Apixaban vs Aspirin in Patients With Cancer and Cryptogenic Stroke: A Post Hoc Analysis of the ARCADIA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Approximately 10% to 15% of ischemic strokes are associated with cancer; cancer-associated stroke, particularly when cryptogenic, is associated with high rates of recurrent stroke and major bleeding. Limited data exist on the safety and efficacy of different antithrombotic strategies in patients with cancer and cryptogenic stroke. Objective: To compare apixaban vs aspirin for the prevention of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with history of cancer and cryptogenic stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: Post hoc analysis of data from 1015 patients with a recent cryptogenic stroke and biomarker evidence of atrial cardiopathy in the Atrial Cardiopathy and Antithrombotic Drugs in Prevention After Cryptogenic Stroke (ARCADIA) trial, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted from 2018 to 2023 at 185 stroke centers in North America. Data analysis was performed from October 15, 2023, to May 23, 2024. Exposures: Oral apixaban, 5 mg (or 2.5 mg if criteria met), twice daily vs oral aspirin, 81 mg, once daily. Subgroups of patients with and without cancer at baseline were examined. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome for this post hoc analysis was a composite of major ischemic or major hemorrhagic events. Major ischemic events were recurrent ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, systemic embolism, and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Major hemorrhagic events included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and any major extracranial hemorrhage. Results: Among 1015 participants (median [IQR] age, 68 [60-76] years; 551 [54.3%] female), 137 (13.5%) had a history of cancer. The median (IQR) follow-up was 1.5 (0.6-2.5) years for patients with history of cancer and 1.5 (0.6-3.0) years for those without history of cancer. Participants with history of cancer, compared with those without history of cancer, had a higher risk of major ischemic or major hemorrhagic events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.73; 95% CI, 1.10-2.71). Among those with history of cancer, 8 of 61 participants (13.1%) randomized to apixaban and 16 of 76 participants (21.1%) randomized to aspirin had a major ischemic or major hemorrhagic event; however, the risk was not significantly different between groups (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.26-1.43). Comparing participants randomized to apixaban vs aspirin among those with cancer, events included recurrent stroke (5 [8.2%] vs 9 [11.8%]), major ischemic events (7 [11.5%] vs 14 [18.4%]), and major hemorrhagic events (1 [1.6%] vs 2 [2.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among participants in the ARCADIA trial with history of cancer, the risk of major ischemic and hemorrhagic events did not differ significantly with apixaban compared with aspirin. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03192215.

Addressing the Evidence Gap in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: The Need for a Pragmatic Randomized Trial Platform.

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) occurs less often than other stroke types but affects younger patients, imposing a disproportionately high burden of long-term disability. Although management advances have improved outcomes over time, relatively few aSAH treatments have been tested in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). One lesson learned from COVID-19 is that trial platforms can facilitate the efficient execution of multicenter RCTs even in complex diseases during challenging conditions. An aSAH trial platform with standardized eligibility criteria, randomization procedures, and end point definitions would enable the study of multiple targeted interventions in a perpetual manner, with treatments entering and leaving the platform based on predefined decision algorithms. An umbrella institutional review board protocol and clinical trial agreement would allow individual arms to be efficiently added as amendments rather than stand-alone protocols. Standardized case report forms using the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke common data elements and general protocol standardization across arms would create synergies for data management and monitoring. A Bayesian analysis framework would emphasize frequent interim looks to enable early termination of trial arms for futility, common controls, borrowing of information across arms, and adaptive designs. A protocol development committee would assist investigators and encourage pragmatic designs to maximize generalizability, reduce site burden, and execute trials efficiently and cost-effectively. Despite decades of steady clinical progress in the management of aSAH, poor patient outcomes remain common, and despite the increasing availability of RCT data in other fields, it remains difficult to perform RCTs to guide more effective care for aSAH. The development of a platform for pragmatic RCTs in aSAH would help close the evidence gap between aSAH and other stroke types and improve outcomes for this important disease with its disproportionate public health burden.

Bayesian hierarchical profile regression for binary covariates.

Dysphagia, a common result of other medical conditions, is caused by malfunctions in swallowing physiology resulting in difficulty eating and drinking. The Modified Barium Swallow Study (MBSS), the most commonly used diagnostic tool for evaluating dysphagia, can be assessed using the Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile (MBSImP™). The MBSImP assessment tool consists of a hierarchical grouped data structure with multiple domains, a set of components within each domain which characterize specific swallowing physiologies, and a set of tasks scored on a discrete scale within each component. We lack sophisticated approaches to extract patterns of physiologic swallowing impairment from the MBSImP task scores within a component while still recognizing the nested structure of components within a domain. We propose a Bayesian hierarchical profile regression model, which uses a Bayesian profile regression model in conjunction with a hierarchical Dirichlet process mixture model to (1) cluster subjects into impairment profile patterns while respecting the hierarchical grouped data structure of the MBSImP, and (2) simultaneously determine associations between latent profile cluster membership for all components and the outcome of dysphagia severity. We apply our approach to a cohort of patients referred for an MBSS and assessed using the MBSImP. Our research results can be used to inform appropriate intervention strategies, and provide tools for clinicians to make better multidimensional management and treatment decisions for patients with dysphagia.

Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Trials: Cutting, Sliding, or Keeping mRS Scores and WFNS Grades.

Rigorous evidence generation with randomized controlled trials has lagged for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) compared with other forms of acute stroke. Besides its lower incidence compared with other stroke subtypes, the presentation and outcome of patients with SAH also differ. This must be considered and adjusted for in designing pivotal randomized controlled trials of patients with SAH. Here, we show the effect of the unique expected distribution of the SAH severity at presentation (World Federation of Neurological Surgeons grade) on the outcome most used in pivotal stroke randomized controlled trials (modified Rankin Scale) and, consequently, on the sample size. Furthermore, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different options to analyze the outcome and control the expected distribution of the World Federation of Neurological Surgeons grades in addition to showing their effects on the sample size. Finally, we offer methods that investigators can adapt to more precisely understand the effect of common modified Rankin Scale analysis methods and trial eligibility pertaining to the World Federation of Neurological Surgeons grade in designing their large-scale SAH randomized controlled trials.

Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Trials: Cutting, Sliding, or Keeping mRS Scores and WFNS Grades.

Rigorous evidence generation with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has lagged for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) compared to other forms of acute stroke. Besides its lower incidence compared to other stroke subtypes, the presentation and outcome of SAH patients also differ. This must be considered and adjusted for in designing pivotal RCTs of SAH patients. Here, we show the effect of the unique expected distribution of the SAH severity at presentation (World Federation of Neurological Surgeons, WFNS, grade) on the outcome most used in pivotal stroke RCTs (modified Rankin Scale, mRS) and consequently on the sample size. Further, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different options to analyze the outcome and control the expected distribution of WFNS grades in addition to showing their effects on the sample size. Last, we offer methods that investigators can adapt to more precisely understand the effect of common mRS analysis methods and trial eligibility pertaining to the WFNS grade in designing their large-scale SAH RCTs.

Multi-session transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation for Parkinson's disease: evaluating feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy.

Background: In pre-clinical animal models of Parkinson's disease (PD), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) can rescue motor deficits and protect susceptible neuronal populations. Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has emerged as a non-invasive alternative to traditional invasive cervical VNS. This is the first report summarizing the safety, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of repeated sessions of taVNS in participants with PD. Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and possible efficacy of taVNS for motor and non-motor symptoms in mild to moderate PD. Methods: This is a double-blind, sham controlled RCT (NCT04157621) of taVNS in 30 subjects with mild to moderate PD without cognitive impairment. Participants received 10, 1-h taVNS sessions (25 Hz, 200% of sensory threshold, 500 µs pulse width, 60 s on and 30 s off) over a 2-week period. Primary outcome measures were feasibility and safety of the intervention; secondary outcomes included the MDS-UPDRS, cognitive function and self-reported symptom improvement. Results: taVNS treatment was feasible, however, daily in-office visits were reported as being burdensome for participants. While five participants in the taVNS group and three in the sham group self-reported one or more minor adverse events, no major adverse events occurred. There were no group differences on blood pressure and heart rate throughout the intervention. There were no group differences in MDS-UPDRS scores or self-reported measures. Although global cognitive scores remained stable across groups, there was a reduction in verbal fluency within the taVNS group. Conclusions: taVNS was safe, and well-tolerated in PD participants. Future studies of taVNS for PD should explore at-home stimulation devices and optimize stimulation parameters to reduce variability and maximize engagement of neural targets.

Individual Differences in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Language Therapy in Subacute Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to improve post-stroke aphasia. However, given the mixed evidence for its efficacy, individual differences may moderate the relative benefit of this strategy. In planned exploratory subgroup analyses, we examined whether age, education, sex, brain-derived neurotrophic factor status, and baseline performance individually impacted improvement in picture naming between baseline and 1 week after the end of the therapy, then whether the combination of factors that predicted recovery of naming and discourse differed for those who received concurrent tDCS. OBJECTIVE: Examine whether individual differences influenced the effect of tDCS on language recovery. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, efficacy study of tDCS combined with language therapy for subacute post-stroke aphasia, patients completed an evaluation including the Philadelphia Naming Test and Cookie Theft picture description, which was analyzed for Content Units (CU) and Syllables/CU. Individual factors were examined using linear models including the interaction between treatment group and subgroup. RESULTS: Significant interactions were observed between tDCS group and both age and education. The predictors of a positive response to tDCS differed from the predictors of a positive response to language treatment alone. While baseline performance was an important predictor of future performance regardless of treatment group, responses to treatment without tDCS were influenced by age whereas responses to treatment with tDCS were not. CONCLUSIONS: Age and education influence the efficacy of different treatment strategies. Refinement of treatment selection is important to the overall individualization and optimization of post-stroke patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02674490.

Desirability of Outcome Ranking for Status Epilepticus: A Benefit-Risk Approach to Design and Analyses of Clinical SE Trials.

Most clinical trials of treatment efficacy evaluate benefits and harms separately. Investigators generally rate the primary outcome of a trial with a binary outcome measure and consider harms separately as adverse events. This approach fails to recognize finer gradations of patient response, correlations between benefits and harms, and the overall effects on individual patients. For example, in status epilepticus trials, efficacy is often defined as the absence of clinically apparent seizures with recovery of consciousness. Such an efficacy outcome fails to recognize that some causes of status epilepticus, such as subarachnoid hemorrhage or stroke, may not be accompanied by return of consciousness, and the need to intubate a patient may be classified as treatment failure even if status was successfully terminated. The Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) method uses a different approach. The DOOR method involves comparing the experiences of trial participants in different treatment arms by the desirability of the overall patient outcome. Using status epilepticus treatment as an example, a patient who experiences successful termination of status epilepticus but with major side effects would have a less desirable outcome than a patient with treatment success and minor side effects, who in turn would have a less desirable outcome than a patient with treatment success but no side effects. This is a patient-centered approach because it considers treatment efficacy in the context of the costs borne by the patient, for example, toxicity in achieving efficacy. Thus, DOOR considers both the benefits and harms to individual patients in assessing the outcome of a clinical trial. In this article, we present the rationale for the use of DOOR, the issues involved in the development of and statistical analyses of an ordinal outcome, and an example of the potential application of the DOOR method to a clinical trial of convulsive status epilepticus.

Optimal Randomization Designs for Large Multicenter Clinical Trials: From the National Institutes of Health Stroke Trials Network Funded by National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Experience.

From 2016 to 2021, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Trials Network funded by National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke initiated ten multicenter randomized controlled clinical trials. Optimal subject randomization designs are demanded with 4 critical properties: (1) protection of treatment assignment randomness, (2) achievement of the desired treatment allocation ratio, (3) balancing of baseline covariates, and (4) ease of implementation. For acute stroke trials, it is necessary to minimize the time between eligibility assessment and treatment initiation. This article reviews the randomization designs for 3 trials currently enrolling in Stroke Trials Network funded by National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the SATURN (Statins in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Trial), the MOST (Multiarm Optimization of Stroke Thrombolysis Trial), and the FASTEST (Recombinant Factor VIIa for Hemorrhagic Stroke Trial). Randomization methods utilized in these trials include minimal sufficient balance, block urn design, big stick design, and step-forward randomization. Their advantages and limitations are reviewed and compared with traditional stratified permuted block design and minimization.

Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation in Subacute Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising adjunct to therapy for chronic aphasia. METHODS: This single-center, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled efficacy trial tested the hypothesis that anodal tDCS augments language therapy in subacute aphasia. Secondarily, we compared the effect of tDCS on discourse measures and quality of life and compared the effects on naming to previous findings in chronic stroke. Right-handed English speakers with aphasia <3 months after left hemisphere ischemic stroke were included, unless they had prior neurological or psychiatric disease or injury or were taking certain medications (34 excluded; final sample, 58). Participants were randomized 1:1, controlling for age, aphasia type, and severity, to receive 20 minutes of tDCS (1 mA) or sham-tDCS in addition to fifteen 45-minute sessions of naming treatment (plus standard care). The primary outcome variable was change in naming accuracy of untrained pictures pretreatment to 1-week posttreatment. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the tDCS (N=30) and sham (N=28) groups: patients were 65 years old, 53% male, and 2 months from stroke onset on average. In intent-to-treat analysis, the adjusted mean change from baseline to 1-week posttreatment in picture naming was 22.3 (95% CI, 13.5-31.2) for tDCS and 18.5 (9.6-27.4) for sham and was not significantly different. Content and efficiency of picture description improved more with tDCS than sham. Groups did not differ in quality of life improvement. No patients were withdrawn due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: tDCS did not improve recovery of picture naming but did improve recovery of discourse. Discourse skills are critical to participation. Future research should examine tDCS in a larger sample with richer functional outcomes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02674490.

Why ketamine.

We present the rationale for testing ketamine as an add-on therapy for treating benzodiazepine refractory (established) status epilepticus. In animal studies, ketamine terminates benzodiazepine refractory status epilepticus by interfering with the pathophysiological mechanisms and is a neuroprotectant. Ketamine does not suppress respiration when used for sedation and anesthesia. A Series of reports suggest that ketamine can help terminate refractory and super refractory status epilepticus. We propose to use 1 or 3 mg/Kg ketamine intravenously based on animal-to-human conversion and pharmacokinetic studies. This paper was presented at the 8th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures held in September 2022.

Recruitment in Acute Stroke Trials: Challenges and Potential Solutions.

Randomized clinical trials of acute stroke have led to major advances in acute stroke therapy over the past decade. Despite these successes, recruitment in acute trials is often difficult. We outline challenges in recruitment for acute stroke trials and present potential solutions, which can increase the speed and decrease the cost of identifying new treatments for acute stroke. One of the largest opportunities to increase the speed of enrollment and make trials more generalizable is expansion of inclusion criteria whose impact on expected recruitment can be assessed by epidemiologic and registry databases. Another barrier to recruitment besides the number of eligible patients is availability of study investigators limited to business hours, which may be helped by financial support for after-hours call. The wider use of telemedicine has accelerated quicker stroke treatment at many hospitals and has the potential to accelerate research enrollment but requires training of clinical investigators who are often inexperienced with this approach. Other potential solutions to enhance recruitment include rapid prehospital notification of clinical investigators of potential patients, use of mobile stroke units, advances in the process of emergency informed consent, storage of study medication in the emergency department, simplification of study treatments and data collection, education of physicians to improve equipoise and enthusiasm for randomization of patients within a trial, and clear recruitment plans, and even potentially coenrollment, when there are competing trials at sites. Without successful recruitment, scientific advances and clinical benefit for acute stroke patients will lag.

An Expected Score Approach to Ordinal Outcomes in a Bayesian, Response Adaptive, Randomized Trial.

Ordinal outcomes are common in medicine and can be analyzed in many ways, but the distribution of ordinal data can present unique challenges. The proposed KESETT study is a three-armed, randomized trial comparing two doses of ketamine plus levetiracetam to levetiracetam alone for treating patients with benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. A Bayesian, adaptive clinical trial is proposed employing an ordinal primary outcome at 60 minutes ranging from 1 (improving consciousness and seizure cessation) to 5 (life-threatening event/death). Based on a previous study, the ordinal outcome is expected to have a bimodal distribution, with the effect of treatment expected to be non-proportional across the outcome scale. As such, approaches relying on assuming proportionality of the odds are not appropriate. We propose for this scenario an analytic approach to compare ordinal outcomes using the expected score derived from the posterior distribution for each treatment group. This approach requires minimal assumptions, maintains the benefit of using the full ordinal scale, is interpretable, and can be used in a Bayesian analysis framework. We compare this new approach under multiple simulated scenarios to 3 traditional frequentist approaches. The new approach controls type I error and power, resulting in a sizable reduction in sample size relative to a non-parametric test.

A feasibility study of objective outcome measures used in clinical trials of freezing of gait.

BACKGROUND: Freezing of gait (FOG) is notoriously difficult to quantify, which has led to the use of multiple markers as outcomes for clinical trials. The instrumented timed up and go (TUG) and the many parameters that can be derived from it are commonly used as objective markers of FOG severity in clinical trials; however, it is unknown if they represent actual FOG severity. OBJECTIVE: To determine the specificity and responsiveness of objective surrogate markers of FOG severity commonly utilized in FOG studies. METHODS: Study design: We compared the specificity and responsiveness of commonly used markers in FOG clinical trials. Markers compared included velocity, step/stride length, step/stride length variability, TUG, and turn duration. Data was collected in four conditions (ON and OFF dopaminergic drugs, with and without a dual task). Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) was administered in the ON and OFF states. RESULTS: Thirty-three subjects were recruited (17 PD subjects without FOG (PD-control) and 16 subjects with PD and dopa-responsive FOG PD-FOG). The UPDRS motor scores were 24.9 for the PD-control group in the ON state, 24.8 for the FOG group in the ON state, and 42.4 for the FOG group in the OFF state. Significant mean differences between the ON and OFF conditions were observed with all surrogate markers (p < 0.01). However, only dual task turn duration and step variability showed trends toward significance when comparing PD-control and ON-FOG (p = 0.08). Test-retest reliability was high (ICC > 0.90) for all markers except standard deviations. Step length variability was the only marker to show an area under the ROC curve analysis > 0.70 comparing ON-FOG vs. PD-control. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple candidate surrogate markers for FOG severity showed responsiveness to levodopa challenge; however, most were not specific for FOG severity.

Recombinant factor VIIa for hemorrhagic stroke treatment at earliest possible time (FASTEST): Protocol for a phase III, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Intracerebral hemorrhage is the deadliest form of stroke. Hematoma expansion, growth of the hematoma between the baseline computed tomography scan and a follow-up computed tomography scan at 24 ± 6 h, predicts long-term disability or death. Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) has reduced hematoma expansion in previous clinical trials with a variable effect on clinical outcomes, with the greatest impact on hematoma expansion and potential benefit when administered within 2 h of symptom onset. METHODS: Factor VIIa for Hemorrhagic Stroke Treatment at Earliest Possible Time (FASTEST, NCT03496883) is a randomized controlled trial that will enroll 860 patients at ∼100 emergency departments and mobile stroke units in five countries. Patients are eligible for enrollment if they have acute intracerebral hemorrhage within 2 h of symptom onset confirmed by computed tomography, a hematoma volume of 2 to 60 mL, no or small volumes of intraventricular hemorrhage, do not take anticoagulant medications or concurrent heparin/heparinoids (antiplatelet medications are permissible), and are not deeply comatose. Enrolled patients will receive rFVIIa 80 µg/kg or placebo intravenously over 2 min. The primary outcome measure is the distribution of the ordinal modified Rankin Scale at 180 days. FASTEST is monitored by a Data Safety Monitoring Board. Safety endpoints include thrombotic events (e.g. myocardial infarction). Human subjects research is monitored by an external Institutional Review Board in participating countries. DISCUSSION: In the US, FASTEST will be first NIH StrokeNet Trial with an Exception from Informed Consent which allows enrollment of non-communicative patients without an immediately identifiable proxy.

Electroencephalographic Seizures in Emergency Department Patients After Treatment for Convulsive Status Epilepticus.

PURPOSE: It is unknown how often and how early EEG is obtained in patients presenting with status epilepticus. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial enrolled patients with benzodiazepine-refractory seizures and randomized participants to fosphenytoin, levetiracetam, or valproate. The use of early EEG, including frequency of electrographic seizures, was determined in Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial participants. METHODS: Secondary analysis of 475 enrollments at 58 hospitals to determine the frequency of EEG performed within 24 hours of presentation. The EEG type, the prevalence of electrographic seizures, and characteristics associated with obtaining early EEG were recorded. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were calculated as appropriate for univariate and bivariate comparisons. Odds ratios are reported with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 278 of 475 patients (58%) in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial cohort underwent EEG within 24 hours (median time to EEG: 5 hours [interquartile range: 3-10]). Electrographic seizure prevalence was 14% (95% confidence interval, 10%-19%; 39/278) in the entire cohort and 13% (95% confidence interval, 7%-21%) in the subgroup of patients meeting the primary outcome of the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (clinical treatment success within 60 minutes of randomization). Among subjects diagnosed with electrographic seizures (39), 15 (38%; 95% confidence interval, 25%-54%) had no clinical correlate on the video EEG recording. CONCLUSIONS: Electrographic seizures may occur in patients who stop seizing clinically after treatment of convulsive status epilepticus. Clinical correlates might not be present during electrographic seizures. These findings support early initiation of EEG recordings in patients suffering from convulsive status epilepticus, including those with clinical evidence of treatment success.

Speech Entrainment for Aphasia Recovery (SpARc) phase II trial design.

BACKGROUND: and purpose: Speech entrainment therapy (SET) is a computerized therapeutic approach that involves mimicking an audiovisual speech model to improve speech production. In a pilot study using SET for treatment of post-stroke non-fluent aphasia, significant gains were achieved in verbs per minute (VPM) during discourse using untrained items 1 and 6 weeks after treatment, suggesting that SET may yield meaningful improvements in fluent spontaneous speech for individuals with non-fluent aphasia. METHODS: The Speech Entrainment for Aphasia Recovery (SpARc) trial is a prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded, multicenter phase II clinical trial studying persons with chronic post-stroke non-fluent aphasia. Participants will be randomized to 3 weeks, 4.5 weeks, or 6 weeks of SET delivered via telehealth or a no SET control condition for 6 weeks. 80 adults (ages 21-81) with history of left hemisphere ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke with residual chronic (>6 months post stroke) non-fluent aphasia diagnosed by the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised (WAB-R) will be randomized (1:1:1:1) over 4 years. The trial will be conducted at the clinical research facilities at three sites: the Medical University of South Carolina, the University of South Carolina, and the University of Utah. CONCLUSIONS: This paper details the trial design of the SpARc trial, which aims to determine the dose of SET that will generate the highest effect size on speech fluency, VPM, sustained at 3 months post-treatment compared to a no SET control arm, for individuals with chronic post-stroke non-fluent aphasia to permit a future definitive trial to test the clinical utility of SET.

Cilostazol for Secondary Stroke Prevention: History, Evidence, Limitations, and Possibilities.

Cilostazol is a PDE3 (phosphodiesterase III) inhibitor with a long track record of safety that is Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency approved for the treatment of claudication in patients with peripheral arterial disease. In addition, cilostazol has been approved for secondary stroke prevention in several Asian countries based on trials that have demonstrated a reduction in stroke recurrence among patients with noncardioembolic stroke. The onset of benefit appears after 60 to 90 days of treatment, which is consistent with cilostazol's pleiotropic effects on platelet aggregation, vascular remodeling, blood flow, and plasma lipids. Cilostazol appears safe and does not increase the risk of major bleeding when given alone or in combination with aspirin or clopidogrel. Adverse effects such as headache, gastrointestinal symptoms, and palpitations, however, contributed to a 6% increase in drug discontinuation among patients randomized to cilostazol in a large secondary stroke prevention trial (CSPS.com [Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study for Antiplatelet Combination]). Due to limitations of prior trials, such as open-label design, premature trial termination, large loss to follow-up, lack of functional or cognitive outcome data, and exclusive enrollment in Asia, the existing trials have not led to a change in clinical practice or guidelines in Western countries. These limitations could be addressed by a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted in a broader population. If positive, it would increase the evidence in support of long-term treatment with cilostazol for secondary prevention in the millions of patients worldwide who have experienced a noncardioembolic ischemic stroke.

Individualized response to semantic versus phonological aphasia therapies in stroke.

Attempts to personalize aphasia treatment to the extent where it is possible to reliably predict individual response to a particular treatment have yielded inconclusive results. The current study aimed to (i) compare the effects of phonologically versus semantically focussed naming treatment and (ii) examine biographical and neuropsychological baseline factors predictive of response to each treatment. One hundred and four individuals with chronic post-stroke aphasia underwent 3 weeks of phonologically focussed treatment and 3 weeks of semantically focussed treatment in an unblinded cross-over design. A linear mixed-effects model was used to compare the effects of treatment type on proportional change in correct naming across groups. Correlational analysis and stepwise regression models were used to examine biographical and neuropsychological predictors of response to phonological and semantic treatment across all participants. Last, chi-square tests were used to explore the association between treatment response and phonological and semantic deficit profiles. Semantically focussed treatment was found to be more effective at the group-level, independently of treatment order (P = 0.041). Overall, milder speech and language impairment predicted good response to semantic treatment (r range: 0.256-0.373) across neuropsychological tasks. The Western Aphasia Battery-Revised Spontaneous Speech score emerged as the strongest predictor of semantic treatment response (R 2 = 0.188). Severity of stroke symptoms emerged as the strongest predictor of phonological treatment response (R 2 = 0.103). Participants who showed a good response to semantic treatment were more likely to present with fluent speech compared to poor responders (P = 0.005), whereas participants who showed a good response to phonological treatment were more likely to present with apraxia of speech (P = 0.020). These results suggest that semantic treatment may be more beneficial to the improvement of naming performance in aphasia than phonological treatment, at the group-level. In terms of personalized predictors, participants with relatively mild impairments and fluent speech responded better to semantic treatment, while phonological treatment benefitted participants with more severe impairments and apraxia of speech.

Efficacy of Home Anticonvulsant Administration for Second-Line Status Epilepticus Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether receiving a second-line anticonvulsant medication that is part of a patient's home regimen influences outcomes in benzodiazepine-refractory convulsive status epilepticus. METHODS: Using the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial data, allocation to a study drug included in the patient's home anticonvulsant medication regimen was compared to receipt of an alternative second-line study medication. The primary outcome was cessation of clinical seizures with improved consciousness by 60 minutes after study drug initiation. Secondary outcomes were seizure cessation adjudicated from medical records and adverse events. We performed inverse probability of treatment-weighted (IPTW) logistic regressions. RESULTS: Of 462 patients, 232 (50%) were taking 1-2 of the 3 study medications at home. The primary outcome was observed in 39/89 (44%) patients allocated to their home medication vs 76/143 (53%) allocated to a nonhome medication (IPTW odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-1.14). The adjudicated outcome occurred in 37/89 (42%) patients vs 82/143 (57%), respectively (IPTW OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30-0.89). There was no interaction between study levetiracetam and home levetiracetam and there were no differences in adverse events. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the primary outcome for patients who received a home medication vs nonhome medication. However, the retrospective evaluation suggested an association between receiving a nonhome medication and seizure cessation. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with refractory convulsive status epilepticus, use of a home second-line anticonvulsant compared to a nonhome anticonvulsant did not significantly affect the probability of stopping seizures.