Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Acute Large-Vessel Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Single-Blinded Trial.

BACKGROUND: Large-vessel ischemic stroke represents about 25-40% of all ischemic strokes. Few clinical trials compared ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in ischemic stroke patients; all these studies included only patients with a transient ischemic attack or minor stroke; moreover, none of these studies included patients from North Africa. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in the first-ever large-vessel occlusion (LVO) acute ischemic stroke in Egypt. METHODS: Our trial involved 580 first-ever LVO ischemic stroke patients who were randomly assigned to administer loading and maintenance doses of ticagrelor or clopidogrel. Screening, randomization, and start of treatment occurred during the first 24 hours of the stroke. RESULTS: 580 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Thirty patients in the ticagrelor group and 49 patients in the clopidogrel group experienced a new ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke at 90 days (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.98; p-value = 0.04), 36 patients in the ticagrelor group, and 57 in the clopidogrel group experienced composite of a new stroke, myocardial infarction, or death due to vascular insults (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37-0.87; p = 0.009). Patients who received ticagrelor had better clinical outcomes regarding National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) reduction and a favorable modified Rankin scale (mRS) score. There were no differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSION: Patients with acute large-vessel ischemic stroke who received ticagrelor within the first 24 hours after ischemic stroke had better clinical outcomes based on recurrent stroke rates, NIHSS reduction, and favorable mRS rates compared with those who received clopidogrel. There were no differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov (NCT06120725).

The effect of lacosamide on calcitonin gene-related peptide serum level in episodic migraine patients: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Migraine affects 11-15% of people worldwide, and the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is released during the migraine attack, producing pulsating pain of migraine. Also, lacosamide reacts with collapsin-response mediator protein 2, preventing its phosphorylation and leading to the inhibition of CGRP release in the trigeminal system. OBJECTIVE: The primary outcome was the difference in the serum level of CGRP-LI after three months of treatment with either lacosamide and ibuprofen or ibuprofen alone in episodic migraine patients. The secondary outcomes were assessing safety and efficacy of lacosamide in episodic migraine patients. METHODS: We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial on episodic migraine patients aged 10-55 years diagnosed according to (ICHD-3) in Kafr El-Sheikh University Hospital, Egypt. We assessed serum levels of CGRP-LI before and three months after treatment in our two groups, the lacosamide, and the control groups. We also assessed the side effects of treatment in each group, the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the migraine monthly days (MMD) frequency and the percentage of patients who achieved pain freedom within 2 h in ≥ 4 of 5 attacks in each group. RESULTS: 200 episodic migraine patients completed the study. There was a statistically significantly higher reduction in the serum CGRP-LI level in the lacosamide group compared with the control group. In addition, lacosamide was well tolerated by patients. Also, the lacosamide group had statistically significant higher percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the migraine monthly days (MMD) frequency and pain freedom within two hours in ≥ 4 of 5 attacks with P-values 0.002, 0.02 respectively. CONCLUSION: The daily use of lacosamide 50 mg Bid for three months in episodic migraine patients was associated with a significant reduction in serum CGRP-LI, better clinical outcomes regarding frequency and duration of migraine attacks, and was well tolerated by patients. These results were derived from an open-label pilot study that needed to be thoroughly investigated by a large-scale, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. TRIAL REGISTRATION:  We registered our trial on ClinicalTrials.gov, named after "The Lacosamide's Effect on Calcitonin Gene-related Peptide in Migraine Patients," and with a clinical trial number (NCT05632133)-August 8, 2023.

Predictors of the unfavorable outcomes in acute ischemic stroke patients treated with alteplase, a multi-center randomized trial.

Worldwide, stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability in adults. Alteplase is the only approved treatment for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and results in an improvement in a third of treated patients. We evaluated the post-stroke unfavourable outcome predictors in alteplase-treated patients from Egypt and Saudi Arabia. We assessed the effect of different risk factors on AIS outcomes after alteplase in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Our study included 592 AIS alteplase-treated patients. The relationship between risk factors, clinical presentation, and imaging features was evaluated to predict factors associated with poor outcomes. An mRS score of three or more was used to define poor outcomes. Poor outcome was seen in 136 patients (23%), and Patients with unfavourable effects had significantly higher admission hyperglycaemia, a higher percentage of diabetes mellitus, cardioembolic stroke, and a lower percentage of small vessel stroke. Patients with higher baseline NIHSS score (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.12-1.71; P = 0.003), admission hyperglycaemia (OR 13.12; 95% CI 3.37-51.1; P < 0.001), and post-alteplase intracerebral haemorrhage (OR 7.41; 95% CI 1.69-32.43; P = 0.008) independently predicted unfavourable outcomes at three months. In AIS patients treated with alteplase, similar to reports from other regions, in patients from Egypt and Saudi Arabia also reveal that higher NIHSS, higher serum blood sugar, and post-alteplase intracerebral haemorrhage were the predictors of unfavourable outcomes three months after ischemic stroke.Trial registration: (clinicaltrials.gov NCT06058884), retrospectively registered on 28/09/2023.

A randomized pilot study of the efficacy and safety of loading ticagrelor in acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor is one of the most recent antiplatelet drugs to be approved to treat ischemic heart disease. Its efficacy may exceed aspirin in improving clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke who are ineligible for rt-PA. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the safety regarding hemorrhagic complications (as a primary endpoint) and the efficacy (as a secondary endpoint) of a 180-mg loading dose of ticagrelor given within 9 h from the onset of the first-ever non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. METHODS: We conducted our study on patients aged 18-75 years who presented with their first clinically manifested non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke and were recruited from the emergency department OF Kafr El-Sheik University Hospitals, Egypt. Eligible patients randomly received ticagrelor or aspirin loading and maintenance doses. Screening, randomization, and initiation of treatment all occurred within the first 9 h of stroke onset. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients received ticagrelor, and 84 received aspirin. Patients who received ticagrelor had a better clinical outcome in terms of NIHSS improvement at 2 days and 1 week of discharge and a favorable mRS score after 1 week of discharge and at 90-day follow-up. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding hemorrhagic adverse effects. CONCLUSION: This pilot study found that ticagrelor had a better clinical outcome than aspirin based on NIHSS and mRS in acute ischemic stroke patients who received it within 9 h from symptom onset and had a shorter hospital stay duration. Ticagrelor was non-inferior to aspirin regarding hemorrhagic complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We registered our trial on ClinicalTrials.gov, named after "ticagrelor versus aspirin in ischemic stroke," and with a clinical trial number (NCT03884530)-March 21, 2019.

A pilot study of the ticagrelor role in ischemic stroke secondary prevention.

INTRODUCTION: Ticagrelor is one of the most recent antiplatelet drugs used to treat ischemic heart disease. Its efficacy may equal or exceed aspirin in improving clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke who are ineligible for rt-PA. AIM OF THE WORK: We aimed at evaluating the safety (as a primary endpoint) and efficacy (as a secondary endpoint) of a 180 mg loading dose of ticagrelor given within 9 h from the onset of first-ever ischemic stroke. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized prospective controlled clinical trial between May 2019 and September 2020 on patients who presented with their first-ever ischemic stroke and were recruited from the emergency department, of Kafr el-sheik University Hospitals, Egypt. Eligible patients randomly received aspirin or ticagrelor loading and maintenance doses. Treatment began within 9 h of stroke onset. RESULTS: Aspirin was given to 84 patients; ticagrelor was given to 85. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the hemorrhagic and nonhemorrhagic complications. Patients who received ticagrelor had a better outcome regarding NIHSS improvement at 2 days and 1 week or discharge and a favorable mRS score after 1 week or discharge and at 90-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: Ticagrelor was noninferior to aspirin regarding safety profile. Compared with aspirin, ticagrelor had a better clinical outcome based on NIHSS and mRS in first-ever acute ischemic stroke patients who received it within 9 h from symptom onset, leading to a shorter hospital stay.