Calculation of sample size for stroke trials assessing functional outcome: comparison of binary and ordinal approaches

Background Many acute stroke trials have given neutral results. Sub-optimal statistical analyses may be failing to detect efficacy. Methods which take account of the ordinal nature of functional outcome data are more efficient. We compare sample size calculations for dichotomous and ordinal outcomes for use in stroke trials. Methods Data from stroke trials studying the effects of interventions known to positively or negatively alter functional outcome – Rankin Scale and Barthel Index – were assessed. Sample size was calculated using comparisons of proportions, means, medians (according to Payne), and ordinal data (according to Whitehead). The sample sizes gained from each method were compared using Friedman 2 way ANOVA. Results Fifty-five comparisons (54 173 patients) of active vs. control treatment were assessed. Estimated sample sizes differed significantly depending on the method of calculation (Po00001). The ordering of the methods showed that the ordinal method of Whitehead and comparison of means produced significantly lower sample sizes than the other methods. The ordinal data method on average reduced sample size by 28% (inter-quartile range 14–53%) compared with the comparison of proportions; however, a 22% increase in sample size was seen with the ordinal method for trials assessing thrombolysis. The comparison of medians method of Payne gave the largest sample sizes. Conclusions Choosing an ordinal rather than binary method of analysis allows most trials to be, on average, smaller by approximately 28% for a given statistical power. Smaller trial sample sizes may help by reducing time to completion, complexity, and financial expense. However, ordinal methods may not be optimal for interventions which both improve functional outcome

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor in experimental stroke and its effects on infarct size and functional outcome: a systematic review

Background Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) shows promise as a treatment for stroke. This systematic review assesses G-CSF in experimental ischaemic stroke. Methods Relevant studies were identified with searches of Medline, Embase and PubMed. Data were extracted on stroke lesion size, neurological outcome and quality, and analysed using Cochrane Review Manager using random effects models; results are expressed as standardised mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR). Results Data were included from 19 publications incorporating 666 animals. G-CSF reduced lesion size significantly in transient (SMD -1.63, p<0.00001) but not permanent (SMD -1.56, p=0.11) focal models of ischaemia. Lesion size was reduced at all doses and with treatment commenced within 4 hours of transient ischaemia. Neurological deficit (SMD -1.37, p=0.0004) and limb placement (SMD -1.88, p=0.003) improved with G-CSF; however, locomotor activity (>4 weeks post ischaemia) was not (SMD 0.76, p=0.35). Death (OR 0.27, p<0.0001) was reduced with G-CSF. Median study quality was 4 (range 0-7/8); Egger’s test suggested significant publication bias (p=0.001). Conclusions G-CSF significantly reduced lesion size in transient but not permanent models of ischaemic stroke. Motor impairment and death were also reduced. Further studies assessing dose-response, administration time, length of ischaemia and long-term functional recovery are needed.

Effect of telmisartan on functional outcome, recurrence, and blood pressure in patients with acute mild ischemic stroke: a PRoFESS subgroup analysis

Background and Purpose—High blood pressure (BP) is common in acute ischemic stroke and associated independently with a poor functional outcome. However, the management of BP acutely remains unclear because no large trials have been completed. Methods—The factorial PRoFESS secondary stroke prevention trial assessed BP-lowering and antiplatelet strategies in 20 332 patients; 1360 were enrolled within 72 hours of ischemic stroke, with telmisartan (angiotensin receptor antagonist, 80 mg/d, n647) vs placebo (n713). For this nonprespecified subgroup analysis, the primary outcome was functional outcome at 30 days; secondary outcomes included death, recurrence, and hemodynamic measures at up to 90 days. Analyses were adjusted for baseline prognostic variables and antiplatelet assignment. Results—Patients were representative of the whole trial (age 67 years, male 65%, baseline BP 147/84 mm Hg, small artery disease 60%, NIHSS 3) and baseline variables were similar between treatment groups. The mean time from stroke to recruitment was 58 hours. Combined death or dependency (modified Rankin scale: OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.84–1.26; P0.81; death: OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.27–4.04; and stroke recurrence: OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.68–2.89; P0.36) did not differ between the treatment groups. In comparison with placebo, telmisartan lowered BP (141/82 vs 135/78 mmHg, difference 6 to 7 mmHg and 2 to 4 mmHg; P0.001), pulse pressure (3 to 4 mmHg; P0.002), and rate-pressure product (466 mmHg.bpm; P0.0004). Conclusion—Treatment with telmisartan in 1360 patients with acute mild ischemic stroke and mildly elevated BP appeared to be safe with no excess in adverse events, was not associated with a significant effect on functional dependency, death, or recurrence, and modestly lowered BP.

Stroke severity, early recovery and outcome are each related with clinical classification of stroke: data from the 'Tinzaparin in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Trial (TAIST)

Introduction: Baseline severity and clinical stroke syndrome (Oxford Community Stroke Project, OCSP) classification are predictors of outcome in stroke. We used data from the ‘Tinzaparin in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Trial’ (TAIST) to assess the relationship between stroke severity, early recovery, outcome and OCSP syndrome. Methods: TAIST was a randomised controlled trial assessing the safety and efficacy of tinzaparin versus aspirin in 1,484 patients with acute ischaemic stroke. Severity was measured as the Scandinavian Neurological Stroke Scale (SNSS) at baseline and days 4, 7 and 10, and baseline OCSP clinical classification recorded: total anterior circulation infarct (TACI), partial anterior circulation infarct (PACI), lacunar infarct (LACI) and posterior circulation infarction (POCI). Recovery was calculated as change in SNSS from baseline at day 4 and 10. The relationship between stroke syndrome and SNSS at days 4 and 10, and outcome (modified Rankin scale at 90 days) were assessed. Results: Stroke severity was significantly different between TACI (most severe) and LACI (mildest) at all four time points (p<0.001), with no difference between PACI and POCI. The largest change in SNSS score occurred between baseline and day 4; improvement was least in TACI (median 2 units), compared to other groups (median 3 units) (p<0.001). If SNSS did not improve by day 4, then early recovery and late functional outcome tended to be limited irrespective of clinical syndrome (SNSS, baseline: 31, day 10: 32; mRS, day 90: 4); patients who recovered early tended to continue to improve and had better functional outcome irrespective of syndrome (SNSS, baseline: 35, day 10: 50; mRS, day 90: 2). Conclusions: Although functional outcome is related to baseline clinical syndrome (best with LACI, worst with TACI), patients who improve early have a more favourable functional outcome, irrespective of their OCSP syndrome. Hence, patients with a TACI syndrome may still achieve a reasonable outcome if early recovery occurs.

Can we improve the statistical analysis of stroke trials? Statistical re-analysis of functional outcomes in stroke trials

Background: Most large acute stroke trials have been neutral. Functional outcome is usually analysed using a yes or no answer, e.g. death or dependency vs. independence. We assessed which statistical approaches are most efficient in analysing outcomes from stroke trials. Methods: Individual patient data from acute, rehabilitation and stroke unit trials studying the effects of interventions which alter functional outcome were assessed. Outcomes included modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, and ‘3 questions’. Data were analysed using a variety of approaches which compare two treatment groups. The results for each statistical test for each trial were then compared. Results: Data from 55 datasets were obtained (47 trials, 54,173 patients). The test results differed substantially so that approaches which use the ordered nature of functional outcome data (ordinal logistic regression, t-test, robust ranks test, bootstrapping the difference in mean rank) were more efficient statistically than those which collapse the data into 2 groups (chi square) (ANOVA p<0.001). The findings were consistent across different types and sizes of trial and for the different measures of functional outcome. Conclusions: When analysing functional outcome from stroke trials, statistical tests which use the original ordered data are more efficient and more likely to yield reliable results. Suitable approaches included ordinal logistic regression, t-test, and robust ranks test.

Can we improve the statistical analysis of stroke trials? Statistical reanalysis of functional outcomes in stroke trials

Background and Purpose—Most large acute stroke trials have been neutral. Functional outcome is usually analyzed using a yes or no answer, eg, death or dependency versus independence. We assessed which statistical approaches are most efficient in analyzing outcomes from stroke trials. Methods—Individual patient data from acute, rehabilitation and stroke unit trials studying the effects of interventions which alter functional outcome were assessed. Outcomes included modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, and “3 questions”. Data were analyzed using a variety of approaches which compare 2 treatment groups. The results for each statistical test for each trial were then compared. Results—Data from 55 datasets were obtained (47 trials, 54 173 patients). The test results differed substantially so that approaches which use the ordered nature of functional outcome data (ordinal logistic regression, t test, robust ranks test, bootstrapping the difference in mean rank) were more efficient statistically than those which collapse the data into 2 groups (2; ANOVA, P0.001). The findings were consistent across different types and sizes of trial and for the different measures of functional outcome. Conclusions—When analyzing functional outcome from stroke trials, statistical tests which use the original ordered data are more efficient and more likely to yield reliable results. Suitable approaches included ordinal logistic regression, test, and robust ranks test.

Relationship between hyperacute blood pressure and outcome after ischemic stroke: data from the VISTA Collaboration

Background and Purpose—High blood pressure (BP) is associated independently with poor outcome after acute ischemic stroke, although in most analyses “baseline” BP was measured 24 hours or more postictus, and not during the hyperacute period. Methods—Analyses included 1722 patients in hyperacute trials (recruitment 8 hours) from the Virtual Stroke International Stroke Trial Archive (VISTA) Collaboration. Data on BP at enrolment and after 1, 2, 16, 24, 48, and 72 hours, neurological impairment at 7 days (NIHSS), and functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin scale) were assessed using logistic regression models, adjusted for confounding variables; results are for 10-mm Hg change in BP. Results—Mean time to enrolment was 3.7 hours (range 1.0 to 7.9). High systolic BP (SBP) was significantly associated with increased neurological impairment (odds ratio, OR 1.06, 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.12), and poor functional outcome; odds ratios for both increased with later BP measurements made at up to 24 hours poststroke. Smaller (versus larger) declines in SBP over the first 24 hours were significantly associated with poor NIHSS scores (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.27) and functional outcome (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.34). A large variability in SBP was also associated with poor functional outcome. Conclusions—High SBP and large variability in SBP in the hyperacute stages of ischemic stroke are associated with increased neurological impairment and poor functional outcome, as are small falls in SBP over the first 24 hours.

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor mobilizes bone marrow stem cells in patients with subacute ischemic stroke: the Stem Cell Trial of Recovery EnhanceMent After Stroke (STEMS) Pilot Randomized, Controlled Trial (ISRCTN 16784092)

Background and Purpose - Loss of motor function is common after stroke and leads to significant chronic disability. Stem cells are capable of self-renewal and of differentiating into multiple cell types, including neurones, glia, and vascular cells. We assessed the safety of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) after stroke and its effect on circulating CD34 stem cells. Methods - We performed a 2-center, dose-escalation, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot trial (ISRCTN 16784092) of G-CSF (6 blocks of 1 to 10 g/kg SC, 1 or 5 daily doses) in 36 patients with recent ischemic stroke. Circulating CD34 stem cells were measured by flow cytometry; blood counts and measures of safety and functional outcome were also monitored. All measures were made blinded to treatment. Results - Thirty-six patients, whose mean SD age was 768 years and of whom 50% were male, were recruited. G-CSF (5 days of 10 g/kg) increased CD34 count in a dose-dependent manner, from 2.5 to 37.7 at day 5 (area under curve, P0.005). A dose-dependent rise in white cell count (P0.001) was also seen. There was no difference between treatment groups in the number of patients with serious adverse events: G-CSF, 7/24 (29%) versus placebo 3/12 (25%), or in their dependence (modified Rankin Scale, median 4, interquartile range, 3 to 5) at 90 days. Conclusions - ”G-CSF is effective at mobilizing bone marrow CD34 stem cells in patients with recent ischemic stroke. Administration is feasible and appears to be safe and well tolerated. The fate of mobilized cells and their effect on functional outcome remain to be determined. (Stroke. 2006;37:2979-2983.)

Amphetamine increases blood pressure and heart rate but has no effect on motor recovery or cerebral haemodynamics in ischaemic stroke: a randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN 36285333)

Amphetamine enhances recovery after experimental ischaemia and has shown promise in small clinical trials when combined with motor or sensory stimulation. Amphetamine, a sympathomimetic, might have haemodynamic effects in stroke patients, although limited data have been published. Subjects were recruited 3-30 days post ischaemic stroke into a phase II randomised (1:1), double blind, placebo-controlled trial. Subjects received dexamphetamine (5mg initially, then 10mg for 10 subsequent doses with 3 or 4 day separations) or placebo in addition to inpatient physiotherapy. Recovery was assessed by motor scales (Fugl-Meyer, FM), and functional scales (Barthel index, BI and modified Rankin score, mRS). Peripheral blood pressure (BP), central haemodynamics and middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity were assessed before, and 90 minutes after, the first 2 doses. 33 subjects were recruited, age 33-88 (mean 71) years, males 52%, 4-30 (median 15) days post stroke to inclusion. 16 patients were randomised to placebo and 17 amphetamine. Amphetamine did not improve motor function at 90 days; mean (standard deviation) FM 37.6 (27.6) vs. control 35.2 (27.8) (p=0.81). Functional outcome (BI, mRS) did not differ between treatment groups. Peripheral and central systolic BP, and heart rate, were 11.2 mmHg (p=0.03), 9.5 mmHg (p=0.04) and 7 beats/minute (p=0.02) higher respectively with amphetamine, compared with control. A non-significant reduction in myocardial perfusion (Buckberg Index) was seen with amphetamine. Other cardiac and cerebral haemodynamics were unaffected. Amphetamine did not improve motor impairment or function after ischaemic stroke but did significantly increase BP and heart rate without altering cerebral haemodynamics.

Should data monitoring committees assess efficacy when considering safety in trails in acute stroke?

The primary role of a trials Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) is to ensure the safety of enrolled patients. In stroke trials, safety is monitored typically by comparing death and stroke specific events between treatment groups. DMCs may also have the remit for monitoring efficacy depending on the aims of the trial. We hypothesised that functional outcome at end of follow-up, a measure of efficacy, is also a powerful measure of safety and tested this in a systematic review

Sex differences in quality of life in stroke survivors. Data from the Tinzaparin in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Trial (TAIST)

Introduction: Female sex is predictive of poor functional outcome in stroke, even after correction for prognostic factors. Poor quality of life (QoL) is observed in stroke survivors, with lower scores seen in the most disabled patients. We used data from the TAIST trial to assess the relationship between sex and QoL after ischaemic stroke. Methods: TAIST was a randomised controlled trial assessing the safety and efficacy of tinzaparin versus aspirin in 1,484 patients with acute ischaemic stroke. QoL was measured at 180 days post randomisation using the short-form 36 health survey which assesses QoL across eight domains. The relationship between sex and each domain was assessed using ordinal regression, both unadjusted and adjusted for key prognostics factors. Results: Of the 1,484 patients randomised into TAIST, 216 had died at 180 days post randomisation. 1,268 survivors were included in this analysis, 694 males (55%), 574 females (45%). Females tended to score lower than males across all QoL domains (apart from general health); statistically significant lower scores were seen for physical functioning (odds ratio (OR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.72), vitality (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98) and mental health (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93). The results for physical functioning and mental health remained significant after adjustment for prognostic variables (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.92; OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.95 respectively). Conclusions: QoL, in particular physical function and mental health domains, is lower in female patients after stroke. This difference persists even after correction for known prognostic factors such as age and stroke severity.

Speeding stroke recovery? A systematic review of amphetamine after stroke

Introduction: The use of drugs to enhance recovery (“rehabilitation pharmacology”) has been assessed. Amphetamine can improve outcome in experimental models of stroke, and several small clinical trials have assessed its use in stroke. Methods: Electronic searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials of amphetamine in stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic). Outcomes included functional outcome (assessed as combined death or disability/dependency), safety (death) and haemodynamic measures. Data were analysed as dichotomous or continuous outcomes, using odds ratios (OR), weighted or standardised mean difference, (WMD or SMD) using random-effects models with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI); statistical heterogeneity was assessed. Results: Eleven completed trials (n=329) were identified. Treatment with amphetamine was associated with non-significant trends to increased death (OR 2.78 (95% CI, 0.75– 10.23), n=329, 11 trials) and improved motor scores (WMD 3.28 (95% CI −0.48–7.04) n=257, 9 trials) but had no effect on the combined outcome of death and dependency (OR 1.15 (95% CI 0.65–2.06, n=206, 5 trials). Amphetamine increased systolic blood pressure (WMD 9.3 mmHg, 95% CI 3.3–15.3, n=106, 3 trials) and heart rate (WMD 7.6 beats per minute (bpm), 95% CI 1.8–13.4, n=106, 3 trials). Despite variations in treatment regimes, outcomes and follow-up duration there was no evidence of significant heterogeneity or publication bias. Conclusion: No evidence exists at present to support the use of amphetamine after stroke. Despite a trend to improved motor function, doubts remain over

Relationship between therapeutic changes in blood pressure and outcomes in acute stroke: a metaregression

Both low and high blood pressure (BP) during the acute phase of stroke are associated independently with a poor outcome. Several small clinical trials have involved the alteration of BP and this study assessed the relationship between change in BP and functional outcome. Randomised controlled trials of interventions that would be expected, on pharmacological grounds, to alter BP in patients within one week of the onset of acute ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke were sought using electronic searches. Data were collected on BP and clinical outcome. The relationship between the difference in on-treatment BP and odds ratios (OR) for outcomes was assessed using meta-regression. Thirty-seven trials involving 9,008 patients were included. A ‘U’ or ‘J’ shaped relationship were found between on-treatment BP difference and early death, death at the end of 90 day follow up, and combined death or dependency at the end of follow up. Although outcomes were not significantly reduced at any level of change in BP, the lowest odds occurred at: early death (OR 0.87, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.54 to 1.23) - 8.1 mmHg; death at end of follow up (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.65) - 14.4 mmHg; and combined death or dependency at end of follow up (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.72) - 14.6 mmHg. Although large falls or increases in BP are associated with a worse outcome, modest reductions may reduce death, and combined death or dependency, although the confidence intervals are wide and compatible with overall benefit or hazard.

Predicting long-term outcome after acute ischemic stroke: a simple index works in patients from controlled clinical trials

Background and Purpose—An early and reliable prognosis for recovery in stroke patients is important for initiation of individual treatment and for informing patients and relatives. We recently developed and validated models for predicting survival and functional independence within 3 months after acute stroke, based on age and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score assessed within 6 hours after stroke. Herein we demonstrate the applicability of our models in an independent sample of patients from controlled clinical trials. Methods—The prognostic models were used to predict survival and functional recovery in 5419 patients from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA). Furthermore, we tried to improve the accuracy by adapting intercepts and estimating new model parameters. Results—The original models were able to correctly classify 70.4% (survival) and 72.9% (functional recovery) of patients. Because the prediction was slightly pessimistic for patients in the controlled trials, adapting the intercept improved the accuracy to 74.8% (survival) and 74.0% (functional recovery). Novel estimation of parameters, however, yielded no relevant further improvement. Conclusions—For acute ischemic stroke patients included in controlled trials, our easy-to-apply prognostic models based on age and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score correctly predicted survival and functional recovery after 3 months. Furthermore, a simple adaptation helps to adjust for a different prognosis and is recommended if a large data set is available. (Stroke. 2008;39:000-000.)