Department of Neurology, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Department of Neurology, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, South Korea.
Lancet Neurol. 2018 Jun;17(6):509-518. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30128-5.
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for patients with ischaemic stroke with a high risk of cerebral haemorrhage is unclear. We assessed the efficacy and safety of cilostazol versus aspirin, with and without probucol, in these patients. METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, 2 × 2 factorial trial, we enrolled patients with ischaemic stroke with a history of or imaging findings of intracerebral haemorrhage or two or more microbleeds from 67 centres in three Asian countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive oral cilostazol (100 mg twice a day), aspirin (100 mg once a day), cilostazol plus probucol (250 mg twice a day), or aspirin plus probucol with centralised blocks stratified by centre. Cilostazol versus aspirin was investigated double-blinded; probucol treatment was open-label, but the outcome assessor was masked to assignment. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of the composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death (efficacy) and incidence of haemorrhagic stroke (safety), which were assessed in intention-to-treat and modified intention-to-treat populations. Efficacy was analysed with a non-inferiority test and a superiority test if non-inferiority was satisfied. Safety was assessed with a superiority test only. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01013532. FINDINGS: Between Aug 1, 2009, and Aug 31, 2015, we randomly assigned 1534 patients to one of the four study groups, of whom 1512 were assessed for the co-primary endpoints. During a median follow-up of 1·9 years (IQR 1·0-3·0), the incidence of composite vascular events was 4·27 per 100 person-years in patients who received cilostazol and 5·33 per 100 person-years in patients who received aspirin (HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·57-1·11; non-inferiority p=0·0077; superiority p=0·18). Incidence of cerebral haemorrhage was 0·61 per 100 person-years in patients who received cilostazol and 1·20 per 100 person-years in those who received aspirin (HR 0·51, 97·5% CI 0·20-1·27; superiority p=0·18). The incidence of vascular events was 3·91 per 100 person-years in the probucol group compared with 5·75 per 100 person-years in the non-probucol group (HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·50-0·97; superiority p=0·0316). The incidence of cerebral haemorrhage was 0·72 per 100 person-years in the probucol group and 1·11 per 100 person-years in the non-probucol group (HR 0·65, 97·5% CI 0·27-1·57; p=0·55). Adverse events were similar across the four study groups; the most common events were dizziness, headache, diarrhoea, and constipation. INTERPRETATION: In patients with ischaemic stroke at high risk of cerebral haemorrhage, cilostazol was non-inferior to aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular events, but did not reduce the risk of haemorrhagic stroke. Addition of probucol to aspirin or cilostazol could be beneficial for reducing the incidence of cardiovascular events. FUNDING: Korea Otsuka Pharmaceutical.
背景:对于有脑出血高危风险的缺血性脑卒中患者,最佳治疗方法尚不清楚。我们评估了西洛他唑与阿司匹林,以及是否添加普罗布考,在这些患者中的疗效和安全性。
方法:在这项随机、对照、2×2 析因试验中,我们从三个亚洲国家的 67 个中心招募了有缺血性脑卒中病史或影像学显示有颅内出血或两个或更多微出血的患者。患者被随机分配(1:1:1:1)接受口服西洛他唑(每天 2 次,每次 100mg)、阿司匹林(每天 1 次,每次 100mg)、西洛他唑加普罗布考(每天 2 次,每次 250mg)或阿司匹林加普罗布考,采用中心分层的随机化方法。西洛他唑与阿司匹林的疗效比较采用非劣效性检验,普罗布考的疗效采用开放性检验,但结局评估者对分组情况设盲。主要复合终点为卒中、心肌梗死或血管性死亡的发生率(疗效)和出血性卒中的发生率(安全性),在意向治疗和改良意向治疗人群中进行评估。如果非劣效性成立,则进行疗效的优效性检验,否则进行非劣效性检验。安全性仅采用优效性检验。本试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上注册,编号为 NCT01013532。
发现:在 2009 年 8 月 1 日至 2015 年 8 月 31 日期间,我们随机将 1534 名患者分配到四个研究组中的一个,其中 1512 名患者被评估主要终点。在中位随访 1.9 年(IQR 1.0-3.0)期间,接受西洛他唑治疗的患者复合血管事件发生率为每 100 人年 4.27 例,而接受阿司匹林治疗的患者为每 100 人年 5.33 例(HR 0.80,95%CI 0.57-1.11;非劣效性 p=0.0077;优效性 p=0.18)。接受西洛他唑治疗的患者脑出血发生率为每 100 人年 0.61 例,而接受阿司匹林治疗的患者为每 100 人年 1.20 例(HR 0.51,97.5%CI 0.20-1.27;优效性 p=0.18)。普罗布考组的血管事件发生率为每 100 人年 3.91 例,而非普罗布考组为每 100 人年 5.75 例(HR 0.69,95%CI 0.50-0.97;优效性 p=0.0316)。普罗布考组的脑出血发生率为每 100 人年 0.72 例,而非普罗布考组为每 100 人年 1.11 例(HR 0.65,97.5%CI 0.27-1.57;p=0.55)。四个研究组的不良事件相似;最常见的事件是头晕、头痛、腹泻和便秘。
解释:对于有脑出血高危风险的缺血性脑卒中患者,西洛他唑与阿司匹林相比在预防心血管事件方面非劣效,但并未降低出血性卒中的风险。阿司匹林或西洛他唑加用普罗布考可能有益于降低心血管事件的发生率。
资金来源:韩国大冢制药。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011-1-19
Front Aging Neurosci. 2024-10-7
Cardiovasc Endocrinol Metab. 2024-8-14