Andexanet for Factor Xa Inhibitor-Associated Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage who are receiving factor Xa inhibitors have a risk of hematoma expansion. The effect of andexanet alfa, an agent that reverses the effects of factor Xa inhibitors, on hematoma volume expansion has not been well studied. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients who had taken factor Xa inhibitors within 15 hours before having an acute intracerebral hemorrhage to receive andexanet or usual care. The primary end point was hemostatic efficacy, defined by expansion of the hematoma volume by 35% or less at 12 hours after baseline, an increase in the score on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of less than 7 points (scores range from 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating worse neurologic deficit) at 12 hours, and no receipt of rescue therapy between 3 hours and 12 hours. Safety end points were thrombotic events and death. RESULTS: A total of 263 patients were assigned to receive andexanet, and 267 to receive usual care. Efficacy was assessed in an interim analysis that included 452 patients, and safety was analyzed in all 530 enrolled patients. Atrial fibrillation was the most common indication for factor Xa inhibitors. Of the patients receiving usual care, 85.5% received prothrombin complex concentrate. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 150 of 224 patients (67.0%) receiving andexanet and in 121 of 228 (53.1%) receiving usual care (adjusted difference, 13.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6 to 22.2; P = 0.003). The median reduction from baseline to the 1-to-2-hour nadir in anti-factor Xa activity was 94.5% with andexanet and 26.9% with usual care (P<0.001). Thrombotic events occurred in 27 of 263 patients (10.3%) receiving andexanet and in 15 of 267 (5.6%) receiving usual care (difference, 4.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 9.2; P = 0.048); ischemic stroke occurred in 17 patients (6.5%) and 4 patients (1.5%), respectively. There were no appreciable differences between the groups in the score on the modified Rankin scale or in death within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with intracerebral hemorrhage who were receiving factor Xa inhibitors, andexanet resulted in better control of hematoma expansion than usual care but was associated with thrombotic events, including ischemic stroke. (Funded by Alexion AstraZeneca Rare Disease and others; ANNEXA-I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03661528.).

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.).

Results from the "Me & My Heart" (eMocial) Study: a Randomized Evaluation of a New Smartphone-Based Support Tool to Increase Therapy Adherence of Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated whether patient support, administered via an electronic device-based app, increased adherence to treatment and lifestyle changes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with ticagrelor in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with diagnosed ACS treated with ticagrelor co-administered with low-dose acetylsalicylic acid were randomized into an active group (with support tool app for medication intake reminders and motivational messages) and a control group (without support tool app), and observed for 48 weeks (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02615704). Patients were asked to complete the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Lifestyle Changes Questionnaire (LSQ), and were assessed for blood pressure and body mass index (BMI) at baseline (visit 1) and at the end of the study (visit 2). Medication adherence was measured using the Brilique Adherence Questionnaire (BAQ). RESULTS: Patients (N = 676) were randomized to an active (n = 342) or a control (n = 334) group. BAQ data were available for 174 patients in the active group and 174 patients in the control group. Over the 48-week period, mean (standard deviation) adherence for the active and control groups was 96.4% (13.2%) and 91.5% (23.1%), respectively (effect of app intervention, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in blood pressure and BMI between visits. General improvements in SF-36 and LSQ scores were observed for both groups. CONCLUSION: The patient support tool app was associated with significant improvements in patient-reported treatment adherence compared with a data collection app alone in patients prescribed ticagrelor for ACS.

Ischemic Benefit and Hemorrhage Risk of Ticagrelor-Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

Background and Purpose: In patients with acute mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, the THALES trial (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death) demonstrated that when added to aspirin, ticagrelor reduced stroke or death but increased risk of severe hemorrhage compared with placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of THALES included hemorrhagic stroke and death, events also counted in the primary safety outcome. We sought to disentangle risk and benefit, assess their relative impact, and attempt to identify subgroups with disproportionate risk or benefit. Methods: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of patients with mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, patients were randomized within 24 hours after symptom onset to a 30-day regimen of either ticagrelor plus aspirin or matching placebo plus aspirin. For the present analyses, we defined the efficacy outcome, major ischemic events, as the composite of ischemic stroke or nonhemorrhagic death, and defined the safety outcome, major hemorrhage, as intracranial hemorrhage or hemorrhagic death. Net clinical impact was defined as the combination of these 2 end points. Results: In 11 016 patients (5523 ticagrelor-aspirin and 5493 aspirin), a major ischemic event occurred in 294 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 359 patients (6.5%) in the aspirin group (absolute risk reduction 1.19% [95% CI, 0.31%­2.07%]). Major hemorrhage occurred in 22 patients (0.4%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and 6 patients (0.1%) in the aspirin group (absolute risk increase 0.29% [95% CI, 0.10%­0.48%]). Net clinical impact favored ticagrelor-aspirin (absolute risk reduction 0.97% [95% CI, 0.08%­1.87%]). Findings were similar when different thresholds for disability were applied and over a range of predefined subgroups. Conclusions: In patients with mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, ischemic benefits of 30-day treatment with ticagrelor-aspirin outweigh risks of hemorrhage. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03354429.

Ticagrelor Added to Aspirin in Acute Nonsevere Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack of Atherosclerotic Origin.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Among patients with a transient ischemic attack or minor ischemic strokes, those with ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis of cervicocranial vasculature have the highest risk of recurrent vascular events. METHODS: In the double-blind THALES (The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Ticagrelor and ASA for Prevention of Stroke and Death) trial, we randomized 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 2-30) or placebo added to aspirin (300-325 mg on day 1 followed by 75-100 mg daily for days 2-30) within 24 hours of symptom onset. The present paper reports a prespecified analysis in patients with and without ipsilateral, potentially causal atherosclerotic stenosis ≥30% of cervicocranial vasculature. The primary end point was time to the occurrence of stroke or death within 30 days. RESULTS: Of 11 016 randomized patients, 2351 (21.3%) patients had an ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis. After 30 days, a primary end point occurred in 92/1136 (8.1%) patients with ipsilateral stenosis randomized to ticagrelor and in 132/1215 (10.9%) randomized to placebo (hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.96], P=0.023) resulting in a number needed to treat of 34 (95% CI, 19-171). In patients without ipsilateral stenosis, the corresponding event rate was 211/4387 (4.8%) and 230/4278 (5.4%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]; P=0.23, Pinteraction=0.245). Severe bleeding occurred in 4 (0.4%) and 3 (0.2%) patients with ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis on ticagrelor and on placebo, respectively (P=NS), and in 24 (0.5%) and 4 (0.1%), respectively, in 8665 patients without ipsilateral stenosis (hazard ratio=5.87 [95% CI, 2.04-16.9], P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory analysis comparing ticagrelor added to aspirin to aspirin alone, we found no treatment by ipsilateral atherosclerosis stenosis subgroup interaction but did identify a higher absolute risk and a greater absolute risk reduction of stroke or death at 30 days in patients with ipsilateral atherosclerosis stenosis than in those without. In this easily identified population, ticagrelor added to aspirin provided a clinically meaningful benefit with a number needed to treat of 34 (95% CI, 19-171). Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03354429.

Methodologies for pragmatic and efficient assessment of benefits and harms: Application to the SOCRATES trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Standard approaches to trial design and analyses can be inefficient and non-pragmatic. Failure to consider a range of outcomes impedes evidence-based interpretation and reduces power. Traditional approaches synthesizing information obtained from separate analysis of each outcome fail to incorporate associations between outcomes and recognize the cumulative nature of outcomes in individual patients, suffer from competing risk complexities during interpretation, and since efficacy and safety analyses are often conducted on different populations, generalizability is unclear. Pragmatic and efficient approaches to trial design and analyses are needed. METHODS: Approaches providing a pragmatic assessment of benefits and harms of interventions, summarizing outcomes experienced by patients, and providing sample size efficiencies are described. Ordinal outcomes recognize finer gradations of patient responses. Desirability of outcome ranking is an ordinal outcome combining benefits and harms within patients. Analysis of desirability of outcome ranking can be based on rank-based methodologies including the desirability of outcome ranking probability, the win ratio, and the proportion in favor of treatment. Partial credit analyses, involving grading the levels of the desirability of outcome ranking outcome similar to an academic test, provides an alternative approach. The methodologies are demonstrated using the acute stroke or transient ischemic attack treated with aspirin or ticagrelor and patient outcomes study (SOCRATES; NCT01994720), a randomized clinical trial. RESULTS: Two 5-level ordinal outcomes were developed for SOCRATES. The first was based on a modified Rankin scale. The odds ratio is 0.86 (95% confidence interval = 0.75, 0.99; p = 0.04) indicating that the odds of worse stroke categorization for a trial participant assigned to ticagrelor is 0.86 times that of a trial participant assigned to aspirin. The 5-level desirability of outcome ranking outcome incorporated and prioritized survival; the number of strokes, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding events; and whether a stroke event was disabling. The desirability of outcome ranking probability and win ratio are 0.504 (95% confidence interval = 0.499, 0.508; p = 0.10) and 1.11 (95% confidence interval = 0.98, 1.26; p = 0.10), respectively, implying that the probability of a more desirable result with ticagrelor is 50.4% and that a more desirable result occurs 1.11 times more frequently on ticagrelor versus aspirin. CONCLUSION: Ordinal outcomes can improve efficiency through required pre-specification, careful construction, and analyses. Greater pragmatism can be obtained by composing outcomes within patients. Desirability of outcome ranking provides a global assessment of the benefits and harms that more closely reflect the experience of patients. The desirability of outcome ranking probability, the proportion in favor of treatment, the win ratio, and partial credit can more optimally inform patient treatment, enhance the understanding of the totality of intervention effects on patients, and potentially provide efficiencies over standard analyses. The methods provide the infrastructure for incorporating patient values and estimating personalized effects.

Time to Loading Dose and Risk of Recurrent Events in the SOCRATES Trial.

Background and Purpose- Recurrent ischemia risk is high in the acute period after cerebral ischemic events. Effects of antiplatelet agents may vary by time to loading dose (TLD). We explored the risk of recurrent events and safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus aspirin in relation to TLD. Methods- We randomized 13 199 patients with noncardioembolic, nonsevere ischemic stroke, or high-risk transient ischemic attack to 90-day ticagrelor or aspirin treatment within 24 hours of symptom onset. For this analysis, 13 126 patients were categorized by TLD as <12 hours or ≥12 hours from start of index event. The primary end point was the composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 90 days. Major bleeding was the primary safety end point. Results- TLD was <12 hours in 4403 (33.5%) and ≥12 hours in 8723 (66.5%). The Kaplan-Meier% for the primary end point for all patients with TLD<12 hours was 7.5% versus 6.9% in TLD≥12 hours. Among patients with TLD<12 hours, the primary end point occurred in 147/2196 (6.8%) randomized to ticagrelor and in 184/2207 (8.3%) randomized to aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P=0.036). Among patients with TLD≥12 hours, the primary end point occurred in 6.7% patients randomized to ticagrelor versus 7.0% to aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.12; P=0.55). There was no significant treatment-by-TLD interaction. Major bleeding rates were comparable on ticagrelor and aspirin, regardless of TLD. Conclusions- The event rate for the primary end point was higher in patients treated early (<12 hours) versus later (≥12 hours). In this exploratory analysis, a larger numerical difference in the primary end point was observed among patients on ticagrelor than on aspirin when TLD was <12 hours compared with ≥12 hours, although the interaction terms for treatment-by-TLD were not significant. For major bleeding, no relation to TLD was observed. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01994720.

Efficacy and Safety of Ticagrelor in Relation to Aspirin Use Within the Week Before Randomization in the SOCRATES Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: SOCRATES (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes), comparing ticagrelor with aspirin in patients with acute cerebral ischemia, found a nonsignificant 11% relative risk reduction for stroke, myocardial infarction, or death (P=0.07). Aspirin intake before randomization could enhance the effect of ticagrelor by conferring dual antiplatelet effect during a high-risk period for subsequent stroke. Therefore, we explored the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus aspirin in the patients who received any aspirin the week before randomization. METHODS: A prespecified subgroup analysis in SOCRATES (n=13 199), randomizing patients with acute ischemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≤5) or transient ischemic attack (ABCD2 score of ≥4) to 90-day treatment with ticagrelor or aspirin. Patients in the prior-aspirin group had received any aspirin within the week before randomization. Primary end point was time to stroke, myocardial infarction, or death. Safety end point was PLATO (Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) major bleeding. RESULTS: The 4232 patients in the prior-aspirin group were older, had more vascular risk factors, and vascular disease than the other patients. In the prior-aspirin group, the primary end point occurred in 138/2130 (6.5%) of patients on ticagrelor and in 177/2102 (8.3%) on aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.95; P=0.02); in patients with no prior-aspirin usage an event occurred in 304/4459 (6.9%) and 320/4508 (7.1%) on ticagrelor and aspirin, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.12; P=0.59). The treatment-by-prior-aspirin interaction was not statistically significant (P=0.10). In the prior-aspirin group, major bleeding occurred in 0.7% and 0.4% of patients on ticagrelor and aspirin, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-3.65; P=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis from SOCRATES, fewer primary end points occurred on ticagrelor treatment than on aspirin in patients receiving aspirin before randomization, but there was no significant treatment-by-prior-aspirin interaction. A new study will investigate the benefit-risk of combining ticagrelor and aspirin in patients with acute cerebral ischemia (URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03354429). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01994720.

Effect of Tenapanor on Serum Phosphate in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis.

Hyperphosphatemia is common among patients with CKD stage 5D and is associated with morbidity and mortality. Current guidelines recommend lowering serum phosphate concentrations toward normal. Tenapanor is a minimally absorbed small molecule inhibitor of the sodium/hydrogen exchanger isoform 3 that functions in the gut to reduce sodium and phosphate absorption. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessed the effects of tenapanor on serum phosphate concentration in patients with hyperphosphatemia receiving hemodialysis. After a 1- to 3-week washout of phosphate binders, we randomly assigned 162 eligible patients (serum phosphate =6.0 to <10.0 mg/dl and a 1.5-mg/dl increase from before washout) to one of six tenapanor regimens (3 or 30 mg once daily or 1, 3, 10, or 30 mg twice daily) or placebo for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was change in serum phosphate concentration from baseline (randomization) to end of treatment. In total, 115 patients (71%) completed the study. Mean serum phosphate concentrations at baseline (after washout) were 7.32-7.92 mg/dl for tenapanor groups and 7.87 mg/dl for the placebo group. Tenapanor provided dose-dependent reductions in serum phosphate level from baseline (least squares mean change: tenapanor =0.47-1.98 mg/dl; placebo =0.54 mg/dl; P=0.01). Diarrhea was the most common adverse event (tenapanor =18%-68%; placebo =12%) and frequent at the highest tenapanor doses. In conclusion, tenapanor treatment resulted in statistically significant, dose-dependent reductions in serum phosphate concentrations in patients with hyperphosphatemia receiving hemodialysis. Additional studies are required to clarify the optimal dosing of tenapanor in patients with CKD-related hyperphosphatemia.

Effect of weight reduction on glycated haemoglobin in weight loss trials in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To quantify the effect of weight loss on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at group level, based on data from published weight loss trials in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: A systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL (January 1990 through December 2012) was conducted to identify prospective trials of energy-reduced diets, obesity drugs or bariatric surgery in adult, overweight and obese patients with T2D. Based on clinical data with follow-up from 3 to 24 months, a linear model was developed to describe the effect of weight reduction on HbA1c. RESULTS: The literature search identified 58 eligible articles consisting of 124 treatment groups and 17 204 subjects, yielding a total of 250 data points with concurrent mean changes from baseline in weight and HbA1c. The model-based analyses indicated a linear relationship between weight loss and HbA1c reduction, with an estimated mean HbA1c reduction of 0.1 percentage points for each 1 kg of reduced body weight for the overall population. Baseline HbA1c was a significant covariate for the relationship between weight loss and HbA1c: high HbA1c at baseline was associated with a greater reduction in HbA1c for the same degree of weight loss. The collected trial data also indicated weight-loss-dependent reductions in antidiabetic medication. CONCLUSIONS: At group level, weight loss in obese and overweight patients with T2D was consistently accompanied by HbA1c reduction in a dose-dependent manner. The model developed in the present study estimates that for each kg of mean weight loss, there is a mean HbA1c reduction of 0.1 percentage points. HbA1c-lowering is greater in populations with poor glycaemic control than in well controlled populations with the same degree of weight loss. This summary of data from previous trials regarding the effect of weight reduction on HbA1c may be used to support the design and interpretation of future studies that aim to demonstrate the efficacy of weight loss interventions for T2D treatment.

Tenapanor administration and the activity of the H+ -coupled transporter PepT1 in healthy volunteers.

AIM: Tenapanor (RDX5791/AZD1722), an inhibitor of gastrointestinal Na+ /H+ exchanger NHE3, is being evaluated for the treatment of patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome and the treatment of hyperphosphataemia in patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis. By reducing intestinal H+ secretion, inhibition of NHE3 by tenapanor could indirectly affect H+ -coupled transporter activity, leading to drug-drug interactions. We investigated the effect of tenapanor on the activity of the H+ -coupled peptide transporter PepT1 via assessment of the pharmacokinetics of cefadroxil - a compound transported by PepT1 - in healthy volunteers. METHODS: In this open-label, two-period crossover, phase 1 study (NCT02140281), 28 volunteers received in random order: a single dose of cefadroxil 500 mg for 1 day; and tenapanor 15 mg twice daily over 4 days followed by single doses of both cefadroxil 500 mg and tenapanor 15 mg on day 5. There was a 4-day washout between treatment periods. RESULTS: Cefadroxil exposure was similar when administered alone or in combination with tenapanor {geometric least-squares mean ratios [(cefadroxil + tenapanor)/cefadroxil] (90% confidence interval): area under the concentration-time curve 93.3 (90.6-96.0)%; maximum concentration in plasma 95.9 (89.8-103)%}. Tenapanor treatment caused a softening of stool consistency and an increase in stool frequency, consistent with its expected pharmacodynamic effect. No safety concerns were identified and tenapanor was not detected in plasma. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that tenapanor 15 mg twice daily does not have a clinically relevant impact on the activity of the H+ -coupled transporter PepT1 in humans. This may guide future research on drug-drug interactions involving NHE3 inhibitors.

A phase 1 study of the safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of tenapanor in healthy Japanese volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Tenapanor (RDX5791, AZD1722), a small molecule with minimal systemic availability, is an inhibitor of the sodium/hydrogen exchanger isoform 3 (NHE3). Tenapanor acts locally in the gut to reduce absorption of sodium and phosphate. It is being developed for the treatment of patients with hyperphosphatemia in CKD requiring dialysis and patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. We report the safety, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of tenapanor in Japanese volunteers. METHODS: In this phase 1, double-blind study (NCT02176252), healthy Japanese adults (aged 20-45 years) received single-dose tenapanor 180 mg (n = 6), repeated-dose tenapanor 15, 30, 60, or 90 mg twice daily (n = 12 each) for 7 days, or placebo (n = 14). All participants received a standardized diet. RESULTS: Single and repeated doses of tenapanor resulted in higher mean stool sodium content vs. placebo (single dose, 41.9 mmol/day; repeated dose, range of means 21.3-32.2 mmol/day; placebo, 4.1 mmol/day) accompanied by lower urinary sodium content (single dose, 110 mmol/day; repeated dose, 101-112 mmol/day; placebo, 143 mmol/day). Additionally, stool phosphorus content was increased (single dose, 31.0 mmol/day; repeated dose, 17.6-24.8 mmol/day; placebo, 16.8 mmol/day) and urinary phosphorus content decreased (single dose, 18.7 mmol/day; repeated dose, 15.3-19.4 mmol/day; placebo, 25.5 mmol/day). Tenapanor had minimal systemic exposure, provided a softer stool consistency, and was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Tenapanor treatment reduced absorption of intestinal sodium and phosphate from the gut in Japanese adults. Tenapanor had minimal systemic exposure and was well tolerated. Further research into the clinical benefits of tenapanor is warranted.

Tralokinumab for moderate-to-severe UC: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIa study.

OBJECTIVE: Interleukin-13 (IL-13) has been implicated as a key driver of UC. This trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of tralokinumab, an IL-13-neutralising antibody, as add-on therapy in adults with moderate-to-severe UC despite standard treatments. DESIGN: Non-hospitalised adults with UC (total Mayo score ≥6) were randomised to receive tralokinumab 300 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the rate of clinical response at week 8. Secondary efficacy end points included clinical remission and mucosal healing rates at week 8 and changes in total Mayo score, total modified Riley score, partial Mayo score and disease activity markers. RESULTS: Clinical response rate was 38% (21/56) for tralokinumab vs. 33% (18/55) for placebo (p=0.406). Clinical remission rate was 18% (10/56) vs. 6% (3/55) (p=0.033) and mucosal healing rate was 32% (18/56) vs. 20% (11/55) (p=0.104) for tralokinumab vs placebo. Changes to week 8 in total Mayo score and total modified Riley score were similar for tralokinumab and placebo (least-squares mean difference between groups: -0.49 (p=0.394) and 0.25 (p=0.449), respectively). Partial Mayo score at week 4 was lower with tralokinumab than placebo (least-squares mean difference between groups: -0.90 (p=0.041)). No consistent patterns were observed for disease activity markers. Tralokinumab had an acceptable safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Add-on therapy with tralokinumab did not significantly improve clinical response. However, the higher clinical remission rate with tralokinumab than placebo suggests that tralokinumab may benefit some patients with UC. Tralokinumab was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01482884.

Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor plus aspirin versus aspirin in acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack: an economic evaluation of the THALES trial.

Objective: THALES demonstrated that ticagrelor plus aspirin reduced the risk of stroke or death but increased bleeding versus aspirin during the 30 days following a mild-to-moderate acute non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke (AIS) or high-risk transient ischaemic attack (TIA). There are no cost-effectiveness analyses supporting this combination in Europe. To address this, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. Methods: Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using a decision tree and Markov model with a short-term and long-term (30-year) horizon. Stroke, mortality, bleeding and EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) data from THALES were used to estimate short-term outcomes. Model transitions were based on stroke severity (disabling stroke was defined as modified Rankin Scale >2). Healthcare resource utilisation and EQ-5D data beyond 30 days were based on SOCRATES, another trial in AIS/TIA that compared ticagrelor with aspirin. Long-term costs, survival and disutilities were based on published literature. Unit costs were derived from national databases and discounted at 3% annually from a Swedish healthcare perspective. Results: One-month treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin resulted in 12 fewer strokes, 4 additional major bleeds and cost savings of €95 000 per 1000 patients versus aspirin from a Swedish healthcare perspective. This translated into increased quality-adjusted life-years (0.04) and reduced societal costs (-€1358) per patient over a lifetime horizon. Key drivers of cost-effectiveness were number of patients experiencing subsequent disabling stroke and degree of disability. Findings were robust over a range of input assumptions. Conclusion: One month of treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin is likely to improve outcomes and reduce costs versus aspirin in mild-to-moderate AIS or high-risk TIA. Trial registration number: NCT03354429.

Extrinsic rewards and crowding-out of prosocial behaviour.

The law of supply is a fundamental principle of economics and states that any increase in price will increase the quantity supplied. In the case of prosocial behaviour, however, increasing rewards have reduced supply, posing a challenge to standard economic theory. Attempts to study such 'crowding-out' have been limited by their small scale and the inherent difficulties posed by calibration of experimental tests. We analyse a large-scale natural experiment in the environmental domain consisting of 20,370 independent observations derived from aggregation of approximately 27 million individual decisions. We find that aggregate supply of prosocial behaviour is 's-shaped', demonstrating how attempts to increase prosocial behaviour using monetary rewards can be counter-productive. Our study shows that results derived from a small set of data points collected from an underlying s-shaped data-generating process are vulnerable to misinterpretation, and that proxy measures of intrinsic motivation ought to be collected to ensure theoretical advance.

Time Course for Benefit and Risk of Ticagrelor and Aspirin in Acute Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The goal of this work was to investigate the short-term time-course benefit and risk of ticagrelor with aspirin in acute mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA in The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated with Ticagrelor and ASA for Prevention of Stroke and Death (THALES) trial. METHODS: In an exploratory analysis of the THALES trial, we evaluated the cumulative incidence of irreversible efficacy and safety outcomes at different time points during the 30-day treatment period. The efficacy outcome was major ischemic events defined as a composite of ischemic stroke or nonhemorrhagic death. The safety outcome was major hemorrhage defined as a composite of intracranial hemorrhage and fatal bleedings. Net clinical impact was defined as the combination of these 2 endpoints. RESULTS: This analysis included a total of 11,016 patients (5,523 in the ticagrelor-aspirin group, 5,493 in the aspirin group) with a mean age of 65 years, and 39% were women. The reduction of major ischemic events by ticagrelor occurred in the first week (4.1% vs 5.3%; absolute risk reduction 1.15%, 95% CI 0.36%-1.94%) and remained throughout the 30-day treatment period. An increase in major hemorrhage was seen during the first week and remained relatively constant in the following weeks (absolute risk increase ≈0.3%). Cumulative analysis showed that the net clinical impact favored ticagrelor-aspirin in the first week (absolute risk reduction 0.97%, 95% CI, 0.17%-1.77%) and remained constant throughout the 30 days. DISCUSSION: In patients with mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA, the treatment effect of ticagrelor-aspirin was present from the first week. The ischemic benefit of ticagrelor-aspirin outweighs the risk of major hemorrhage throughout the treatment period, which may support the use of 30-day treatment with ticagrelor and aspirin in these patients. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that, for patients with mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA, the ischemic benefit of ticagrelor-aspirin outweighs the risk of major hemorrhage throughout the 30-day treatment period.

Ticagrelor Added to Aspirin in Acute Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack in Prevention of Disabling Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Reduction of subsequent disabling stroke is the main goal of preventive treatment in the acute setting after transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor ischemic stroke. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the superiority of ticagrelor added to aspirin in preventing disabling stroke and to understand the factors associated with recurrent disabling stroke. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death (THALES) was a randomized clinical trial conducted between January 22, 2018, and December 13, 2019, with a 30-day follow-up, at 414 hospitals in 28 countries. The trial included 11 016 patients with a noncardioembolic, nonsevere ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA, including 10 803 with modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) recorded at 30 days. INTERVENTIONS: Ticagrelor (180-mg loading dose on day 1 followed by 90 mg twice daily for days 2-30) or placebo within 24 hours of symptom onset. All patients received aspirin, 300 to 325 mg on day 1 followed by 75 to 100 mg daily for days 2 to 30. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Time to the occurrence of disabling stroke (progression of index event or new stroke) or death within 30 days, as measured by mRS at day 30. Disabling stroke was defined by mRS greater than 1. RESULTS: Among participants with 30-day mRS greater than 1, mean age was 68.1 years, 1098 were female (42.6%), and 2670 had an ischemic stroke (95.8%) as a qualifying event. Among 11 016 patients, a primary end point with mRS greater than 1 at 30 days occurred in 221 of 5511 patients (4.0%) randomized to ticagrelor and in 260 of 5478 patients (4.7%) randomized to placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-0.99, P = .04). A primary end point with mRS 0 or 1 at 30 days occurred in 70 of 5511 patients (1.3%) and 87 of 5478 patients (1.6%) (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.57-1.08; P = .14). The ordinal analysis of mRS in patients with recurrent stroke showed a shift of the disability burden following a recurrent ischemic stroke in favor of ticagrelor (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.91; P = .002). Factors associated with disability were baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 4 to 5, ipsilateral stenosis of at least 30%, Asian race/ethnicity, older age, and higher systolic blood pressure, while treatment with ticagrelor was associated with less disability. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients with TIA and minor ischemic stroke, ticagrelor added to aspirin was superior to aspirin alone in preventing disabling stroke or death at 30 days and reduced the total burden of disability owing to ischemic stroke recurrence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03354429.

Disability after minor stroke and TIA: A secondary analysis of the SOCRATES trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with disability following TIA and minor stroke, including poststroke complications such as stroke recurrence, major bleeding, and other adverse medical events. METHODS: The SOCRATES trial randomized patients with TIA/minor stroke (NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score ≤5) within 24 hours of onset. We performed a post hoc analysis of factors associated with disability (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score >1). TIA and minor stroke were analyzed separately. Patients with premorbid mRS >0 were excluded. RESULTS: At 90 days, 687/3,663 (19%) patients with stroke were disabled; for TIA, 122/2,384 (5%) were disabled. In multivariate analyses, age, diabetes, and NIHSS were associated with disability in the stroke cohort, and age with disability in the TIA cohort. Postrandomization events (recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, serious adverse events) were strongly associated with disability in both cohorts (stroke cohort: odds ratio [OR] 5.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5-6.9; TIA cohort: OR 14.8, 95% CI 9.9-22.0). Of the TIA patients who ended up disabled, 65% experienced a postrandomization event; for stroke patients who ended up disabled, 39% had a postrandomization event. Disability increased linearly with NIHSS score (p < 0.0001) and was greater in those with limb weakness (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: After TIA and minor stroke, subsequent stroke and medical complications are strongly associated with disability. In addition, even within a low range of baseline scores, the NIHSS is a powerful predictor of disability in minor stroke patients, with items scoring limb weakness particularly associated with subsequent disability.

Estimated treatment effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin by investigator-assessed events compared with judgement by an independent event adjudication committee in the SOCRATES trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjudication of endpoints is a standard procedure in cardiovascular clinical trials. However, several studies indicate that the benefit of adjudication in estimating treatment effect may be limited. AIMS: This post hoc analysis of SOCRATES (NCT01994720) compared the treatment effects and investigated the agreement of clinical event assessment by site investigators and independent adjudicators. METHODS: SOCRATES compared ticagrelor and aspirin in 13,199 patients with acute minor stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack. The primary endpoint was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death. Stroke was the major component of the primary endpoint and a secondary endpoint. The endpoints were adjudicated by a blinded independent committee. We compared the treatment effect on the primary endpoint and stroke alone based on the investigators' and adjudicators' assessments, and investigated the agreement rate on the stroke endpoint and major hemorrhages. RESULTS: The hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for ticagrelor versus aspirin therapy for the primary endpoint were 0.89 (0.78-1.01) when calculated on adjudicator-assessed events and 0.88 (0.78-1.00) for investigator-assessed events. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for stroke were 0.86 (0.75-0.99) based on the adjudicators' diagnoses and 0.85 (0.75-0.97) based on the investigators' diagnoses. The overall agreement between adjudicator- and investigator-diagnosed stroke was 91%, and for major hemorrhages was 88%. CONCLUSIONS: In SOCRATES, there was no clinically meaningful difference in the estimated treatment effect, on either the primary endpoint or stroke, by using investigator- or adjudicator-assessed events. Double-blind treatment outcome studies with stroke endpoints may not benefit from adjudication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01994720.

The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated with Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death (THALES) trial: Rationale and design.

RATIONALE: In patients with acute cerebral ischemia, the rate of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during 90 days was reported to be non-significantly lower with ticagrelor compared with aspirin, with no increase in major hemorrhage. Dual antiplatelet therapy may be more effective in this setting. AIM: To investigate whether ticagrelor combined with aspirin are superior to aspirin alone in preventing stroke or death in patients with non-severe, non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack. DESIGN: The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated with Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death (THALES) trial is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, event-driven study. Patients will be randomized within 24 h of onset of acute ischemic symptoms. THALES is expected to randomize 13,000 at ∼450 sites worldwide, to collect 764 primary outcome events. Study treatments are ticagrelor 180 mg loading dose on day 1, then 90 mg twice daily on days 2-30, or matching placebo. All patients will also receive open-label aspirin 300-325 mg on day 1, then 75-100 mg once daily on days 2-30. STUDY OUTCOMES: The primary efficacy outcome is time to the composite endpoint of stroke or death through 30-day follow-up. The primary safety outcome is time to first severe bleeding event. DISCUSSION: The THALES trial will provide important information about the benefits and risks of dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor and aspirin in patients with acute cerebral ischemia in a global setting (funding: AstraZeneca). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03354429.