The International Stroke Trial database

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We aimed to make individual patient data from the International Stroke Trial (IST), one of the largest randomised trials ever conducted in acute stroke, available for public use, to facilitate the planning of future trials and to permit additional secondary analyses.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>For each randomised patient, we have extracted data on the variables assessed at randomisation, at the early outcome point (14-days after randomisation or prior discharge) and at 6-months and provide them as an analysable database.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The IST dataset includes data on 19 435 patients with acute stroke, with 99% complete follow-up. Over 26.4% patients were aged over 80 years at study entry. Background stroke care was limited and none of the patients received thrombolytic therapy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The IST dataset provides a source of primary data which could be used for planning further trials, for sample size calculations and for novel secondary analyses. Given the age distribution and nature of the background treatment given, the data may be of value in planning trials in older patients and in resource-poor settings.</p

Targeted use of heparin, heparinoids, or low-molecular-weight heparin to improve outcome after acute ischaemic stroke:an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

SummaryBackgroundMany international guidelines on the prevention of venous thromboembolism recommend targeting heparin treatment at patients with stroke who have a high risk of venous thrombotic events or a low risk of haemorrhagic events. We sought to identify reliable methods to target anticoagulant treatment and so improve the chance of avoiding death or dependence after stroke.MethodsWe obtained individual patient data from the five largest randomised controlled trials in acute ischaemic stroke that compared heparins (unfractionated heparin, heparinoids, or low-molecular-weight heparin) with aspirin or placebo. We developed and evaluated statistical models for the prediction of thrombotic events (myocardial infarction, stroke, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism) and haemorrhagic events (symptomatic intracranial or significant extracranial) in the first 14 days after stroke. We calculated the absolute risk difference for the outcome “dead or dependent” in patients grouped by quartiles of predicted risk of thrombotic and haemorrhagic events with random effect meta-analysis.FindingsPatients with ischaemic stroke who were of advanced age, had increased neurological impairment, or had atrial fibrillation had a high risk of both thrombotic and haemorrhagic events after stroke. Additionally, patients with CT-visible evidence of recent cerebral ischaemia were at increased risk of thrombotic events. In evaluation datasets, the area under a receiver operating curve for prediction models for thrombotic events was 0·63 (95% CI 0·59–0·67) and for haemorrhagic events was 0·60 (0·55–0·64). We found no evidence that the net benefit from heparins increased with either increasing risk of thrombotic events or decreasing risk of haemorrhagic events.InterpretationThere was no evidence that patients with ischaemic stroke who were at higher risk of thrombotic events or lower risk of haemorrhagic events benefited from heparins. We were therefore unable to define a targeted approach to select the patients who would benefit from treatment with early anticoagulant therapy. We recommend that guidelines for routine or selective use of heparin in stroke should be revised.FundingMRC

Effects of alteplase for acute stroke according to criteria defining the European Union and United States marketing authorizations : Individual-patient-data meta-analysis of randomized trials

Background The recommended maximum age and time window for intravenous alteplase treatment of acute ischemic stroke differs between the Europe Union and United States. Aims We compared the effects of alteplase in cohorts defined by the current Europe Union or United States marketing approval labels, and by hypothetical revisions of the labels that would remove the Europe Union upper age limit or extend the United States treatment time window to 4.5h. Methods We assessed outcomes in an individual-patient-data meta-analysis of eight randomized trials of intravenous alteplase (0.9mg/kg) versus control for acute ischemic stroke. Outcomes included: excellent outcome (modified Rankin score 0-1) at 3-6 months, the distribution of modified Rankin score, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, and 90-day mortality. Results Alteplase increased the odds of modified Rankin score 0-1 among 2449/6136 (40%) patients who met the current European Union label and 3491 (57%) patients who met the age-revised label (odds ratio 1.42, 95% CI 1.21-1.68 and 1.43, 1.23-1.65, respectively), but not in those outside the age-revised label (1.06, 0.90-1.26). By 90 days, there was no increased mortality in the current and age-revised cohorts (hazard ratios 0.98, 95% CI 0.76-1.25 and 1.01, 0.86-1.19, respectively) but mortality remained higher outside the age-revised label (1.19, 0.99-1.42). Similarly, alteplase increased the odds of modified Rankin score 0-1 among 1174/6136 (19%) patients who met the current US approval and 3326 (54%) who met a 4.5-h revised approval (odds ratio 1.55, 1.19-2.01 and 1.37, 1.17-1.59, respectively), but not for those outside the 4.5-h revised approval (1.14, 0.97-1.34). By 90 days, no increased mortality remained for the current and 4.5-h revised label cohorts (hazard ratios 0.99, 0.77-1.26 and 1.02, 0.87-1.20, respectively) but mortality remained higher outside the 4.5-h revised approval (1.17, 0.98-1.41). Conclusions An age-revised European Union label or 4.5-h-revised United States label would each increase the number of patients deriving net benefit from alteplase by 90 days after acute ischemic stroke, without excess mortality.Peer reviewe

A systematic review of clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke (1955-2008) that were completed, but not published in full

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We assessed the prevalence, and potential impact of, trials of pharmacological agents for acute stroke that were completed but not published in full. Failure to publish trial data is to be deprecated as it sets aside the altruism of participants' consent to be exposed to the risks of experimental interventions, potentially biases the assessment of the effects of therapies, and may lead to premature discontinuation of research into promising treatments.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Specialised Register of Trials in June 2008 for completed trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke, and searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (January 2007 - March 2009) for references to recent full publications. We assessed trial completion status from trial reports, online trials registers and correspondence with experts.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified 940 trials. Of these, 125 (19.6%, 95% confidence interval 16.5-22.6) were completed but not published in full by the point prevalence date. They included 16,058 participants (16 trials had over 300 participants each) and tested 89 different interventions. Twenty-two trials with a total of 4,251 participants reported the number of deaths. In these trials, 636/4251 (15.0%) died.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our data suggest that, at the point prevalence date, a substantial body of evidence that was of relevance both to clinical practice in acute stroke and future research in the field was not published in full. Over 16,000 patients had given informed consent and were exposed to the risks of therapy. Responsibility for non-publication lies with investigators, but pharmaceutical companies, research ethics committees, journals and governments can all encourage the timely publication of trial data.</p

Screening out irrelevant cell-based models of disease

The common and persistent failures to translate promising preclinical drug candidates into clinical success highlight the limited effectiveness of disease models currently used in drug discovery. An apparent reluctance to explore and adopt alternative cell-and tissue-based model systems, coupled with a detachment from clinical practice during assay validation, contributes to ineffective translational research. To help address these issues and stimulate debate, here we propose a set of principles to facilitate the definition and development of disease-relevant assays, and we discuss new opportunities for exploiting the latest advances in cell-based assay technologies in drug discovery, including induced pluripotent stem cells, three-dimensional (3D) co-culture and organ-on-a-chip systems, complemented by advances in single-cell imaging and gene editing technologies. Funding to support precompetitive, multidisciplinary collaborations to develop novel preclinical models and cell-based screening technologies could have a key role in improving their clinical relevance, and ultimately increase clinical success rates

The forecast for future clinical trials and clinical trialists - storms or sunshine?

Item does not contain fulltextRandomized controlled trials are the most unbiased way to evaluate many types of healthcare interventions. Pharmaceutical and medical technology industries play an important role in developing and testing new interventions that have commercial potential. However, many interventions for the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of stroke are either not drugs or devices or have no commercial potential. Like many other clinicians who are uncertain about the value of existing or new treatments, we are involved in investigator-led clinical trials to resolve treatment uncertainties. There is common agreement that investigator-led clinical trials are facing increasing difficulties and that as a result clinicians may be deterred from pursuing clinical trials as a research career. In this article, we express our concerns for the future of such trials, balanced with the hope that systems to foster and sustain this important type of research in the future can be developed