13 research outputs found

    Identification of a 160-kDa polypeptide that binds to the tight junction protein ZO-1.

    No full text

    RNA Expression Differentiates Large Artery and Cardioembolic Stroke: A Pilot Analysis from the Base Trial

    No full text
    Background: An accurate test to differentiate large artery stroke patients from those with cardioembolic stroke would be of significant utility. Using the Biomarkers of Acute Stroke Etiology (BASE) trial (NCT02014896) dataset, our purpose was to determine if blood gene expression signatures accurately differentiate large artery stroke patients from those with cardioembolic stroke. Methods: The BASE trial enrolled suspected stroke patients presenting to 10 hospitals within 8 hours of symptom onset. Gold standard diagnosis was per local neurologist adjudication blinded to RNA testing. The final gold standard diagnosis was determined by an adjudication committee blinded to RNA test results. Whole blood, obtained in PAX tubes, was frozen at -20C within 72 hours and analyzed at a core lab (Ischemia Care, LLC, Blue Ash, OH) using Affymetrix HTA micro arrays. Significantly differentially expressed genes (p\u3c0.005) were identified by calculating an empirical Bayes moderated t-statistic contrasting expression in large artery and cardioembolic stroke patients. Differentially expressed genes were used as input to a multi-layer perceptron neural network to derive a 66-gene diagnostic signature. Results: Overall, 32 patients were enrolled, 8 (25%) with large artery stroke and 24 (75%) with cardioembolic stroke; 50% were male, and median (IQR) age was 68.6 (47,88). Median (IQR) time from symptoms to presentation was 102.5 (14, 450) minutes. Coexistent pathology at presentation was atrial fibrillation in 13 (41%), heart failure 7 (22%), prior stroke 7 (22%), and coronary artery disease 8 (25%). The resulting gene signature distinguished large artery stroke from cardioembolic stroke; C-statistic 0.99 (0.94-1.0, 95% CI), sensitivity 0.91 (0.56-1.0, 95% CI), at a fixed specificity of 0.95, as observed in 5-fold cross validation of the training data. Conclusion: RNA expression differentiates large artery stroke patients from those with cardioembolic stroke, and may have therapeutic and outcome implications

    Vorapaxar in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events

    Get PDF
    Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Thrombin potently activates platelets through the protease-activated receptor PAR-1. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that selectively inhibits the cellular actions of thrombin through antagonism of PAR-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 26,449 patients who had a history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or peripheral arterial disease to receive vorapaxar (2.5 mg daily) or matching placebo and followed them for a median of 30 months. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. After 2 years, the data and safety monitoring board recommended discontinuation of the study treatment in patients with a history of stroke owing to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: At 3 years, the primary end point had occurred in 1028 patients (9.3%) in the vorapaxar group and in 1176 patients (10.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the vorapaxar group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.94; P<0.001). Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or recurrent ischemia leading to revascularization occurred in 1259 patients (11.2%) in the vorapaxar group and 1417 patients (12.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95; P=0.001). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 4.2% of patients who received vorapaxar and 2.5% of those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.93; P<0.001). There was an increase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage in the vorapaxar group (1.0%, vs. 0.5% in the placebo group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of PAR-1 with vorapaxar reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or ischemic events in patients with stable atherosclerosis who were receiving standard therapy. However, it increased the risk of moderate or severe bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRA 2P-TIMI 50 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00526474.)

    Rivaroxaban or aspirin for patent foramen ovale and embolic stroke of undetermined source: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the NAVIGATE ESUS trial

    No full text
    Background: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a contributor to embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Subgroup analyses from previous studies suggest that anticoagulation could reduce recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy. We hypothesised that anticoagulant treatment with rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, would reduce the risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke compared with aspirin among patients with PFO enrolled in the NAVIGATE ESUS trial. Methods: NAVIGATE ESUS was a double-blinded, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 459 centres in 31 countries that assessed the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban versus aspirin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with ESUS. For this prespecified subgroup analysis, cohorts with and without PFO were defined on the basis of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE). The primary efficacy outcome was time to recurrent ischaemic stroke between treatment groups. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, according to the criteria of the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. The primary analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Additionally, we did a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of studies in which patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO were randomly assigned to receive anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy. Findings: Between Dec 23, 2014, and Sept 20, 2017, 7213 participants were enrolled and assigned to receive rivaroxaban (n=3609) or aspirin (n=3604). Patients were followed up for a mean of 11 months because of early trial termination. PFO was reported as present in 534 (7·4%) patients on the basis of either TTE or TOE. Patients with PFO assigned to receive aspirin had a recurrent ischaemic stroke rate of 4·8 events per 100 person-years compared with 2·6 events per 100 person-years in those treated with rivaroxaban. Among patients with known PFO, there was insufficient evidence to support a difference in risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke between rivaroxaban and aspirin (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54; 95% CI 0·22–1·36), and the risk was similar for those without known PFO (1·06; 0·84–1·33; pinteraction=0·18). The risks of major bleeding with rivaroxaban versus aspirin were similar in patients with PFO detected (HR 2·05; 95% CI 0·51–8·18) and in those without PFO detected (HR 2·82; 95% CI 1·69–4·70; pinteraction=0·68). The random-effects meta-analysis combined data from NAVIGATE ESUS with data from two previous trials (PICSS and CLOSE) and yielded a summary odds ratio of 0·48 (95% CI 0·24–0·96; p=0·04) for ischaemic stroke in favour of anticoagulation, without evidence of heterogeneity. Interpretation: Among patients with ESUS who have PFO, anticoagulation might reduce the risk of recurrent stroke by about half, although substantial imprecision remains. Dedicated trials of anticoagulation versus antiplatelet therapy or PFO closure, or both, are warranted. Funding: Bayer and Janssen
    corecore