after enrollment or rare causes, which allowed to construct an ESUS category in all other patients with documented brain infarction. The primary end point was the time to the occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 90 days. RESULTS: ESUS was identified in 4329 (32.8%) patients. There was no treatment-by-ESUS category interaction (P=0.83). Hazard ratio in ESUS patients was 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.10; P=0.24). However, hazard ratio was 0.51 (95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.90; P=0.02) in ESUS patients with ipsilateral stenosis <50% or aortic arch atherosclerosis (n=961) and 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.27; P=0.89) in the remaining ESUS patients (n=3368; P for heterogeneity =0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc, exploratory analysis, we found no treatment-by-ESUS category interaction. ESUS subgroups have heterogeneous response to treatment (Funded by AstraZeneca). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01994720.

Risk for Major Bleeding in Patients Receiving Ticagrelor Compared With Aspirin After Transient Ischemic Attack or Acute Ischemic Stroke in the SOCRATES Study (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes).

BACKGROUND: Patients with minor acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack are at high risk for subsequent stroke, and more potent antiplatelet therapy in the acute setting is needed. However, the potential benefit of more intense antiplatelet therapy must be assessed in relation to the risk for major bleeding. The SOCRATES trial (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes) was the first trial with ticagrelor in patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack in which the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor were compared with those of aspirin. The main safety objective was assessment of PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes)-defined major bleeds on treatment, with special focus on intracranial hemorrhage (ICrH). METHODS: An independent adjudication committee blinded to study treatment classified bleeds according to the PLATO, TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction), and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) definitions. The definitions of ICrH and major bleeding excluded cerebral microbleeds and asymptomatic hemorrhagic transformations of cerebral infarctions so that the definitions better discriminated important events in the acute stroke population. RESULTS: A total of 13 130 of 13 199 randomized patients received at least 1 dose of study drug and were included in the safety analysis set. PLATO major bleeds occurred in 31 patients (0.5%) on ticagrelor and 38 patients (0.6%) on aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.34). The most common locations of major bleeds were intracranial and gastrointestinal. ICrH was reported in 12 patients (0.2%) on ticagrelor and 18 patients (0.3%) on aspirin. Thirteen of all 30 ICrHs (4 on ticagrelor and 9 on aspirin) were hemorrhagic strokes, and 4 (2 in each group) were symptomatic hemorrhagic transformations of brain infarctions. The ICrHs were spontaneous in 6 and 13, traumatic in 3 and 3, and procedural in 3 and 2 patients on ticagrelor and aspirin, respectively. In total, 9 fatal bleeds occurred on ticagrelor and 4 on aspirin. The composite of ICrH or fatal bleeding included 15 patients on ticagrelor and 18 on aspirin. Independently of bleeding classification, PLATO, TIMI, or GUSTO, the relative difference between treatments for major/severe bleeds was similar. Nonmajor bleeds were more common on ticagrelor. CONCLUSIONS: Antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor in patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack showed a bleeding profile similar to that of aspirin for major bleeds. There were few ICrHs. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01994720.

The Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group: Progress Report and Work in Progress.

The Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG), with funding from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, was created in June 2013. Its mission is to develop, prioritize, and implement a clinical research agenda that addresses the public health threat of antibacterial resistance. This article reports on the progress that the ARLG has made to date in fulfilling its mission. Since inception, the ARLG has received and reviewed >70 study proposals, initiated >30 studies, executed >300 agreements, included data from >7000 subjects, published >45 manuscripts, and provided opportunities for 26 mentees. Despite this substantial progress, there remains significant work to be accomplished. This article also describes the considerable challenges that lie ahead.

Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus aspirin in acute stroke or transient ischaemic attack of atherosclerotic origin: a subgroup analysis of SOCRATES, a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor is an effective antiplatelet therapy for patients with coronary atherosclerotic disease and might be more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events in patients with acute cerebral ischaemia of atherosclerotic origin. Our aim was to test for a treatment-by-ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis interaction in a subgroup analysis of patients in the Acute Stroke or Transient Ischaemic Attack Treated with Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes (SOCRATES) trial. METHODS: SOCRATES was a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial of ticagrelor versus aspirin in patients aged 40 years or older with a non-cardioembolic, non-severe acute ischaemic stroke, or high-risk transient ischaemic attack from 674 hospitals in 33 countries. We randomly allocated patients (1:1) to ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by 90 mg twice daily for days 2-90, given orally) or aspirin (300 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg daily for days 2-90, given orally) within 24 h of symptom onset. Investigators classified all patients into atherosclerotic and non-atherosclerotic groups for the prespecified, exploratory analysis reported in this study. The primary endpoint was the time to occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 90 days. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. The SOCRATES trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01994720. FINDINGS: Between Jan 7, 2014, and Oct 29, 2015, we randomly allocated 13 199 patients (6589 [50%] to ticagrelor and 6610 [50%] to aspirin). Potentially symptomatic ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis was reported in 3081 (23%) of 13 199 patients. We found a treatment-by-atherosclerotic stenosis interaction (p=0·017). 103 (6·7%) of 1542 patients with ipsilateral stenosis in the ticagrelor group and 147 (9·6%) of 1539 patients with ipsilateral stenosis in the aspirin group had an occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 90 days (hazard ratio 0·68 [95% CI 0·53-0·88]; p=0·003). In 10 118 patients with no ipsilateral stenosis, 339 (6·7%) of 5047 patients in the ticagrelor group had an occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 90 days compared with 350 (6·9%) of 5071 in the aspirin group (0·97 [0·84-1·13]; p=0·72). There were no significant differences in the proportion of life-threatening bleeding or major or minor bleeding events in patients with ipsilateral stenosis in the ticagrelor group compared with the aspirin group. INTERPRETATION: In this prespecified exploratory analysis, ticagrelor was superior to aspirin at preventing stroke, myocardial infarction, or death at 90 days in patients with acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack when associated with ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis. An understanding of stroke mechanisms and causes is important to deliver safe and efficacious treatments for early stroke prevention. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Ticagrelor in Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack in Asian Patients: From the SOCRATES Trial (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In the SOCRATES trial (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes), ticagrelor was not superior to aspirin. Because of differences in patient demographics and stroke disease pattern in Asia, outcomes of ticagrelor versus aspirin were assessed among Asian patients in a prespecified exploratory analysis. METHODS: Baseline demographics, treatment effects, and safety of ticagrelor and aspirin were assessed among Asian patients. Differences in outcomes between groups were assessed using Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: A total of 3858 (29.2%) SOCRATES participants were recruited in Asia. Among the Asian patients, the primary end point event occurred in 186 (9.6%) of the 1933 patients treated with ticagrelor, versus 224 (11.6%) of the 1925 patients treated with aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.99). The exploratory P value for treatment-by-region interaction was 0.27. The primary end point event rate in the Asian subgroup was numerically higher than that in the non-Asian group (10.6% versus 5.7%; nominal P<0.01). Among the Asian patients, the rate of PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes)-defined major bleeding was similar in the ticagrelor group and the aspirin group (0.6% versus 0.8%; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: The event rates were numerically higher in the Asian patients. Among the Asian patients with acute stroke or transient ischemic attacks, there was a trend toward a lower hazard ratio in reducing risk of the primary end point of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death in the ticagrelor group. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01994720.

Ticagrelor versus Aspirin in Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor may be a more effective antiplatelet therapy than aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events in patients with acute cerebral ischemia. METHODS: We conducted an international double-blind, controlled trial in 674 centers in 33 countries, in which 13,199 patients with a nonsevere ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack who had not received intravenous or intraarterial thrombolysis and were not considered to have had a cardioembolic stroke were randomly assigned within 24 hours after symptom onset, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive either ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by 90 mg twice daily for days 2 through 90) or aspirin (300 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg daily for days 2 through 90). The primary end point was the time to the occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 90 days. RESULTS: During the 90 days of treatment, a primary end-point event occurred in 442 of the 6589 patients (6.7%) treated with ticagrelor, versus 497 of the 6610 patients (7.5%) treated with aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.01; P=0.07). Ischemic stroke occurred in 385 patients (5.8%) treated with ticagrelor and in 441 patients (6.7%) treated with aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.00). Major bleeding occurred in 0.5% of patients treated with ticagrelor and in 0.6% of patients treated with aspirin, intracranial hemorrhage in 0.2% and 0.3%, respectively, and fatal bleeding in 0.1% and 0.1%. CONCLUSIONS: In our trial involving patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, ticagrelor was not found to be superior to aspirin in reducing the rate of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death at 90 days. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01994720.).

Sample Size Considerations in Clinical Trials when Comparing Two Interventions using Multiple Co-Primary Binary Relative Risk Contrasts.

The effects of interventions are multi-dimensional. Use of more than one primary endpoint offers an attractive design feature in clinical trials as they capture more complete characterization of the effects of an intervention and provide more informative intervention comparisons. For these reasons, multiple primary endpoints have become a common design feature in many disease areas such as oncology, infectious disease, and cardiovascular disease. More specifically in medical product development, multiple endpoints are utilized as co-primary to evaluate the effect of the new interventions. Although methodologies to address continuous co-primary endpoints are well-developed, methodologies for binary endpoints are limited. In this paper, we describe power and sample size determination for clinical trials with multiple correlated binary endpoints, when relative risks are evaluated as co-primary. We consider a scenario where the objective is to evaluate evidence for superiority of a test intervention compared with a control intervention, for all of the relative risks. We discuss the normal approximation methods for power and sample size calculations and evaluate how the required sample size, power and Type I error vary as a function of the correlations among the endpoints. Also we discuss a simple, but conservative procedure for appropriate sample size calculation. We then extend the methods allowing for interim monitoring using group-sequential methods.

A randomized trial evaluating Prosaptide for HIV-associated sensory neuropathies: use of an electronic diary to record neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and safety of Prosaptide (PRO) for the treatment of painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathies (HIV-SN). DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study in participants with sensory neuropathy. Pain modulating therapy was discontinued prior to baseline. Participants were stratified by sural sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) amplitude. Participants were trained to use an electronic diary (ED) to record pain. SETTING: Peripheral neuropathies are common complications of HIV infection. The pathogenesis is unknown and currently treatments are restricted to symptomatic measures. We examined PRO against placebo (PBO) for treatment of painful HIV-SN and performed a post-hoc evaluation of an electronic diary (ED) to record HIV-associated neuropathic pain. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants included adults with neurologist-confirmed painful HIV-SN. INTERVENTIONS: 2, 4, 8, or 16 mg/d PRO or PBO administered via subcutaneous (SC) injection for six weeks. Neurotoxic antiretroviral drug usage was held constant. OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes from baseline in the weekly average of evaluable daily random prompts measuring pain using the Gracely pain scale and adverse events. RESULTS: 237 participants were randomized. The study was stopped after a planned futility analysis. There were no between-group differences in the frequency of adverse events or laboratory toxicities. The 6-week mean (sd) Gracely pain scale changes were -0.12 (0.23), -0.24 (0.35), -0.15 (0.32), -0.18 (0.34), and -0.18 (0.32) for the 2, 4, 8, 16 mg, and PBO arms respectively. A similar variability of pain changes recorded using the ED were noted compared to previous trials that used paper collection methods. CONCLUSIONS: 6-week treatment with PRO was safe but not effective at reducing HIV-associated neuropathic pain. Use of an ED to record neuropathic pain is novel in HIV-SN, resulted in reasonable compliance in recording pain data, but did not decrease the variability of pain scores compared to historical paper collection methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials NCT00286377.

Comparison of direct and indirect measurement of LDL-C in HIV-infected individuals: ACTG 5087.

BACKGROUND: Hypertriglyceridemia is common in HIV-infected individuals on antiretroviral therapy. Triglyceride (TG) levels >400 mg/dL interfere with the accurate determination of low-density lipoproteins (LDL-C) by the Friedewald equation, making it difficult to assess coronary heart disease risk. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the agreement of the direct LDL-C assay and the Friedewald equation with a reference ultracentrifugation method in the estimation of LDL-C concentrations. METHOD: Samples from ACTG 5087 were assayed by ultracentrifugation and a direct enzymatic assay and calculated using the Friedewald equation. RESULTS: In subjects with TG <400 mg/dL (n = 271), 90% of the direct LDL-C values and Friedewald calculations were within 30 mg/dL and 32 mg/dL of the ultracentrifugation values, respectively. With TG > or = 400 mg/dL (n = 186), 90% of the direct assay and Friedewald observations were within 68 mg/dL and 120 mg/dL of the ultracentrifugation results, respectively. Only 27% of the LDL-C values were within 15 mg/dL of the ultracentrifugation LDL-C results for direct assay and 16.3% for the Friedewald equation. CONCLUSION: The direct LDL-C assay and the calculated LDL-C values did not display adequate agreement with the reference ultracentrifugation method. In subjects with TG >400 mg/dL, the direct assay overestimates the actual LDL-C whereas the Friedewald calculation underestimates the actual LDL. Clinical usage of these methods may lead to misclassification of the severity of dyslipidemia, resulting in improper management.

Phase II evaluation of low-dose oral etoposide for the treatment of relapsed or progressive AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma: an AIDS Clinical Trials Group clinical study.

PURPOSE: Liposomal anthracyclines and paclitaxel are considered the best available cytotoxic therapies for Kaposi's sarcoma (KS), but relapse is common. To identify new interventions for relapsed or progressive KS, a phase II study of low-dose etoposide to assess its toxicity and efficacy was conducted. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with high-risk KS were treated with oral etoposide 50 mg/d for 7 consecutive days of every 2-week cycle. All patients' disease had relapsed or progressed after prior combination chemotherapy or anthracycline therapy. For patients without a complete or partial response after two cycles of therapy and no toxicity greater than grade 2, the dose of etoposide was escalated to 100 mg/d orally on days 1 to 7 of each 14-day cycle. Treatment-related and disease-specific quality of life was evaluated using patient reports on the General Health Self-Assessment Form and a KS-specific measure. RESULTS: One patient achieved a complete response, 12 patients had a partial response (overall response rate, 36.1%), and stable disease was observed in 12 patients (33.3%). Tumor responses were seen in all disease sites. Fourteen patients had their dose escalated, of whom five responded. The median time to response was 17.7 weeks; the median duration of response was 25 weeks. The most frequent hematologic abnormality was neutropenia, which was grade 4 in seven patients and grade 3 in six. Opportunistic infections occurred in eight patients during the treatment period. Both response to treatment and toxicity influenced patient-reported quality of life. CONCLUSION: We conclude that low-dose oral etoposide at a dose of 50 mg/d is safe and effective for the treatment of refractory or progressed AIDS-related KS and has an overall positive effect on the quality of life of responding patients.