| 1. |
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Sandset, Else Charlotte, et al.
(författare)
-
Angiotensin receptor blockade in acute stroke. The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial : rationale, methods and design of a multicentre, randomised- and placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT00120003)
- 2010
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Stroke. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4930 .- 1747-4949. ; 5:5, s. 423-427
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Elevated blood pressure following acute stroke is common, and yet early antihypertensive treatment is controversial. ACCESS suggested a beneficial effect of the angiotensin receptor blocker candesartan in the acute phase of stroke, but these findings need to be confirmed in new, large trials. Aims and design The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial is an international randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of candesartan in acute stroke. We plan to recruit 2500 patients presenting within 30 h of stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic) and with systolic blood pressure >= 140 mmHg. The recruited patients are randomly assigned to candesartan or placebo for 7-days (doses increasing from 4 to 16 mg once daily). Randomisation is performed centrally via a secure web interface. The follow-up period is 6-months. Patients are included from the following nine North-European countries: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland. Study outcomes There are two co-primary effect variables:center dot Functional status at 6-months, measured by the modified Rankin Scale, and center dot vascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke during the first 6-months.Secondary outcome variables:Secondary effect variables include center dot the Barthel index (functional status)center dot EuroQol (quality of life) and center dot Mini-mental state examination (cognition) at 6-months center dot Health economic costs during the first 6-months Funding The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial receives basic funding from Norwegian health authorities. AstraZeneca supplies the trial drugs, and AstraZeneca and Takeda support the trial with limited, unrestricted grants. Summary The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial is the first large trial of angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with elevated blood pressure and acute stroke, and aims to answer whether treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers is beneficial for this indication.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sandset, Else Charlotte, et al.
(författare)
-
The angiotensin-receptor blocker candesartan for treatment of acute stroke (SCAST) : a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial
- 2011
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 377:9767, s. 741-750
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Raised blood pressure is common in acute stroke, and is associated with an increased risk of poor outcomes. We aimed to examine whether careful blood-pressure lowering treatment with the angiotensin-receptor blocker candesartan is beneficial in patients with acute stroke and raised blood pressure. Methods Participants in this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial were recruited from 146 centres in nine north European countries. Patients older than 18 years with acute stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic) and systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or higher were included within 30 h of symptom onset. Patients were randomly allocated to candesartan or placebo (1:1) for 7 days, with doses increasing from 4 mg on day 1 to 16 mg on days 3 to 7. Randomisation was stratified by centre, with blocks of six packs of candesartan or placebo. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. There were two co-primary effect variables: the composite endpoint of vascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke during the first 6 months; and functional outcome at 6 months, as measured by the modified Rankin Scale. Analyses were by intention to treat. The study is registered, number NCT00120003 (ClinicalTrials.gov), and ISRCTN13643354. Findings 2029 patients were randomly allocated to treatment groups (1017 candesartan, 1012 placebo), and data for status at 6 months were available for 2004 patients (99%; 1000 candesartan, 1004 placebo). During the 7-day treatment period, blood pressures were significantly lower in patients allocated candesartan than in those on placebo (mean 147/82 mm Hg [SD 23/14] in the candesartan group on day 7 vs 152/84 mm Hg [22/14] in the placebo group; p<0.0001). During 6 months' follow-up, the risk of the composite vascular endpoint did not differ between treatment groups (candesartan, 120 events, vs placebo, 111 events; adjusted hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.84-1.41; p=0.52). Analysis of functional outcome suggested a higher risk of poor outcome in the candesartan group (adjusted common odds ratio 1.17, 95% CI 100-138; p=0.048 [not significant at p <= 0.025 level]). The observed effects were similar for all prespecified secondary endpoints (including death from any cause, vascular death, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction, stroke progression, symptomatic hypotension, and renal failure) and outcomes (Scandinavian Stroke Scale score at 7 days and Barthel index at 6 months), and there was no evidence of a differential effect in any of the prespecified subgroups. During follow-up, nine (1%) patients on candesartan and five (<1%) on placebo had symptomatic hypotension, and renal failure was reported for 18 (2%) patients taking candesartan and 13 (1%) allocated placebo. Interpretation There was no indication that careful blood-pressure lowering treatment with the angiotensin-receptor blocker candesartan is beneficial in patients with acute stroke and raised blood pressure. If anything, the evidence suggested a harmful effect.
|
|
| 4. |
- Steiner, Thorsten, et al.
(författare)
-
European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guidelines for the management of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage
- 2014
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Stroke. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4949 .- 1747-4930. ; 9:7, s. 840-855
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundIntracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) accounted for 9% to 27% of all strokes worldwide in the last decade, with high early case fatality and poor functional outcome. In view of recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the management of ICH, the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) has updated its evidence-based guidelines for the management of ICH. MethodA multidisciplinary writing committee of 24 researchers from 11 European countries identified 20 questions relating to ICH management and created recommendations based on the evidence in RCTs using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ResultsWe found moderate- to high-quality evidence to support strong recommendations for managing patients with acute ICH on an acute stroke unit, avoiding hemostatic therapy for acute ICH not associated with antithrombotic drug use, avoiding graduated compression stockings, using intermittent pneumatic compression in immobile patients, and using blood pressure lowering for secondary prevention. We found moderate-quality evidence to support weak recommendations for intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure to <140mmHg within six-hours of ICH onset, early surgery for patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score 9-12, and avoidance of corticosteroids. ConclusionThese guidelines inform the management of ICH based on evidence for the effects of treatments in RCTs. Outcome after ICH remains poor, prioritizing further RCTs of interventions to improve outcome.
|
|
| 5. |
- van der Worp, H. Bart, et al.
(författare)
-
EuroHYP-1: European multicenter, randomized, phase III clinical trial of therapeutic hypothermia plus best medical treatment vs. best medical treatment alone for acute ischemic stroke
- 2014
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Stroke. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4949 .- 1747-4930. ; 9:5, s. 642-645
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Rationale Cooling reduced infarct size and improved neurological outcomes in animal studies modeling ischemic stroke, and also improved outcome in randomized clinical trials in patients with hypoxic-ischemic brain injury after cardiac arrest. Cooling awake patients with ischemic stroke has been shown feasible in phase II clinical trials. Primary aim To determine whether systemic cooling to a target body temperature between 34 center dot 0 and 35 center dot 0 degrees C, started within six-hours of symptom onset and maintained for 24h, improves functional outcome at three-months in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Design International, multicenter, phase III, randomized, open-label clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment in 1500 patients aged 18 years or older with acute ischemic stroke and a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 6 up to and including 18. In patients randomized to hypothermia, cooling to a target body temperature of 34-35 degrees C will be started within six-hours after symptom onset with rapid intravenous infusion of refrigerated normal saline or a surface cooling technique and maintained for 24h with a surface or endovascular technique. Patients randomized to hypothermia will receive pethidine and buspirone to prevent shivering and discomfort. Primary outcome Score on the modified Rankin Scale at 91 days, as analyzed with ordinal logistic regression and expressed as a common odds ratio. Discussion With 750 patients per intervention group, this trial has 90% power to detect 7% absolute improvement at the 5% significance level. The full trial protocol is available at http://www.eurohyp1.eu. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01833312.
|
|
