Sherihan Rezk Ahmed, Nevine El Nahas, Mohamed Fouad Elsayed Khalil, Ahmed Elbassiouny, Mohamed Ahmed Almoataz, Tarek Youssif Omar, Ahmed Mohamed Ali Daabis, Hossam Mohamed Refat, Ahmed Ahmed Mohamed Kamal Ebied, Asmaa Mohammed Hassan, Diaa Mostafa Atiaa Mohamed, Mohamed Ismaiel, Mohamed G Zeinhom
{"title":"TICA-CLOP研究:Ticagrelor与氯吡格雷治疗急性中度和中重度缺血性卒中的多中心随机对照试验。","authors":"Sherihan Rezk Ahmed, Nevine El Nahas, Mohamed Fouad Elsayed Khalil, Ahmed Elbassiouny, Mohamed Ahmed Almoataz, Tarek Youssif Omar, Ahmed Mohamed Ali Daabis, Hossam Mohamed Refat, Ahmed Ahmed Mohamed Kamal Ebied, Asmaa Mohammed Hassan, Diaa Mostafa Atiaa Mohamed, Mohamed Ismaiel, Mohamed G Zeinhom","doi":"10.1007/s40263-024-01127-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with ischemic stroke; none of these trials included North African participants, and all of these trials comprised only participants who experienced transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with first-ever noncardioembolic moderate or moderate-to-severe ischemic stroke.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our trial involved 900 first-ever noncardioembolic patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who randomly received either loading and maintenance doses of ticagrelor or clopidogrel within the first 24 h of stroke onset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We involved 900 patients in the intention-to-treat analysis. A total of 39 (8.7%) patients in ticagrelor arm and 62 (13.8%) in clopidogrel arm experienced a new stroke [hazard ratio (HR) 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.83; P value = 0.006]. A total of 57 (12.7%) patients in ticagrelor group and 80 (17.8%) patients in clopidogrel group experienced composite of new stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), or death due to vascular insults (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.43-0.82; P value = 0.004). Participants who received ticagrelor experienced less frequent unfavorable outcomes. We found no significant variation between our study's two arms concerning the hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with noncardioembolic moderate or moderate-to-severe ischemic stroke who received ticagrelor within the first 24 h after ischemic stroke had better clinical outcomes based on recurrent stroke rates and unfavorable modified Rankin Scale (mRS) rates compared with those who received clopidogrel. There were no significant variations between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number NCT05553613.</p>","PeriodicalId":10508,"journal":{"name":"CNS drugs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"TICA-CLOP STUDY: Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Acute Moderate and Moderate-to-Severe Ischemic Stroke, a Randomized Controlled Multi-Center Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Sherihan Rezk Ahmed, Nevine El Nahas, Mohamed Fouad Elsayed Khalil, Ahmed Elbassiouny, Mohamed Ahmed Almoataz, Tarek Youssif Omar, Ahmed Mohamed Ali Daabis, Hossam Mohamed Refat, Ahmed Ahmed Mohamed Kamal Ebied, Asmaa Mohammed Hassan, Diaa Mostafa Atiaa Mohamed, Mohamed Ismaiel, Mohamed G Zeinhom\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40263-024-01127-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with ischemic stroke; none of these trials included North African participants, and all of these trials comprised only participants who experienced transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with first-ever noncardioembolic moderate or moderate-to-severe ischemic stroke.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our trial involved 900 first-ever noncardioembolic patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who randomly received either loading and maintenance doses of ticagrelor or clopidogrel within the first 24 h of stroke onset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We involved 900 patients in the intention-to-treat analysis. A total of 39 (8.7%) patients in ticagrelor arm and 62 (13.8%) in clopidogrel arm experienced a new stroke [hazard ratio (HR) 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.83; P value = 0.006]. A total of 57 (12.7%) patients in ticagrelor group and 80 (17.8%) patients in clopidogrel group experienced composite of new stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), or death due to vascular insults (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.43-0.82; P value = 0.004). Participants who received ticagrelor experienced less frequent unfavorable outcomes. We found no significant variation between our study's two arms concerning the hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with noncardioembolic moderate or moderate-to-severe ischemic stroke who received ticagrelor within the first 24 h after ischemic stroke had better clinical outcomes based on recurrent stroke rates and unfavorable modified Rankin Scale (mRS) rates compared with those who received clopidogrel. There were no significant variations between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number NCT05553613.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CNS drugs\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CNS drugs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-024-01127-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CNS drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-024-01127-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
TICA-CLOP STUDY: Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Acute Moderate and Moderate-to-Severe Ischemic Stroke, a Randomized Controlled Multi-Center Trial.
Background: Many studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with ischemic stroke; none of these trials included North African participants, and all of these trials comprised only participants who experienced transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke.
Objectives: We compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with first-ever noncardioembolic moderate or moderate-to-severe ischemic stroke.
Methods: Our trial involved 900 first-ever noncardioembolic patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who randomly received either loading and maintenance doses of ticagrelor or clopidogrel within the first 24 h of stroke onset.
Results: We involved 900 patients in the intention-to-treat analysis. A total of 39 (8.7%) patients in ticagrelor arm and 62 (13.8%) in clopidogrel arm experienced a new stroke [hazard ratio (HR) 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.83; P value = 0.006]. A total of 57 (12.7%) patients in ticagrelor group and 80 (17.8%) patients in clopidogrel group experienced composite of new stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), or death due to vascular insults (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.43-0.82; P value = 0.004). Participants who received ticagrelor experienced less frequent unfavorable outcomes. We found no significant variation between our study's two arms concerning the hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications.
Conclusion: Patients with noncardioembolic moderate or moderate-to-severe ischemic stroke who received ticagrelor within the first 24 h after ischemic stroke had better clinical outcomes based on recurrent stroke rates and unfavorable modified Rankin Scale (mRS) rates compared with those who received clopidogrel. There were no significant variations between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications.
Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number NCT05553613.
期刊介绍:
CNS Drugs promotes rational pharmacotherapy within the disciplines of clinical psychiatry and neurology. The Journal includes:
- Overviews of contentious or emerging issues.
- Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on pharmacological approaches to managing neurological and psychiatric illnesses.
- Systematic reviews that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement.
- Adis Drug Reviews of the properties and place in therapy of both newer and established drugs in neurology and psychiatry.
- Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies with a strong link to clinical practice, such as clinical pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies, clinical trials, meta-analyses, outcomes research, and pharmacoeconomic and pharmacoepidemiological studies.
Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in CNS Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.