Dataset Information

Antiplatelet therapy with aspirin, clopidogrel, and dipyridamole versus clopidogrel alone or aspirin and dipyridamole in patients with acute cerebral ischaemia (TARDIS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 superiority trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Intensive antiplatelet therapy with three agents might be more effective than guideline treatment for preventing recurrent events in patients with acute cerebral ischaemia. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of intensive antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin, clopidogrel, and dipyridamole) with that of guideline-based antiplatelet therapy.

Methods

We did an international, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial in adult participants with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) within 48 h of onset. Participants were assigned in a 1:1 ratio using computer randomisation to receive loading doses and then 30 days of intensive antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin 75 mg, clopidogrel 75 mg, and dipyridamole 200 mg twice daily) or guideline-based therapy (comprising either clopidogrel alone or combined aspirin and dipyridamole). Randomisation was stratified by country and index event, and minimised with prognostic baseline factors, medication use, time to randomisation, stroke-related factors, and thrombolysis. The ordinal primary outcome was the combined incidence and severity of any recurrent stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic; assessed using the modified Rankin Scale) or TIA within 90 days, as assessed by central telephone follow-up with masking to treatment assignment, and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN47823388.

Findings

3096 participants (1556 in the intensive antiplatelet therapy group, 1540 in the guideline antiplatelet therapy group) were recruited from 106 hospitals in four countries between April 7, 2009, and March 18, 2016. The trial was stopped early on the recommendation of the data monitoring committee. The incidence and severity of recurrent stroke or TIA did not differ between intensive and guideline therapy (93 [6%] participants vs 105 [7%]; adjusted common odds ratio [cOR] 0·90, 95% CI 0·67-1·20, p=0·47). By contrast, intensive antiplatelet therapy was associated with more, and more severe, bleeding (adjusted cOR 2·54, 95% CI 2·05-3·16, p<0·0001).

Interpretation

Among patients with recent cerebral ischaemia, intensive antiplatelet therapy did not reduce the incidence and severity of recurrent stroke or TIA, but did significantly increase the risk of major bleeding. Triple antiplatelet therapy should not be used in routine clinical practice.

Funding

National Institutes of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme, British Heart Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Bath PM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5854459 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDual antiplatelet therapy using acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) and clopidogrel is of great importance following coronary stenting. However, the variable platelet inhibitory effectiveness compromises the antithrombotic advantages provided by dual antiplatelet therapy. The aim of this single-center prospective study was to reduce the low response incidence of dual antiplatelet therapy with ASA and clopidogrel according to a prespecified therapy algorithm.MethodsPlatelet function testing using whole blood aggregometry (Chronolog 590) was performed 48 hours following coronary stenting (for either acute coronary syndromes or stable coronary artery disease) on 504 patients. The antiplatelet therapy included a loading dose of 600 mg clopidogrel and 500 mg ASA, followed by 75 mg clopidogrel and 100 mg ASA once daily. Clopidogrel low responders (CLR: >5 ohm; adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 5 μM) and/or ASA low responders (ALR: >0 ohm; arachidonic acid 10 μM) were treated according to a structured therapy plan: in the case of CLR, the maintenance + dose was doubled (repeated loading dose followed by 150 mg daily), and when still ineffective ticlopidine or prasugrel, if available and not contraindicated, were used. ALR was treated by increasing the dose to 300 mg in a first step or to 500 mg ASA when the first modification did not take effect sufficiently. In addition, ADP receptor antagonist 2-methylthioadenosine 5'-monophosphate triethylammonium salt (MeSAMP) testing and ASA incubation were performed to rule out either a platelet ADP-receptor defect or an ASA pharmacokinetic resistance.ResultsOf the total cohort of 504 patients, we detected 30.8% clopidogrel low-responders and 19.4% aspirin low-responders. For ALR, with a dose adjustment of 300 mg ASA daily, 94.6% of ALR were effectively treated and the residual 5.4% by administration of daily dosages of 500 mg ASA. This means that after modification of the ASA maintenance dose, all initial ALRs had an adequate antiplatelet response. The results for clopidogrel revealed that 69% of the CLR were treated effectively by increasing the clopidogrel dose to 150 mg daily. When prasugrel was not available or contraindicated, 12.7% of the remaining low responders showed an adequate result after being switched to ticlopidine. Consequently, by applying the therapy algorithm, we were able to reduce the CLR prevalence by 86.6%. On including prasugrel in the therapy plan, we were finally able to eliminate thienopyridine low response. In addition, no ADP receptor defect was found in this study as a potential reason for CLR. We identified the following factors associated with both CLR and ALR status: acute coronary syndromes, positive troponin values as well as diabetes mellitus and elevated HbA1C values and a higher platelet count. Furthermore, our data revealed for CLR elevated C-reactive protein values and a high PREDICT-score (including an age >65 years, acute coronary syndrome, diabetes mellitus, renal failure, and reduced left ventricular function) as risk factors. The following factors correlated with the risk of ASA low response: patients with elevated hemoglobin, serum creatinine and C-reactive protein values. In addition, medication with nitrates reduced the risk of being CLR. As also holds true for CLR, we found the PREDICT-score to be correlated to the risk of being ALR. However, by far the strongest risk factor for CLR or ALR was the fact of dual resistance.ConclusionFollowing a structured therapy plan based on a "test and treat" strategy, the prevalence of clopidogrel or aspirin low response can be significantly reduced and the risk of inadequate dual antiplatelet therapy minimized.

Project description:Background and purposeAlthough dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel reduces the recurrence of ischemic stroke while significantly increasing the bleeding events compared with monotherapy, the CSPS.com trial (Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study combination) showed that DAPT using cilostazol was more effective without the bleeding risk. In the CSPS.com trial, aspirin or clopidogrel was used as the underlying antiplatelet drug. The effectiveness and safety of each combination were examined and clarified.MethodsIn the CSPS.com trial, a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled study, patients with high-risk, noncardioembolic ischemic stroke 8 to 180 days after onset treated with aspirin or clopidogrel alone at the discretion of the physician in charge were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either monotherapy or DAPT using cilostazol and followed for 0.5 to 3.5 years. The primary efficacy outcome was first recurrence of ischemic stroke. The safety outcome was severe or life-threatening bleeding. The analysis was based on the underlying antiplatelet agents.ResultsA total of 763 patients taking aspirin and 1116 taking clopidogrel were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Although the clopidogrel group had more risk factors than the aspirin group, the primary efficacy outcome and safety outcome did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. In the aspirin group, the primary efficacy outcome and safety outcome did not differ significantly between the DAPT group and the aspirin-monotherapy group. In the clopidogrel group, the primary end point occurred at a rate of 2.31 per 100 patient-years in the DAPT group and 5.19 per 100 patient-years in the clopidogrel-monotherapy group (hazard ratio, 0.447 [95% CI, 0.258–0.774]). Safety outcome did not differ significantly between groups (0.51 per 100 patient-years versus 0.71 per 100 patient-years, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.730 [95% CI, 0.206–2.588]).ConclusionsThe combination of cilostazol and clopidogrel significantly reduced the recurrence of ischemic stroke without increasing the bleeding risk in noncardioembolic, high-risk patients.RegistrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01995370. URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/; Unique identifier: UMIN000012180.