SummaryBackgroundResults of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects.MethodsFOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762.FindingsBetween Sept 10, 2012, and March 31, 2017, 3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99·3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0·951 [95% CI 0·839–1·079]; p=0·439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13·43%] patients vs 269 [17·21%]; difference 3·78% [95% CI 1·26–6·30]; p=0·0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2·88%] vs 23 [1·47%]; difference 1·41% [95% CI 0·38–2·43]; p=0·0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months.InterpretationFluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function.FundingUK Stroke Association and NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme.

SummaryBackgroundIntensive antiplatelet therapy with three agents might be more effective than guideline treatment for preventing recurrent events in patients with acute cerebral ischaemia. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of intensive antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin, clopidogrel, and dipyridamole) with that of guideline-based antiplatelet therapy.MethodsWe did an international, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial in adult participants with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) within 48 h of onset. Participants were assigned in a 1:1 ratio using computer randomisation to receive loading doses and then 30 days of intensive antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin 75 mg, clopidogrel 75 mg, and dipyridamole 200 mg twice daily) or guideline-based therapy (comprising either clopidogrel alone or combined aspirin and dipyridamole). Randomisation was stratified by country and index event, and minimised with prognostic baseline factors, medication use, time to randomisation, stroke-related factors, and thrombolysis. The ordinal primary outcome was the combined incidence and severity of any recurrent stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic; assessed using the modified Rankin Scale) or TIA within 90 days, as assessed by central telephone follow-up with masking to treatment assignment, and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN47823388.Findings3096 participants (1556 in the intensive antiplatelet therapy group, 1540 in the guideline antiplatelet therapy group) were recruited from 106 hospitals in four countries between April 7, 2009, and March 18, 2016. The trial was stopped early on the recommendation of the data monitoring committee. The incidence and severity of recurrent stroke or TIA did not differ between intensive and guideline therapy (93 [6%] participants vs 105 [7%]; adjusted common odds ratio [cOR] 0·90, 95% CI 0·67–1·20, p=0·47). By contrast, intensive antiplatelet therapy was associated with more, and more severe, bleeding (adjusted cOR 2·54, 95% CI 2·05–3·16, p<0·0001).InterpretationAmong patients with recent cerebral ischaemia, intensive antiplatelet therapy did not reduce the incidence and severity of recurrent stroke or TIA, but did significantly increase the risk of major bleeding. Triple antiplatelet therapy should not be used in routine clinical practice.FundingNational Institutes of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme, British Heart Foundation.

Summary Background Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. Funding British Heart Foundation.

Background Recent randomised trials showed benefit for anti-inflammatory therapies in coronary disease but excluded stroke. The prognostic value of blood inflammatory markers after stroke is uncertain and guidelines do not recommend their routine measurement for risk stratification. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies investigating the association of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and fibrinogen and risk of recurrent stroke or major vascular events (MVEs). We searched EMBASE and Ovid Medline until 10/1/19. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed for studies reporting comparable effect measures. Results Of 2,515 reports identified, 39 met eligibility criteria (IL-6, n = 10; CRP, n = 33; fibrinogen, n = 16). An association with recurrent stroke was reported in 12/26 studies (CRP), 2/11 (fibrinogen) and 3/6 (IL-6). On random-effects meta-analysis of comparable studies, CRP was associated with an increased risk of recurrent stroke [pooled hazard ratio (HR) per 1 standard-deviation (SD) increase in loge-CRP (1.14, 95% CI 1.06–1.22, p < 0.01)] and MVEs (pooled HR 1.21, CI 1.10–1.34, p < 0.01). Fibrinogen was also associated with recurrent stroke (HR 1.26, CI 1.07–1.47, p < 0.01) and MVEs (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.15–1.49, p < 0.01). Trends were identified for IL-6 for recurrent stroke (HR per 1-SD increase 1.17, CI 0.97–1.41, p = 0.10) and MVEs (HR 1.22, CI 0.96–1.55, p = 0.10). Conclusion Despite evidence suggesting an association between inflammatory markers and post-stroke vascular recurrence, substantial methodological heterogeneity was apparent between studies. Individual-patient pooled analysis and standardisation of methods are needed to determine the prognostic role of blood inflammatory markers and to improve patient selection for randomised trials of inflammatory therapies.

Objective:To determine whether carotid plaque inflammation identified by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18FDG)-PET is associated with late (5-year) recurrent stroke.Methods:We did an individual-participant data pooled analysis of three prospective studies with near-identical study methods. Eligible patients had recent non-severe (modified Rankin Score ≤3) ischaemic stroke/TIA and ipsilateral carotid stenosis (50-99%). Participants underwent carotid 18FDG-PET/CT angiography ≤14 days after recruitment. 18FDG uptake was expressed as maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) in the axial single hottest slice of symptomatic plaque. We calculated the previously-validated Symptomatic Carotid Atheroma Inflammation Lumen-stenosis (SCAIL) score, which incorporates a measure of stenosis severity and 18FDG uptake. The primary outcome was 5-year recurrent ipsilateral ischaemic stroke after PET imaging.Results:Of 183 eligible patients, 181 patients completed follow-up (98.9%). The median duration of follow-up was 4.9 years (interquartile range 3.3-6.4, cumulative follow-up period 901.8 patient-years). After PET imaging, 17 patients had a recurrent ipsilateral ischemic strokes at 5 years (recurrence rate 9.4%, 95% CI 5.6-14.6%). Baseline plaque SUVmax independently predicted 5-year ipsilateral recurrent stroke after adjustment for age, gender, carotid revascularization, stenosis severity, NIH Stroke Scale, and diabetes mellitus (adjusted HR 1.98; 95 % CI, 1.10-3.56, p=0.02, per 1g/mL increase SUVmax). On multivariable Cox regression, SCAIL score predicted 5-year ipsilateral stroke (adjusted HR 2.73 per 1-point increase; 95% CI 1.52-4.90, p=0.001).Conclusion:Plaque inflammation-related 18FDG uptake improved identification of 5-year recurrent ipsilateral ischaemic stroke. Addition of plaque inflammation to current selection strategies may target patients most likely to have late as well as early benefit from carotid revascularization.Classification of Evidence:This study provides Class I evidence that in individuals with recent ischemic stroke/TIA and ipsilateral carotid stenosis, carotid plaque inflammation-related 18FDG uptake on PET/CT angiography was associated with 5-year recurrent ipsilateral stroke.