Safety of ticagrelor in patients with baseline conduction abnormalities: A PLATO (Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) analysis

A disproportionality analysis of FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) events for ticagrelor

Background

Ticagrelor is a commonly used antiplatelet agent, but due to the stringent criteria for trial population inclusion and the limited sample size, its safety profile has not been fully elucidated.

Method

We utilized OpenVigil 2.1 to query the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database and retrieved reports by the generic name "ticagrelor" published between 1 October 2010 and 31 March 2023. Adverse drug events (ADEs) were classified and described according to the preferred terms and system organ classes in the Medical Dictionary of Regulatory Activity. Proportional reporting ratio (PRR), reporting odds ratio (ROR) and Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN) were used to detect signals.

Results

The number of ADE reports with ticagrelor as the primary suspect drug was 12,909. The top three ADEs were dyspnea [1824 reports, ROR 7.34, PRR 6.45, information component (IC) 2.68], chest pain (458 reports, ROR 5.43, PRR 5.27, IC 2.39), and vascular stent thrombosis (406 reports, ROR 409.53, PRR 396.68, IC 8.02). The highest ROR, 630.24, was found for "vascular stent occlusion". Cardiac arrest (137 reports, ROR 3.41, PRR 3.39, IC 1.75), atrial fibrillation (99 reports, ROR 2.05, PRR 2.04, IC 1.03), asphyxia (101 reports, ROR 23.60, PRR 23.43, IC 4.51), and rhabdomyolysis (57 reports, ROR 2.75, PRR 2.75, IC 1.45) were suspected new adverse events of ticagrelor.

Conclusion

The FAERS database produced potential signals associated with ticagrelor that have not been recorded in the package inserts, such as cardiac arrest, atrial fibrillation, asphyxia, and rhabdomyolysis. Further clinical surveillance is needed to quantify and validate potential hazards associated with ticagrelor-related adverse events.

Adverse reaction signals mining and hemorrhagic signals comparison of ticagrelor and clopidogrel: A pharmacovigilance study based on FAERS

Background: Ticagrelor and clopidogrel are commonly used antiplatelet agents, and we conducted a pharmacovigilance analysis using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to provide a reference for safe and reasonable clinical use.

Methods: Data were collected in FAERS from 2012 Q1 to 2022 Q2 for data cleaning. We used system organ classes (SOCs) and prefer terms (PTs) from the Medical Dictionary of Regulatory Activity (MedDRA version 25.1). Adverse event reports were retrieved at the PT level. Adverse reaction (ADR) signals of ticagrelor and clopidogrel were mined by calculating reporting odds ratios (ROR), proportional reporting ratios (PRR), information component (IC) and empirical Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM). After that, further analysis of the hemorrhagic signals and their clinical information were performed.

Results: The number of ADR reports where the primary suspect (PS) drugs were 15,133 for ticagrelor and 23,860 for clopidogrel. Significant ADR signals were identified by the SOC analysis for ticagrelor including cardiac disorders (ROR 4.87, PRR 4.46), respiratory disorders (ROR 2.45, PRR 2.28), and vascular disorders (ROR 2.22, PRR 2.16). Clopidogrel included blood disorders (ROR 2.86, PRR 2.77), vascular disorders (ROR 2.71, PRR 2.61), and cardiac disorders (ROR 2.29, PRR 2.22). At the PT level, the more frequent ADR signals for ticagrelor were dyspnoea, contusion, and haemorrhage, while clopidogrel were gastrointestinal haemorrhage, anaemia, and drug interaction. The hemorrhagic signals of both were mainly focused on the SOC level of gastrointestinal disorders, injury disorders and vascular disorders and nervous system disorders. The death and life-threatening rate of ticagrelor was 7.76 percentage higher than that of clopidogrel.

Conclusion: Clinicians need to pay attention to not only common ADRs but also be alert to new ADR signals when choosing to use ticagrelor and clopidogrel. This study provides a reference for the reasonable and safe clinical use of ticagrelor and clopidogrel.

Antiplatelet agents for chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet agents are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events. The risks and benefits of antiplatelet agents may be different in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for whom occlusive atherosclerotic events are less prevalent, and bleeding hazards might be increased. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents in people with any form of CKD, including those with CKD not receiving renal replacement therapy, patients receiving any form of dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials of any antiplatelet agents versus placebo or no treatment, or direct head-to-head antiplatelet agent studies in people with CKD. Studies were included if they enrolled participants with CKD, or included people in broader at-risk populations in which data for subgroups with CKD could be disaggregated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently extracted data from primary study reports and any available supplementary information for study population, interventions, outcomes, and risks of bias. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from numbers of events and numbers of participants at risk which were extracted from each included study. The reported RRs were extracted where crude event rates were not provided. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies, enrolling 51,959 participants; 90 studies (40,597 CKD participants) compared an antiplatelet agent with placebo or no treatment, and 29 studies (11,805 CKD participants) directly compared one antiplatelet agent with another. Fifty-six new studies were added to this 2021 update. Seven studies originally excluded from the 2013 review were included, although they had a follow-up lower than two months. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in 16 and 22 studies, respectively. Sixty-four studies reported low-risk methods for blinding of participants and investigators; outcome assessment was blinded in 41 studies. Forty-one studies were at low risk of attrition bias, 50 studies were at low risk of selective reporting bias, and 57 studies were at low risk of other potential sources of bias. Compared to placebo or no treatment, antiplatelet agents probably reduces myocardial infarction (18 studies, 15,289 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, I² = 0%; moderate certainty). Antiplatelet agents has uncertain effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke (12 studies, 10.382 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.59, I² = 37%; very low certainty) and may have little or no effect on death from any cause (35 studies, 18,241 participants: RR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.84 to 1.06, I² = 14%; low certainty). Antiplatelet therapy probably increases major bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with haemodialysis (HD) (29 studies, 16,194 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65, I² = 12%; moderate certainty). In addition, antiplatelet therapy may increase minor bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with HD (21 studies, 13,218 participants: RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.90, I² = 58%; low certainty). Antiplatelet treatment may reduce early dialysis vascular access thrombosis (8 studies, 1525 participants) RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.70; low certainty). Antiplatelet agents may reduce doubling of serum creatinine in CKD (3 studies, 217 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.86, I² = 8%; low certainty). The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents on stroke, cardiovascular death, kidney failure, kidney transplant graft loss, transplant rejection, creatinine clearance, proteinuria, dialysis access failure, loss of primary unassisted patency, failure to attain suitability for dialysis, need of intervention and cardiovascular hospitalisation were uncertain. Limited data were available for direct head-to-head comparisons of antiplatelet drugs, including prasugrel, ticagrelor, different doses of clopidogrel, abciximab, defibrotide, sarpogrelate and beraprost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antiplatelet agents probably reduced myocardial infarction and increased major bleeding, but do not appear to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular death among people with CKD and those treated with dialysis. The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents compared with each other are uncertain.

Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy in patients following percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety ticagrelor monotherapy following percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

Online databases were searched for relevant studies (published between the years 2015 and 2020) comparing 1-month Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy with 12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy following percutaneous coronary intervention. Primary outcomes assessed efficacy whereas secondary outcomes assessed safety. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on a random effect model were calculated and the analysis was carried out by the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Only 6 studies were selected for this meta-analytical research. The meta-analysis results: MI(OR:0.96, 95% CI:0.86-1.06, P = .40), stroke (OR:1.04, 95% CI: 0.87-1.25, P = .68), stent thrombosis (OR: 0.91,95% CI:0.76-1.10,P = .32),New-Q Wave (OR:0.85,95% CI: 0.72-1.00, P = .05), all cause death (OR:0.91, 95% CI: 0.87-0.96, P < .0001), death from cardiovascular (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58-0.99, P = .04), revascularization (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99, P = .03). Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a significantly lower rate of myocardial Infarction (MI), stroke, stent thrombosis, all cause death, death from cardiovascular and revascularization (OR:0.91,95% CI:0.87-0.96, P < .0001) when compared to DAPT. Besides, DAPT was associated with a significantly higher rate of BARC3 or 5 bleeding (OR:0.85, 95% CI: 0.68-1.06; P = .16) when compared to ticagrelor. When bleeding was further subdivided, minor or major bleeding was also significantly higher with DAPT (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.41-1.27; P = .26). GUSTO moderate or severe bleeding was also significantly higher with DAPT (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.39-1.52; P = .45).

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) can optimize ischemic and bleeding risks. And, it can reduce the occurrence of events outcome (MI, revascularization, stroke, stent thrombosis).

Premature Ticagrelor Discontinuation in Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic CVD: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Ticagrelor is a cornerstone of modern antithrombotic therapy alongside aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndrome and after percutaneous coronary intervention. Adverse effects such as bleeding and dyspnea have been associated with premature ticagrelor discontinuation, which may limit any potential advantage of ticagrelor over clopidogrel. The randomized trials of ticagrelor captured adverse events, offering the opportunity to more precisely quantify these effects across studies. Therefore, a meta-analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials of ticagrelor conducted between January 2007 and June 2017 was performed to quantify the incidence and causes of premature ticagrelor discontinuation. Among 66,870 patients followed for a median 18 months, premature ticagrelor discontinuation was seen in 25%; bleeding was the most common cause of discontinuation followed by dyspnea. Versus the comparators, the relative risk of dyspnea-related discontinuation during follow-up was 6.4-fold higher, the relative risk of bleeding was 3.2-fold higher, and the relative risk of discontinuation due to any adverse event was 59% higher for patients receiving ticagrelor. Understanding these potential barriers to adherence to ticagrelor is crucial for informed patient-physician decision making and can inform future efforts to improve ticagrelor adherence. This review discusses the incidence, causes, and biological mechanisms of ticagrelor-related adverse effects and offers strategies to improve adherence to ticagrelor.