90 research outputs found
Outcome assessment by central adjudicators in randomised stroke trials: Simulation of differential and non-differential misclassification
INTRODUCTION: Adjudication of the primary outcome in randomised trials is thought to control misclassification. We investigated the amount of misclassification needed before adjudication changed the primary trial results. Patients (or materials) and methods: We included data from five randomised stroke trials. Differential misclassification was introduced for each primary outcome until the estimated treatment effect was altered. This was simulated 1000 times. We calculated the between-simulation mean proportion of participants that needed to be differentially misclassified to alter the treatment effect. In addition, we simulated hypothetical trials with a binary outcome and varying sample size (1000–10,000), overall event rate (10%–50%) and treatment effect (0.67–0.90). We introduced non-differential misclassification until the treatment effect was non-significant at 5% level. RESULTS: For the five trials, the range of unweighted kappa values were reduced from 0.89–0.97 to 0.65–0.85 before the treatment effect was altered. This corresponded to 2.1%–6% of participants misclassified differentially for trials with a binary outcome. For the hypothetical trials, those with a larger sample size, stronger treatment effect and overall event rate closer to 50% needed a higher proportion of events non-differentially misclassified before the treatment effect became non-significant. DISCUSSION: We found that only a small amount of differential misclassification was required before adjudication altered the primary trial results, whereas a considerable proportion of participants needed to be misclassified non-differentially before adjudication changed trial conclusions. Given that differential misclassification should not occur in trials with sufficient blinding, these results suggest that central adjudication is of most use in studies with unblinded outcome assessment. CONCLUSION: For trials without adequate blinding, central adjudication is vital to control for differential misclassification. However, for large blinded trials, adjudication is of less importance and may not be necessary
Lowering blood pressure after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis using individual patient data from randomised controlled trials participating in the Blood Pressure in Acute Stroke Collaboration (BASC)
INTRODUCTION: Conflicting results from multiple randomised trials indicate that the methods and effects of blood pressure (BP) reduction after acute intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) are complex. The Blood pressure in Acute Stroke Collaboration is an international collaboration, which aims to determine the optimal management of BP after acute stroke including ICH. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review will be undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data (IPD) guideline. A search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE from inception will be conducted to identify randomised controlled trials of BP management in adults with acute spontaneous (non-traumatic) ICH enrolled within the first 7 days of symptom onset. Authors of studies that meet the inclusion criteria will be invited to share their IPD. The primary outcome will be functional outcome according to the modified Rankin Scale. Safety outcomes will be early neurological deterioration, symptomatic hypotension and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will include death and neuroradiological and haemodynamic variables. Meta-analyses of pooled IPD using the intention-to-treat dataset of included trials, including subgroup analyses to assess modification of the effects of BP lowering by time to treatment, treatment strategy and patient's demographic, clinical and prestroke neuroradiological characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No new patient data will be collected nor is there any deviation from the original purposes of each study where ethical approvals were granted; therefore, further ethical approval is not required. Results will be reported in international peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019141136
Protocol for a prospective collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials of vasoactive drugs in acute stroke: the Blood pressure in Acute Stroke Collaboration, stage-3 (BASC-3)
Rationale
Despite several large clinical trials assessing blood pressure lowering in acute stroke, equipoise remains, particularly for ischaemic stroke. The ‘Blood pressure in Acute Stroke Collaboration’ (BASC) commenced in the mid 1990s focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analysis of blood pressure lowering in acute stroke. From the start, BASC planned to assess safety and efficacy of blood pressure lowering in acute stroke using individual patient data.
Aims
To determine the optimal management of blood pressure in patients with acute stroke, encompassing both intracerebral haemorrhage and ischaemic stroke. Secondary aims are to assess which clinical and therapeutic factors may alter the optimal management of high blood pressure in patients with acute stroke and to assess the effect of vasoactive treatments on haemodynamic variables.
Methods and design
Individual patient data from randomised controlled trials of blood pressure management in participants with ischaemic stroke and/or intracerebral haemorrhage enrolled during the ultra-acute (pre-hospital), hyper-acute (<6 hours), acute (<48 hours) and sub-acute (<168 hours) phases of stroke.
Study outcomes
The primary effect variable will be functional outcome defined by the ordinal distribution of the modified Rankin Scale; analyses will also be carried out in prespecified subgroups to assess the modifying effects of stroke-related and pre-stroke patient characteristics. Key secondary variables will include clinical, haemodynamic and neuroradiological variables; safety variables will comprise death and serious adverse events.
Discussion
Study questions will be addressed in stages, according to the protocol, before integrating these into a final overreaching analysis. We invite eligible trials to join the collaboration
Prehospital transdermal glyceryl trinitrate in patients with ultra-acute presumed stroke (RIGHT-2): an ambulance-based, randomised, sham-controlled, blinded, phase 3 trial
Background High blood pressure is common in acute stroke and is a predictor of poor outcome; however, large trials of
lowering blood pressure have given variable results, and the management of high blood pressure in ultra-acute stroke
remains unclear. We investigated whether transdermal glyceryl trinitrate (GTN; also known as nitroglycerin), a nitric
oxide donor, might improve outcome when administered very early after stroke onset.
Methods We did a multicentre, paramedic-delivered, ambulance-based, prospective, randomised, sham-controlled,
blinded-endpoint, phase 3 trial in adults with presumed stroke within 4 h of onset, face-arm-speech-time score of 2
or 3, and systolic blood pressure 120 mm Hg or higher. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive
transdermal GTN (5 mg once daily for 4 days; the GTN group) or a similar sham dressing (the sham group) in UKbased ambulances by paramedics, with treatment continued in hospital. Paramedics were unmasked to treatment,
whereas participants were masked. The primary outcome was the 7-level modified Rankin Scale (mRS; a measure of
functional outcome) at 90 days, assessed by central telephone follow-up with masking to treatment. Analysis was
hierarchical, first in participants with a confirmed stroke or transient ischaemic attack (cohort 1), and then in all
participants who were randomly assigned (intention to treat, cohort 2) according to the statistical analysis plan. This
trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN26986053.
Findings Between Oct 22, 2015, and May 23, 2018, 516 paramedics from eight UK ambulance services recruited
1149 participants (n=568 in the GTN group, n=581 in the sham group). The median time to randomisation was 71 min
(IQR 45–116). 597 (52%) patients had ischaemic stroke, 145 (13%) had intracerebral haemorrhage, 109 (9%) had
transient ischaemic attack, and 297 (26%) had a non-stroke mimic at the final diagnosis of the index event. In the GTN
group, participants’ systolic blood pressure was lowered by 5·8 mm Hg compared with the sham group (p<0·0001),
and diastolic blood pressure was lowered by 2·6 mm Hg (p=0·0026) at hospital admission. We found no difference in
mRS between the groups in participants with a final diagnosis of stroke or transient ischaemic stroke (cohort 1):
3 (IQR 2–5; n=420) in the GTN group versus 3 (2–5; n=408) in the sham group, adjusted common odds ratio for poor
outcome 1·25 (95% CI 0·97–1·60; p=0·083); we also found no difference in mRS between all patients (cohort 2:
3 [2–5]; n=544, in the GTN group vs 3 [2–5]; n=558, in the sham group; 1·04 [0·84–1·29]; p=0·69). We found no
difference in secondary outcomes, death (treatment-related deaths: 36 in the GTN group vs 23 in the sham group
[p=0·091]), or serious adverse events (188 in the GTN group vs 170 in the sham group [p=0·16]) between treatment
groups.
Interpretation Prehospital treatment with transdermal GTN does not seem to improve functional outcome in patients
with presumed stroke. It is feasible for UK paramedics to obtain consent and treat patients with stroke in the ultraacute prehospital setting
Statistical analysis plan for the ‘Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke’ (ENOS) trial
High blood pressure is common during the acute phase of stroke and is associated with a poor outcome. However, the management of high blood pressure remains unclear. The ‘Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke’ trial tested whether transdermal glyceryl trinitrate, a nitric oxide donor that lowers blood pressure, is safe and effective in improving outcome after acute stroke. Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke is an international multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, blinded endpoint trial, with funding from the UK Medical Research Council. Patients with acute ischemic stroke or intracerebral hemorrhage and systolic blood pressure 140–220 mmHg were randomized to glyceryl trinitrate or no glyceryl trinitrate and, where relevant, to continue or stop prestrike antihypertensive therapy. The primary outcome is shift in modified Rankin Scale at three-months. Patients or relatives gave written informed (proxy) consent, and all sites had research ethics approval. Analyses will be done by intention to treat. This paper and attachment describe the trial’s statistical analysis plan, developed prior to unblinding of date. The statistical analysis plan contains design and methods for analyses, and unpopulated tables and figures for the two primary publications and some secondary publications. The database will be locked in late February 2014 in preparation for presentation of the results in May 2014. The data from the trial will improve the precision of the estimates of the overall treatment effects (efficacy and safety) of results from completed trials of blood pressure management in acute stroke, and provide the first large-scale randomized evidence on transdermal glyceryl trinitrate, and of continuing (vs. stopping) prestroke antihypertensive medications, in acute stroke
Long-term impact of intrauterine fetal death on quality of life and depression: a case–control study
Testing devices for the prevention and treatment of stroke and its complications
We are entering a challenging but exciting period when many new interventions may appear for stroke based on the use of devices. Hopefully these will lead to improved outcomes at a cost that can be afforded in most parts of the world. Nevertheless, it is vital that lessons are learnt from failures in the development of pharmacological interventions (and from some early device studies), including inadequate preclinical testing, suboptimal trial design and analysis, and underpowered studies. The device industry is far more disparate than that seen for pharmaceuticals; companies are very variable in size and experience in stroke, and are developing interventions across a wide range of stroke treatment and prevention. It is vital that companies work together where sales and marketing are not involved, including in understanding basic stroke mechanisms, prospective systematic reviews, and education of physicians. Where possible, industry and academics should also work closely together to ensure trials are designed to be relevant to patient care and outcomes. Additionally, regulation of the device industry lags behind that for pharmaceuticals, and it is critical that new interventions are shown to be safe and effective rather than just feasible. Phase IV postmarketing surveillance studies will also be needed to ensure that devices are safe when used in the ‘real-world’ and to pick up uncommon adverse events
Stroke in women — from evidence to inequalities
Stroke is the second largest cause of disability-adjusted life-years lost worldwide. The prevalence of stroke in women is predicted to rise rapidly, owing to the increasing average age of the global female population. Vascular risk factors differ between women and men in terms of prevalence, and evidence increasingly supports the clinical importance of sex differences in stroke. The influence of some risk factors for stroke — including diabetes mellitus and atrial fibrillation — are stronger in women, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also affect the risk of stroke decades after pregnancy. However, in an era of evidence-based medicine, women are notably under-represented in clinical trials — despite governmental actions highlighting the need to include both men and women in clinical trials — resulting in a reduced generalizability of study results to women. The aim of this Review is to highlight new insights into specificities of stroke in women, to plan future research priorities, and to influence public health policies to decrease the worldwide burden of stroke in women
Stroke genetics informs drug discovery and risk prediction across ancestries
Previous genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of stroke — the second leading cause of death worldwide — were conducted predominantly in populations of European ancestry1,2. Here, in cross-ancestry GWAS meta-analyses of 110,182 patients who have had a stroke (five ancestries, 33% non-European) and 1,503,898 control individuals, we identify association signals for stroke and its subtypes at 89 (61 new) independent loci: 60 in primary inverse-variance-weighted analyses and 29 in secondary meta-regression and multitrait analyses. On the basis of internal cross-ancestry validation and an independent follow-up in 89,084 additional cases of stroke (30% non-European) and 1,013,843 control individuals, 87% of the primary stroke risk loci and 60% of the secondary stroke risk loci were replicated (P < 0.05). Effect sizes were highly correlated across ancestries. Cross-ancestry fine-mapping, in silico mutagenesis analysis3, and transcriptome-wide and proteome-wide association analyses revealed putative causal genes (such as SH3PXD2A and FURIN) and variants (such as at GRK5 and NOS3). Using a three-pronged approach4, we provide genetic evidence for putative drug effects, highlighting F11, KLKB1, PROC, GP1BA, LAMC2 and VCAM1 as possible targets, with drugs already under investigation for stroke for F11 and PROC. A polygenic score integrating cross-ancestry and ancestry-specific stroke GWASs with vascular-risk factor GWASs (integrative polygenic scores) strongly predicted ischaemic stroke in populations of European, East Asian and African ancestry5. Stroke genetic risk scores were predictive of ischaemic stroke independent of clinical risk factors in 52,600 clinical-trial participants with cardiometabolic disease. Our results provide insights to inform biology, reveal potential drug targets and derive genetic risk prediction tools across ancestries
Stroke genetics informs drug discovery and risk prediction across ancestries
Previous genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of stroke - the second leading cause of death worldwide - were conducted predominantly in populations of European ancestry(1,2). Here, in cross-ancestry GWAS meta-analyses of 110,182 patients who have had a stroke (five ancestries, 33% non-European) and 1,503,898 control individuals, we identify association signals for stroke and its subtypes at 89 (61 new) independent loci: 60 in primary inverse-variance-weighted analyses and 29 in secondary meta-regression and multitrait analyses. On the basis of internal cross-ancestry validation and an independent follow-up in 89,084 additional cases of stroke (30% non-European) and 1,013,843 control individuals, 87% of the primary stroke risk loci and 60% of the secondary stroke risk loci were replicated (P < 0.05). Effect sizes were highly correlated across ancestries. Cross-ancestry fine-mapping, in silico mutagenesis analysis(3), and transcriptome-wide and proteome-wide association analyses revealed putative causal genes (such as SH3PXD2A and FURIN) and variants (such as at GRK5 and NOS3). Using a three-pronged approach(4), we provide genetic evidence for putative drug effects, highlighting F11, KLKB1, PROC, GP1BA, LAMC2 and VCAM1 as possible targets, with drugs already under investigation for stroke for F11 and PROC. A polygenic score integrating cross-ancestry and ancestry-specific stroke GWASs with vascular-risk factor GWASs (integrative polygenic scores) strongly predicted ischaemic stroke in populations of European, East Asian and African ancestry(5). Stroke genetic risk scores were predictive of ischaemic stroke independent of clinical risk factors in 52,600 clinical-trial participants with cardiometabolic disease. Our results provide insights to inform biology, reveal potential drug targets and derive genetic risk prediction tools across ancestries.</p
- …