Large variations in atrial fibrillation screening practice after ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack in Sweden: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) is given high priority in clinical guidelines. However, patient selection, electrocardiogram (ECG) modality and screening duration remains undecided and current recommendations vary. METHODS: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical practice of AF screening after ischemic stroke or TIA at Swedish stroke units. In collaboration with the stakeholders of the Swedish Stroke Register (Riksstroke) a digital survey was drafted, then tested and revised by three stroke consultants. The survey consisted of 17 multiple choice/ free text questions and was sent by e-mail to the medical directors at all stroke units in Sweden. RESULTS: All 72 stroke units in Sweden responded to the survey. Most stroke units reported that ≥ 75% of ischemic stroke (69/72 stroke units) or TIA patients (67/72 stroke units), without previously known AF, were screened for AF. Inpatient telemetry ECG was the method of first-choice in 81% of the units, but 7% reported lack of access. A variety of standard monitoring durations were used for inpatient telemetry ECG. The second most common choice was Holter ECG (17%), also with considerable variations in monitoring duration. Other AF screening modalities were used as a first-choice method (handheld and patch ECG) but less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical practice for AF screening after ischemic stroke or TIA differed between Swedish stroke units, both in choice of AF screening methods as well as in monitoring durations. There is an urgent need for evidence and evidence-based recommendations in this field. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Multicentre, national, investigator-initiated, randomised, parallel-group, register-based superiority trial to compare extended ECG monitoring versus standard ECG monitoring in elderly patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and the effect on stroke, death and intracerebral bleeding: the AF SPICE protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major risk factor for ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and AF detection can be challenged by asymptomatic and paroxysmal presentation. Long-term ECG monitoring after ischaemic stroke or TIA is recommended by all major societies in cardiology and cerebrovascular medicine as a secondary prophylactic measure. However, data on stroke reduction are lacking, and the recommendations show significant diversity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: AF SPICE is a multicentre, national, investigator-initiated, randomised, parallel-group, register-based trial comparing extended ECG monitoring versus standard ECG monitoring in patients admitted with ischaemic stroke or TIA, with a composite endpoint of stroke, all-cause-mortality and intracerebral bleeding. Patients aged ≥70 years without previous AF will be randomised 1:1 to control (standard ECG monitoring) or intervention (extended ECG monitoring). In the control arm, patients will undergo 48±24 hours (ie, a range of 24-72 hours) of continuous ECG monitoring according to national recommendations. In the intervention arm, patients will undergo 14+14 days of continuous ECG monitoring 3 months apart using an ECG patch device, which will provide an easy-accessed, well-tolerated 14-day continuous ECG recording. All ECG patch recordings will be read in a core facility. In cases of AF detection, oral anticoagulation will be recommended if not contraindicated. A pilot phase has been concluded in 2022, which will transcend into the main trial during 2023-2026, including approximately 30 stroke units. The sample size was calculated to be 3262 patients. The primary outcome will be collected from register data during a 36-month follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been provided by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority, reference 2021-02770. The trial will be conducted according to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and national regulatory standards. Positive results from the study have the potential for rapid dissemination in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05134454.

SARS-CoV-2 induces a durable and antigen specific humoral immunity after asymptomatic to mild COVID-19 infection.

Current SARS-CoV-2 serological assays generate discrepant results, and the longitudinal characteristics of antibodies targeting various antigens after asymptomatic to mild COVID-19 are yet to be established. This longitudinal cohort study including 1965 healthcare workers, of which 381 participants exhibited antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike antigen at study inclusion, reveal that these antibodies remain detectable in most participants, 96%, at least four months post infection, despite having had no or mild symptoms. Virus neutralization capacity was confirmed by microneutralization assay in 91% of study participants at least four months post infection. Contrary to antibodies targeting the spike protein, antibodies against the nucleocapsid protein were only detected in 80% of previously anti-nucleocapsid IgG positive healthcare workers. Both anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid IgG levels were significantly higher in previously hospitalized COVID-19 patients four months post infection than in healthcare workers four months post infection (p = 2*10-23 and 2*10-13 respectively). Although the magnitude of humoral response was associated with disease severity, our findings support a durable and functional humoral response after SARS-CoV-2 infection even after no or mild symptoms. We further demonstrate differences in antibody kinetics depending on the antigen, arguing against the use of the nucleocapsid protein as target antigen in population-based SARS-CoV-2 serological surveys.

Effects of Fluoxetine on Outcomes at 12 Months After Acute Stroke: Results From EFFECTS, a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background and Purpose: The EFFECTS (Efficacy of Fluoxetine­a Randomised Controlled Trial in Stroke) recently reported that 20 mg fluoxetine once daily for 6 months after acute stroke did not improve functional outcome but reduced depression and increased fractures and hyponatremia at 6 months. The purpose of this predefined secondary analysis was to identify if any effects of fluoxetine were maintained or delayed over 12 months. Methods: EFFECTS was an investigator-led, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial in Sweden that enrolled adult patients with stroke. Patients were randomized to 20 mg oral fluoxetine or matching placebo for 6 months and followed for another 6 months. The primary outcome was functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale), at 6 months. Predefined secondary outcomes for these analyses included the modified Rankin Scale, health status, quality of life, fatigue, mood, and depression at 12 months. Results: One thousand five hundred patients were recruited from 35 centers in Sweden between 2014 and 2019; 750 were allocated fluoxetine and 750 placebo. At 12 months, modified Rankin Scale data were available in 715 (95%) patients allocated fluoxetine and 712 (95%) placebo. The distribution of modified Rankin Scale categories was similar in the 2 groups (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.76­1.10]). Patients allocated fluoxetine scored worse on memory with a median value of 89 (interquartile range, 75­100) versus 93 (interquartile range, 82­100); P=0.0021 and communication 93 (interquartile range, 82­100) versus 96 (interquartile range, 86­100); P=0.024 domains of the Stroke Impact Scale compared with placebo. There were no other differences in secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Fluoxetine after acute stroke had no effect on functional outcome at 12 months. Patients allocated fluoxetine scored worse on memory and communication on the Stroke Impact Scale compared with placebo, but this is likely to be due to chance. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02683213.

Validation of the Simplified Modified Rankin Scale Questionnaire.

INTRODUCTION: The modified Rankin scale (mRS) is the most common assessment tool for measuring overall functional outcome in stroke studies. The traditional way of using mRS face-to-face is time- and cost-consuming. The aim of this study was to test the validity of the Swedish translation of the simplified modified Rankin scale questionnaire (smRSq) as compared with the mRS assessed face-to-face 6 months after a stroke. METHODS: Within the ongoing EFFECTS trial, smRSq was sent out to 108 consecutive stroke patients 6 months after a stroke. The majority, 90% (97/108), of the patients answered the questionnaire; for the remaining 10%, it was answered by the next of kin. The patients were assessed by face-to-face mRS by 7 certified healthcare professionals at 4 Swedish stroke centres. The primary outcome was assessed by Cohen's kappa and weighted kappa. RESULTS: There was good agreement between postal smRSq, answered by the patients, and the mRS face-to-face; Cohen's kappa was 0.43 (CI 95% 0.31-0.55), weighted kappa was 0.64 (CI 95% 0.55-0.73), and Spearman rank correlation was 0.82 (p < 0.0001). In 55% (59/108), there was full agreement, and of the 49 patients not showing exact agreement, 44 patients differed by 1 grade and 5 patients had a difference of 2 grades. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our results show good validity of the postal smRSq, answered by the patients, compared with the mRS carried out face-to-face at 6 months after a stroke. This result could help trialists in the future simplify study design and make multicentre trials and quality registers with a large number of patients more feasible and time-saving.

Correction to: Update on the EFFECTS study of fluoxetine for stroke recovery: a randomised controlled trial in Sweden.

Following publication of the original article [1], we were notified that one of the corresponding author's affiliations was omitted.

Update on the EFFECTS study of fluoxetine for stroke recovery: a randomised controlled trial in Sweden.

Studies have suggested that fluoxetine might improve neurological recovery after stroke, but the results remain inconclusive. The EFFECTS (Efficacy oF Fluoxetine - a randomisEd Controlled Trial in Stroke) reached its recruitment target of 1500 patients in June 2019. The purpose of this article is to present all amendments to the protocol and describe how we formed the EFFECTS trial collaboration in Sweden. METHODS: In this investigator-led, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled non-depressed stroke patients aged 18 years or older between 2 and 15 days after stroke onset. The patients had a clinical diagnosis of stroke (ischaemic or intracerebral haemorrhage) with persisting focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomised to fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo capsules once daily for 6 months. RESULTS: Seven amendments were made and included clarification of drug interaction between fluoxetine and metoprolol and the use of metoprolol for severe heart failure as an exclusion criterion, inclusion of data from central Swedish registries and the Swedish Stroke Register, changes in informed consent from patients, and clarification of design of some sub-studies. EFFECTS recruited 1500 patients at 35 centres in Sweden between 20 October 2014 and 28 June 2019. We plan to unblind the data in January 2020 and report the primary outcome in May 2020. CONCLUSION: EFFECTS will provide data on the safety and efficacy of 6 months of treatment with fluoxetine after stroke in a Swedish health system setting. The data from EFFECTS will also contribute to an individual patient data meta-analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2011-006130-16. Registered on 8 August 2014. ISRCTN, ISRCTN13020412. Registered on 19 December 2014. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02683213. Retrospectively registered on 2 February 2016.

Identifying important barriers to recruitment of patients in randomised clinical studies using a questionnaire for study personnel.

BACKGROUND: Many randomised controlled trials (RCT) fail to meet their recruitment goals. Study personnel play a key role in recruitment. The aim of this study was to identify successful strategies that study personnel consider to be important in patient recruitment to RCT. METHODS: We constructed a questionnaire based on the literature, discussions with colleagues and our own experience as trialists. The survey was named "What is Important for Making a Study Successful questionnaire" (WIMSS-q). Our target group was the study personnel in the ongoing EFFECTS study. The questionnaire was sent out electronically to all physicians and nurses (n = 148). Success factors and barriers were divided according to patient, centre and study level, respectively. RESULTS: Responses were received from 94% of the study personnel (139/148). The five most important factors at centre level for enhancing recruitment were that the research question was important (97%), a simple procedure for providing information and gaining consent (92%), a highly engaged local principal investigator and research nurse (both 87%), and that study-related follow-ups are practically feasible and possible to coordinate with the clinical follow-up (87%). The most significant barrier at the local centre was lack of time and resources devoted to research (72%). Important patient-related barriers were fear of side effects (35%) and language problems (30%). CONCLUSIONS: For recruitment in an RCT to be successful, the research question must be relevant, and the protocol must be simple and easy to implement in the daily routine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this study was registered at the Northern Ireland Hub for trials methodology research (SWAT ID 64 ). The EFFECTS study has EudraCT number 2011-006130-16 and was registered 17 February 2016 at ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02683213 .

Enhancing Recruitment Using Teleconference and Commitment Contract (ERUTECC): study protocol for a randomised, stepped-wedge cluster trial within the EFFECTS trial.

BACKGROUND: Many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) fail to meet their recruitment goals in time. Trialists are advised to include study recruitment strategies within their trials. EFFECTS is a Swedish, academic-led RCT of fluoxetine for stroke recovery. The trial's primary objective is to investigate whether 20 mg fluoxetine daily compared with placebo for 6 months after an acute stroke improves the patient's functional outcome. The first patient was included on 20 October 2014 and, as of 31 August 2017, EFFECTS has included 810 of planned 1500 individuals. EFFECTS currently has 32 active centres. The primary objective of the ERUTECC (Enhancing Recruitment Using Teleconference and Commitment Contract) study is to investigate whether a structured teleconference re-visit with the study personnel at the centres, accompanied by a commitment contract, can enhance recruitment by 20% at 60 days post intervention, compared with 60 days pre-intervention, in an ongoing RCT. METHODS: ERUTECC is a randomised, stepped-wedge cluster trial embedded in EFFECTS. The plan is to start ERUTECC with a running-in period of September 2017. The first intervention is due in October 2017, and the study will continue for 12 months. We are planning to intervene at all active centres in EFFECTS, except the five top recruiting centres (n = 27). The rationale for not intervening at the top recruiting centres is that we believe they have reached their full potential and the intervention would be too weak for them. The hypothesis of this study is that a structured teleconference re-visit with the study personnel at the centres, accompanied by a commitment contract, can enhance recruitment by 20% 60 days post intervention, compared to 60 days pre-intervention, in an ongoing RCT. DISCUSSION: EFFECTS is a large, pragmatic RCT of stroke in Sweden. Results from the embedded ERUTECC study could probably be generalised to high-income Western countries, and is relevant to trial management and could improve trial management in the future. It might also be useful in clinical settings outside the field of stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: The ERUTECC study was registered in the Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research Studies Within a Trial repository ( SWAT58 ) on 30 April 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02683213 . Retrospectively registered on 2 February 2016.

The FOCUS, AFFINITY and EFFECTS trials studying the effect(s) of fluoxetine in patients with a recent stroke: statistical and health economic analysis plan for the trials and for the individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Small trials have suggested that fluoxetine may improve neurological recovery from stroke. FOCUS, AFFINITY and EFFECTS are a family of investigator-led, multicentre, parallel group, randomised, placebo-controlled trials which aim to determine whether the routine administration of fluoxetine (20 mg daily) for six months after an acute stroke improves patients' functional outcome. METHODS/DESIGN: The core protocol for the three trials has been published (Mead et al., Trials 20:369, 2015). The trials include patients aged 18 years and older with a clinical diagnosis of stroke and persisting focal neurological deficits at randomisation 2-15 days after stroke onset. Patients are randomised centrally via each trials' web-based randomisation system using a common minimisation algorithm. Patients are allocated fluoxetine 20 mg once daily or matching placebo capsules for six months. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at six months. Secondary outcomes include: living circumstances; the Stroke Impact Scale; EuroQol (EQ5D-5 L); the vitality subscale of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF36); diagnosis of depression; adherence to medication; serious adverse events including death and recurrent stroke; and resource use at six and 12 months and the mRS at 12 months. DISCUSSION: Minor variations have been tailored to the national setting in the UK (FOCUS), Australia, New Zealand and Vietnam (AFFINITY) and Sweden (EFFECTS). Each trial is run and funded independently and will report its own results. A prospectively planned individual patient data meta-analysis of all three trials will provide the most precise estimate of the overall effect and establish whether any effects differ between trials or subgroups. This statistical analysis plan describes the core analyses for all three trials and that for the individual patient data meta-analysis. Recruitment and follow-up in the FOCUS trial is expected to be completed by the end of 2018. AFFINITY and EFFECTS are likely to complete follow-up in 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FOCUS: ISRCTN , ISRCTN83290762 . Registered on 23 May 2012. EudraCT, 2011-005616-29. Registered on 3 February 2012. AFFINITY: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12611000774921 . Registered on 22 July 2011. EFFECTS: ISRCTN , ISRCTN13020412 . Registered on 19 December 2014. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02683213 . Registered on 2 February 2016. EudraCT, 2011-006130-16 . Registered on 8 August 2014.

Effects of alteplase on survival after ischaemic stroke (IST-3): 3 year follow-up of a randomised, controlled, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of alteplase on patient survival after ischaemic stroke is the subject of debate. We report the effect of intravenous alteplase on long-term survival after ischaemic stroke of participants in the Third International Stroke Trial (IST-3). METHODS: In IST-3, done at 156 hospitals in 12 countries (Australia, Europe, and the UK), participants (aged >18 years) were randomly assigned with a telephone voice-activated or web-based system in a 1:1 ratio to treatment with intravenous 0·9 mg/kg alteplase plus standard care or standard care alone within 6 h of ischaemic stroke. We followed up participants in the UK and Scandinavia (Sweden and Norway) for survival up to 3 years after randomisation using data from national registries and compared survival in the two groups with proportional hazards survival analysis, adjusting for key prognostic variables. IST-3 is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN25765518. FINDINGS: Between May 5, 2000, and July 27, 2011, 3035 participants were enrolled in IST-3. Of these, 1948 (64%) of 3035 participants were scheduled for analysis of 3 year survival, and 1946 (>99%) of these were included in the analysis (967 [50%] in the alteplase plus standard care group and 979 [50%] in the standard care alone group). By 3 years after randomisation, 453 (47%) of 967 participants in the alteplase plus standard care group and 494 (50%) of 979 in the standard care alone group had died (risk difference 3·6% [95% CI -0·8 to 8·1]). Participants allocated to alteplase had a significantly higher hazard of death during the first 7 days (99 [10%] of 967 died in the alteplase plus standard care group vs 65 [7%] of 979 in the standard care alone group; hazard ratio 1·52 [95% CI 1·11-2·08]; p=0·004) and a significantly lower hazard of death between 8 days and 3 years (354 [41%] of 868 vs 429 [47%] of 914; 0·78 [0·68-0·90]; p=0·007). INTERPRETATION: Alteplase treatment within 6 h after ischaemic stroke was associated with a small, non-significant reduction in risk of death at 3 years, but among individuals who survived the acute phase, treatment was associated with a significant increase in long-term survival. These results are reassuring for clinicians who have expressed concerns about the effect of alteplase on survival. FUNDING: Heart and Stroke Scotland, UK Medical Research Council, Health Foundation UK, Stroke Association UK, Research Council of Norway, AFA Insurance, Swedish Heart Lung Fund, Foundation of Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg, Polish Ministry of Science and Education, Australian Heart Foundation, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Swiss National Research Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Assessorato alla Sanita (Regione dell'Umbria), and Danube University.