Cervical Artery DissectionPhase 3CADISSNCT00238667
To Determine the Feasibility of a Clinical Trial Comparing Anticoagulants Versus Antiplatelets in the Acute Treatment of Patients With Cervical Artery Dissection
A Phase 3 study testing Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel) and Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin) in people with Cervical Artery Dissection and Carotid Artery Dissection, run by St George's, University of London at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
This is a feasibility study to determine if a sufficient number of patients can be recruited throughout the United Kingdom and whether sufficient endpoints can be generated for a full scale therapeutic trial of anticoagulants versus antiplatelets in acute cervical artery dissection treatment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Cervical Artery Dissection, Carotid Artery Dissection, Vertebral Artery Dissection
- What is being tested?
- Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel) and Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 250 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- Nov 2005to May 2014
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Extracranial carotid or vertebral artery dissection with symptom onset within the last 7 days. This includes:
- Ipsilateral transient ischemic attack or stroke
- Ipsilateral Horner's syndrome or neck pain with known date of onset.
- Imaging evidence of definite or probable dissection on MRI/MRA, CTA or ultrasound.
Who cannot join
- Intracranial cerebral artery dissection
- Symptom onset after 7 days
- Contraindication to either antiplatelet agents or anticoagulation therapy
- Patient's refusal to consent
- Patients who are undergoing angiography and stenting or surgery for treatment of their dissection.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United Kingdom1 site
St. George's University of London, Clinical Neuroscience Department, Cranmer Terrace
London, England, SW17 0RE
About this study
Official title: Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study
This is a feasibility study to determine if a sufficient number of patients can be recruited throughout the United Kingdom and whether sufficient endpoints can be generated for a full scale therapeutic trial of anticoagulants versus antiplatelets in acute cervical artery dissection treatment.
Read the detailed description
ST. GEORGE'S HEADED NOTEPAPER
CADISS FEASIBILITY STUDY (Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study) PROTOCOL
Aim:
To determine the feasibility of a clinical trial comparing antiplatelet therapy with anticoagulation in the acute treatment of patients with cervical artery dissection. Specifically to address whether:
- There are sufficient clinical endpoints to provide the power to determine treatment effect;
- Adequate numbers of patients can be recruited.
Dissection of the carotid and vertebral arteries is a major cause of stroke in persons < 50 years of age, mainly due to embolism from clot sealing the tear. At present physicians treat these patients with anticoagulants or antiplatelet drugs to prevent further stroke, but neither therapy is evidence-based. Anticoagulants may be powerful anti-embolic agents but are also more dangerous than aspirin, and potentially could encourage further dissection. Most published studies are flawed by retrospective data, with no reference to the number of patients in the original study cohort and do not include the critical principles of randomisation and 'blinding'.
Proposal of present 'feasibility'study:
The only prospective data available (1) suggest that anticoagulants are more effective than antiplatelet agents in reducing further TIA and stroke after dissection, but the numbers were small and lack reliable statistical confirmation. This study was not a randomised controlled trial and therefore may be open to bias in selection of treatment. As well, it found that most recurrent events occur within the first month and thereafter the number tails off. A total of about 1800 patients for a two armed therapeutical trial was necessary to be calculated on these data.
Authors of a previous Cochrane review (2) reviewing available published literature calculated that a total of about 2000 patients (1000 in each treatment arm) is needed for a blinded randomised trial of anticoagulants versus antiplatelet agents. This would need a major, probably international, study involving over 50 centres, and would be an expensive undertaking. Prior to starting such a study it is important to determine whether this would be feasible. This is particularly important for carotid and vertebral dissection which is a frequently missed diagnosis, at least during the acute phase. Limited natural history outcome data suggest the risk of recurrent stroke and TIA following carotid and vertebral dissection is only markedly raised during the first week to month (1, 3) and therefore early identification and recruitment of patients are essential if any treatment effect is to be demonstrated.
For these reasons, a feasibility study is essential before any large scale clinical trial. Specifically, two things need to be determined. Firstly, whether a sufficient number of patients can be recruited sufficiently early from participating centres. Secondly, in view of the limited data on the rate of recurrent TIA and stroke in patients with recent dissection, we need more data to obtain a robust estimate of early risk to inform power calculations for a large scale study.
A preliminary informal survey conducted by Clinical Neurosciences, St. George's University of London, in association with the Association of British Neurologists, has indicated that at least 27 neurologists/stroke physicians throughout the UK would be interested in collaborating and enrolling consecutive consenting patients into such a study comparing anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.
Methods:
This will be a randomised multicentre single blind study comparing antiplatelet therapy with anticoagulation for patients with carotid and vertebral dissection. Recruitment must be within seven days of onset of symptoms.
Inclusion Criteria:
- Extracranial carotid or vertebral artery dissection with symptom onset within the last 7 days. This includes:
- Ipsilateral TIA or stroke
- Ipsilateral Horner's syndrome or neck pain with known date of onset
- Imaging evidence of definite or probable dissection on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), computed tomography angiography (CTA) or ultrasound (patients can be initially randomised on ultrasound alone but subsequent MR or CTA confirmation is needed)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Intracranial cerebral artery dissection
- Symptom onset after 7 days
- Contraindications to either antiplatelet agents or anticoagulation therapy
- Patient refusal to consent
- Patients who are undergoing angioplasty and stenting or surgery for treatment of their dissection
Treatment:
Patients will be randomised to either antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy allocated on a single blind basis and continued for six months.
- Antiplatelet therapy: Aspirin 75-300 mg daily, aspirin and dipyridamole or clopidogrel alone
- Anticoagulation with heparin (either unfractionated heparin or a therapeutic dose of low molecular weight heparin) followed by warfarin aiming for an INR in the range 2.5-4. Local protocols for heparin therapy can be used.
Primary Endpoint:
Ipsilateral stroke, transient ischaemic attack or vascular death within 6 months from randomisation
Secondary Endpoint:
- TIA and stroke in other cerebral vascular territories
- Recanalisation on repeat imaging at 6 months.
Imaging Protocol:
The diagnosis of dissection is based on different modalities in different centres. Centres should use their usual imaging protocol to diagnose dissection. Diagnosis on the basis of MRI with cross-sectional imaging through the artery wall, MRA, CT angiography, intra-arterial angiography, and ultrasound (later confirmed by MR or CTA) are all acceptable.
Patients can be randomised if the HQ radiologist (Dr. Clifton) agrees that the diagnosis is probable or definite. Hard copies of imaging must be recorded for central reading.
The primary analysis will include only those patients judged to have probable or definite dissection on central reading of the hard copies.
Randomisation:
Randomisation will be via 24 hour randomisation service provided by the University of Aberdeen Health Services Research Unit.
The local investigator will personally contact this service at 0800 387 4444 and the Centre will give the investigator a code number, known only to the randomisation centre and local investigator.
Trial Management:
The study will be coordinated from Clinical Neuroscience at St. George's, University of London. The principal co-investigators are Professor John Norris and Professor Hugh Markus. The principal neuroradiological investigator, responsible for assessment of hard copies of imaging, is Dr Andrew Clifton. The trial will be coordinated by a clinical fellow funded by a project grant from The Stroke Association.
References
- Beletsky V, Nadareishvili Z, Lynch J, Shuaib A, Woolfenden A, Norris JW; Canadian Stroke Consortium (2003) Cervical Arterial Dissection; Time for a Therapeutic Trial? Stroke Dec; 34(12)2856-60
- Lyrer P, Engelter S. Antithrombotic drugs for carotid artery dissection. Cochrane Review Oxford,UK. Cochrane Library 2002. Issue 1
- Biousse V, D'Anglejan-Chatillon J, Touboul PJ, Amarenco P, Bousser MG (1995) Timecourse of Symptoms in Extracranial Carotid Artery Dissections. A Series of 80 patients Stroke Feb; 26(2)
- Conditions
- Cervical Artery Dissection, Carotid Artery Dissection, Vertebral Artery Dissection, Stroke
- Being tested
- Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel), Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin)
- Keywords
- Extracranial carotid artery dissection, Dissection and stroke
- Medical subject headings
- Vertebral Artery Dissection, Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel)Drug
Also called Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel
Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin)Drug
Also called Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Anti-platelet therapy | Active comparator | Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel alone or in dual therapy Receives: Drug: Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel) |
| Anti-coagulant | Active comparator | Warfarin, unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, dalteparin, tinzaparin aiming for an INR in range of 2-3. Local protocols for Heparin can be used Receives: Drug: Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin) |
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Oct 2005 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2005
- Study completionMay 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Cervical Artery DissectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 250 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- St George's, University of London
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Stroke Association, United Kingdom
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Professor John W Norris, MD, FRCP, Principal investigator, St George's, University of LondonProfessor Hugh Markus, DM, FRCP, Principal investigator, St George's, University of London
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00238667
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CAMER5UA
- Other IDs
- 2006-002827-18, 04.0287, 04/Q0803/15, 04/Q0803/215, TSA2004/16
- Acronym
- CADISS
- Status last verified
- Sep 2005
- First submitted
- 11 Oct 2005
- Last updated
- 20 May 2015
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 May 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00238667
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CADISS / CAMER5UA
- Conditions
- Cervical Artery Dissection, Carotid Artery Dissection, Vertebral Artery Dissection, Stroke
- Keywords
- Extracranial carotid artery dissection, Dissection and stroke
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 250 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- St George's, University of LondonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Stroke Association, United Kingdom
- Study start
- Nov 2005
- Study completion
- May 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Oct 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This is a feasibility study to determine if a sufficient number of patients can be recruited throughout the United Kingdom and whether sufficient endpoints can be generated for a full scale therapeutic trial of anticoagulants versus antiplatelets in acute cervical artery dissection treatment.
Detailed description
ST. GEORGE'S HEADED NOTEPAPER
CADISS FEASIBILITY STUDY (Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study) PROTOCOL
Aim:
To determine the feasibility of a clinical trial comparing antiplatelet therapy with anticoagulation in the acute treatment of patients with cervical artery dissection. Specifically to address whether:
- There are sufficient clinical endpoints to provide the power to determine treatment effect;
- Adequate numbers of patients can be recruited.
Dissection of the carotid and vertebral arteries is a major cause of stroke in persons < 50 years of age, mainly due to embolism from clot sealing the tear. At present physicians treat these patients with anticoagulants or antiplatelet drugs to prevent further stroke, but neither therapy is evidence-based. Anticoagulants may be powerful anti-embolic agents but are also more dangerous than aspirin, and potentially could encourage further dissection. Most published studies are flawed by retrospective data, with no reference to the number of patients in the original study cohort and do not include the critical principles of randomisation and 'blinding'.
Proposal of present 'feasibility'study:
The only prospective data available (1) suggest that anticoagulants are more effective than antiplatelet agents in reducing further TIA and stroke after dissection, but the numbers were small and lack reliable statistical confirmation. This study was not a randomised controlled trial and therefore may be open to bias in selection of treatment. As well, it found that most recurrent events occur within the first month and thereafter the number tails off. A total of about 1800 patients for a two armed therapeutical trial was necessary to be calculated on these data.
Authors of a previous Cochrane review (2) reviewing available published literature calculated that a total of about 2000 patients (1000 in each treatment arm) is needed for a blinded randomised trial of anticoagulants versus antiplatelet agents. This would need a major, probably international, study involving over 50 centres, and would be an expensive undertaking. Prior to starting such a study it is important to determine whether this would be feasible. This is particularly important for carotid and vertebral dissection which is a frequently missed diagnosis, at least during the acute phase. Limited natural history outcome data suggest the risk of recurrent stroke and TIA following carotid and vertebral dissection is only markedly raised during the first week to month (1, 3) and therefore early identification and recruitment of patients are essential if any treatment effect is to be demonstrated.
For these reasons, a feasibility study is essential before any large scale clinical trial. Specifically, two things need to be determined. Firstly, whether a sufficient number of patients can be recruited sufficiently early from participating centres. Secondly, in view of the limited data on the rate of recurrent TIA and stroke in patients with recent dissection, we need more data to obtain a robust estimate of early risk to inform power calculations for a large scale study.
A preliminary informal survey conducted by Clinical Neurosciences, St. George's University of London, in association with the Association of British Neurologists, has indicated that at least 27 neurologists/stroke physicians throughout the UK would be interested in collaborating and enrolling consecutive consenting patients into such a study comparing anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.
Methods:
This will be a randomised multicentre single blind study comparing antiplatelet therapy with anticoagulation for patients with carotid and vertebral dissection. Recruitment must be within seven days of onset of symptoms.
Inclusion Criteria:
- Extracranial carotid or vertebral artery dissection with symptom onset within the last 7 days. This includes:
- Ipsilateral TIA or stroke
- Ipsilateral Horner's syndrome or neck pain with known date of onset
- Imaging evidence of definite or probable dissection on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), computed tomography angiography (CTA) or ultrasound (patients can be initially randomised on ultrasound alone but subsequent MR or CTA confirmation is needed)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Intracranial cerebral artery dissection
- Symptom onset after 7 days
- Contraindications to either antiplatelet agents or anticoagulation therapy
- Patient refusal to consent
- Patients who are undergoing angioplasty and stenting or surgery for treatment of their dissection
Treatment:
Patients will be randomised to either antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy allocated on a single blind basis and continued for six months.
- Antiplatelet therapy: Aspirin 75-300 mg daily, aspirin and dipyridamole or clopidogrel alone
- Anticoagulation with heparin (either unfractionated heparin or a therapeutic dose of low molecular weight heparin) followed by warfarin aiming for an INR in the range 2.5-4. Local protocols for heparin therapy can be used.
Primary Endpoint:
Ipsilateral stroke, transient ischaemic attack or vascular death within 6 months from randomisation
Secondary Endpoint:
- TIA and stroke in other cerebral vascular territories
- Recanalisation on repeat imaging at 6 months.
Imaging Protocol:
The diagnosis of dissection is based on different modalities in different centres. Centres should use their usual imaging protocol to diagnose dissection. Diagnosis on the basis of MRI with cross-sectional imaging through the artery wall, MRA, CT angiography, intra-arterial angiography, and ultrasound (later confirmed by MR or CTA) are all acceptable.
Patients can be randomised if the HQ radiologist (Dr. Clifton) agrees that the diagnosis is probable or definite. Hard copies of imaging must be recorded for central reading.
The primary analysis will include only those patients judged to have probable or definite dissection on central reading of the hard copies.
Randomisation:
Randomisation will be via 24 hour randomisation service provided by the University of Aberdeen Health Services Research Unit.
The local investigator will personally contact this service at 0800 387 4444 and the Centre will give the investigator a code number, known only to the randomisation centre and local investigator.
Trial Management:
The study will be coordinated from Clinical Neuroscience at St. George's, University of London. The principal co-investigators are Professor John Norris and Professor Hugh Markus. The principal neuroradiological investigator, responsible for assessment of hard copies of imaging, is Dr Andrew Clifton. The trial will be coordinated by a clinical fellow funded by a project grant from The Stroke Association.
References
- Beletsky V, Nadareishvili Z, Lynch J, Shuaib A, Woolfenden A, Norris JW; Canadian Stroke Consortium (2003) Cervical Arterial Dissection; Time for a Therapeutic Trial? Stroke Dec; 34(12)2856-60
- Lyrer P, Engelter S. Antithrombotic drugs for carotid artery dissection. Cochrane Review Oxford,UK. Cochrane Library 2002. Issue 1
- Biousse V, D'Anglejan-Chatillon J, Touboul PJ, Amarenco P, Bousser MG (1995) Timecourse of Symptoms in Extracranial Carotid Artery Dissections. A Series of 80 patients Stroke Feb; 26(2)
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Anti-platelet therapy | Active comparator | Drug: Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel)Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel alone or in dual therapy |
| Anti-coagulant | Active comparator | Drug: Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin)Warfarin, unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, dalteparin, tinzaparin aiming for an INR in range of 2-3. Local protocols for Heparin can be used |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Extracranial carotid or vertebral artery dissection with symptom onset within the last 7 days. This includes:
- Imaging evidence of definite or probable dissection on MRI/MRA, CTA or ultrasound.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Intracranial cerebral artery dissection
- Symptom onset after 7 days
- Contraindication to either antiplatelet agents or anticoagulation therapy
- Patient's refusal to consent
- Patients who are undergoing angiography and stenting or surgery for treatment of their dissection.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel)Also: Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel | Drug | Anti-platelet therapy |
| Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin)Also: Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin | Drug | Anti-coagulant |
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 May 2015.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Cervical Artery Dissection
RecruitingObservational study
Defining the Basis of Fibromuscular Dysplasia (FMD)
Fibromuscular Dysplasia, Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection
Not yet recruiting
Antithrombotic Treatment Strategies in Cervical Artery Dissection
Cervical Artery Dissection
RecruitingObservational study
Targeting Real World Usage In Stroke Treatment
Saccular and Fusiform Aneurysms, Pseudoaneurysm
Recruiting
Next Generation Sequencing Analysis of Patients with Spontaneous Dissection of Cervical Arteries
Dissection Carotid Artery, Dissection Arterial
RecruitingObservational study
Risk of Recurrent CeAD After Pregnancy
Cervical Artery Dissection, Pregnancy Complications
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Professor John W Norris, MD, FRCP principal investigator
St George's, University of London
Professor Hugh Markus, DM, FRCP principal investigator
St George's, University of London
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Antiplatelet (Aspirin, Dipyridamole, clopidogrel) and Anticoagulant (Unfractionated Heparin, LMW Heparin, Warfarin) in people with Cervical Artery Dissection and Carotid Artery Dissection, run by St George's, University of London at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 May 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 May 2015.