ArticleScientific reports2025
Secondary prevention with antiplatelet medications in patients with antiphospholipid antibody-related stroke.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management and outcomes in patients with cryptogenic stroke and weakly positive antiphospholipid antibodies.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Article
- Secondary Prevention Strategies for Ischemic Stroke in Antiphospholipid Syndrome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical guidelines recommend warfarin for patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) and ischemic stroke; however, robust evidence is lacking. We investigated the clinical benefits of different categories of antithrombotic medications in ischemic stroke patients positive for antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) in real-world practice. We reviewed data from patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack who tested positive for aPLs. Based on their secondary preventive antithrombotic medications, patients were classified into antiplatelet and anticoagulant categories, and further into warfarin, single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), and direct oral anticoagulant groups. The outcome of interest was a composite of recurrent thrombosis and major bleeding events. Time-varying Cox proportional hazards model was used. Among 167 eligible patients, 28 experienced composite outcome events over 601.1 person-years. SAPT and DAPT demonstrated clinical benefits over warfarin (SAPT vs. warfarin, adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence intervals], 0.24 [0.07-0.83]; DAPT vs. warfarin, 0.25 [0.08-0.81]). Notably, DAPT was advantageous regarding major bleeding (DAPT vs. warfarin, 0.10 [0.02-0.47]), while the risk of recurrent thrombotic events was comparable between the antiplatelet and warfarin groups. Antiplatelet therapy may be a safe and effective alternative to warfarin for secondary prevention of aPL- and APS-related stroke. Further prospective validation is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.