← Back
NeuroTrials.ai
Neurology Clinical Trial Database

BASIS

Balloon Angioplasty for Symptomatic Intracranial Artery Stenosis

Year of Publication: 2024

Authors: Xuan Sun, Yiming Deng, Yong Zhang, ..., Zhongrong Miao

Journal: JAMA

Citation: JAMA. 2024;332(13):1059-1069. doi:10.1001/jama.2024.12829

Link: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.12829


Clinical Question

Is submaximal balloon angioplasty plus aggressive medical management superior to aggressive medical management alone for secondary stroke prevention in patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (70–99%)?

Bottom Line

Balloon angioplasty plus aggressive medical management significantly reduced the 1-year composite primary outcome (4.4% vs 13.5%; HR 0.32) driven by lower rates of qualifying artery ischemic stroke and revascularization beyond 30 days, despite numerically higher periprocedural risk. This is the first positive RCT of endovascular treatment over medical management for sICAS, though procedural complications including 14.5% arterial dissection remain a concern.

Major Points

  • Primary composite outcome significantly lower with balloon angioplasty: 4.4% vs 13.5% (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16–0.63; P<0.001).
  • 30-day stroke or death was numerically higher with angioplasty (3.2% vs 1.6%; HR 2.05, P=0.24) — Kaplan-Meier curves crossed at 30 days.
  • Beyond 30 days through 1 year: qualifying artery ischemic stroke 0.4% vs 7.5%; qualifying artery revascularization 1.2% vs 8.3%.
  • Post hoc analysis removing revascularization from composite still favored angioplasty (3.6% vs 9.1%; HR 0.39, P=0.01).
  • Arterial dissection occurred in 14.5% of angioplasty patients; 71.4% of these underwent rescue stenting.
  • sICH rate 1.2% (angioplasty) vs 0.4% (medical management).
  • 1-year mRS shift favored angioplasty (generalized OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06–1.45; P=0.01).
  • Disabling stroke (mRS ≥2 at 1 year) was lower with angioplasty (2.4% vs 7.1%; P=0.02).
  • Restenosis rate of the qualifying artery within 1 year was 15.7% in the angioplasty group; only 2.0% had TIA/stroke related to restenosis.
  • All prespecified subgroup point estimates favored balloon angioplasty, with no significant interactions.
  • First positive RCT of any endovascular approach over medical management for sICAS, after negative results from SAMMPRIS, VISSIT, and CASSISS (all stenting trials).
  • Submaximal inflation (50–70% of proximal diameter) may reduce snowplowing effect on perforator branches compared to stenting.
  • Median time from qualifying event to randomization was 34 days (angioplasty) and 32 days (medical), longer than SAMMPRIS (7 days) but shorter than CASSISS (38 days).
  • 84.4% of qualifying events were ischemic stroke; 40.0% had border zone infarction, a marker of hemodynamic compromise.

Design

Study Type: Investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint trial (PROBE design)

Randomization: 1

Blinding: Open-label with blinded endpoint evaluation. Clinical event adjudication committee blinded to group assignment. Neuroimaging core lab of independent neuroradiologists masked to all clinical information.

Enrollment Period: November 8, 2018 to April 2, 2022

Follow-up Duration: 12 months (primary; up to 3 years planned)

Centers: 31

Countries: China

Sample Size: 501

Analysis: Primary analysis population (all eligible patients analyzed per randomization). Kaplan-Meier plots with log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards model for HR (Schoenfeld residual test P=0.12). Post hoc landmark analysis at 30 days due to crossing survival curves. Ordinal mRS analysis with generalized OR via Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney (proportional odds assumption not met). Per-protocol and as-treated sensitivity analyses. No multiplicity adjustment for secondary outcomes. SAS v9.4.


Inclusion Criteria

  • Age 35–80 years
  • Symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: recent TIA (<90 days) or ischemic stroke (14–90 days) before enrollment
  • 70–99% stenosis of a major intracranial artery (WASID method): ICA C4–C7, M1, V4, or basilar artery
  • Normal distal artery beyond stenosis
  • Receiving at least 1 antithrombotic drug and/or standard risk factor management
  • Baseline mRS <3

Exclusion Criteria

  • Thrombolytic therapy within 24 hours before enrollment
  • Worsening neurological deficits within 24 hours before enrollment
  • Other intracranial arteries with severe stenosis (70–99%) apart from qualifying artery
  • Stenosis >50% of the parent artery to the qualifying artery (tandem lesion)
  • Perforator stroke (unless severe stenosis of supplying artery with hemodynamic compromise)
  • Baseline mRS ≥3
  • Ischemic stroke onset ≤14 days before enrollment

Arms

FieldBalloon Angioplasty + Aggressive Medical ManagementControl
InterventionSubmaximal balloon angioplasty (inflation diameter 50–70% of proximal artery diameter) with dedicated intracranial balloon (Sinomed Neuro RX/LPS) under general anesthesia within 3 business days of randomization, plus aspirin 100 mg daily + clopidogrel 75 mg daily for 90 days (ticagrelor or cilostazol if clopidogrel resistant) + risk factor management (BP ≤140/90, LDL <70, HbA1c <7%, lifestyle modification)Aspirin 100 mg daily + clopidogrel 75 mg daily for 90 days (ticagrelor or cilostazol if clopidogrel resistant) + risk factor management (BP ≤140/90, LDL <70, HbA1c <7%, lifestyle modification)
Duration12 months follow-up12 months follow-up

Outcomes

OutcomeTypeControlInterventionHR / OR / RRP-value
Composite of any stroke or death within 30 days after enrollment or after balloon angioplasty, or any ischemic stroke in the qualifying artery territory or revascularization of the qualifying artery after 30 days through 12 monthsPrimary34/252 (13.5%)11/249 (4.4%)0.32P<0.001
Any stroke or all-cause death within 30 daysSecondary4/252 (1.6%)8/249 (3.2%)HR 2.05 (95% CI 0.62–6.81)P=0.24
Any stroke in qualifying artery territory or death within 90 daysSecondary10/252 (4.0%)7/249 (2.8%)HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.27–1.88)P=0.49
Any stroke in qualifying artery territory or death within 1 yearSecondary23/252 (9.1%)8/249 (3.2%)HR 0.35 (95% CI 0.16–0.78)P=0.01
Qualifying artery revascularization within 1 yearSecondary24/252 (9.5%)4/249 (1.6%)HR 0.16 (95% CI 0.06–0.47)P<0.001
Combined vascular events (stroke, MI, vascular death) within 1 yearSecondary26/252 (10.3%)10/249 (4.0%)HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.19–0.80)P=0.01
mRS score at 90 days (ordinal shift)SecondaryMedian 0 [IQR 0–1]Median 0 [IQR 0–0]Generalized OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.03–1.38)P=0.01
mRS score at 1 year (ordinal shift)SecondaryMedian 0 [IQR 0–1]Median 0 [IQR 0–0]Generalized OR 1.26 (95% CI 1.06–1.45)P=0.01
Any stroke outside qualifying artery territory within 1 yearSecondary4/252 (1.6%)3/249 (1.2%)HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.17–3.40)P=0.72
Qualifying artery ischemic stroke beyond 30 days through 1 year (post hoc)Secondary19/252 (7.5%)1/249 (0.4%)HR 0.05 (95% CI 0.01–0.39)
Qualifying artery revascularization beyond 30 days through 1 year (post hoc)Secondary21/252 (8.3%)3/249 (1.2%)HR 0.14 (95% CI 0.04–0.47)
Post hoc composite excluding revascularization (stroke/death ≤30d or qualifying artery ischemic stroke 30d–1y)Secondary23/252 (9.1%)9/249 (3.6%)HR 0.39 (95% CI 0.18–0.85)P=0.01
Restenosis of qualifying artery within 1 year (angioplasty group only)Secondary15.7%
Symptomatic ICHAdverse1/252 (0.4%)3/249 (1.2%)
Asymptomatic ICHAdverse0/252 (0%)3/249 (1.2%)
Disabling Stroke (mRS ≥2 at 1 year)Adverse18/252 (7.1%)6/249 (2.4%)P=0.02
Death within 30 daysAdverse0/252 (0%)1/249 (0.4%)
Death within 1 yearAdverse1/252 (0.4%)1/249 (0.4%)
Procedural Complications (total)Adverse17.4%
Arterial DissectionAdverse14.5%
VasospasmAdverse1.2%
ThrombosisAdverse1.7%
Arterial OcclusionAdverse0.4%
Arterial PerforationAdverse0.4%

Subgroup Analysis

All prespecified subgroup analyses (sex, age </>65, hypertension, diabetes, smoking, hypoperfusion, lesion location anterior/posterior, qualifying event TIA/stroke, eGFR, stenosis degree </>80%, BMI </>25) showed point estimates favoring balloon angioplasty with no significant interaction effects. Posterior circulation (HR 0.16) and age ≥65 (HR 0.16) showed the strongest trends.


Criticisms

  • Over half of enrolled patients (51.5%) were from the lead center, limiting generalizability — though post hoc center-effect adjustment showed similar results.
  • All-Chinese population (98.6% Han Chinese); findings may not generalize to other ethnic populations.
  • Composite primary outcome included revascularization, which is a soft endpoint partly driven by clinical decision-making — though post hoc analysis excluding revascularization still favored angioplasty.
  • Kaplan-Meier curves crossed at 30 days, indicating higher early periprocedural risk with angioplasty before later benefit.
  • Arterial dissection rate of 14.5% is high, with 71.4% of dissections requiring rescue stenting — partially undermining the 'angioplasty without stenting' concept.
  • Sample size was revised downward from 802 to 512 during the trial due to COVID-19 pandemic and funding constraints.
  • Interim analysis was forgone during sample size re-estimation; though blinded endpoint data were not accessed, this introduces methodological concern.
  • Open-label design with potential for performance bias, although endpoint adjudication was blinded.
  • Low baseline NIHSS (median 0) and high mRS 0–1 at admission (>91%) indicate a relatively well-recovered population, which may not represent the full spectrum of sICAS patients.
  • Aggressive medical management group event rate (13.5%) was comparable to prior trials but may have been inflated by inclusion of revascularization as an endpoint.
  • Long-term restenosis data and durability of balloon angioplasty effect beyond 1 year not yet available.
  • Drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents were not assessed.
  • Funded in part by Sino Medical Sciences Technology (manufacturer of the intracranial balloon catheter used in the trial).

Funding

Sino Medical Sciences Technology Inc; National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82425101); Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission; Capital's Funds for Health Improvement and Research; National Key R&D Program of China; and multiple other Chinese governmental grants

Based on: BASIS (JAMA, 2024)

Authors: Xuan Sun, Yiming Deng, Yong Zhang, ..., Zhongrong Miao

Citation: JAMA. 2024;332(13):1059-1069. doi:10.1001/jama.2024.12829

Content summarized and formatted by NeuroTrials.ai.