Flexible Analytical Methods for Adding a Treatment Arm Mid-Study to an Ongoing Clinical Trial

It is not uncommon to have experimental drugs under different stages of development for a given disease area. Methods are proposed for use when another treatment arm is to be added mid-study to an ongoing clinical trial. Monte Carlo simulation was used to compare potential analytical approaches for pairwise comparisons through a difference in means in independent normal populations including 1.) a linear model adjusting for the design change (stage effect), 2.) pooling data across the stages, or 3.) the use of an adaptive combination test. In the presence of intra-stage correlation (or a non-ignorable fixed stage effect), simply pooling the data will result in a loss of power and will inflate the type I error rate. The linear model approach is more powerful, but the adaptive methods allow for flexibility (re-estimating sample size). The flexibility to add a treatment arm to an ongoing trial may result in cost savings as treatments that become ready for testing can be added to ongoing studies

Clopidogrel and Aspirin in Acute Ischemic Stroke and High-Risk TIA.

BACKGROUND—Combination antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin may reduce the rate of recurrent stroke during the first 3 months after a minor ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). A trial of combination antiplatelet therapy in a Chinese population has shown a reduction in the risk of recurrent stroke. We tested this combination in an international population. METHODS—In a randomized trial, we assigned patients with minor ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA to receive either clopidogrel at a loading dose of 600 mg on day 1, followed by 75 mg per day, plus aspirin (at a dose of 50 to 325 mg per day) or the same range of doses of aspirin alone. The dose of aspirin in each group was selected by the site investigator. The primary efficacy outcome in a time-to-event analysis was the risk of a composite of major ischemic events, which was defined as ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from an ischemic vascular event, at 90 days. RESULTS—A total of 4881 patients were enrolled at 269 international sites. The trial was halted after 84% of the anticipated number of patients had been enrolled because the data and safety monitoring board had determined that the combination of clopidogrel and aspirin was associated with both a lower risk of major ischemic events and a higher risk of major hemorrhage than aspirin alone at 90 days. Major ischemic events occurred in 121 of 2432 patients (5.0%) receiving clopidogrel plus aspirin and in 160 of 2449 patients (6.5%) receiving aspirin plus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.95; P = 0.02), with most events occurring during the first week after the initial event. Major hemorrhage occurred in 23 patients (0.9%) receiving clopidogrel plus aspirin and in 10 patients (0.4%) receiving aspirin plus placebo (hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.87; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS—In patients with minor ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA, those who received a combination of clopidogrel and aspirin had a lower risk of major ischemic events but a higher risk of major hemorrhage at 90 days than those who received aspirin alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; POINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00991029.

Albumin Administration in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Safety Analysis of the ALIAS Part 2 Multicenter Trial

BACKGROUND: Albumin treatment of ischemic stroke was associated with cardiopulmonary adverse events in previous studies and a low incidence of intracranial hemorrhage. We sought to describe the neurological and cardiopulmonary adverse events in the ALIAS Part 2 Multicenter Trial. METHODS: Ischemic stroke patients, aged 18-83 and a baseline NIHSS ≥ 6, were randomized to treatment with ALB or saline control within 5 hours of stroke onset. Neurological adverse events included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, hemicraniectomy, neurological deterioration and neurological death. Cardiopulmonary adverse events included pulmonary edema/congestive heart failure, acute coronary syndromes, atrial fibrillation, pneumonia and pulmonary thromboembolism. RESULTS: Among 830 patients, neurological and cardiopulmonary adverse events were not differentially associated with poor outcome between ALB and saline control subjects. The rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage in the first 24h was low overall (2.9%, 24/830) but more common in the ALB treated subjects (RR = 2.4, CI95 1.01-5.8). The rate of pulmonary edema/CHF in the first 48h was 7.9% (59/830) and was more common among ALB treated subjects (RR = 10.7, CI95 4.3-26.6); this complication was expected and was satisfactorily managed with mandated diuretic administration and intravenous fluid guidelines. Troponin elevations in the first 48h were common, occurring without ECG change or cardiac symptoms in 52 subjects (12.5%). CONCLUSIONS: ALB therapy was associated with an increase in symptomatic ICH and pulmonary edema/congestive heart failure but this did not affect final outcomes. Troponin elevation occurs routinely in the first 48 hours after acute ischemic stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincalTrials.gov NCT00235495

National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale An Alternative Primary Outcome Measure for Trials of Acute Treatment for Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose- The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months is the most commonly used primary outcome measure in stroke treatment trials, but it lacks specificity and requires long-term follow-up interviews, which consume time and resources. An alternative may be the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), early after stroke. Our aim was to evaluate whether the NIHSS assessed within 1 week after treatment could serve as a primary outcome measure for trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke. Methods- We used data from 2 randomized controlled trials of endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke: the positive MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands; N=500) and the neutral IMS (Interventional Management of Stroke) III trial (N=656). We used a causal mediation model, with linear and ordinal logistic regression adjusted for confounders, to evaluate the NIHSS 24 hours and 5 to 7 days after endovascular treatment as primary outcome measures (instead of the mRS at 3 months) in both trials. Patients who had died before the NIHSS was assessed received the maximum score of 42. NIHSS+1 was then log10-transformed. Results- In both trials, there was a significant correlation between the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days and the mRS. In MR CLEAN, we found a significant effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS and on the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days. After adjustment for NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days, the effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS decreased from common odds ratio 1.68 (95% CI, 1.22-2.32) to respectively 1.36 (95% CI, 0.97-1.91) and 1.24 (95% CI, 0.87-1.79), indicating that treatment effect on the mRS is in large part mediated by the NIHSS. In the IMS III trial there was no treatment effect on the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days, corresponding with the absence of a treatment effect on the mRS. Conclusions- The NIHSS within 1 week satisfies the requirements for a surrogate end point and may be used as a primary outcome measure in trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke, particularly in phase II(b) trials. This could reduce stroke-outcome assessment to its essentials (ie, neurological deficit), and reduce trial duration and costs. Whether and under which conditions it could be used in phase III trials requires a debate in the field with all parties. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.isrctn.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00359424.</p

National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: An Alternative Primary Outcome Measure for Trials of Acute Treatment for Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose- The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months is the most commonly used primary outcome measure in stroke treatment trials, but it lacks specificity and requires long-term follow-up interviews, which consume time and resources. An alternative may be the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), early after stroke. Our aim was to evaluate whether the NIHSS assessed within 1 week after treatment could serve as a primary outcome measure for trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke. Methods- We used data from 2 randomized controlled trials of endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke: the positive MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands; N=500) and the neutral IMS (Interventional Management of Stroke) III trial (N=656). We used a causal mediation model, with linear and ordinal logistic regression adjusted for confounders, to evaluate the NIHSS 24 hours and 5 to 7 days after endovascular treatment as primary outcome measures (instead of the mRS at 3 months) in both trials. Patients who had died before the NIHSS was assessed received the maximum score of 42. NIHSS+1 was then log10-transformed. Results- In both trials, there was a significant correlation between the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days and the mRS. In MR CLEAN, we found a significant effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS and on the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days. After adjustment for NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days, the effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS decreased from common odds ratio 1.68 (95% CI, 1.22-2.32) to respectively 1.36 (95% CI, 0.97-1.91) and 1.24 (95% CI, 0.87-1.79), indicating that treatment effect on the mRS is in large part mediated by the NIHSS. In the IMS III trial there was no treatment effect on the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days, corresponding with the absence of a treatment effect on the mRS. Conclusions- The NIHSS within 1 week satisfies the requirements for a surrogate end point and may be used as a primary outcome measure in trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke, particularly in phase II(b) trials. This could reduce stroke-outcome assessment to its essentials (ie, neurological deficit), and reduce trial duration and costs. Whether and under which conditions it could be used in phase III trials requires a debate in the field with all parties. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.isrctn.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00359424

A Dose-Escalation and Safety Study of Albumin Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke—I: Physiological Responses and Safety Results

Permissions: Requests for permissions to reproduce figures, tables, or portions of articles originally published in Stroke can be obtained via RightsLink, a service of the Copyright Clearance Center, not the Editorial Office. Once the online version of the published article for which permission is being requested is located, click Request Permissions in the middle column of the Web page under Services. Further information about this process is available in the Permissions and Rights Question and Answer document. Reprints: Information about reprints can be found online at