METHODS: We used a matched case-control design using the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA). Cases were patients who had an acute coronary syndrome, recurrent stroke or transient ischaemic attack within 90 days post-stroke and were matched for age ± 10 years and sex with up to four controls. Antiplatelet use was categorized as persistent (used for >3 days and continued up to day 90), early cessation (used antiplatelet <3 days) or stopped/interrupted users (used for >3 days but stopped prior to day 90). These categories were compared in cases and controls using a conditional logistic regression model that adjusted for potential confounders.
RESULTS: A total of 970 patients were included, of whom 194 were cases and 776 were matched controls. At 90 days, 10 cases (5.2%) and 58 controls (7.5%) stopped/interrupted their antiplatelet. The risk of cardiovascular event was not different in stopped/interrupted users (adjusted odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.33, 1.48; P = 0.352) and early cessations (adjusted odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.62, 1.74; P = 0.876) when compared to persistent users.
CONCLUSION: We found no increased risk in patients who stopped and interrupted antiplatelets early after stroke but the study was limited by a small sample size and further research is needed.
AIM OF THE STUDY: To establish the relationship between CYP2C19 genotype, clopidogrel responsiveness and 1-year MACE.
MATERIALS & METHODS: Aspirin/clopidogrel responses were assessed with Multiplate Analyzer and CYP2C19*2 allele by SpartanRx.
RESULTS: A total of 42.0% carried ≥1 CYP2C19*2 allele. Prevalences of aspirin and clopidogrel high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR; local cutoffs: 300 AU*min for aspirin and 600 AU*min for clopidogrel) were 11.5% and 19.8% respectively. In multivariate ana-lysis, clopidogrel HPR was found to be an independent predictor for 1-year MACE (adj HR: 3.48, p = 0.022 ).
CONCLUSION: Having clopidogrel HPR could be a potentially modifiable risk factor guided by phenotyping.
METHODS: In an international, randomized, single-blind trial, we compared polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents with polymer-free umirolimus-coated stents in patients at high bleeding risk. After PCI, patients were treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy, followed by single antiplatelet therapy. The primary outcome was a safety composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1 year. The principal secondary outcome was target-lesion failure, an effectiveness composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. Both outcomes were powered for noninferiority.
RESULTS: A total of 1996 patients at high bleeding risk were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents (1003 patients) or polymer-free drug-coated stents (993 patients). At 1 year, the primary outcome was observed in 169 of 988 patients (17.1%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 164 of 969 (16.9%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.1; P = 0.01 for noninferiority). The principal secondary outcome was observed in 174 patients (17.6%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 169 (17.4%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.4; P = 0.007 for noninferiority).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high bleeding risk who received 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI, use of polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents was noninferior to use of polymer-free drug-coated stents with regard to safety and effectiveness composite outcomes. (Funded by Medtronic; ONYX ONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03344653.).
METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of consecutive patients with acute stroke who were admitted to 36 participating hospitals in China, India, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. With the use of a simple identical data sheet, we recorded the demographics and cardiovascular risk factors of each patient. Early death was defined as death on discharge from the acute hospital.
RESULTS: We enrolled 2403 patients with ischemic stroke and 783 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. Among patients with ischemic stroke, previous use of antiplatelet drugs (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0. 30 to 0.95) and relatively young age group 56 to 75 years (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.00) were protective factors; atrial fibrillation (OR 2.23; 95% CI 1.40 to 3.57), ischemic heart disease (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.37 to 3.05), diabetes (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.22), and ex-smoker status (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.18 to 4.05) were risk factors for early death. Among patients with intracerebral hemorrhage, hypertension (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.82) and young age group 56 to 75 years old (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.87) were associated with lower death rate, whereas diabetes (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.98) was a risk factor for early death.
CONCLUSIONS: In Asian patients with stroke, previous use of antiplatelet drugs nearly halved the risk of early death in patients with ischemic stroke, whereas atrial fibrillation, ischemic heart disease, diabetes, and ex-smoker status were risk factors for early death. Among patients with intracerebral hemorrhage, diabetes was associated with early death, whereas young age group and hypertension were associated with lower death rates, though no clear explanation for the hypertension association could be discerned from the data available.
METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months.
RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=-4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events. (Funded by Bayer; COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01776424 .).
METHODS: Using a 2-by-2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned participants without cardiovascular disease who had an elevated INTERHEART Risk Score to receive a polypill (containing 40 mg of simvastatin, 100 mg of atenolol, 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide, and 10 mg of ramipril) or placebo daily, aspirin (75 mg) or placebo daily, and vitamin D or placebo monthly. We report here the outcomes for the polypill alone as compared with matching placebo, for aspirin alone as compared with matching placebo, and for the polypill plus aspirin as compared with double placebo. For the polypill-alone and polypill-plus-aspirin comparisons, the primary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure, or revascularization. For the aspirin comparison, the primary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Safety was also assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 5713 participants underwent randomization, and the mean follow-up was 4.6 years. The low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was lower by approximately 19 mg per deciliter and systolic blood pressure was lower by approximately 5.8 mm Hg with the polypill and with combination therapy than with placebo. The primary outcome for the polypill comparison occurred in 126 participants (4.4%) in the polypill group and in 157 (5.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 1.00). The primary outcome for the aspirin comparison occurred in 116 participants (4.1%) in the aspirin group and in 134 (4.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.10). The primary outcome for the polypill-plus-aspirin comparison occurred in 59 participants (4.1%) in the combined-treatment group and in 83 (5.8%) in the double-placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.97). The incidence of hypotension or dizziness was higher in groups that received the polypill than in their respective placebo groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment with a polypill plus aspirin led to a lower incidence of cardiovascular events than did placebo among participants without cardiovascular disease who were at intermediate cardiovascular risk. (Funded by the Wellcome Trust and others; TIPS-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01646437.).