Intracranial and systemic atherosclerosis in the NAVIGATE ESUS trial: Recurrent stroke risk and response to antithrombotic therapy

Background: Non-stenotic intracranial and systemic atherosclerosis are associated with ischemic stroke. We report frequency and response to anticoagulant vs. antiplatelet prophylaxis of patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) who have non-stenotic intracranial atherosclerosis and/or systemic atherosclerosis. Methods: Exploratory analysis of the international NAVIGATE ESUS randomized trial comparing rivaroxaban 15mg daily with aspirin 100mg daily in 7213 patients with recent ESUS. Among participants with results of intracranial arterial imaging with either computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), the frequency and predictors of non-stenotic intracranial and systemic atherosclerosis and responses to antithrombotic therapy were assessed. Results: Among 4723 participants with available intracranial CTA or MRA results (65% of the trial cohort), the prevalence of intracranial atherosclerosis was 16% (n=739). Patient features independently associated with intracranial atherosclerosis included East Asian region (odds ratio 2.7, 95%CI 2.2,3.3) and cervical carotid plaque (odds ratio 2.3, 95%CI 1.9,2.7), among others. The rate of recurrent ischemic stroke averaged 4.8%/year among those with intracranial atherosclerosis vs. 5.0.%/year for those without (HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.65, 1.4). Among those with intracranial atherosclerosis, the recurrent ischemic stroke rate was higher if assigned to rivaroxaban (5.8%/year) vs. aspirin (3.7%/year), but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 1.6, 95%CI 0.78, 3.3). There was trend for the effect of antithrombotic treatments to be different according to the presence or absence of intracranial atherosclerosis (pinteraction=0.09). Among participants with evidence of systemic atherosclerosis by either history or imaging (n=3820), recurrent ischemic stroke rates were similar among those assigned to rivaroxaban (5.5%/year) vs. aspirin (4.9%/year)(HR 1.1, 95%CI 0.84, 1.5). Conclusions: East Asia region was the strongest factor associated with intracranial atherosclerosis. There were no statistically significant differences between rivaroxaban and aspirin prophylaxis for recurrent ischemic stroke in patients with non-stenotic intracranial atherosclerosis and/or systemic atherosclerosis. © 202

Intracranial and systemic atherosclerosis in the NAVIGATE ESUS trial: Recurrent stroke risk and response to antithrombotic therapy

Background: Non-stenotic intracranial and systemic atherosclerosis are associated with ischemic stroke. We report frequency and response to anticoagulant vs. antiplatelet prophylaxis of patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) who have non-stenotic intracranial atherosclerosis and/or systemic atherosclerosis. Methods: Exploratory analysis of the international NAVIGATE ESUS randomized trial comparing rivaroxaban 15mg daily with aspirin 100mg daily in 7213 patients with recent ESUS. Among participants with results of intracranial arterial imaging with either computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), the frequency and predictors of non-stenotic intracranial and systemic atherosclerosis and responses to antithrombotic therapy were assessed. Results: Among 4723 participants with available intracranial CTA or MRA results (65% of the trial cohort), the prevalence of intracranial atherosclerosis was 16% (n=739). Patient features independently associated with intracranial atherosclerosis included East Asian region (odds ratio 2.7, 95%CI 2.2,3.3) and cervical carotid plaque (odds ratio 2.3, 95%CI 1.9,2.7), among others. The rate of recurrent ischemic stroke averaged 4.8%/year among those with intracranial atherosclerosis vs. 5.0.%/year for those without (HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.65, 1.4). Among those with intracranial atherosclerosis, the recurrent ischemic stroke rate was higher if assigned to rivaroxaban (5.8%/year) vs. aspirin (3.7%/year), but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 1.6, 95%CI 0.78, 3.3). There was trend for the effect of antithrombotic treatments to be different according to the presence or absence of intracranial atherosclerosis (pinteraction=0.09). Among participants with evidence of systemic atherosclerosis by either history or imaging (n=3820), recurrent ischemic stroke rates were similar among those assigned to rivaroxaban (5.5%/year) vs. aspirin (4.9%/year)(HR 1.1, 95%CI 0.84, 1.5). Conclusions: East Asia region was the strongest factor associated with intracranial atherosclerosis. There were no statistically significant differences between rivaroxaban and aspirin prophylaxis for recurrent ischemic stroke in patients with non-stenotic intracranial atherosclerosis and/or systemic atherosclerosis.Fil: Ameriso, Sebastián Francisco. Fleni. Departamento de Neurología. Servicio de Neurología Vascular; Argentina.Fil: Mundl, Hardi. Bayer; Alemania.Fil: Hart, Robert G. Population Health Research Institute; Canadá.Fil: Amarenco, Pierre. Bichat Hospital. Department of Neurology; Francia.Fil: Pearce, Lesly A. Biostatistics Consultant; Estados Unidos.Fil: Perera, Kanjana S. McMaster University/Population Health Research Institute. Department of Medicine (Neurology); Canadá.Fil: Ntaios, George. University of Thessaly. Department of Medicine; Grecia.Fil: Lang, Wilfried. Sigmund Freud Private University. Hospital St. John of God. Medical Faculty; Austria.Fil: Bereczki, Daniel. Semmelweis University. Department of Neurology; Hungría.Fil: Uchiyama, Shinichiro. Sanno Hospital and Sanno Medical Center. International University of Health and Welfare; Japón.Fil: Kasner, Scott E. University of Pennsylvania. Department of Neurology; Estados Unidos.Fil: Yoon, Byung-Woo. Seoul National University Hospital. Department of Neurology; Corea.Fil: Lavados, Pablo M. Universidad del Desarrollo. Clinica Alemana de Santiago; Chile .Fil: Firstenfeld, Alfredo. Instituto Cardiologico Banfield; Argentina.Fil: Mikulik, Robert. St. Anne's University Hospital and Masaryk University. International Clinical Research Center and Neurology Department; República Checa.Fil: Povedano, Guillermo Pablo. Complejo Medico de la PFA Churruca Visca; Argentina.Fil: Ferrari, Jorge. Hospital Interzonal General de Agudos Eva Peron; Argentina.Fil: Berkowitz, Scott D. Bayer. Pharmaceuticals Clinical Development Thrombosis; Estados Unidos.Fil: Connolly, Stuart J. McMaster University / Population Health Research Institute. Department of Medicine (Cardiology); Canadá

Corticosteroid treatment of multiple sclerosis relapses is associated with lower disability worsening over 5 years

Background Corticosteroid treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses is assumed to improve the speed of relapse recovery, without modifying long-term disability risk. We aimed to re-evaluate this assumption in a large cohort of individuals with MS. Methods Individuals with clinically definite MS and ≥3 Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) measurements over ≥12 months were identified within the international neuroimmunology registry MSBase. Individuals were required to have ≥1 relapse, with complete information on relapse treatment, phenotype and severity for all documented relapses. The primary outcome was disability worsening confirmed over 12 months. The association of the cumulative number of steroid-treated and untreated relapses (as a time-varying exposure) with disability worsening was evaluated with Cox proportional hazards. Results In total, 3673 individuals met the inclusion criteria (71% female, mean age 38 years, mean disability EDSS step 2); 5809 relapses (4671 treated/1138 untreated) were captured (annualised relapse rate 0.19). Over the study period (total 30 175 person-years), 32.7% reached the outcome of confirmed disability worsening (median survival time 5.2 years). Non-treated relapses were associated with a higher risk of disability worsening (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.57 to 1.88) than steroid-treated relapses (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.57). This association was modified by the efficacy of disease-modifying therapy at the time of relapse. Conclusions Our results suggest that a lack of steroid treatment of MS relapses is associated with a higher risk of future disability worsening. Hence, corticosteroid treatment of MS relapses may impact not only the speed of recovery but also the severity of residual structural damage

Rivaroxaban for Stroke Prevention after Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source

Embolic strokes of undetermined source represent 20% of ischemic strokes and are associated with a high rate of recurrence. Anticoagulant treatment with rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may result in a lower risk of recurrent stroke than aspirin. METHODS We compared the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban (at a daily dose of 15 mg) with aspirin (at a daily dose of 100 mg) for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with recent ischemic stroke that was presumed to be from cerebral embolism but without arterial stenosis, lacune, or an identified cardioembolic source. The primary efficacy outcome was the first recurrence of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism in a time-to-event analysis; the primary safety outcome was the rate of major bleeding. RESULTS A total of 7213 participants were enrolled at 459 sites; 3609 patients were randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban and 3604 to receive aspirin. Patients had been followed for a median of 11 months when the trial was terminated early because of a lack of benefit with regard to stroke risk and because of bleeding associated with rivaroxaban. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 172 patients in the rivaroxaban group (annualized rate, 5.1%) and in 160 in the aspirin group (annualized rate, 4.8%) (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.33; P = 0.52). Recurrent ischemic stroke occurred in 158 patients in the rivaroxaban group (annualized rate, 4.7%) and in 156 in the aspirin group (annualized rate, 4.7%). Major bleeding occurred in 62 patients in the rivaroxaban group (annualized rate, 1.8%) and in 23 in the aspirin group (annualized rate, 0.7%) (hazard ratio, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.68 to 4.39; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Rivaroxaban was not superior to aspirin with regard to the prevention of recurrent stroke after an initial embolic stroke of undetermined source and was associated with a higher risk of bleeding

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

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

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

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; p interaction =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; p interaction =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

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

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