Patterns and Implications of Intracranial Atherosclerosis in Anterior and Posterior Circulation Identified by High-Resolution Vessel Wall Imaging.

INTRODUCTION: Anterior and posterior circulation atheroscleroses differ in vascular risk factors and stroke patterns. Posterior circulation stroke has worse clinical outcomes. However, few studies described the differentiation of plaque features between anterior and posterior circulation atheroscleroses via high-resolution vessel wall imaging (HR-VWI). We aimed to compare the plaque imaging features between anterior and posterior circulations to highlight the relevance of plaque imaging features to clinical events of ischemic stroke. METHODS: Prospective data from a HR-VWI cohort of adult patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack were retrospectively analyzed. Quantitative and qualitative measurements of atherosclerotic plaques along the middle cerebral arteries (MCAs), the basilar artery (BA), and the vertebral arteries (VAs) were conducted on HR-VWI. Vessels with stenotic degrees over 30% were identified on the matched time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (TOF-MRA) and visually classified into normal, irregular, stenotic, and occluded. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for TOF-MRA in detecting abnormal vessels were calculated by using quantification on the basis of HR-VWI findings as the reference standard. RESULTS: One hundred and one patients (median age, 64 years old; 62.4% males) were included in this study. A total of 292 plaques were identified, with 152 in the MCAs, 35 in the BA, and 105 in the VAs. The VAs possessed significantly higher enhancement index (EI) (median 38.37 vs. 18.40, p <0.001), more plaques with positive remodeling (76.2% vs. 57.2%, p = 0.002) and intraplaque hypo-intensity (43.8% vs. 12.5%, p <0.001) than the MCAs. The MCAs presented with more intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH) (20.4% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.014) than the VAs. The sensitivity and specificity of TOF-MRA for evaluating luminal stenosis were 89.0 (82.5-93.4) and 66.7 (24.1-94.0) in anterior circulation, respectively, and were 75.2 (66.7-82.2) and 27.3 (7.3-60.7) in posterior circulation, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings might elucidate the clinical events and outcomes in anterior and posterior circulation stroke. Posterior circulation atherosclerosis had higher EI and more plaques with hypo-intensity, suggesting a heavier atherosclerosis burden. Positive remodeling pattern in posterior circulation atherosclerosis might create an impression of "wider" vascular lumen, leading to possible underestimation of atherosclerosis burden of posterior circulation on TOF-MRA as compared to HR-VWI. Besides, anterior circulation atherosclerosis with IPH might be associated with plaque rupture and artery-to-artery embolism. Future studies are needed to verify these findings.

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.

Ticagrelor versus Aspirin in Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

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

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

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

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.

Antiplatelet therapy after stroke: should it differ in the acute and chronic phase after stroke.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Reviewing existing evidence regarding well tolerated and effective antiplatelet treatment in patients with acute or chronic, noncardioembolic ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). RECENT FINDINGS: For patients with high-risk stroke or TIA, for instance, minor stroke or high-risk TIA, or stroke of atherosclerotic origin with evidence suggesting risk of artery-to-artery embolism or with high-grade, symptomatic arterial stenosis, early initiated, short-term dual antiplatelet (e.g. aspirin and clopidogrel) is effective in reducing the risk of recurrent stroke and other vascular events which does not increase the risk of severe or fatal bleeding, as compared with mono antiplatelet therapy. However, long-term application of aggressive antiplatelet therapies after a noncardioembolic stroke or TIA increases the bleeding risks. Triple antiplatelet therapy is not appropriate for noncardioembolic stroke or TIA, in view of the high bleeding risk. In addition, emerging antiplatelets such as ticagrelor and cilostazol may work better in certain subgroups of stroke patients, which warrants further investigation. SUMMARY: Antiplatelet therapies should differ in the acute and chronic phases among patients with high-risk stroke or TIA when more aggressive antiplatelet treatment is reasonable in the acute phase, but no solid evidence supports different antiplatelet strategies in acute and chronic phases in patients with low-risk noncardioembolic stroke.

Ticagrelor Versus Aspirin in Acute Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source.

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

Prognostic Factors and Pattern of Long-Term Recovery with MLC601 (NeuroAiD™) in the Chinese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke Recovery - Extension Study.

BACKGROUND: The Chinese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke recovery - Extension (CHIMES-E) study is among the few acute stroke trials with long-term outcome data. We aimed to evaluate the recovery pattern and the influence of prognostic factors on treatment effect of MLC601 over 2 years. METHODS: The CHIMES-E study evaluated the 2 years outcome of subjects aged ≥18 years with acute ischemic stroke, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 6-14, pre-stroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤1 included in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MLC601 for 3 months. Standard stroke care and rehabilitation were allowed during follow-up with mRS score being assessed in-person at month (M) 3 and by telephone at M1, M6, M12, M18 and M24. RESULTS: Data from 880 subjects were analyzed. There was no difference in baseline characteristics between treatment groups. The proportion of subjects with mRS score 0-1 increased over time in favor of MLC601 most notably from M3 to M6, thereafter remaining stable up to M24, while the proportion deteriorating to mRS score ≥2 remained low at all time points. Older age (p < 0.01), female sex (p = 0.06), higher baseline NIHSS score (p < 0.01) and longer onset to treatment time (OTT; p < 0.01) were found to be predictors of poorer outcome at M3. Greater treatment effect, with more subjects improving on MLC601 than placebo, was seen among subjects with 2 or more prognostic factors (OR 1.65 at M3, 1.78 at M6, 1.90 at M12, 1.65 at M18, 1.39 at M24), especially in subjects with more severe stroke or longer OTT. CONCLUSIONS: The sustained benefits of MLC601 over 2 years were due to more subjects improving to functional independence at M6 and beyond compared to placebo. Selection of subjects with poorer prognosis, particularly those with more severe NIHSS score and longer OTT delay, as well as a long follow-up period, may improve the power of future trials investigating the treatment effect of neuroprotective or neurorestorative therapies.

Comparison Between the Original and Shortened Versions of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in Ischemic Stroke Patients of Intermediate Severity.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The 15-item National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) has been critiqued for its complexity and variability, and shortened versions have been proposed. This study aimed to compare the measurement properties of the original version with 3 shortened versions with 11, 8, and 5 items, respectively. METHODS: Analyses were performed using data from an international, double-blind randomized controlled trial investigating the efficacy of MLC601 on stroke recovery in patients with ischemic stroke of intermediate severity (Chinese Medicine Neuroaid Efficacy on Stroke recovery [CHIMES]). To compare discriminative ability and responsiveness to change, the effect sizes of the NIHSS scores in relation to modified Rankin Scale, mini-mental status examination, and Barthel index were estimated using regression analysis. RESULTS: For both discriminative ability and responsiveness to change, the original version exhibited a larger effect size (0.55 and 0.84) in relation to modified Rankin Scale than the other 3 shortened versions (0.35-0.46 and 0.74-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The original 15-item NIHSS retained information that made it more discriminative and responsive to change than the shortened versions. We recommend future clinical researchers to use the full version NIHSS to evaluate patients' stroke severity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00554723.

Impact of Collateral Status on Successful Revascularization in Endovascular Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pre-treatment collateral status may be associated with the rates of successful revascularization in acute ischemic stroke patients receiving endovascular treatment (EVT). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize relevant evidence currently available. METHODS: Relevant full-text articles published in English since January 1, 2000, reporting associations between collateral status and successful reperfusion and/or recanalization in acute ischemic stroke patients receiving EVT in cohort or case-control studies, or randomized clinical trials, were retrieved through search of PubMed. Study selection, data extraction and study quality assessment were carried out by 2 investigators. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled for good vs. poor collaterals for the outcomes of successful reperfusion and recanalization, based on random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore for potential factors that might interfere with the effects of pre-treatment collateral status on reperfusion by EVT. RESULTS: In total, 27 studies (2,366 subjects) were included in qualitative analysis, among which 24 studies (2,239 subjects) were quantitatively analyzed. Overall, good pre-treatment collaterals significantly increased the rate of both successful reperfusion (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17-1.40; p < 0.001) and recanalization (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.06-1.42; p = 0.006), as compared with poor collaterals. Subgroup analyses revealed that the effects of collateral status on successful reperfusion by EVT might be different between populations with different ethnicities. CONCLUSIONS: Good pre-treatment collaterals may enhance the rates of successful reperfusion and recanalization in EVT for acute ischemic stroke. This may partly explain the favorable effects of good pre-treatment collaterals on clinical outcomes of stroke patients receiving EVT. Thus, it would be valuable to assess the collateral status prior to EVT in acute ischemic stroke. But studies are needed to further verify if the positive effects of good collaterals on revascularization by EVT are restricted to certain subgroups of patients.

CHInese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke Recovery - Extension Study (CHIMES-E): A Multicenter Study of Long-Term Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: The CHInese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke recovery (CHIMES) study was an international randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of MLC601 (NeuroAiD) in subjects with cerebral infarction of intermediate severity within 72 h. CHIMES-E (Extension) aimed at evaluating the effects of the initial 3-month treatment with MLC601 on long-term outcome for up to 2 years. METHODS: All subjects randomized in CHIMES were eligible for CHIMES-E. Inclusion criteria for CHIMES were age ≥18, baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale of 6-14, and pre-stroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤1. Initial CHIMES treatment allocation blinding was maintained, although no further study treatment was provided in CHIMES-E. Subjects received standard care and rehabilitation as prescribed by the treating physician. mRS, Barthel Index (BI), and occurrence of medical events were ascertained at months 6, 12, 18, and 24. The primary outcome was mRS at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were mRS and BI at other time points. RESULTS: CHIMES-E included 880 subjects (mean age 61.8 ± 11.3; 36% women). Adjusted OR for mRS ordinal analysis was 1.08 (95% CI 0.85-1.37, p = 0.543) and mRS dichotomy ≤1 was 1.29 (95% CI 0.96-1.74, p = 0.093) at 24 months. However, the treatment effect was significantly in favor of MLC601 for mRS dichotomy ≤1 at 6 months (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.11-2.01, p = 0.008), 12 months (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.90, p = 0.023), and 18 months (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01-1.83, p = 0.045), and for BI dichotomy ≥95 at 6 months (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.14-2.10, p = 0.005) but not at other time points. Subgroup analyses showed no treatment heterogeneity. Rates of death and occurrence of vascular and other medical events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: While the benefits of a 3-month treatment with MLC601 did not reach statistical significance for the primary endpoint at 2 years, the odds of functional independence defined as mRS ≤1 was significantly increased at 6 months and persisted up to 18 months after a stroke.

Prognostic factors and treatment effect in the CHIMES study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke trials often analyze patients with heterogeneous prognoses using a single definition of outcome, which may not be applicable to all subgroups. We aimed to evaluate the treatment effects of MCL601 among patients stratified by prognosis in the Chinese Medicine Neuroaid Efficacy on Stroke Recovery (CHIMES) study. METHODS: Analyses were performed using data from the CHIMES study, an international, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial comparing MLC601 with placebo in patients with ischemic stroke of intermediate severity in the preceding 72 hours. All subjects with baseline data and the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months were included. RESULTS: Data from 1006 subjects were analyzed. The predictive variables for mRS score greater than 1 at month 3 were age older than 60 years (P < .001), baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 10-14 (P < .001), stroke onset to initiation of study treatment of more than 48 hours (P < .001), and female sex (P = .026). A higher number of predictors was associated with poorer mRS score at month 3 for both placebo (P < .001) and treatment (P < .001) groups. The odds ratio (OR) for achieving a good outcome increased with the number of predictors and reached statistical significance in favor of MLC601 among patients with 2 to 4 predictors combined (unadjusted OR = 1.44, 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.03; adjusted OR = 1.60, 95% confidence interval, 1.10-2.34). CONCLUSIONS: Age, sex, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, and time to first dose are predictors of functional outcome in the CHIMES study. Stratification by prognosis showed that patients with 2 or more predictors of poorer outcome have better treatment effect with MLC601 than patients with single or no prognostic factor. These results have implications on designing future stroke trials.

Effects of MLC601 on early vascular events in patients after stroke: the CHIMES study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Early vascular events are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the first 3 months after a stroke. We aimed to investigate the effects of MLC601 on the occurrence of early vascular events within 3 months of stroke onset. METHODS: Post hoc analysis was performed on data from subjects included in the CHInese Medicine Neuroaid Efficacy on Stroke recovery (CHIMES) study, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial that compared MLC601 with placebo in 1099 subjects with ischemic stroke of intermediate severity in the preceding 72 hours. Early vascular events were defined as a composite of recurrent stroke, acute coronary syndrome, and vascular death occurring within 3 months of stroke onset. RESULTS: The frequency of early vascular events during the 3-month follow-up was significantly less in the MLC601 group than in the placebo group (16 [2.9%] versus 31 events [5.6%]; risk difference=-2.7%; 95% confidence interval, -5.1% to -0.4%; P=0.025) without an increase in nonvascular deaths. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a difference in the risk of vascular outcomes between the 2 groups as early as the first month after stroke (Log-rank P=0.024; hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with MLC601 was associated with reduced early vascular events among subjects in the CHIMES study. The mechanisms for this effect require further study. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00554723.

Chinese medicine neuroaid efficacy on stroke recovery: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous clinical studies suggested benefit for poststroke recovery when MLC601 was administered between 2 weeks and 6 months of stroke onset. The Chinese Medicine Neuroaid Efficacy on Stroke recovery (CHIMES) study tested the hypothesis that MLC601 is superior to placebo in acute, moderately severe ischemic stroke within a 72-hour time window. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized 1100 patients with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 6 to 14, within 72 hours of onset, to trial medications for 3 months. The primary outcome was a shift in the modified Rankin Scale. Secondary outcomes were modified Rankin Scale dichotomy, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale improvement, difference in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale total and motor scores, Barthel index, and mini-mental state examination. Planned subgroup analyses were performed according to age, sex, time to first dose, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, presence of cortical signs, and antiplatelet use. RESULTS: The modified Rankin Scale shift analysis-adjusted odds ratio was 1.09 (95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.32). Statistical difference was not detected between the treatment groups for any of the secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses showed no statistical heterogeneity for the primary outcome; however, a trend toward benefit in the subgroup receiving treatment beyond 48 hours from stroke onset was noted. Serious and nonserious adverse events rates were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: MLC601 is statistically no better than placebo in improving outcomes at 3 months when used among patients with acute ischemic stroke of intermediate severity. Longer treatment duration and follow-up of participants with treatment initiated after 48 hours may be considered in future studies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00554723.

Risk of subsequent disabling or fatal stroke in patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke: an international, prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have had a transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke have an increased risk of cardiovascular events for the following 5 years. We aimed to assess 5-year functional outcomes in patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke and to determine the factors associated with long-term disability. METHODS: We analysed data from patients in TIAregistry.org, an international, prospective, observational registry of patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke from 61 specialised centres in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older who had a transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke within the previous 7 days between May 30, 2009, and Dec 30, 2011, with a baseline modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0-1, and who had been followed up for 5 years, were eligible for inclusion in this study. We evaluated whether existing comorbidities and stroke recurrence, categorised as disabling (mRS score of >1, including death) or non-disabling (mRS score of 0-1), at 5 years after baseline, were associated with poor functional outcome (defined as an mRS score of >1). We used multivariable generalised equation models for factors associated with poor functional outcome at 5 years and multivariable cause-specific Cox hazard regression models in case of stroke recurrence. FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2009, and Dec 30, 2011, 3847 eligible patients were included in the study, 3105 (80·7%) of whom had an mRS evaluation at 5 years of follow-up. Median follow-up duration was 5·00 years (IQR 4·78-5·00). 710 (22·9%) of 3105 patients had an mRS score greater than 1 at 5 years. Factors associated with poor functional outcome at 5 years were older age (per 10-year increase, odds ratio [OR] 2·18, 95% CI 1·93-2·46; p<0·0001), diabetes of any type (1·45, 1·18-1·78; p=0·0001), history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack before the qualifying event (1·74, 1·37-2·22; p<0·0001), hypertension (1·38, 1·00-1·92; p=0·050), atrial fibrillation or flutter (1·52, 1·04-1·94; p=0·030), congestive heart failure (1·73, 1·22-2·46; p=0·0024), valvular disease (2·47, 1·70-3·58; p<0·0001), stroke as qualifying event (1·31, 1·09-1·57; p=0·0037), history of peripheral artery disease (1·98, 1·28-3·07; p=0·0023), history of coronary artery disease (1·32, 1·00-1·74; p=0·049), intracranial haemorrhage during follow up (4·94, 1·91-12·78; p=0·0013), and living alone (1·32, 1·10-1·59; p=0·0031). Regular physical activity before the index event was associated with reduced risk of poor functional outcome (OR 0·52, 95% CI 0·42-0·66; p<0·0001). 345 recurrent strokes had occurred at 5 years of follow-up, 141 (40·9%) of which were disabling or fatal. Stroke recurrence increased the risk of having a disability at 5 years (OR 3·52, 95% CI 2·37-5·22; p<0·0001). Recurrent disabling or fatal strokes were independently associated with older age (per 10-year increase, hazard ratio [HR] 1·61, 95% CI 1·35-1·92; p<0·0001), diabetes of any type (2·23, 1·56-3·17; p<0·0001), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of greater than 5 at discharge (5·11, 2·15-12·13; p=0·0013), history of coronary artery disease (1·76, 1·17-2·65; p=0·0063), history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack before the qualifying event (1·54, 1·03-2·29; p=0·035), congestive heart failure (1·86, 1·01-3·47; p=0·044), stroke as qualifying event (1·73, 1·22-2·45; p=0·0024), mRS score of greater than 1 at discharge (2·48, 1·27-4·87; p=0·0083), and intracranial haemorrhage during follow-up (17·15, 9·95-27·43; p<0·0001). Regular physical activity before the index event was associated with reduced risk of recurrent disabling stroke at 5 years (HR 0·56, 95% CI 0·31-0·99; p=0·046), and 5-year disability without recurrent stroke (0·61, 0·47-0·79; p=0·0001). INTERPRETATION: We found a substantial burden of disability (mRS score of >1) at 5 years after transient ischaemic attack or minor ischemic stroke, and most predictors of this disability were modifiable risk factors. Patients who did regular physical exercise before the index event had a significantly reduced risk of disability at 5 years compared with patients who did no exercise. FUNDING: AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Bristol Myers Squibb, SOS Attaque Cérébrale Association.

Stroke and stroke care in China: huge burden, significant workload, and a national priority.

At the same time as the world recognizes the rapid economic development in China, Chinese healthcare system has also had significant improvement. However, this nation of 1.4 billion faces tough challenges in treating stroke, the leading cause of death in China. The recently completed Chinese National Stroke Registry has provided new information on the status of stroke epidemiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention strategies in China. In this article, we summarized these new findings, described the effort of providing and improving stroke care, and illustrated the challenges in risk factor modification and secondary stroke prevention. Well-designed epidemiological surveys and clinical trials for stroke prevention and management are still urgently needed in China.

Efficacy and safety of combination antiplatelet therapies in patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: An optimal strategy for management of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) has not yet been established. We compared the efficacy of 2 combinations of antiplatelets, aspirin plus cilostazol (cilostazol group) verus aspirin plus clopidogrel (clopidogrel group), on the progression of ICAS, which is known to be associated with clinical stroke recurrence. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated double-blind trial, 457 patients with acute symptomatic stenosis in the M1 segment of the middle cerebral artery or the basilar artery were randomly allocated into either a cilostazol group or a clopidogrel group. After 7 months of treatment, follow-up MR angiogram and MRI were performed. The primary end point was the progression of ICAS in comparison with stenosis on the baseline MR angiogram. Secondary end points included the occurrence of new ischemic lesions on MRI, composite of cardiovascular events, and major bleeding complications. RESULTS: Cardiovascular events occurred in 15 of 232 patients (6.4%) in the cilostazol group and 10 of 225 (4.4%) in the clopidogrel group (P=0.312). Cilostazol did not reduce the progression of symptomatic ICAS (20 of 202) compared to clopidogrel (32 of 207) (odds ratio, 0.61; P=0.092), although favorable changes in serum lipoproteins were observed in the cilostazol group. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to new ischemic lesions (18.7% versus 12.0%; P=0.078) and major hemorrhagic complications (0.9% versus 2.6%; P=0.163). CONCLUSIONS: This trial failed to show significant difference in preventing progression of ICAS and new ischemic lesions between the 2 combination antiplatelet therapies in the patients with symptomatic ICAS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00130039.

Stroke caused by small vessel occlusion in a patient taking etoricoxib and thalidomide.

We report a 33-year-old man with seronegative arthritis who had an acute infarct at the left lentiform nucleus while taking etoricoxib and thalidomide regularly. Extensive investigations did not find any evidence of large artery atherosclerosis, vasculitis, cardioembolic source or anti-phospholipid antibodies. While it is possible that a short smoking history, hyperlipidemia, and the use of thalidomide could have contributed to the thrombosis of a small penetrator vessel, we postulated that the prolonged use of etoricoxib is another possible contributing factor.

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

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