The impact of enteric coating of aspirin on aspirin responsiveness in patients with suspected or newly diagnosed ischemic stroke: prospective cohort study: results from the (ECASIS) study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Uncertainty remains regarding the impact of enteric-coated aspirin (EC-ASA) on secondary prevention of ischemic stroke compared to plain aspirin (P-ASA). Hence, this study was designed to investigate the effect of EC formulation on ASA response via evaluating thromboxane B2 (TXB2) levels in patients with suspected or newly diagnosed stroke. METHODS: A prospective cohort study on suspected or newly diagnosed ischemic stroke patients who are aspirin-naive was conducted. Patients were received either EC aspirin or plain aspirin for at least 3 days. The primary outcome was the proportion of aspirin non-responsiveness between two groups (level of residual serum TXB2 associated with elevated thrombotic risk (< 99.0% inhibition or TXB2 > 3.1 ng/ml) within 72 h after three daily aspirin doses, while secondary outcomes were the incidence of early gastrointestinal tract (GIT) bleeding with the various aspirin preparations. (Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04330872 registered on 02 April 2020). RESULTS: Of 42 patients, ischemic strokes were confirmed in both P-ASA (81%) and EC-ASA (67%) arms. ASA non-responsiveness showed no significant difference between the two formulations (P-ASA vs. EC-ASA; 28.6% vs 23.8%; P = 0.726). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that patients treated with EC-ASA were more likely to have a lower rate of non-responders compared to P-ASA (unadjusted OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.20, 3.11); with the risk highest in type 2 diabetic patients with HBA1c > 6.5% (adjusted OR 6; 95% CI 1.02, 35.27; P = 0.047). No incidence of GIT bleeding observed throughout the study. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of ASA non-responsiveness was recorded regardless of ASA formulation administered. The increased risk of ASA non-responsiveness in diabetic patients needs further exploration by larger prospective studies.

An investigation into the impact of enteric coated of aspirin in patients with newly diagnosed ischemic stroke (ECASIS).

INTRODUCTION: Uncertainty remains regarding the impact of enteric-coated (EC) aspirin as it relates to the reduction of cardiovascular risk. We hypothesize that EC formulation based on a previous report may blunt aspirin response as evidenced by reduced Thromboxane A2 (TXA 2) levels in diabetic patients. Thus, it was imperative to ascertain and validate the effect of the EC formulation of Aspirin on the Thromboxane B2 (TXB2) level. METHODS/DESIGN: An open-label consecutive randomized interventional controlled trial. Patients with newly diagnosed ischemic stroke who are just about to start Aspirin were assessed for eligibility and inclusion in our trial. Consecutive patients (admitted to the stroke unit of Hamad General Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar) will be randomized to receive either EC aspirin or plain Aspirin. They will be required to continue taking them throughout the study (3 days). Demographics and laboratory records of the study participants will be abstracted from online records. Further study variables will be obtained manually in designated case record forms (CRF). The primary outcomes are the incidence of aspirin non-responders (level of residual serum TXB2 associated with elevated thrombotic risk (<99.0% inhibition or TXB2 >3.1 ng/mL) within 72 h after three daily aspirin doses). Whereas secondary outcomes are the incidence of GIT bleeding of various preparations of Aspirin. The study was approved by MRC and IRB of Hamad Medical Corporation (MRC number: 01-18-156). DISCUSSION: This trial will determine potential differences in the efficacy of EC Aspirin and plain Aspirin on the Thromboxane B2 level. Additionally, it will ascertain the tolerability and safety of both formulations of Aspirin in patients with newly diagnosed ischemic stroke. These results will either support the current notion of no difference between the two formulations. However, if a difference is found, this will invite for future trials exploring clinical outcomes occurrence between various formulations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04330872 registered on April 2, 2020.