Zha, Alicia

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is a potential cardioembolic source of ischemic stroke, but its role in recurrent stroke risk and treatment response remains unclear. We explore whether LV injury associates with the risk of recurrent stroke and modifies the association between anticoagulation and stroke recurrence using real-world data. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective study of Cardiac Abnormalities in Stroke Prevention and Recurrence cohort across 27 US sites. Patients with LV ejection fraction ≥20% were included. LV injury, defined as LV ejection fraction 20% to 40% and wall motion abnormality, was the primary exposure and treatment effect modifier. The treatment of interest was anticoagulant versus antiplatelet therapy. The composite outcome included recurrent stroke, major bleeding, or death. Outcomes were evaluated using unadjusted and inverse probability weighting adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, with treatment effect modification tested by LV injury status. RESULTS: Among 2685 patients enrolled, 2328 with complete data were analyzed (median age, 65 years; 49.8% female; median follow-up, 1.6 years). LV injury was present in 310 patients (13.3%). Overall, 535 events occurred: 258 recurrent ischemic strokes, 28 hemorrhagic strokes, 67 major hemorrhages, and 256 deaths. LV injury was associated with a higher unadjusted risk of the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.21–1.87]), though nonsignificant after inverse probability weighting adjustment (adjusted HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.97–1.70]). In the LV injury subgroup, anticoagulation versus antiplatelet therapy was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome (adjusted HR, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.10–0.59]), relative to the non-LV injury subgroup (adjusted HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.83–1.95]; p[LV-interaction], 0.001). Similar interactions were seen for EF 20% to 40% (versus >40%; adjusted HR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.04–0.86]; p[LV-interaction], 0.001) and wall motion abnormality (versus no wall motion abnormality; adjusted HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.15–0.73]). CONCLUSIONS: After cryptogenic stroke, anticoagulation in those with LV injury was associated with lower rates of recurrent stroke, major bleeding, and death. These findings warrant confirmation in a dedicated randomized controlled trial. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT06398366.

Introduction: Embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) is a clinical construct encompassing heterogenous possible mechanisms of incident stroke, potentially with variable responsiveness to anticoagulation and antiplatelet treatment. This study aims to identify differences in recurrent stroke risk based on phenotypic clusters in an ESUS population, and whether some clusters may benefit relatively more from anticoagulation over antiplatelet therapy. Methods: We identified patient phenotypes from a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of 1909 ESUS patients by dividing them into groups using Partitioning Around Medoids (PAM) with correlation-weighted Gower distance over 23 baseline demographic, clinical, laboratory, radiographic, and cardiac features. We confirmed optimal clustering at 3 groups. We assessed cluster associations with time to recurrent stroke using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. We then employed a causal survival forest to estimate conditional average treatment effects (CATE) of anticoagulation versus antiplatelet therapy using the same baseline features as predictors with a 365-day horizon for restricted mean survival time differences. Finally, we used best linear projection to identify baseline features predictive of treatment effect and assessed whether effects differed significantly by cluster. Results: Cluster 1 (n=542) identified a low-risk, younger sample with minimal baseline disability and comorbidity burden. Cluster 2 (n=743) comprised a moderate-risk phenotype with intermediate comorbidity. Cluster 3 (n=626) represented the oldest and highest-risk phenotype. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significant differences in stroke-free survival across patient clusters (p < 0.001), where Cluster 1 experienced the lowest recurrent stroke rate and Cluster 3 had the highest. The clustering algorithm successfully identified clinically meaningful phenotypes with distinct risk profiles. While CATE varied across clusters, the differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: In a multicenter ESUS population, we identified 3 distinct phenotypic clusters, each comprising nearly one-third of the sample and with a differential risk of recurrent stroke. Although cluster was not a significant effect modifier, substantial CATE variability by cluster was observed. Future clinical trials may consider evaluating secondary stroke prevention therapies among phenotypically similar patients who may respond differentially to novel therapies.

Background: Embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) comprises infarct mechanisms presumed to be embolic and non-lacunar. One explanation for the lack of superiority of anticoagulation over aspirin is the inclusion of subcortical infarcts with white matter disease (WMD), reflecting small vessel pathology. We hypothesized that WMD is associated with recurrent ischemic stroke (RIS) in ESUS and this risk is not lessened by anticoagulation. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the multicenter Cardiac Abnormalities in Stroke Prevention and Recurrence (CASPR) registry, including ESUS patients from 27 U.S. centers (2015–2024). WMD severity was graded using the Fazekas scale from MRI and dichotomized as mild (0–1) vs. moderate-to-severe (2–3). The primary outcome was RIS. Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjusted for baseline differences. Cox proportional hazards models assessed associations between WMD and outcomes. Subgroup analyses explored effect modification by age, risk factors, and treatment type. Results: Among 1,890 ESUS patients with MRI data, 684 (36.2%) had Fazekas 2–3. These patients were older with more vascular risk factors, but IPTW achieved covariate balance. In the weighted cohort, RIS occurred more frequently in Fazekas 2–3 vs. 0–1 (7.1% vs. 4.6%/year; HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.10–2.22, p = 0.01). Major bleeding and mortality were similar (bleeding: 1.7% vs. 1.8%/yr, HR 0.96, p = 0.92; death: 7.0% vs. 6.7%/yr, HR 1.04, p = 0.81). Subgroup analyses showed no interaction between WMD and age, vascular risk factors, or treatment type (antiplatelet vs. anticoagulation), suggesting consistent RIS risk in those with higher WMD. Discussion: Moderate-to-severe WMD identifies ESUS patients at higher risk of ischemic stroke recurrence, with no mitigation by anticoagulation. These findings suggest that WMD may indicate non-embolic mechanisms and support the use of imaging-based risk stratification in ESUS.

Background: Although the embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) construct was proposed as a unifying concept for embolic-appearing strokes without an identified cause, it includes patients with diverse and often unrecognized underlying mechanisms. This study investigates the differential rate of recurrent stroke according to the completeness of neurodiagnostic testing in a diverse multicenter cohort. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of a multicenter observational cohort study (n=27 sites). Patients with ESUS were categorized into three groups: (1) established mechanism after further work up (ESUS-E), (2) patients who underwent a comprehensive diagnostic workup without an identified etiology (ESUS 2.0), and (3) no advanced workup (ESUS-NAW). The primary outcome of recurrent ischemic stroke was assessed by comparing ESUS 2.0 to both ESUS-E and ESUS-NAW groups using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Of the 2,281 patients included, 694 (30%) were classified as ESUS-E, 344 (15%) as ESUS 2.0, and 1,443 (55%) as ESUS-NAW. The ESUS 2.0 group had a significantly lower annualized recurrence rate (1.98 per 100 person-years) compared to both the ESUS-NAW group (7.7 per 100 person-years; aHR 0.27, 95% CI: 0.11–0.62; p=0.002) and the ESUS-E group (6.10 per 100 person-years; aHR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.15–0.85, p=0.020). Within the ESUS-E group, cancer (aHR 5.33; 95% CI: 2.09–13.63; p < 0.001) and non-stenosing atherosclerotic disease or arch atheroma (aHR 3.40; 95% CI: 1.18–9.83; p = 0.023) were associated with significantly increased risk of recurrence when compared to ESUS 2.0. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate a lower risk of recurrent stroke in patients classified as ESUS 2.0, diverging from the 5–6% annual recurrence rates observed in prior ESUS trials. These findings suggest that patients who receive comprehensive diagnostic evaluation without identification of a specific etiology have a lower risk of recurrent stroke, an important consideration for the design of future ESUS studies.

Background: Left ventricular (LV) injury is a cardioembolic etiology of ischemic stroke. We aimed to 1) evaluate recurrent stroke risk among patients with cryptogenic stroke and LV injury, and 2) determine if there is a treatment effect with anticoagulation in this population. Methods: We analyzed the multicenter, retrospective Cardiac Abnormalities in Stroke Prevention and Recurrence cohort of patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke. The exposure was LV injury defined by 1) LV ejection fraction (EF) 20-40% and/or 2) LV wall motion abnormality (hypokinesis or akinesis). The primary composite outcome included recurrent stroke, major bleeding, or death. Cox proportional hazard models were built and sequentially adjusted for 1) age and sex (Model 1), and 2) age, sex, race, ethnicity, anti-thrombotic use, and vascular risk factors (Model 2). We then assessed if there was heterogeneity in treatment effect by LV injury status with an interaction term of LV injury and oral anticoagulation use in Model 2. Results: Of 2,641 patients in CASPR, the analytic cohort included 2,191 patients with complete exposure and outcome data (median age 65 years, 49.8% female, median follow-up 1.55 years). There were 113 (5.2%) patients with LV injury (median LVEF 30%, interquartile range 25-34%). There were 559 incident events (321 recurrent strokes [288 ischemic], 71 major hemorrhages, 250 deaths). Among patients with LV injury, 15.9% were prescribed an anticoagulant within 7 days of index stroke (vs 9.6% without LV injury, p=0.03). The unadjusted risk of the primary outcome was non-significantly higher among patients with LV injury vs without (HR 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-2.00), but became significant in Model 1 (HR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.85) and in Model 2 (HR 1.35, 95% CI, 1.11-1.64). In the LV injury subgroup, anticoagulation vs antiplatelet therapy was associated with a significant reduction in the primary outcome (HR 0.63, 95% CI, 0.43-0.94). In patients without LV injury, anticoagulation was associated with a higher risk of the composite outcome (HR 4.35, 95% CI, 1.69-11.16, p[interaction]=0.002). Conclusion: In this observational study, there was an increased risk of the primary outcome which included recurrent stroke among patients with cryptogenic stroke and LV injury. Anticoagulation use in LV injury is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of the primary outcome. These findings warrant confirmation in a dedicated randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: Malignancy represents an important subgroup of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). We aim to compare infarct features, potential embolic sources, and long-term outcomes in ESUS patients with and without malignancy. Methods: In this pre-specified secondary analysis of the Cardiac Abnormalities in Stroke Prevention and Recurrence (CASPR) retrospective cohort study, active cancers were identified by site investigators and adjudicated as malignant if they were non-squamous or non-basal cell skin cancers. We compared the prevalence of various potential embolic sources (e.g., patent foramen ovale, left ventricular dysfunction, post-stroke atrial fibrillation) among patients with and without malignancy. The risk of recurrent stroke, major bleeding, or death was evaluated using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, accounting for age, sex, vascular risk factors, competing potential embolic sources, and initial treatment with anticoagulation versus non-anticoagulant (e.g., antiplatelet) regimen. Results: Of the 2201 patients followed over a median of 564 days, 236 (10.7%) were diagnosed with cancer at the time of stroke. Patients with malignancy were older, more frequently hypertensive and did not differ with regards to prevalence of specific infarct patterns or potential cardiac embolic sources. No difference was observed in the composite outcome of recurrent stroke, major bleeding, or death (adjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI, 0.71-1.46). Age (adjusted HR per year 1.02, 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), baseline stroke severity (adjusted HR 1.03 per NIHSS point, 95% CI, 1.01-1.05), prior stroke (adjusted HR 1.68, 95% CI, 1.38-2.05), and multi-territorial infarct pattern (adjusted HR 1.67, 95% CI, 1.33-2.08) were significantly associated with this composite outcome, but anticoagulation was not. There was a nominally lower rate of major bleeding with malignancy (adjusted HR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.19-1.04), a significantly higher rate of death (adjusted HR 1.58, 95% CI, 1.09-2.30), but no significant difference in recurrent ischemic stroke (p=0.31). Conclusions: Patients with malignancy and ESUS had higher mortality but did not differ in recurrent stroke risk or major bleeding when compared to patients without malignancy. Anticoagulation was not independently associated with better outcomes. Further analysis of infarct topology and risk factors may better identify patients for whom anticoagulation may benefit.

Introduction: Stroke code simulation training is effective at reducing door to needle times (DTNT) for tPA administration. We aimed to evaluate the effect on DTNT from simulation training specifically for Neurology residents. Method: Stroke code simulation was implemented at our comprehensive stroke center in July 2017, targeting PGY2 adult neurology residents and PGY3 pediatric neurology residents who were first responders at stroke codes during off-hours. Training was completed at the beginning of the residents’ respective training years. An interrupted time series analysis of DTNT for tPA before and after the implementation of simulation training from July 2016 to July 2019 was performed. Demographics, tPA metrics, and safety and hospital metrics were compared pre and post intervention among the residents. No other quality improvement projects targeting DTNT were implemented during this time. Results: Between July 2016 and July 2019, 305 patients received thrombolysis from a resident first responder - 118 (39%) of whom were treated pre-simulation and 187 (61.3%) treated during the simulation period. There was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics between the two groups (Table 1). Median DTNT was 49.5 (IQR 40-71) min during the pre-simulation period and 48 (IQR 37-60) min during the post-simulation period (p= 0.04). Compared to pre-simulation, there were no months in which the median DTNT exceeded 60 min post-simulation. IQR for the DTNT appeared both clinically and statistically different. Pre and post simulation, there was no difference in incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage nor in 90-day outcomes. Conclusion: In our analysis of the effect of stroke code simulation training among neurology residents, improvement in DTNT after simulation training appears more driven by improvement in the variation in times rather than a clinically significant decrease in median times.