Literature DB >> 26251251

Do Patient Characteristics Explain the Differences in Outcome Between Medically Treated Patients in SAMMPRIS and WASID?

Seemant Chaturvedi1, Tanya N Turan2, Michael J Lynn2, Colin P Derdeyn2, David Fiorella2, L Scott Janis2, Marc I Chimowitz2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: The Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis (SAMMPRIS) medical group had a much lower primary end point rate than predicted from the preceding Warfarin Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) trial. This result has been attributed to the aggressive medical therapy used in SAMMPRIS, but an alternative hypothesis is that SAMMPRIS patients were at lower risk. We undertook analyses to evaluate these competing hypotheses.
METHODS: Using proportional hazards regression, we compared the SAMMPRIS primary end point between SAMMPRIS medical patients and WASID patients meeting the same qualifying criteria adjusted for confounding baseline characteristics.
RESULTS: The unadjusted comparison of the SAMMPRIS primary end point showed a significantly higher risk for WASID patients (P=0.009, logrank test) with 12 month Kaplan-Meier estimates of 21.9% in WASID and 12.6% in SAMMPRIS and hazard ratio 1.9 (95% confidence interval =1.2-3.0). The analyses identified the following confounding factors that varied between the studies and that conferred a higher risk: lack of statin use at enrollment (hazard ratio =1.8, 95% confidence interval =1.1-2.9, P=0.027) that was more prevalent among WASID patients (39% versus 14%, P<0.0001) and prior infarcts in the territory of the symptomatic vessel (hazard ratio =1.8, 95% confidence interval =1.1-2.9, P=0.023) that was more prevalent among SAMMPRIS patients (34% versus 22%, P=0.015).The hazard ratio for WASID versus SAMMPRIS adjusted for these 2 characteristics was 1.9 (95% confidence interval =1.1-3.2).
CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for confounding baseline characteristics, WASID patients had an almost 2-fold higher risk of the SAMMPRIS primary end point, which supports the hypothesis that the lower rate of the primary end point in the medical arm of SAMMPRIS compared with WASID patients was as a result of the aggressive medical management used in SAMMPRIS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00576693.
© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  atherosclerosis; dyslipidemia; intracranial atherosclerosis; stroke; warfarin

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26251251      PMCID: PMC4550543          DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.009656

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN: 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


  12 in total

1.  US trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension, 1988-2008.

Authors:  Brent M Egan; Yumin Zhao; R Neal Axon
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Predictors of ischemic stroke in the territory of a symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis.

Authors:  Scott E Kasner; Marc I Chimowitz; Michael J Lynn; Harriet Howlett-Smith; Barney J Stern; Vicki S Hertzberg; Michael R Frankel; Steven R Levine; Seemant Chaturvedi; Curtis G Benesch; Cathy A Sila; Tudor G Jovin; Jose G Romano; Harry J Cloft
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-01-23       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Risk factor status and vascular events in patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis.

Authors:  S Chaturvedi; T N Turan; M J Lynn; S E Kasner; J Romano; G Cotsonis; M Frankel; M I Chimowitz
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2007-11-27       Impact factor: 9.910

4.  Design of the stenting and aggressive medical management for preventing recurrent stroke in intracranial stenosis trial.

Authors:  Marc I Chimowitz; Michael J Lynn; Tanya N Turan; David Fiorella; Bethany F Lane; Scott Janis; Colin P Derdeyn
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.136

5.  Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis.

Authors:  Marc I Chimowitz; Michael J Lynn; Harriet Howlett-Smith; Barney J Stern; Vicki S Hertzberg; Michael R Frankel; Steven R Levine; Seemant Chaturvedi; Scott E Kasner; Curtis G Benesch; Cathy A Sila; Tudor G Jovin; Jose G Romano
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-03-31       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Rationale, design, and implementation of aggressive risk factor management in the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Prevention of Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis (SAMMPRIS) trial.

Authors:  Tanya N Turan; Michael J Lynn; Azhar Nizam; Bethany Lane; Brent M Egan; Ngoc-Anh Le; Maria F Lopes-Virella; Kathie L Hermayer; Oscar Benavente; Carole L White; W Virgil Brown; Michelle F Caskey; Meghan R Steiner; Nicole Vilardo; Andrew Stufflebean; Colin P Derdeyn; David Fiorella; Scott Janis; Marc I Chimowitz
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2012-09-01

7.  Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis.

Authors:  Marc I Chimowitz; Michael J Lynn; Colin P Derdeyn; Tanya N Turan; David Fiorella; Bethany F Lane; L Scott Janis; Helmi L Lutsep; Stanley L Barnwell; Michael F Waters; Brian L Hoh; J Maurice Hourihane; Elad I Levy; Andrei V Alexandrov; Mark R Harrigan; David Chiu; Richard P Klucznik; Joni M Clark; Cameron G McDougall; Mark D Johnson; G Lee Pride; Michel T Torbey; Osama O Zaidat; Zoran Rumboldt; Harry J Cloft
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-09-07       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Long-term mortality and recurrent stroke risk among Chinese stroke patients with predominant intracranial atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Ka Sing Wong; Huan Li
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2003-08-28       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report.

Authors:  Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Relationship between blood pressure and stroke recurrence in patients with intracranial arterial stenosis.

Authors:  Tanya N Turan; George Cotsonis; Michael J Lynn; Seemant Chaturvedi; Marc Chimowitz
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  10 in total

1.  Intracranial Atherosclerosis Disease: A Preventable Epidemic.

Authors:  Majaz Moonis
Journal:  Ann Indian Acad Neurol       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 1.383

2.  Early Acute Ischemic Stroke Management for Pharmacists.

Authors:  Michael Armahizer; Alison Blackman; Michael Plazak; Gretchen M Brophy
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2018-08-07

3.  Lipid Levels and Short-Term Risk of Recurrent Brain Infarcts in Symptomatic Intracranial Stenosis.

Authors:  Shyam Prabhakaran; David S Liebeskind; George Cotsonis; Azhar Nizam; Edward Feldmann; Rajbeer S Sangha; Iszet Campo-Bustillo; Jose G Romano
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2021-10-26       Impact factor: 2.136

4.  European Stroke Organisation guidelines on treatment of patients with intracranial atherosclerotic disease.

Authors:  Marios Psychogios; Alex Brehm; Elena López-Cancio; Gian Marco De Marchis; Elena Meseguer; Aristeidis H Katsanos; Christine Kremer; Peter Sporns; Marialuisa Zedde; Adam Kobayashi; Jildaz Caroff; Daniel Bos; Sabrina Lémeret; Avtar Lal; Juan F Arenillas
Journal:  Eur Stroke J       Date:  2022-06-03

Review 5.  Management of Symptomatic Intracranial Stenosis.

Authors:  David A Hoak; Helmi L Lutsep
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 6.  The urgent need for contemporary clinical trials in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

Authors:  Seemant Chaturvedi; Marc Chimowitz; Robert D Brown; Brajesh K Lal; James F Meschia
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 9.910

7.  Challenges in the Medical Management of Symptomatic Intracranial Stenosis in an Urban Setting.

Authors:  Rajbeer S Sangha; Andrew M Naidech; Carlos Corado; Sameer A Ansari; Shyam Prabhakaran
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 8.  Treatment and imaging of intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: current perspectives and future directions.

Authors:  Ido R van den Wijngaard; Ghislaine Holswilder; Marianne A A van Walderveen; Ale Algra; Marieke J H Wermer; Osama O Zaidat; Jelis Boiten
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 2.708

9.  Is the future of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis management promising?

Authors:  Dacheng Liu; Jingyi Liu; Yuan Cai; Ka Sing Lawrence Wong; Liping Liu
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 10.154

10.  Prevalence, predictors, and prognosis of symptomatic intracranial stenosis in patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Robert Hurford; Frank J Wolters; Linxin Li; Kui Kai Lau; Wilhelm Küker; Peter M Rothwell
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 44.182

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.