OPTIMAS
(2024)Objective
OPTIMAS assessed whether early (≤4 days) versus delayed (7–14 days) initiation of DOACs after ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation is safe and effective.
Study Summary
• No increase in symptomatic ICH with early initiation (0.6% vs 0.7%)
• No efficacy difference; supports earlier anticoagulation
Intervention
Phase 4, multicenter RCT of 3621 patients with AF-related ischemic stroke, randomized to early (≤4 days) vs delayed (7–14 days) DOAC initiation. Primary outcome: composite of recurrent stroke, ICH, systemic embolism, or unclassifiable stroke at 90 days.
Inclusion Criteria
• Age ≥18 with AF
• Acute ischemic stroke ≥24h duration
• Brain imaging excluding ICH
• Eligible for DOAC but uncertain timing
Study Design
Arms: Early DOAC (≤4 days) vs Delayed DOAC (7–14 days)
Patients per Arm: 1814 early, 1807 delayed
Outcome
• Symptomatic ICH: 0.6% vs 0.7%
• Mortality: 8.8% early vs 8.9% delayed
Bottom Line
Early DOAC initiation within 4 days after ischaemic stroke associated with atrial fibrillation was non-inferior to delayed initiation for the composite outcome of ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, unclassifiable stroke, or systemic embolism at 90 days. These findings do not support the current common and guideline-supported practice of delaying DOAC initiation after ischaemic stroke with atrial fibrillation.
Major Points
- OPTIMAS was a multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, parallel-group, phase 4, randomised controlled trial conducted at 100 UK hospitals.
- Participants with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke were randomised 1:1 to early (≤4 days from stroke symptom onset) or delayed (7-14 days) DOAC initiation.
- The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent ischaemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, unclassifiable stroke, or systemic embolism incidence at 90 days.
- 3621 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (1814 early group, 1807 delayed group).
- The primary outcome occurred in 3.3% in both early and delayed DOAC initiation groups (adjusted risk difference [RD] 0.000, 95% CI -0.011 to 0.012).
- The upper limit of the 95% CI for the adjusted RD was less than the non-inferiority margin of 2 percentage points (Pnon-inferiority=0.0003).
- Superiority was not identified (Psuperiority=0.96).
- Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 0.6% in the early group and 0.7% in the delayed group (adjusted RD 0.001, -0.004 to 0.006; p=0.78).
- The study provides more precise estimates than previous trials, including a broad patient population with moderate-to-severe stroke (14.6% of participants had NIHSS score >10 at randomisation).
- No evidence of heterogeneity of effect was found across subgroups including stroke severity, reperfusion treatment, or previous anticoagulation.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Randomised Controlled Trial
- Randomization
- Yes
- Blinding
- Blinded-endpoint adjudication by a masked independent external adjudication committee.
- Sample Size
- 3648
- Follow-up
- 90 days for primary and secondary outcomes
- Centers
- 100
- Countries
- UK
Primary Outcome
Definition: Composite of recurrent ischaemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, unclassifiable stroke, or systemic embolism incidence at 90 days.
| Control | Intervention | HR/OR | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 59 (3.3%) | 59 (3.3%) | - | 0.96 |
Limitations & Criticisms
- Open-label design, which means participants and treating clinicians were not masked to treatment assignment, potentially introducing performance bias (though outcome adjudication was blinded).
- The study did not randomly assign participants to start anticoagulation between 4 and 7 days after onset, limiting the ability to observe optimal timing within this specific early period.
- The low number of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage events limited statistical power for this specific safety outcome.
- The 95% CI for the primary outcome, while meeting non-inferiority, includes a maximum adjusted risk difference of 1.2 percentage points, which might be considered clinically meaningful by some.
- The trial excluded patients with severe parenchymal haematoma type 2, limiting definitive guidance for this rare, high-risk subgroup.
- The study did not centrally adjudicate cardiovascular mortality data.
- Brain imaging analyses (e.g., infarct volume, haemorrhagic transformation subtypes) will be reported separately, meaning full imaging-related insights are not yet available in this publication.
Citation
Lancet 2024; 404: 1731-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02197-4