Ischemic Benefit and Hemorrhage Risk of Ticagrelor-Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Background and Purpose: In patients with acute mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, the THALES trial (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death) demonstrated that when added to aspirin, ticagrelor reduced stroke or death but increased risk of severe hemorrhage compared with placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of THALES included hemorrhagic stroke and death, events also counted in the primary safety outcome. We sought to disentangle risk and benefit, assess their relative impact, and attempt to identify subgroups with disproportionate risk or benefit. Methods: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of patients with mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, patients were randomized within 24 hours after symptom onset to a 30-day regimen of either ticagrelor plus aspirin or matching placebo plus aspirin. For the present analyses, we defined the efficacy outcome, major ischemic events, as the composite of ischemic stroke or nonhemorrhagic death, and defined the safety outcome, major hemorrhage, as intracranial hemorrhage or hemorrhagic death. Net clinical impact was defined as the combination of these 2 end points. Results: In 11 016 patients (5523 ticagrelor-aspirin and 5493 aspirin), a major ischemic event occurred in 294 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 359 patients (6.5%) in the aspirin group (absolute risk reduction 1.19% [95% CI, 0.31%–2.07%]). Major hemorrhage occurred in 22 patients (0.4%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and 6 patients (0.1%) in the aspirin group (absolute risk increase 0.29% [95% CI, 0.10%–0.48%]). Net clinical impact favored ticagrelor-aspirin (absolute risk reduction 0.97% [95% CI, 0.08%–1.87%]). Findings were similar when different thresholds for disability were applied and over a range of predefined subgroups. Conclusions: In patients with mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, ischemic benefits of 30-day treatment with ticagrelor-aspirin outweigh risks of hemorrhage. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03354429.

[1]  A. Demchuk,et al.  Ticagrelor Added to Aspirin in Acute Nonsevere Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack of Atherosclerotic Origin , 2020, Stroke.

[2]  S. Johnston,et al.  Ticagrelor and Aspirin or Aspirin Alone in Acute Ischemic Stroke or TIA. , 2020, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  Peter J. Godolphin,et al.  Outcome Assessment by Central Adjudicators Versus Site Investigators in Stroke Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. , 2019, Stroke.

[4]  S. Johnston,et al.  Estimated treatment effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin by investigator-assessed events compared with judgement by an independent event adjudication committee in the SOCRATES trial , 2019, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[5]  S. Johnston,et al.  The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated with Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death (THALES) trial: Rationale and design , 2019, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[6]  W. Powers,et al.  2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association , 2018, Stroke.

[7]  Mikhail V. Arkhipov,et al.  Risk for Major Bleeding in Patients Receiving Ticagrelor Compared With Aspirin After Transient Ischemic Attack or Acute Ischemic Stroke in the SOCRATES Study (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes) , 2017, Circulation.

[8]  L. Trinquart,et al.  Comparison of central adjudication of outcomes and onsite outcome assessment on treatment effect estimates. , 2016, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[9]  V. Chair,et al.  Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. , 2014, Stroke.

[10]  M. Wintermark,et al.  Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association , 2013, Stroke.

[11]  D. McCormick,et al.  Endpoint Selection and Relative (Versus Absolute) Risk Reporting in Published Medication Trials , 2011, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[12]  J. Switzer,et al.  Simplified Modified Rankin Scale Questionnaire: Reproducibility Over the Telephone and Validation With Quality of Life , 2011, Stroke.

[13]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[14]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics.

[15]  E. Unger,et al.  Weighing benefits and risks--the FDA's review of prasugrel. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  S Claiborne Johnston,et al.  Validation and refinement of scores to predict very early stroke risk after transient ischaemic attack , 2007, The Lancet.

[17]  N. Black CONSORT , 1996, The Lancet.

[18]  Frans Van de Werf,et al.  An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.