| 1. |
- Ederle, Joerg, et al.
(författare)
-
Carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (International Carotid Stenting Study): an interim analysis of a randomised controlled trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 1474-547X. ; 375:9719, s. 985-997
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. Methods The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. Findings The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.16-2.45, p=0.006), Risks of any stroke (65 vs 35 events; HR 1.92, 1.27-2.89) and all-cause death (19 vs seven events; HR 2.76, 1.16-6.56) were higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group. Three procedural myocardial infarctions were recorded in the stenting group, all of which were fatal, compared with four, all non-fatal, in the endarterectomy group. There was one event of cranial nerve palsy in the stenting group compared with 45 in the endarterectomy group. There were also fewer haematomas of any severity in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (31 vs 50 events; p=0.0197). Interpretation Completion of long-term follow-up is needed to establish the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy. In the meantime, carotid endarterectomy should remain the treatment of choice for patients suitable for surgery.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Hacke, W., et al.
(författare)
-
Transcranial Laser Therapy in Acute Stroke Treatment Results of Neurothera Effectiveness and Safety Trial 3, a Phase III Clinical End Point Device Trial
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Stroke. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0039-2499 .- 1524-4628. ; 45:11, s. 3187-3193
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and Purpose On the basis of phase II trials, we considered that transcranial laser therapy could have neuroprotective effects in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods We studied transcranial laser therapy in a double-blind, sham-controlled randomized clinical trial intended to enroll 1000 patients with acute ischemic stroke treated 24 hours after stroke onset and who did not undergo thrombolytic therapy. The primary efficacy measure was the 90-day functional outcome as assessed by the modified Rankin Scale, with hierarchical Bayesian analysis incorporating relevant previous data. Interim analyses were planned after 300 and 600 patients included. Results The study was terminated on recommendation by the Data Monitoring Committee after a futility analysis of 566 completed patients found no difference in the primary end point (transcranial laser therapy 140/282 [49.6%] versus sham 140/284 [49.3%] for good functional outcome; modified Rankin Scale, 0-2). The results remained stable after inclusion of all 630 randomized patients (adjusted odds ratio, 1.024; 95% confidence interval, 0.705-1.488). Conclusions Once the results of the interim futility analysis became available, all study support was immediately withdrawn by the capital firms behind PhotoThera, and the company was dissolved. Proper termination of the trial was difficult but was finally achieved through special efforts by former employees of PhotoThera, the CRO Parexel and members of the steering and the safety committees. We conclude that transcranial laser therapy does not have a measurable neuroprotective effect in patients with acute ischemic stroke when applied within 24 hours after stroke onset. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01120301.
|
|
| 4. |
- Ali, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Development, expansion, and use of a stroke clinical trials resource for novel exploratory analyses
- 2012
-
Ingår i: International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4949. ; 7:2, s. 133-138
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Analysis of reliable registry data can direct future research to influence clinical care. Data from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive have been used to test hypotheses and inform trial design. We sought to expand Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive into a broader stroke resource with new opportunities for research and international collaboration. Methods Using procedures initially developed for an acute stroke trial archive, we invited trialists to lodge data on rehabilitation, secondary prevention, intracerebral haemorrhage, imaging, and observational stroke studies. Results We have extended Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive into six subsections: Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Acute ( n = 28 190 patients’ data), Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Rehab ( n = 10 194), Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-intracerebral haemorrhage ( n = 1829), Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Prevention, Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Imaging ( n = 1300), and Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Plus ( n = 6573). Enrollment continues, with commitments for the contribution of six further trials to Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Prevention, 13 trials to Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Rehab, and one registry to Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Plus. Data on age, type of stroke, medical history, outcomes by modified Rankin scale and Barthel Index (BI), mortality, and adverse events are available for analyses. The Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive network encourages the development of young investigators and provides opportunities for international peer review and collaboration. Conclusions Application of the original Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive concepts beyond acute stroke trials can extend the value of clinical research at low cost, without threatening commercial or intellectual property interests. This delivers valuable research output to inform the efficiency of future stroke research. We invite stroke researchers to participate actively in Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive and encourage the extension of Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive principles to other disease areas.
|
|
| 5. |
- Hankey, Graeme J., et al.
(författare)
-
Rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack: a subgroup analysis of ROCKET AF
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - 1474-4465. ; 11:4, s. 315-322
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background In ROCKET AF, rivaroxaban was non-inferior to adjusted-dose warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to investigate whether the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin is consistent among the subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Methods In ROCKET AF, patients with AF who were at increased risk of stroke were randomly assigned (1:1) in a double-blind manner to rivaroxaban 20 mg daily or adjusted dose warfarin (international normalised ratio 2-0-3.0). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Between Dec 18,2006, and June 17,2009,14 264 patients from 1178 centres in 45 countries were randomly assigned. The primary endpoint was the composite of stroke or non-CNS systemic embolism. In this substudy we assessed the interaction of the treatment effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin among patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done in the on-treatment population. ROCKET AF is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00403767. Findings 7468 (52%) patients had a previous stroke (n=4907) or TIA (n=2561) and 6796 (48%) had no previous stroke or TIA. The number of events per 100 person-years for the primary endpoint in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (2.79% rivaroxaban vs 2.96% warfarin; hazard ratio [HR] 0-94,95% CI 0.77-1.16) and those without (1.44% vs 1.88%; 0.77, 0.58-1-01; interaction p=0.23). The number of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding events per 100 person-years in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (13.31% rivaroxaban vs 13.87% warfarin; HR 0.96,95% CI 0.87-1-07) and those without (16.69% vs 15.19%; 1.10, 0.99-1.21; interaction p=0.08). Interpretation There was no evidence that the relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was different between patients who had a previous stroke or TIA and those who had no previous stroke or TIA. These results support the use of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin for prevention of recurrent as well as initial stroke in patients with AF.
|
|
