Cilostazol for prevention of secondary stroke (CSPS 2): An aspirin-controlled, double-blind, randomised non-inferiority trial

456Citations
Citations of this article
282Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: The antiplatelet drug cilostazol is efficacious for prevention of stroke recurrence compared with placebo. We designed the second Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study (CSPS 2) to establish non-inferiority of cilostazol versus aspirin for prevention of stroke, and to compare the efficacy and safety of cilostazol and aspirin in patients with non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke. Methods: Patients aged 20-79 years who had had a cerebral infarction within the previous 26 weeks were enrolled at 278 sites in Japan and allocated to receive 100 mg cilostazol twice daily or 81 mg aspirin once daily for 1-5 years. Patients were allocated according to a computer-generated randomisation sequence by means of a dynamic balancing method using patient information obtained at registration. All patients, study personnel, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the first occurrence of stroke (cerebral infarction, cerebral haemorrhage, or subarachnoid haemorrhage). The predefined margin of non-inferiority was an upper 95% CI limit for the hazard ratio of 1·33. Analyses were by full-analysis set. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00234065. Findings: Between December, 2003, and October, 2006, 2757 patients were enrolled and randomly allocated to receive cilostazol (n=1379) or aspirin (n=1378), of whom 1337 on cilostazol and 1335 on aspirin were included in analyses; mean follow-up was 29 months (SD 16). The primary endpoint occurred at yearly rates of 2·76% (n=82) in the cilostazol group and 3·71% (n=119) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio 0·743, 95% CI 0·564-0·981; p=0·0357). Haemorrhagic events (cerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, or haemorrhage requiring hospital admission) occurred in fewer patients on cilostazol (0·77%, n=23) than on aspirin (1·78%, n=57; 0·458, 0·296-0·711; p=0·0004), but headache, diarrhoea, palpitation, dizziness, and tachycardia were more frequent in the cilostazol group than in the aspirin group. Interpretation: Cilostazol seems to be non-inferior, and might be superior, to aspirin for prevention of stroke after an ischaemic stroke, and was associated with fewer haemorrhagic events. Therefore, cilostazol could be used for prevention of stroke in patients with non-cardioembolic stroke. Funding: Otsuka Pharmaceutical. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.

References Powered by Scopus

A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE)

6489Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II)

2615Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials

2603Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: A guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

3456Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

2021 Guideline for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack: A Guideline From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

1721Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy for ischemic stroke: Antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American college of chest physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

409Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shinohara, Y., Katayama, Y., Uchiyama, S., Yamaguchi, T., Handa, S., Matsuoka, K., … Hamada, C. (2010). Cilostazol for prevention of secondary stroke (CSPS 2): An aspirin-controlled, double-blind, randomised non-inferiority trial. The Lancet Neurology, 9(10), 959–968. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(10)70198-8

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 84

46%

Researcher 55

30%

Professor / Associate Prof. 32

17%

Lecturer / Post doc 13

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 156

80%

Neuroscience 19

10%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11

6%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 8

4%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 1
News Mentions: 1
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free