Dual Versus Mono Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients with Acute Mild-to-Moderate Stroke: A Multicentre Perspective Cohort Study.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between different antiplatelet therapy regimens and the functional outcomes and bleeding complications among mild-to-moderate ischaemic stroke patients based on real-world data. We used data from the SEACOAST trial (Safety and efficacy of aspirin-clopidogrel in acute noncardiogenic minor ischaemic stroke) to analyse the data of patients with mild-to-moderate stroke within 72 h after onset who were treated with aspirin or clopidogrel alone or a combination of clopidogrel and aspirin from September 2019 to November 2021. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the differences between groups. We performed an analysis to evaluate the association of different antiplatelet regimens and 90-day disability, which was defined as a modified Rankin Scale score ≥2, as well as disability ascribed to index or recurrent stroke by the local investigator. In terms of safety, we then compared the bleeding events between the two groups. A total of 2822 mild-to-moderate ischaemic stroke patients were treated with either clopidogrel plus aspirin (n = 1726, 61.2%) or aspirin/clopidogrel (n = 1096, 38.8%). Of 1726 patients in the dual antiplatelet group, 1350 (78.5%) received less than or equal to 30 days of combined therapy. At 90 days, 433 (15.3%) patients were disabled. Patients who received combined therapy had a lower overall disability rate (13.7% versus 17.9%; OR 0.78 (0.6-1.01); P = 0.064). However, investigators found that index stroke was the reason for significantly fewer patients in the dual antiplatelet group having disability (8.4% versus 12%; OR, 0.72 (0.52-0.98); P = 0.038). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of moderate to severe bleeding complications between the dual and mono antiplatelet drug regimens (0.4% versus 0.2%; HR 1.5 (0.25, 8.98); P = 0.657). Aspirin plus clopidogrel was associated with a reduction in the incidence of disability attributed to index stroke. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of moderate to severe bleeding complications between the two antiplatelet drug regimens. ChiCTR1900025214.

Zhang K ，Liu T ，Fan H ，Wang Y ，Li Y ，Li J ，Li Y ，Yu Y ，Wang J ，Xue L ，Du W ，Niu W ，Yan Y ，Gao X ，Li G ，Liu Q ，Liu Y ，Fan Y ，Ren J ，Li X ，Wu X ，Niu X ... -  《-》

Dual Antiplatelet Treatment up to 72 Hours After Ischemic Stroke Stratified by Risk Profile: A Post Hoc Analysis.

Zhang Y ，Wang X ，Gao Y ，Chen W ，Johnston SC ，Amarenco P ，Bath PM ，Yan H ，Wang T ，Yang Y ，Zhou Q ，Wang M ，Jing J ，Wang C ，Wang Y ，Wang Y ，Pan Y ... -  《-》

Outcomes Associated With Clopidogrel-Aspirin Use in Minor Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Pooled Analysis of Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients With Acute Non-Disabling Cerebrovascular Events (CHANCE) and Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and

Pan Y ，Elm JJ ，Li H ，Easton JD ，Wang Y ，Farrant M ，Meng X ，Kim AS ，Zhao X ，Meurer WJ ，Liu L ，Dietrich D ，Wang Y ，Johnston SC ... -  《-》

Efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy in the elderly for stroke prevention: a subgroup analysis of the CHANCE-2 trial.

Evidence of the optimal antiplatelet therapy for elderly patients who had a stroke is limited, especially those elder than 80 years. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in old-old patients compared with younger patients in the ticagrelor or Clopidogrel with aspirin in High-risk patients with Acute Non-disabling Cerebrovascular Events-II (CHANCE-2) trial. CHANCE-2 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in China involving patients with high-risk transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke with CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles. In our substudy, all enrolled patients were stratified by age: old-old (≥80 years), young-old (65-80 years) and younger (<65 years). The primary outcomes were stroke recurrence and moderate to severe bleeding within 90 days, respectively. Of all the 6412 patients, 406 (6.3%) were old-old, 2755 (43.0%) were young-old and 3251 (50.7%) were younger. Old-old patients were associated with higher composite vascular events (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.98, p=0.048), disabling stroke (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.88, p=0.0002), severe or moderate bleeding (HR 8.40, 95% CI 1.95 to 36.21, p=0.004) and mortality (HR 7.56, 95% CI 2.23 to 25.70, p=0.001) within 90 days. Ticagrelor-aspirin group was associated with lower risks of stroke recurrence within 90 days in younger patients (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.91, p=0.008), which was no differences in old-old patients. Elderly patients aged over 80 in CHANCE-2 trial had higher risks of composite vascular events, disabling stroke, severe or moderate bleeding and mortality within 90 days. Genotype-guided DAPT might not be as effective in old-old patients as in younger ones. NCT04078737.

Zhang X ，Jing J ，Wang A ，Xie X ，Johnston SC ，Li H ，Bath PM ，Xu Q ，Lin J ，Wang Y ，Zhao X ，Li Z ，Jiang Y ，Liu L ，Chen W ，Gong X ，Li J ，Han X ，Meng X ，Wang Y ... -  《-》

Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.

Survival estimation for patients with symptomatic skeletal metastases ideally should be made before a type of local treatment has already been determined. Currently available survival prediction tools, however, were generated using data from patients treated either operatively or with local radiation alone, raising concerns about whether they would generalize well to all patients presenting for assessment. The Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine-learning algorithm (SORG-MLA), trained with institution-based data of surgically treated patients, and the Metastases location, Elderly, Tumor primary, Sex, Sickness/comorbidity, and Site of radiotherapy model (METSSS), trained with registry-based data of patients treated with radiotherapy alone, are two of the most recently developed survival prediction models, but they have not been tested on patients whose local treatment strategy is not yet decided. (1) Which of these two survival prediction models performed better in a mixed cohort made up both of patients who received local treatment with surgery followed by radiotherapy and who had radiation alone for symptomatic bone metastases? (2) Which model performed better among patients whose local treatment consisted of only palliative radiotherapy? (3) Are laboratory values used by SORG-MLA, which are not included in METSSS, independently associated with survival after controlling for predictions made by METSSS? Between 2010 and 2018, we provided local treatment for 2113 adult patients with skeletal metastases in the extremities at an urban tertiary referral academic medical center using one of two strategies: (1) surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy or (2) palliative radiotherapy alone. Every patient's survivorship status was ascertained either by their medical records or the national death registry from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration. After applying a priori designated exclusion criteria, 91% (1920) were analyzed here. Among them, 48% (920) of the patients were female, and the median (IQR) age was 62 years (53 to 70 years). Lung was the most common primary tumor site (41% [782]), and 59% (1128) of patients had other skeletal metastases in addition to the treated lesion(s). In general, the indications for surgery were the presence of a complete pathologic fracture or an impending pathologic fracture, defined as having a Mirels score of ≥ 9, in patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of less than or equal to IV and who were considered fit for surgery. The indications for radiotherapy were relief of pain, local tumor control, prevention of skeletal-related events, and any combination of the above. In all, 84% (1610) of the patients received palliative radiotherapy alone as local treatment for the target lesion(s), and 16% (310) underwent surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy. Neither METSSS nor SORG-MLA was used at the point of care to aid clinical decision-making during the treatment period. Survival was retrospectively estimated by these two models to test their potential for providing survival probabilities. We first compared SORG to METSSS in the entire population. Then, we repeated the comparison in patients who received local treatment with palliative radiation alone. We assessed model performance by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration analysis, Brier score, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The AUROC measures discrimination, which is the ability to distinguish patients with the event of interest (such as death at a particular time point) from those without. AUROC typically ranges from 0.5 to 1.0, with 0.5 indicating random guessing and 1.0 a perfect prediction, and in general, an AUROC of ≥ 0.7 indicates adequate discrimination for clinical use. Calibration refers to the agreement between the predicted outcomes (in this case, survival probabilities) and the actual outcomes, with a perfect calibration curve having an intercept of 0 and a slope of 1. A positive intercept indicates that the actual survival is generally underestimated by the prediction model, and a negative intercept suggests the opposite (overestimation). When comparing models, an intercept closer to 0 typically indicates better calibration. Calibration can also be summarized as log(O:E), the logarithm scale of the ratio of observed (O) to expected (E) survivors. A log(O:E) > 0 signals an underestimation (the observed survival is greater than the predicted survival); and a log(O:E) < 0 indicates the opposite (the observed survival is lower than the predicted survival). A model with a log(O:E) closer to 0 is generally considered better calibrated. The Brier score is the mean squared difference between the model predictions and the observed outcomes, and it ranges from 0 (best prediction) to 1 (worst prediction). The Brier score captures both discrimination and calibration, and it is considered a measure of overall model performance. In Brier score analysis, the "null model" assigns a predicted probability equal to the prevalence of the outcome and represents a model that adds no new information. A prediction model should achieve a Brier score at least lower than the null-model Brier score to be considered as useful. The DCA was developed as a method to determine whether using a model to inform treatment decisions would do more good than harm. It plots the net benefit of making decisions based on the model's predictions across all possible risk thresholds (or cost-to-benefit ratios) in relation to the two default strategies of treating all or no patients. The care provider can decide on an acceptable risk threshold for the proposed treatment in an individual and assess the corresponding net benefit to determine whether consulting with the model is superior to adopting the default strategies. Finally, we examined whether laboratory data, which were not included in the METSSS model, would have been independently associated with survival after controlling for the METSSS model's predictions by using the multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Between the two models, only SORG-MLA achieved adequate discrimination (an AUROC of > 0.7) in the entire cohort (of patients treated operatively or with radiation alone) and in the subgroup of patients treated with palliative radiotherapy alone. SORG-MLA outperformed METSSS by a wide margin on discrimination, calibration, and Brier score analyses in not only the entire cohort but also the subgroup of patients whose local treatment consisted of radiotherapy alone. In both the entire cohort and the subgroup, DCA demonstrated that SORG-MLA provided more net benefit compared with the two default strategies (of treating all or no patients) and compared with METSSS when risk thresholds ranged from 0.2 to 0.9 at both 90 days and 1 year, indicating that using SORG-MLA as a decision-making aid was beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting for treatment was 0.2 to 0.9. Higher albumin, lower alkaline phosphatase, lower calcium, higher hemoglobin, lower international normalized ratio, higher lymphocytes, lower neutrophils, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lower platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, higher sodium, and lower white blood cells were independently associated with better 1-year and overall survival after adjusting for the predictions made by METSSS. Based on these discoveries, clinicians might choose to consult SORG-MLA instead of METSSS for survival estimation in patients with long-bone metastases presenting for evaluation of local treatment. Basing a treatment decision on the predictions of SORG-MLA could be beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting to undergo a particular treatment strategy ranged from 0.2 to 0.9. Future studies might investigate relevant laboratory items when constructing or refining a survival estimation model because these data demonstrated prognostic value independent of the predictions of the METSSS model, and future studies might also seek to keep these models up to date using data from diverse, contemporary patients undergoing both modern operative and nonoperative treatments. Level III, diagnostic study.

Lee CC ，Chen CW ，Yen HK ，Lin YP ，Lai CY ，Wang JL ，Groot OQ ，Janssen SJ ，Schwab JH ，Hsu FM ，Lin WH ... -  《-》