You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Review
Effects of vitamin E on stroke: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
  1. Hong Chuan Loh1,
  2. Renly Lim2,
  3. Kai Wei Lee3,
  4. Chin Yik Ooi1,
  5. Deik Roy Chuan1,
  6. Irene Looi1,4,
  7. Yuen Kah Hay5,
  8. Nurzalina Abdul Karim Khan5
  1. 1 Clinical Research Center, Hospital Seberang Jaya, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Seberang Jaya, Malaysia
  2. 2 Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  3. 3 Department of Pre-Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman - Kampus Bandar Sungai Long, Kajang, Malaysia
  4. 4 Medical Department, Hospital Seberang Jaya, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Seberang Jaya, Malaysia
  5. 5 School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Malaysia
  1. Correspondence to Dr. Nurzalina Abdul Karim Khan; nurza{at}usm.my

Abstract

There are several previous studies on the association of vitamin E with prevention of stroke but the findings remain controversial. We have conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis together with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials to evaluate the effect of vitamin E supplementation versus placebo/no vitamin E on the risk reduction of total, fatal, non-fatal, haemorrhagic and ischaemic stroke. Relevant studies were identified by searching online databases through Medline, PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. A total of 18 studies with 148 016 participants were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the prevention of total stroke (RR (relative risk)=0.98, 95% CI 0.92–1.04, p=0.57), fatal stroke (RR=0.96, 95% CI 0.77–1.20, p=0.73) and non-fatal stroke (RR=0.96, 95% CI 0.88–1.05, p=0.35). Subgroup analyses were performed under each category (total stroke, fatal stroke and non-fatal stroke) and included the following subgroups (types of prevention, source and dosage of vitamin E and vitamin E alone vs control). The findings in all subgroup analyses were statistically insignificant. In stroke subtypes analysis, vitamin E showed significant risk reduction in ischaemic stroke (RR=0.92, 95% CI 0.85–0.99, p=0.04) but not in haemorrhagic stroke (RR=1.17, 95% CI 0.98–1.39, p=0.08). However, the trial sequential analysis demonstrated that more studies were needed to control random errors. Limitations of this study include the following: trials design may not have provided sufficient power to detect a change in stroke outcomes, participants may have had different lifestyles or health issues, there were a limited number of studies available for subgroup analysis, studies were mostly done in developed countries, and the total sample size for all included studies was insufficient to obtain a meaningful result from meta-analysis. In conclusion, there is still a lack of statistically significant evidence of the effects of vitamin E on the risk reduction of stroke. Nevertheless, vitamin E may offer some benefits in the prevention of ischaemic stroke and additional well-designed randomised controlled trials are needed to arrive at a definitive finding. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020167827.

  • stroke
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2020-000519

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Stroke is defined as rapidly developing focal (or global) disturbance of cerebral function, including cerebral infarction, intracerebral haemorrhage and subarachnoid haemorrhage. It usually occurs with one or more clinical signs, lasting for more than 24 hours or leading to death, with no apparent cause other than it being of vascular origin.1 Globally, 84.4% of all strokes are ischaemic and 15.6% are haemorrhagic. According to The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study, there are 5.5 million stroke deaths annually around the world and it is the second leading cause of death globally.2 Stroke-related morbidity remains high. It is estimated that the total annual cost due to stroke will increase to $240.67 billion by 2030, including both stroke-related medical costs and indirect annual costs attributable to loss of productivity.3 Thus, proper stroke management and preventive measures are crucial in helping to reduce escalating healthcare costs. Notwithstanding that both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors have been widely associated with stroke, there is evidence that certain types of diet and nutrition are linked with the incidence or prevention of stroke.4 5

    Vitamin E is a lipid-soluble antioxidant that diminishes the rate of oxidative stress, an important component in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Oxidised phospholipids and other lipid oxidation products (lipid peroxidation) permit build-up of plaque in arteries and cause atherogenesis.6 By scavenging the reactive oxygen species, modifying vascular endothelium vasodilator responsiveness7 and reducing platelet aggregation,8 as well as preserving cell membranes, vitamin E plays a crucial role in inhibiting formation of atherosclerosis.9 Therefore, for populations in which atherosclerosis in major intracranial arteries accounts for a high prevalence of stroke, such as African-American, Asian (Chinese, Japanese, South Korean, Indian) and Hispanic,10 vitamin E supplementation may aid in stroke prevention.

    Previous prospective cohort studies have indicated association between a high intake of vitamin E and the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD).11–13 A community study (Aric Study) also hypothesised that vitamin E may protect against atherosclerosis and thus prevent stroke.14 From a subgroup analysis of a cancer prevention study, patients with hypertension showed a reduction in the risk of ischaemic stroke with vitamin E supplementation. Additionally, similar results were also found in hypertensive patients with diabetes.15

    To date, there have been several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies investigating the association of vitamin E with stroke prevention.16–20 However, the results are inconsistent. The discrepancy in the outcomes is mainly due to the pathological subtypes of stroke, namely ischaemic stroke and haemorrhagic stroke. In addition, we added quality assessment on all of the included studies since the previous systematic reviews had either no quality assessment or incomplete quality assessment. Furthermore, we also included trial sequential analysis (TSA) because previously there had not been any quantitative attempt to summarise the precise effect of vitamin E on prevention of stroke. Hence, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis with TSA was to assess the effect of vitamin E on stroke prevention based on a sufficient sample size and with adequate reliability of the conclusions.

    Methods

    This study was registered with PROSPERO and the local National Medical Research Register (NMRR-20-1197-55340) and performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.21

    Literature search

    Two investigators (HCL and KWL) independently searched through three major citation databases, namely Medline, PubMed, as well as Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and included all relevant articles published from inception to 12 February 2020. We limited our search to English language articles and studies relating only to humans. We also used reverse-forward citation (hand searches) from the included studies to search for relevant studies. We used a combination of search terms as follows (antioxidant OR anti-oxidant OR vitamin* OR vitamin E OR tocopherol OR tocotrienol) AND (stroke OR cerebral vascular OR cerebrovascular OR transient ischemic attack OR brain attack OR brain isch*emia OR intracranial bleed* OR intracranial h*emorrhage OR brain h*emorrhage OR cardiovascular) AND (control* trial* OR clinical trial* OR random*). Study authors were contacted for clarification where necessary.

    Intervention and control group definitions

    The intervention group was defined as subjects who were taking vitamin E supplementation while the control group was defined as subjects who were taking a placebo or receiving no treatment at all.

    Study selection

    All articles obtained via the database searches were imported into Endnote programme X9 version, merged and any duplicate publications were removed. Titles and abstracts were screened independently by three investigators (HCL, CYO, DRC). Full-text articles were retrieved and independently reviewed by the same investigators to assess eligibility. We also manually performed reverse-forward citation of the identified studies. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing the effect of vitamin E supplementation on the incidences of stroke and its subtypes. Studies were excluded if there was no access to full text, and/or there were multiple papers reporting on the same trial (we chose either the original paper or the one with the most relevant information or outcomes).

    Data extraction

    Two investigators (HCL and RL) independently reviewed and extracted relevant data from each of the included articles using a standard data extraction template. Extracted data included the following variables: study characteristics (first author, trial’s name, publication year, country and study design), baseline characteristics of the study population, type of prevention, trial duration, intervention and trial outcome measures (number of total stroke, fatal stroke, non-fatal stroke, ischaemic stroke and haemorrhagic stroke). All discrepancies and disagreements were resolved through consensus.

    Data syntheses

    The results were pooled if comparable outcome data were available from two or more studies. Meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager software22 using a random-effects model to produce the study risk ratio and their respective 95% CIs with a two‐sided p value of <0.05 considered as statistically significant. Statistical heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the I2 index (low was <25%, moderate 25%–50% and high >50%), and the sources of heterogeneity were explored if present.23 In addition, a leave-one-out meta-analysis was performed as a sensitivity analysis to determine how individual studies influenced the overall estimate of the rest of the studies with exactly one study being left out each time.24 We also performed TSA for the outcome with the random‐effects (DerSimonian and Laird) model using the TSA software package.25 We set α level of 0.05 (two-sided) and a β level of 0.20 (80% power), and the control event proportions were calculated from the control arm of the trials. TSA contributed to a better control of type I26 27 and type II errors27 and provided clarification if more trials were needed.

    Risk of bias assessment

    Quality of the included trials was independently assessed by two investigators (HCL and RL) for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.28 29 Assessment was done across five domains of bias including the bias arising from the randomisation process, bias due to deviations from intended interventions, bias due to missing outcome data, bias in measurement of the outcome and bias in selection of the reported results. Questions within each domain were answered as ‘Yes’ or ‘Probably Yes’ or ‘No’ or ‘Probably No’ or ‘No information’. The responses were used to indicate whether there is low risk (proper methods taken to reduce bias), some concern (insufficient information provided to determine the bias level), or high risk (improper methods creating bias). All discrepancies and disagreements were resolved through consensus. Risk of bias assessment across studies was reported too with publication bias. The bias was assessed by using the funnel plot and was quantified by using Egger and Begg’s tests.30 31

    Grading of the evidence

    The quality of evidence for each trial outcome was subsequently assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework methodology.32–36 The certainty of evidence was assessed as high, moderate, low or very low based on the basic design of the studies, the limitations in design or execution due to the risk of bias in the studies, the indirectness of the evidence, the inconsistency of results across studies, the imprecision of results and other considerations.

    Results

    Search results

    Figure 1 shows the literature search and selection process. We identified a total of 3609 studies after removing duplicates, 3543 of which were excluded based on review of the title and/or abstract. The remaining 66 studies were retrieved and reviewed in full and 48 were excluded based on selection criteria. A total of 18 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analyses.37–54

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram of the literature screening process. RCT, randomised controlled trials.

    Trials characteristics

    The characteristics of 18 included randomised controlled trials are summarised in table 1. The sample sizes of these trials ranged from 100 to 39 876 subjects, and the total number of subjects in the trials was 148 016 with 74 000 randomised to vitamin E and 74 016 to control arm. Out of seven continents, seven studies were conducted in Europe,37–40 43 47 48 five in North America,46 51–54 three in Asia44 45 49 and three were international and not continent-specific.41 42 50 In two trials, vitamin E was compared with no vitamin E40 48 while the remaining trials compared vitamin E to a placebo. All the studies were comprised mixed genders except for four studies which respectively involved only female52 53 and male37 46 subjects. Subjects from all studies were with comorbidity except three studies37 51 53 in which the subjects were healthy individuals or without known serious illness. Across the studies, α-tocopherol was used. Eight studies used vitamin E from a natural source38 41 42 44 49 50 52 53 while another eight studies used vitamin E from a synthetic source.37 39 40 43 45 46 48 51 All the studies had a trial duration that ranged from 10 days to 10.9 years.

    View this table:
    Table 1

    Characteristics of trials

    Sensitivity and publication bias analysis

    We performed sensitivity analyses of vitamin E vs placebo/no vitamin E for total stroke, fatal stroke, non-fatal stroke, haemorrhagic stroke and ischaemic stroke as outcome measures to reveal the studies which affected the pooled relative risk. We only excluded a study from the meta-analyses if the study was high in heterogeneity and with publication bias.

    For haemorrhagic stroke, there were two RCTs43 53 while for ischaemic stroke, three RCTs37 49 52 were found to influence the summary estimate respectively. Nevertheless, since there was no significant publication bias based on the funnel plot, Egger’s test and Begg’s test (haemorrhagic stroke: Egger’s test, p=0.251; Begg’s test p=0.293, and ischaemic stroke: Egger’s test, p=0.228; Begg’s test p=0.176) and the heterogeneity were low for both outcomes (haemorrhagic stroke: I2=0%, and ischaemic stroke: I2=5%), we did not exclude any studies from the meta-analyses.

    Effect of vitamin E on stroke and its subgroup analysis

    The effect of vitamin E on total stroke and its subgroup analysis by type of prevention (primary or secondary), source of vitamin E (synthetic or natural), dosage of vitamin E (high if 300 IU or more; or low if less than 300 IU) and vitamin E alone (without other pharmacological and/or non-pharmacological intervention) are shown in table 2. There is no significant reduction in the risk of total stroke observed in those taking vitamin E supplement as compared with control arm (RR=0.98, 95% CI 0.92–1.04, p=0.57) among all subjects. Similar results were also seen when we compared the effect of vitamin E on primary with secondary prevention of stroke, risk reduction of stroke between synthetic and natural vitamin E, high versus low dosage of vitamin E and when vitamin E alone was used.

    View this table:
    Table 2

    Relative risks of the effects of vitamin E on stroke for the pooled population and its subgroup analysis

    Supplemental material

    Supplementation with vitamin E does not significantly reduce the risk of fatal stroke (RR=0.96, 95% CI 0.77–1.20, p=0.73) or non-fatal stroke (RR=0.96, 95% CI 0.88–1.05, p=0.35). In their respective subgroup analysis, we observed that all the findings were insignificant as well.

    In stroke subtypes analysis, vitamin E showed significant risk reduction in ischaemic stroke (RR=0.92, 95% CI 0.85–0.99, p=0.04) but not in haemorrhagic stroke (RR=1.17, 95% CI 0.98–1.39, p=0.08).

    For the risk reduction of vitamin E on total stroke and fatal stroke, the boundary TSA was ignored because too little information was used, while 3 542 181 and 8 193 891 subjects, respectively are needed for stable conclusions for total stroke and fatal stroke prevention (figures 2 and 3). For the risk reduction of vitamin E on non-fatal stroke and haemorrhagic stroke, the cumulative Z curve (blue curve) did not reach either the conventional boundary or the α-spending boundary. This indicates that there was no significant difference between the subjects treated with vitamin E and without vitamin E, and the required information size of 1 159 873 and 356 095 subjects, respectively are needed (figures 4 and 5). Since the cumulative Z curves did not cross the trial sequential boundaries for benefit, harm or futility, we cannot exclude the risks of random errors based on traditional naïve meta-analysis.

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Trial sequential analysis on the effect of vitamin E compared with control on total stroke prevention.

    Figure 3
    Figure 3

    Trial sequential analysis on the effect of vitamin E compared with control on fatal stroke prevention.

    Figure 4
    Figure 4

    Trial sequential analysis on the effect of vitamin E compared with control on non-fatal stroke prevention.

    Figure 5
    Figure 5

    Trial sequential analysis on the effect of vitamin E compared with control on haemorrhagic stroke prevention.

    Conversely, for the risk reduction of vitamin E on ischaemic stroke, the cumulative Z curve initially crossed the conventional boundary for benefit after the first trial, then regressed, and bounced back at the end after other trials were added. Nevertheless, the cumulative Z curve did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary, and 212 626 patients are needed to reduce spurious conclusions (figure 6). Therefore, the preventive effect of vitamin E on ischaemic stroke remains inconclusive based on the current sample size available.

    Figure 6
    Figure 6

    Trial sequential analysis on the effect of vitamin E compared with control on ischaemic stroke prevention.

    Risk of bias within studies

    We evaluated the risk of bias for each included study. All the studies were randomised but we had some concerns in our evaluation when there was no information present addressing such issues as how the randomisation of sequence had been conducted, how allocation sequences had been concealed and so on.41 45 54 We considered that there may be some concern for bias to deviation from intended intervention arising from the studies when subjects were aware of their assigned intervention during the trial.40 48 With respect to the attrition bias, most of the studies provided inadequate information as there were large numbers of subjects who were lost during follow-up, which led to the bias of missing outcome data.39 41 42 44–52 54 Regarding the bias in measurement of the outcome, all the studies were at low risk of bias because the methods of measuring the outcome were appropriate, and ascertainment of the outcome was the same between the intervention and control groups. For the risk of bias from selection of the reported result, the majority of the studies were low in bias, except one study37 which may not have performed according to the pre-specified analysis plan. In that study,37 some subjects were excluded after randomisation. In another study,54 the statistical method and analysis plan were not mentioned. All in all, three studies38 43 53 were considered to have an overall low risk of bias, fourteen studies37 39–42 44–52 had some concern of risk of bias overall and one study54 was considered to have an overall high risk of bias. A graph and a summary of risk of bias are shown in online supplemental figures S16 and S17.

    GRADE assessment

    By using GRADE, we rated the quality of evidence as high for vitamin E effect on fatal stroke and non-fatal stroke; moderate for total stroke and ischaemic stroke owing to a downgrade for risk of bias as most of the included studies were ruled out for low risk of bias; and very low for haemorrhagic stroke due to very serious imprecision because the number of events was small and the confidence intervals were wide. GRADE evidence profiles and a summary of findings are shown in online supplemental table S1.

    Discussion

    This study revealed that vitamin E supplementation significantly reduced the risk of ischaemic stroke by 8% and there was no significant heterogeneity among the trials (p value for heterogeneity=0.39). Although the exact mechanism of action for this finding is unknown, we conjecture that it could be attributed to its antioxidative activity,55 antiplatelet action8 and antiatherogenic properties.6 This can be seen in studies that show that a diet predominantly composed of fruits and vegetables, high in antioxidant vitamins, is associated with lower incidence of stroke.56 In addition, a randomised controlled trial, Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta-Carotene Cancer Prevention Study15 37 indicated a reduction in ischaemic stroke of about 14% (95% CI 0.75–0.99, p=0.03) with vitamin E supplementation. Nevertheless, we performed TSA which demonstrated that the available data were insufficient to draw firm conclusions regarding the superiority of vitamin E in preventing the risk of ischaemic stroke. Hence, we believe additional well-designed RCTs are necessary to provide a more accurate and reliable outcome.

    Our meta-analysis did not detect any significant difference from vitamin E supplementation in the risk reduction of haemorrhagic stroke. The finding was significantly different from Schürks et al which showed an increased risk of 22% (95% CI 1.00–1.48, p=0.045).16 This may be due to the incorporation of an extra two RCTs43 54 in our study. Since the heterogeneity is low (I2=0%), we decided to incorporate the trials in our pooled risk reduction result. On top of that, TSA indicated that previous meta-analysis16 may have led to random errors and the current evidence for a vitamin E preventive effect on haemorrhagic stroke was insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions. Therefore, even though vitamin E is known for its antiplatelet57 and anticoagulant effect58 due to its interference with activation of the vitamin K dependent clotting factor, the conclusion that vitamin E increases the risk of haemorrhagic stroke cannot be established.

    Furthermore, our meta-analyses showed no significant preventive action of vitamin E in total stroke, fatal stroke and non-fatal stroke. Our findings confirm a result published in the journal of the American Heart Association59 which reported that there was no statistical difference favouring the vitamin E group compared with the control group in stroke prevention. However, TSA indicated that the current evidence for total stroke, fatal stroke and non-fatal stroke was insufficient to draw solid conclusions.

    Based on the dietary reference intakes framework developed by US and Canadian scientists, 1 IU of the natural form is equivalent to 0.67 mg of α-tocopherol and 0.45 mg of α-tocopherol in synthetic form.60 Previous studies also showed that a relatively high dose of α-tocopherol of more than 300 IU daily aids in the prevention of CVD.61 62 Thus, we further investigated the effect of vitamin E on the prevention of stroke by conducting subgroup analysis to look at the outcome by types of prevention, as well as source and dosage of vitamin E. The results showed no significant difference regardless of whether it is for primary or secondary prevention, from a synthetic or natural source, or whether high or low doses of vitamin E supplementation were used.

    We added another analysis to look at the preventive effect of vitamin E on stroke when it is used alone without other pharmacological and/or non-pharmacological intervention. This helps to exclude factors contributed by the synergistic or mixed effect of other interventions with vitamin E. The outcome was not significant. We included 4 RCTs that meet the criteria and the results we obtained only reflect on total stroke. Thus, more RCTs with other outcome measures of stroke are needed for a stronger conclusion.

    Limitations and future research recommendation

    There are several limitations in the current study. First, for some of the studies, stroke or CVD were not primary outcomes. Therefore, the trials design may not provide sufficient power to detect a change in these outcomes. Second, the participants have different risk factors to stroke, such as differences in smoking status, body mass index, alcohol consumption, lifestyle, diet and so forth. All of these are associated with a potential to increase or reduce the risk of stroke. Third, the results of subgroup analyses may not be robust enough due to the limited number of studies included. Fourth, the included studies were mainly conducted in developed countries such as the USA and European countries. Other than differences like race, lifestyle, dietary habits and so on, populations of developed countries are usually without known vitamin deficiency and have lower incidence of stroke. Hence, it is difficult to generalise the results to populations in other parts of the world. Fifth, ischaemic stroke subgroup analysis was not carried out as the papers included were too few in number to provide sufficient statistical power to achieve a worthwhile result.63 Also, due to the lack of information to standardise available data, this study did not perform meta-analysis for the duration of vitamin E supplementation with respect to its preventive effect of stroke. Finally, we lacked sufficient sample size from RCTs to conclusively support our hypotheses and any conclusions we derived are made with caution. Future research with larger stroke-oriented randomised clinical trials and with more homogenised characteristics of participants from different parts of the world are needed to prove the efficacy of vitamin E supplementation in stroke prevention.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, the findings of this review demonstrate that vitamin E cannot be unequivocally shown to prevent stroke. However, it may be beneficial to prevent ischaemic stroke and additional well-designed RCTs are needed to draw a conclusive statement. Vitamin E is regularly consumed as a supplement without evidence of a statistically significant increase in the incidence of adverse events. It only serves as an adjunct to, rather than as a replacement for medication due to the greater risk reduction of stroke achieved by medication. Therefore, the use of vitamin E supplementation remains debatable until future trials provide more reliable evidence.

    Acknowledgments

    We would like to thank the Director General of Health Malaysia for his permission to publish this article. We also would like to thank Prof. Dr. Liew Su-May (Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia) for her guidance.

    References

    1. ↵
      2. Sacco RL ,
      3. Kasner SE ,
      4. Broderick JP , et al
      . An updated definition of stroke for the 21st century. Stroke 2013;44:2064–89.doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e318296aeca
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    2. ↵
      1. GBD 2016 Stroke Collaborators
      . Global, regional, and national burden of stroke, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. Lancet Neurol 2019;18:439–58.doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30034-1 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30871944
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    3. ↵
      2. Ovbiagele B ,
      3. Goldstein LB ,
      4. Higashida RT , et al
      . Forecasting the future of stroke in the United States: a policy statement from the American heart association and American stroke association. Stroke 2013;44:2361–75.doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e31829734f2 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23697546
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    4. ↵
      2. Ginsberg HN ,
      3. Barr SL ,
      4. Gilbert A , et al
      . Reduction of plasma cholesterol levels in normal men on an American heart association step 1 diet or a step 1 diet with added monounsaturated fat. N Engl J Med 1990;322:574–9.doi:10.1056/NEJM199003013220902 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2304504
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. ↵
      2. Foroughi M ,
      3. Akhavanzanjani M ,
      4. Maghsoudi Z , et al
      . Stroke and nutrition: a review of studies. Int J Prev Med 2013;4:S165–79.pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23776719
      OpenUrlPubMed
    6. ↵
      2. Navab M ,
      3. Ananthramaiah GM ,
      4. Reddy ST , et al
      . The oxidation hypothesis of atherogenesis: the role of oxidized phospholipids and HDL. J Lipid Res 2004;45:993–1007.doi:10.1194/jlr.R400001-JLR200 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15060092
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    7. ↵
      2. Koh KK ,
      3. Blum A ,
      4. Hathaway L , et al
      . Vascular effects of estrogen and vitamin E therapies in postmenopausal women. Circulation 1999;100:1851–7.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.100.18.1851 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10545428
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    8. ↵
      2. Mabile L ,
      3. Bruckdorfer KR ,
      4. Rice-Evans C
      . Moderate supplementation with natural alpha-tocopherol decreases platelet aggregation and low-density lipoprotein oxidation. Atherosclerosis 1999;147:177–85.doi:10.1016/S0021-9150(99)00169-0 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10525139
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    9. ↵
      2. Clarke MW ,
      3. Burnett JR ,
      4. Croft KD
      . Vitamin E in human health and disease. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2008;45:417–50.doi:10.1080/10408360802118625 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18712629
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    10. ↵
      2. Banerjee C ,
      3. Chimowitz MI
      . Stroke caused by atherosclerosis of the major intracranial arteries. Circ Res 2017;120:502–13.doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.308441 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28154100
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    11. ↵
      2. Kushi LH ,
      3. Folsom AR ,
      4. Prineas RJ , et al
      . Dietary antioxidant vitamins and death from coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1156–62.doi:10.1056/NEJM199605023341803 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8602181
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    12. ↵
      2. Stampfer MJ ,
      3. Hennekens CH ,
      4. Manson JE , et al
      . Vitamin E consumption and the risk of coronary disease in women. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1444–9.doi:10.1056/NEJM199305203282003 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8479463
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    13. ↵
      2. Rimm EB ,
      3. Stampfer MJ ,
      4. Ascherio A , et al
      . Vitamin E consumption and the risk of coronary heart disease in men. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1450–6.doi:10.1056/NEJM199305203282004 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8479464
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    14. ↵
      2. Kritchevsky SB ,
      3. Shimakawa T ,
      4. Tell GS , et al
      . Dietary antioxidants and carotid artery wall thickness. Circulation 1995;92:2142–50.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.92.8.2142
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. ↵
      2. Leppälä JM ,
      3. Virtamo J ,
      4. Fogelholm R , et al
      . Vitamin E and beta carotene supplementation in high risk for stroke: a subgroup analysis of the alpha-tocopherol, beta-carotene cancer prevention study. Arch Neurol 2000;57:1503–9.doi:10.1001/archneur.57.10.1503 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11030804
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    16. ↵
      2. Schürks M ,
      3. Glynn RJ ,
      4. Rist PM , et al
      . Effects of vitamin E on stroke subtypes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2010;341:c5702. doi:10.1136/bmj.c5702 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21051774
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    17. ↵
      2. Bin Q ,
      3. Hu X ,
      4. Cao Y , et al
      . The role of vitamin E (tocopherol) supplementation in the prevention of stroke. A meta-analysis of 13 randomised controlled trials. Thromb Haemost 2011;105:579–85.doi:10.1160/TH10-11-0729 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21264448
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    18. ↵
      2. Alkhenizan AH ,
      3. Al-Omran MA
      . The role of vitamin E in the prevention of coronary events and stroke. meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neurosciences 2005;10:23–9.pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22473179
      OpenUrlPubMed
    19. ↵
      2. Vivekananthan DP ,
      3. Penn MS ,
      4. Sapp SK , et al
      . Use of antioxidant vitamins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2003;361:2017–23.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13637-9 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12814711
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    20. ↵
      2. Eidelman RS ,
      3. Hollar D ,
      4. Hebert PR , et al
      . Randomized trials of vitamin E in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease. Arch Intern Med 2004;164:1552–6.doi:10.1001/archinte.164.14.1552 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15277288
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    21. ↵
      2. Moher D ,
      3. Shamseer L ,
      4. Clarke M , et al
      . Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4:1. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25554246
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    22. ↵
      1. Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5)
      . Copenhagen: Nordic Cochrane centre, the Cochrane collaboration, 2014.
    23. ↵
      2. Higgins JPT ,
      3. Thompson SG
      . Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539–58.doi:10.1002/sim.1186 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12111919
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    24. ↵
      2. Wallace BC ,
      3. Dahabreh IJ ,
      4. Trikalinos TA ,
      5. Lau T.; , et al
      . Closing the Gap between Methodologists and End-Users: R as a Computational Back-End. J Stat Softw 2012;49.doi:10.18637/jss.v049.i05
    25. ↵
      2. Thorlund K ,
      3. Engstrøm J ,
      4. Wetterslev J
      . Copenhagen trial unit, centre for clinical intervention research, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2017: 1–114.
    26. ↵
      2. Pogue JM ,
      3. Yusuf S
      . Cumulating evidence from randomized trials: utilizing sequential monitoring boundaries for cumulative meta-analysis. Control Clin Trials 1997;18:580–93.doi:10.1016/S0197-2456(97)00051-2 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9408720
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    27. ↵
      2. Wetterslev J ,
      3. Thorlund K ,
      4. Brok J , et al
      . Trial sequential analysis may establish when firm evidence is reached in cumulative meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:64–75.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.013 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18083463
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    28. ↵
      2. Higgins JPT TJ ,
      3. Chandler J ,
      4. Cumpston M , et al
      . Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019), 2019.
    29. ↵
      2. Sterne JAC ,
      3. Savović J ,
      4. Page MJ , et al
      . Rob 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019;366:l4898.doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31462531
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    30. ↵
      2. Egger M ,
      3. Davey Smith G ,
      4. Schneider M , et al
      . Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629–34.doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9310563
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    31. ↵
      2. Begg CB ,
      3. Mazumdar M
      . Operating characteristics of a RANK correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994;50:1088–101.doi:10.2307/2533446 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7786990
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    32. ↵
      2. Guyatt G ,
      3. Oxman AD ,
      4. Akl EA , et al
      . Grade guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:383–94.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21195583
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    33. ↵
      2. Balshem H ,
      3. Helfand M ,
      4. Schünemann HJ , et al
      . Grade guidelines: 3. rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401–6.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21208779
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    34. ↵
      2. Guyatt GH ,
      3. Oxman AD ,
      4. Kunz R , et al
      . Grade guidelines: 2. framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:395–400.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21194891
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    35. ↵
      2. Guyatt GH ,
      3. Oxman AD ,
      4. Vist G , et al
      . GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:407–15.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.017 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21247734
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    36. ↵
      2. Guyatt GH ,
      3. Thorlund K ,
      4. Oxman AD , et al
      . Grade guidelines: 13. preparing summary of findings tables and evidence profiles-continuous outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:173–83.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.08.001 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23116689
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    37. ↵
      2. Leppälä JM ,
      3. Virtamo J ,
      4. Fogelholm R , et al
      . Controlled trial of alpha-tocopherol and beta-carotene supplements on stroke incidence and mortality in male smokers. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2000;20:230–5.doi:10.1161/01.ATV.20.1.230 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10634823
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    38. ↵
      2. Stephens NG ,
      3. Parsons A ,
      4. Schofield PM , et al
      . Randomised controlled trial of vitamin E in patients with coronary disease: Cambridge heart antioxidant study (chaos). Lancet 1996;347:781–6.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90866-1 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8622332
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    39. ↵
      1. Critical Leg Ischaemia Prevention Study (CLIPS) Group,
      2. Catalano M ,
      3. Born G , et al
      . Prevention of serious vascular events by aspirin amongst patients with peripheral arterial disease: randomized, double-blind trial. J Intern Med 2007;261:276–84.doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2006.01763.x pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17305650
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    40. ↵
      Dietary supplementation with n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and vitamin E after myocardial infarction: results of the GISSI-Prevenzione trial. The Lancet 1999;354:447–55.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(99)07072-5
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    41. ↵
      2. Brown BG ,
      3. Zhao XQ ,
      4. Chait A , et al
      . Simvastatin and niacin, antioxidant vitamins, or the combination for the prevention of coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1583–92.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa011090 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11757504
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. ↵
      1. Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators,
      2. Yusuf S ,
      3. Dagenais G , et al
      . Vitamin E supplementation and cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2000;342:154–60.doi:10.1056/NEJM200001203420302 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10639540
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    43. ↵
      1. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group
      . MRC/BHF heart protection study of antioxidant vitamin supplementation in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:23–33.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)09328-5 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12114037
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    44. ↵
      2. Milman U ,
      3. Blum S ,
      4. Shapira C , et al
      . Vitamin E supplementation reduces cardiovascular events in a subgroup of middle-aged individuals with both type 2 diabetes mellitus and the haptoglobin 2-2 genotype: a prospective double-blinded clinical trial. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2008;28:341–7.doi:10.1161/ATVBAHA.107.153965 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18032779
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    45. ↵
      2. Li JY ,
      3. Taylor PR ,
      4. Li B , et al
      . Nutrition intervention trials in Linxian, China: multiple vitamin/mineral supplementation, cancer incidence, and disease-specific mortality among adults with esophageal dysplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:1492–8.doi:10.1093/jnci/85.18.1492 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8360932
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    46. ↵
      2. Sesso HD ,
      3. Buring JE ,
      4. Christen WG , et al
      . Vitamins E and C in the prevention of cardiovascular disease in men: the physicians' health study II randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008;300:2123–33.doi:10.1001/jama.2008.600 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18997197
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    47. ↵
      2. Belch J ,
      3. MacCuish A ,
      4. Campbell I , et al
      . The prevention of progression of arterial disease and diabetes (POPADAD) trial: factorial randomised placebo controlled trial of aspirin and antioxidants in patients with diabetes and asymptomatic peripheral arterial disease. BMJ 2008;337:a1840. doi:10.1136/bmj.a1840 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18927173
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    48. ↵
      2. de Gaetano G , Collaborative Group of the Primary Prevention Project
      . Low-Dose aspirin and vitamin E in people at cardiovascular risk: a randomised trial in general practice. Collaborative group of the primary prevention project. Lancet 2001;357:89–95.doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03539-x pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11197445
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    49. ↵
      2. Boaz M ,
      3. Smetana S ,
      4. Weinstein T , et al
      . Secondary prevention with antioxidants of cardiovascular disease in endstage renal disease (space): randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2000;356:1213–8.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02783-5 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11072938
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    50. ↵
      2. Lamas GA ,
      3. Boineau R ,
      4. Goertz C , et al
      . Oral high-dose multivitamins and minerals after myocardial infarction: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2013;159:797–805.doi:10.7326/0003-4819-159-12-201312170-00004 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24490264
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    51. ↵
      2. Hodis HN ,
      3. Mack WJ ,
      4. LaBree L , et al
      . Alpha-Tocopherol supplementation in healthy individuals reduces low-density lipoprotein oxidation but not atherosclerosis: the vitamin E atherosclerosis prevention study (VEAPS). Circulation 2002;106:1453–9.doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000029092.99946.08 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12234947
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    52. ↵
      2. Cook NR ,
      3. Albert CM ,
      4. Gaziano JM , et al
      . A randomized factorial trial of vitamins C and E and beta carotene in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in women: results from the women's antioxidant cardiovascular study. Arch Intern Med 2007;167:1610–8.doi:10.1001/archinte.167.15.1610 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17698683
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    53. ↵
      2. Lee I-M ,
      3. Cook NR ,
      4. Gaziano JM , et al
      . Vitamin E in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer: the women's health study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;294:56–65.doi:10.1001/jama.294.1.56 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15998891
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    54. ↵
      2. Steiner M ,
      3. Glantz M ,
      4. Lekos A
      . Vitamin E plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone in patients with transient ischemic attacks. Am J Clin Nutr 1995;62:1381S–4.doi:10.1093/ajcn/62.6.1381S pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7495235
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    55. ↵
      2. Yamauchi R
      . Vitamin E: mechanism of its antioxidant activity. FSTI 1997;3:301–9.doi:10.3136/fsti9596t9798.3.301
      OpenUrl
    56. ↵
      2. Gillman MW ,
      3. Cupples LA ,
      4. Gagnon D , et al
      . Protective effect of fruits and vegetables on development of stroke in men. JAMA 1995;273:1113–7.doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520380049034 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7707599
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    57. ↵
      2. Calzada C ,
      3. Bruckdorfer KR ,
      4. Rice-Evans CA
      . The influence of antioxidant nutrients on platelet function in healthy volunteers. Atherosclerosis 1997;128:97–105.doi:10.1016/S0021-9150(96)05974-6 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9051202
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    58. ↵
      2. Dowd P ,
      3. Zheng ZB
      . On the mechanism of the anticlotting action of vitamin E quinone. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995;92:8171–5.doi:10.1073/pnas.92.18.8171 pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7667263
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    59. ↵
      2. Hankey GJ
      . Vitamin supplementation and stroke prevention. Stroke 2012;43:2814–8.doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.639930
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    60. ↵
      1. Institute of Medicine (US) Panel on Dietary Antioxidants and Related Compounds
      . Dietary reference intakes for vitamin C, vitamin E, selenium, and carotenoids. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US), 2000.
    61. ↵
      2. Hennekens CH ,
      3. Gaziano JM ,
      4. Manson JE , et al
      . Antioxidant vitamin-cardiovascular disease hypothesis is still promising, but still unproven: the need for randomized trials. Am J Clin Nutr 1995;62:1377S–80.doi:10.1093/ajcn/62.6.1377S pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7495234
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    62. ↵
      2. Marchioli R ,
      3. Schweiger C ,
      4. Levantesi G , et al
      . Antioxidant vitamins and prevention of cardiovascular disease: epidemiological and clinical trial data. Lipids 2001;36 Suppl:S53–63.doi:10.1007/s11745-001-0683-y pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11837994
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    63. ↵
      2. Fu R ,
      3. Gartlehner G ,
      4. Grant M , et al
      . AHRQ methods for effective health care conducting quantitative synthesis when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the effective health care program. methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2008.

    Supplementary material

    • Supplementary Data

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    Footnotes

    • Contributors Conceptualisation: HCL, KWL and NAKK; methodology: HCL, RL, KWL, CYO, DRC and NAKK; software: HCL, RL, KWL, CYO and DRC; validation: IL, KHY and NAKK; formal analysis: HCL, RL, KWL; investigation: IL, KHY and NAKK; resources: IL, KHY and NAKK; data curation: IL, KHY and NAKK; writing-original draft preparation: HCL, RL; writing-review and editing: IL, KHY and NAKK; visualisation: HCL, KWL; supervision: KHY; project administration: IL; funding acquisition: not applicable. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.