1-Year Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Primary Angioplasty for Myocardial Infarction Treated With Prasugrel Versus Ticagrelor

Ticagrelor vs Prasugrel for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Routine Care

Importance

In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive treatment, ticagrelor and prasugrel are guideline-recommended P2Y12 receptor inhibitors. The ISAR-REACT5 randomized clinical trial demonstrated superiority for prasugrel, although concerns were raised about the generalizability of some underpowered subgroup analyses.

Objectives

To emulate a randomized clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of ticagrelor vs prasugrel under the conditions of routine care in individuals with ACS planned to undergo an invasive treatment strategy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This new-user cohort study included secondary data from a German statutory health insurance claims database between January 2012 and December 2021, using 1:1 propensity score nearest-neighbor matching to emulate ISAR-REACT5. Individuals with ACS receiving either ticagrelor or prasugrel treatment after hospital discharge were followed up for 1 year. Eligibility criteria closely emulated those of ISAR-REACT5 and included age of 18 years or older and cardiovascular risk factors. Data were analyzed from May 2023 to May 2024.

Exposure

Outpatient prescription of ticagrelor or prasugrel.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke within 1 year of outpatient treatment initiation. Secondary end points included individual components of the primary end point and stent thrombosis. The safety end point was major bleeding. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was fitted to the overall cohort.

Results

Of 17 642 propensity score-matched individuals (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [10.9] years; 73.9% male), 8821 received ticagrelor and 8821 received prasugrel. Agreement was met in 11 of 12 predefined agreement metrics when comparing the results with ISAR-REACT5. The primary composite end point of all-cause mortality, MI, or stroke occurred in 815 individuals (9.2%) receiving ticagrelor and 663 (7.5%) receiving prasugrel (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.12-1.37). Myocardial infarction (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36) and stroke (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.02-1.74) each occurred significantly more often in the ticagrelor group. Analysis of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.99-1.64), stent thrombosis (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.30), and major bleeding (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.96-1.32) revealed no significant differences between treatment groups. Subgroup analysis showed that prasugrel was associated with the primary composite end point in fewer individuals with ST-segment elevation MI (338 of 4941 [6.8%] vs 451 of 4852 [9.3%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found that prasugrel was associated with lower rates of all-cause mortality, MI, or stroke compared with ticagrelor in individuals with ACS undergoing an invasive treatment strategy in routine care, particularly in individuals with ST-segment elevation MI. The findings suggest that carefully designed database studies can complement and extend findings from randomized clinical trials, informing guidelines and clinical decision-making.

Clinical Impact of Dyspnea after Ticagrelor Treatment and the Effect of Switching to Clopidogrel in Patients with Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

 Dyspnea is frequent during ticagrelor-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, its clinical characteristics or management strategy remains uncertain.

METHODS

 The study assessed 2,617 AMI patients from the Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Stabilized Patients with AMI (TALOS-AMI) trial. Dyspnea during 1-month ticagrelor-based DAPT and following DAPT strategies with continued ticagrelor or de-escalation to clopidogrel from 1 to 12 months were evaluated for drug adherence, subsequent dyspnea, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and bleeding events.

RESULTS

 Dyspnea was reported by 538 patients (20.6%) during 1 month of ticagrelor-based DAPT. Adherence to allocated DAPT over the study period was lower in the continued ticagrelor arm than the de-escalation to clopidogrel, particularly among the dyspneic population (81.1% vs. 91.5%, p < 0.001). Among ticagrelor-treated patients with dyspnea, those switched to clopidogrel at 1 month had a lower frequency of dyspnea at 3 months (34.3% vs. 51.7%, p < 0.001) and 6 months (25.5% vs. 38.4%, p = 0.002) than those continued with ticagrelor. In patients with dyspnea in their 1-month ticagrelor-based DAPT, de-escalation was not associated with increased MACE (1.3% vs. 3.9%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-1.11, p = 0.07) or clinically relevant bleeding (3.2% vs. 6.2%, HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.22-1.19, p = 0.12) at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

 Dyspnea is a common side effect among ticagrelor-based DAPTs in AMI patients. Switching from ticagrelor to clopidogrel after 1 month in AMI patients may provide a reasonable option to alleviate subsequent dyspnea in ticagrelor-relevant dyspneic patients, without increasing the risk of ischemic events (NCT02018055).

De-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) de-escalation with five alternative DAPT strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). Parallel-arm randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT strategies were included and arms of interest were compared via NMA. Partial ranking of each identified arm and for each investigated endpoint was also performed.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients with ACS (≥18 years) undergoing PCI with indications for DAPT.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search covered several databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, Conference Proceeding Citation Index-Science) from inception to 15 October 2023. Medical subject headings and keywords related to ACS, PCI and DAPT interventions were used. Reference lists of included studies were screened. Clinical trials registers were searched for ongoing or unpublished trials.

INTERVENTIONS

Six strategies were assessed: T1 arm: acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and prasugrel for 12 months; T2 arm: ASA and low-dose prasugrel for 12 months; T3 arm: ASA and ticagrelor for 12 months; T4 arm: DAPT de-escalation (ASA+P2Y12 inhibitor for 1-3 months, then single antiplatelet therapy with potent P2Y12 inhibitor or DAPT with clopidogrel); T5 arm: ASA and clopidogrel for 12 months; T6 arm: ASA and clopidogrel for 3-6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome: Cardiovascular mortality.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

bleeding events (all, major, minor), stent thrombosis (ST), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

RESULTS

23 RCTs (75 064 patients with ACS) were included. No differences in cardiovascular mortality, all-cause death, recurrent MI or MACE were found when the six strategies were compared, although with different levels of certainty of evidence. ASA and clopidogrel for 12 or 3-6 months may result in a large increase of ST risk versus ASA plus full-dose prasugrel (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.12, and OR 3.42, 95% CI 1.33 to 7.26, respectively; low certainty evidence for both comparisons). DAPT de-escalation probably results in a reduced risk of all bleedings compared with ASA plus full-dose 12-month prasugrel (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81, moderate-certainty evidence) and ASA plus 12-month ticagrelor (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.75), while it may not increase the risk of ST. ASA plus 12-month clopidogrel may reduce all bleedings versus ASA plus full-dose 12-month prasugrel (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.94, low certainty) and ASA plus 12-month ticagrelor (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

DAPT de-escalation and ASA-clopidogrel regimens may reduce bleeding events compared with 12 months ASA and potent P2Y12 inhibitors. 3-6 months or 12-month aspirin-clopidogrel may increase ST risk compared with 12-month aspirin plus potent P2Y12 inhibitors, while DAPT de-escalation probably does not.

Sex-based outcomes on unguided de-escalation from ticagrelor to clopidogrel in stabilized patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a post-hoc analysis of the TALOS-AMI

Background

The TALOS-AMI study highlighted the effectiveness of a de-escalation strategy shifting from ticagrelor to clopidogrel 1 month after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), resulting in significant reduction in clinical events, primarily attributed to a substantial decrease in bleeding events. Nevertheless, the impact of this strategy on outcomes based on sex remains unclear.

Methods

This was a post-hoc analysis of the TALOS-AMI study. At 1 month after PCI, patients who remained adherent to aspirin and ticagrelor without experiencing major adverse events were randomized into either the de-escalation group (clopidogrel plus aspirin) or the active control group (ticagrelor plus aspirin) for an additional 12 months. The primary endpoint encompassed a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding type 2 or greater at 12 months after randomization.

Results

Among the 2,697 patients included in this study, 454 (16.8%) were women. Women, characterized by older age and a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, impaired renal function, and non-ST-segment myocardial infarction, exhibited a lower primary endpoint at 12 months compared to men [adjusted hazards ratio (HR), 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37-0.95; P = 0.03]. Compare to the active control group, the de-escalation group demonstrated a reduced risk of the primary endpoint in both women (adjusted HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15-0.95; P = 0.039) and men (adjusted HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.40-0.79; P = 0.001) (interaction P = 0.46).

Conclusions

In stabilized patients post-PCI with drug-eluting stents for acute myocardial infarction, the primary endpoint was lower among women compared to men. In this cohort, the benefits of an unguided de-escalation strategy from ticagrelor to clopidogrel were comparable in women and men.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients of acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: A propensity score-matched analysis

Evidence on comparative effectiveness and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor post-percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty is scarce in Indian population. In a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort with 71 individuals in each group, the incidence of a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or coronary revascularization was not significantly different in prasugrel and ticagrelor group (7.04% vs 9.86%; absolute difference, 2.8%; HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.21-2.1; p = 0.49). There was no significant difference in bleeding (5.63% vs 9.86%; absolute difference, -4.20%; 95% CI, -13.0%-4.5%) and dyspnea (7.04% vs 12.7%; absolute difference, -5.60%; 95% CI, -15.4%-4.1%).

Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology 2023 Focused Update of the Guidelines for the Use of Antiplatelet Therapy

Antiplatelet therapy (APT) is the foundation of treatment and prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Selecting the optimal APT strategies to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events, while balancing bleeding risk, requires ongoing review of clinical trials. Appended, the focused update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology guidelines for the use of APT provides recommendations on the following topics: (1) use of acetylsalicylic acid in primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; (2) dual APT (DAPT) duration after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients at high bleeding risk; (3) potent DAPT (P2Y12 inhibitor) choice in patients who present with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and possible DAPT de-escalation strategies after PCI; (4) choice and duration of DAPT in ACS patients who are medically treated without revascularization; (5) pretreatment with DAPT (P2Y12 inhibitor) before elective or nonelective coronary angiography; (6) perioperative and longer-term APT management in patients who require coronary artery bypass grafting surgery; and (7) use of APT in patients with atrial fibrillation who require oral anticoagulation after PCI or medically managed ACS. These recommendations are all on the basis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses conducted as part of the development of these guidelines, provided in the Supplementary Material.

Tailored antiplatelet therapy in stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms: a nationwide registry study

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet therapy, where regimens are tailored based on platelet function testing, has been introduced into neurointerventional surgery. This nationwide registry study evaluated the effect and safety of tailored antiplatelet therapy in stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms compared with conventional therapy using a standard regimen.

METHODS

This study enrolled 1686 patients in 44 participating centers who received stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019. The standard regimen (aspirin and clopidogrel) was used for all patients in the conventional group (924, 19 centers). The regimen was selected based on platelet function testing (standard regimen for clopidogrel responders; adding cilostazol or replacing clopidogrel with other thienopyridines (ticlopidine, prasugrel, or ticagrelor) for clopidogrel non-responders) in the tailored group (762, 25 centers). The primary outcome was thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes were bleeding and poor outcomes (increase in modified Rankin Scale score). Outcomes within 30 days after coiling were compared using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The thromboembolic event rate was lower in the tailored group than in the conventional group (30/762 (3.9%) vs 63/924 (6.8%), adjusted OR 0.560, 95% CI 0.359 to 0.875, P=0.001). The bleeding event rate was not different between the study groups (62/762 (8.1%) vs 73/924 (7.9%), adjusted OR 0.790, 95% CI 0.469 to 1.331, P=0.376). Poor outcomes were less frequent in the tailored group (12/762 (1.6%) vs 34 (3.7%), adjusted OR 0.252, 95% CI 0.112 to 0.568, P=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Tailored antiplatelet therapy in stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms reduced thromboembolic events and poor outcomes without increasing bleeding.

Duration and kind of dual antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndrome patients: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

For acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the choice of the duration and kind of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) offering the most accurate balance between ischemic and bleeding risk remains unknown.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A network meta-analysis was performed including all Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing different DAPT regimens and duration in ACS patients undergoing PCI. Trial-defined MACE and major bleedings were the primary endpoints. Stroke, stent thrombosis (ST), all-cause and cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) represented secondary endpoints.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

13 RCTs encompassing 46145 patients were included. Mean age was 62 (61-64) years old, 42% being admitted with STEMI, 33% with NSTEMI and 25% with UA. The competitive arms were: clopidogrel and aspirin for 12 months (6 arms/18183 patients), clopidogrel and aspirin for 6 months (4/3329), clopidogrel and aspirin >12 months (3/2238), ticagrelor and aspirin for 12 months (6/12942) and prasugrel and aspirin for 12 months (3/9453). Trial-defined MACE and major bleedings, stroke and death were similar among the different arms. DAPT with prasugrel and aspirin for 12 months reduced MI compared to aspirin and clopidogrel for 12 months (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54.0.94) and reduced the risk of ST compared to ticagrelor (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49-0.90). Both prasugrel and ticagrelor reduced ST as compared to clopidogrel and aspirin for 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Different DAPT strategies yield similar risk of MACE, major bleeding, death and stroke in ACS patients. Prasugrel and aspirin for 12 months proved to be the most effective strategy regarding ST and MI.

Short-Term DAPT and DAPT De-Escalation Strategies for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Short-term (≤6 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and DAPT de-escalation become attractive for patients with acute coronary syndrome.

METHODS

A systemic search identified randomized controlled trials that included patients with acute coronary syndrome treated using (1) standard DAPT (12 months) with clopidogrel, prasugrel (standard/low dose), or ticagrelor; (2) extended DAPT (≥18 months); (3) short-term DAPT (≤6 months) followed by P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin; (4) 12-month DAPT with unguided de-escalation from potent P2Y12 inhibitors to low-dose potent P2Y12 inhibitor or clopidogrel at 1 month; and (5) guided selection DAPT with genotype or platelet function tests. The primary efficacy outcome (major adverse cardiovascular events) was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major or minor bleeding.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 32 randomized controlled trials with 103 497 patients. While there were no differences in efficacy between short, unguided de-escalation and guided selection strategies, unguided de-escalation was associated with reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with standard DAPT with clopidogrel or ticagrelor (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.67 [0.49-0.93] and 0.68 [0.50-0.93]). Both short DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor and unguided de-escalation were associated with reduced risks in safety compared with other strategies, including guided selection (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.66 [0.47-0.93] and 0.48 [0.33-0.71]). Short DAPT followed by a P2Y12 inhibitor was associated with reduced risk of major bleeding and all-cause death compared with standard, extended DAPT (eg, versus DAPT with clopidogrel; hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.64 [0.42-0.97] and 0.60 [0.44-0.82]). By rankogram, unguided de-escalation strategy was the safest and most effective strategy in reducing major adverse cardiovascular events and major or minor bleeding while short DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor was ranked the best for major bleeding and all-cause death.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute coronary syndrome, unguided de-escalation was associated with the lowest risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and major or minor bleeding outcomes, while short DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor was associated with the lowest risk of major bleeding and all-cause death.

P2Y12 Inhibitors for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

For patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), prasugrel was recommended over ticagrelor in a recent randomized controlled trial, although more data are needed on the rationale. Here, the effects of P2Y12 inhibitors on ischemic and bleeding events in patients with NSTE-ACS were investigated.

METHODS

Clinical trials that enrolled patients with NSTE-ACS were included, relevant data were extracted, and a network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

This study included 37,268 patients with NSTE-ACS from 11 studies. There was no significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor for any end point, although prasugrel had a higher likelihood of event reduction than ticagrelor for all end points except cardiovascular death. Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel was associated with decreased risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99) but not an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.97-1.74). Similarly, compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular death (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.94) and an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00-1.77; P = .049). For the primary efficacy end point (MACE), prasugrel showed the highest likelihood of event reduction (P = .97) and was superior to ticagrelor (P = .29) and clopidogrel (P = .24).

CONCLUSION

Prasugrel and ticagrelor had comparable risks for every end point, although prasugrel had the highest probability of being the best treatment for reducing the primary efficacy end point. This study highlights the need for further studies to investigate optimal P2Y12 inhibitor selection in patients with NSTE-ACS.

Antiplatelet Strategies for Older Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: Finding Directions in a Low-Evidence Field

Patients ≥ 75 years of age account for about one third of hospitalizations for acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Since the latest European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend that older ACS patients use the same diagnostic and interventional strategies used by the younger ones, most elderly patients are currently treated invasively. Therefore, an appropriate dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is indicated as part of the secondary prevention strategy to be implemented in such patients. The choice of the composition and duration of DAPT should be tailored on an individual basis, after careful assessment of the thrombotic and bleeding risk of each patient. Advanced age is a main risk factor for bleeding. Recent data show that in patients of high bleeding risk short DAPT (1 to 3 months) is associated with decreased bleeding complications and similar thrombotic events, as compared to standard 12-month DAPT. Clopidogrel seems the preferable P2Y12 inhibitor, due to a better safety profile than ticagrelor. When the bleeding risk is associated with a high thrombotic risk (a circumstance present in about two thirds of older ACS patients) it is important to tailor the treatment by taking into account the fact that the thrombotic risk is high during the first months after the index event and then wanes gradually over time, whereas the bleeding risk remains constant. Under these circumstances, a de-escalation strategy seems reasonable, starting with DAPT that includes aspirin and low-dose prasugrel (a more potent and reliable P2Y12 inhibitor than clopidogrel) then switching after 2-3 months to DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel for up to 12 months.

Feasibility of Community Pharmacist-Initiated and Point-of-Care CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided De-Escalation of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors

Tailoring antiplatelet therapy based on CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing can improve cardiovascular outcomes and potentially reduce healthcare costs in patients on a P2Y12-inhibitor regime with prasugrel or ticagrelor. However, ubiquitous adoption—particularly in an outpatient setting—remains limited. We conducted a proof-of-concept study to evaluate the feasibility of CYP2C19-guided de-escalation of prasugrel/ticagrelor to clopidogrel through point-of-care (POC) PGx testing in the community pharmacy. Multiple feasibility outcomes were assessed. Overall, 144 patients underwent CYP2C19 PGx testing in 27 community pharmacies. Successful test results were obtained in 142 patients (98.6%). De-escalation to clopidogrel occurred in 19 patients (20%) out of 95 (67%) eligible for therapy de-escalation, which was mainly due to PGx testing not being included in cardiology guidelines. Out of the 119 patients (84%) and 14 pharmacists (100%) surveyed, 109 patients (92%) found the community pharmacy a suitable location for PGx testing, and the majority of pharmacists (86%) thought it has added value. Net costs due to PGx testing were estimated at €43 per patient, which could be reduced by earlier testing and could turn into savings if de-escalation would double to 40%. Although the observed de-escalation rate was low, POC CYP2C19-guided de-escalation to clopidogrel appears feasible in a community pharmacy setting.

Trends in outcomes of women with myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty-Analysis of randomized trials

Background

Sex- and gender-associated differences determine the disease response to treatment.

Aim

The study aimed to explore the hypothesis that progress in the management of STE-myocardial infarction (STEMI) overcomes the worse outcome in women.

Methods and results

We performed an analysis of three randomized trials enrolling patients treated with primary PCI more than 10 years apart. PRAGUE-1,-2 validated the preference of transport for primary PCI over on-site fibrinolysis. PRAGUE-18 enrollment was ongoing at the time of the functional network of 24/7PCI centers, and the intervention was supported by intensive antiplatelets. The proportion of patients with an initial Killip ≥ 3 was substantially higher in the more recent study (0.6 vs. 6.7%, p = 0.004). Median time from symptom onset to the door of the PCI center shortened from 3.8 to 3.0 h, p < 0.001. The proportion of women having total ischemic time ≤3 h was higher in the PRAGUE-18 (OR [95% C.I.] 2.65 [2.03-3.47]). However, the percentage of patients with time-to-reperfusion >6 h was still significant (22.3 vs. 27.2% in PRAGUE-18). There was an increase in probability for an initial TIMI flow >0 in the later study (1.49 [1.0-2.23]), and also for an optimal procedural result (4.24 [2.12-8.49], p < 0.001). The risk of 30-day mortality decreased by 61% (0.39 [0.17-0.91], p = 0.029).

Conclusion

The prognosis of women with MI treated with primary PCI improved substantially with 24/7 regional availability of mechanical reperfusion, performance-enhancing technical progress, and intensive adjuvant antithrombotic therapy. A major modifiable hindrance to achieving this benefit in a broad population of women is the timely diagnosis by health professional services.

Effect of ticagrelor and prasugrel on remote myocardial inflammation in patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST-elevation: a CMR T1 and T2 mapping study

PURPOSE

Acute myocardial ischaemia triggers a non-specific inflammatory response of remote myocardium through the increase of plasma concentrations of acute-phase proteins, which causes myocardial oedema. As ticagrelor has been shown to significantly decrease circulating levels of several pro-inflammatory cytokines in patients after acute myocardial infarction with ST-elevation (STEMI), we sought to investigate a potential suppressive effect of ticagrelor over prasugrel on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 and T2 values in remote myocardium.

METHODS

Ninety STEMI patients were prospectively included and randomised to receive either ticagrelor or prasugrel maintenance treatment after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients underwent CMR after 2-7 days. The protocol included long and short axis cine imaging, T1 mapping, T2 mapping and late gadolinium enhancement imaging.

RESULTS

After excluding 30 patients due to either missing images or insufficient quality of the T1 or T2 maps, 60 patients were included in our analysis. Of those, 29 patients were randomised to the ticagrelor group and 31 patients to the prasugrel group. In the remote myocardium, T1 values did not differ between groups (931.3 [919.4-950.4] ms for ticagrelor vs. 932.6 [915.5-949.2] ms for prasugrel (p = 0.94)), nor did the T2 values (53.8 ± 4.6 ms for ticagrelor vs. 53.7 ± 4.7 ms for prasugrel (p = 0.86)). Also, in the infarcted myocardium, T1 and T2 values did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

In revascularised STEMI patients, ticagrelor maintenance therapy did not show superiority over prasugrel in preventing early remote myocardial inflammation as assessed by CMR T1 and T2 mapping.

Reduction or de-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy intensity or duration in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A mini-review

Current guidelines for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 12 months. Since bleeding is the main Achilles' heel of DAPT, in recent years several randomized controlled trials have evaluated the safety and efficacy of de-escalation of DAPT with respect to ischaemic and bleeding endpoints. These trials can be broadly divided into studies evaluating a shorter duration of DAPT, and those studies in which DAPT that includes a potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, such as prasugrel or ticagrelor, is compared to less intense DAPT, mainly clopidogrel or reduced-dose prasugrel. We sought to evaluate the studies assessing de-escalation of DAPT in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. We review the studies evaluating the strategies of de-escalation of DAPT intensity and those evaluating a strategy of de-escalation of DAPT duration in ACS patients undergoing PCI. We summarize the limitations of studies to date, gaps in evidence and make recommendations for future studies.

Current and Future Insights for Optimizing Antithrombotic Therapy to Reduce the Burden of Cardiovascular Ischemic Events in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

The pharmacological treatment strategies for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in recent years are constantly evolving to develop more potent antithrombotic agents, as reflected by the introduction of more novel P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors and anticoagulants to reduce the ischemic risk among ACS patients. Despite the substantial improvements in the current antithrombotic regimen, a noticeable number of ACS patients continue to experience ischemic events. Providing effective ischemic risk reduction while balancing bleeding risk remains a clinical challenge. This updated review discusses the currently approved and widely used antithrombotic agents and explores newer antithrombotic treatment strategies under development for the initial phase of ACS.

Comparison of Unguided De-Escalation Versus Guided Selection of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for reducing ischemic events is greatest in the early period of acute coronary syndrome, and recent randomized controlled trials have investigated the unguided de-escalation strategy of changing potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitors to less potent or reduced-dose P2Y₁₂ inhibitors 1 month after acute coronary syndrome. However, it remains unclear which strategy is more effective and safer: the uniform unguided de-escalation strategy versus the personalized guided selection of DAPT with genotype or platelet function tests.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central were searched for articles published from database inception to September 10, 2021. Randomized controlled trials investigating DAPT using clopidogrel, low-dose prasugrel, standard-dose prasugrel, ticagrelor, unguided de-escalation strategy, and guided selection strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome were included. Hazard ratios and relative risk estimates were extracted from each study. The estimates were pooled using a random-effects network meta-analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major or minor bleeding. Secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

This study included 19 randomized controlled trials with 69 746 patients. Compared with guided selection of DAPT, unguided de-escalation of DAPT was associated with a decreased risk of the primary safety outcome (hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.33-0.72]) without increased risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.53-1.28]) or any secondary outcomes. The results were similar when the guided selection strategy was divided into platelet function-guided and genotype-guided strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with guided selection of DAPT, unguided de-escalation of DAPT decreased bleeding without increasing ischemic events in patients after acute coronary syndrome. If a strategy of de-escalation is chosen, these findings do not support the routine use of personalized guiding tests.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifier: CRD42021273082.

Protease-activated receptor-mediated platelet aggregation in patients with type 2 diabetes on potent P2Y12 inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet therapy is a cornerstone in the secondary prevention of ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The new P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors prasugrel and ticagrelor have been shown to improve patients' outcomes. Whether or not these drugs have equal efficacy in individuals with or without diabetes is disputed. Furthermore, platelets can be activated by thrombin, which is, at least in part, independent of P2Y₁₂ -mediated platelet activation. Protease-activated receptor (PAR)-1 and -4 are thrombin receptors on human platelets. We sought to compare the in vitro efficacy of prasugrel (n = 121) and ticagrelor (n = 99) to inhibit PAR-mediated platelet aggregation in individuals with type 2 diabetes (prasugrel n = 26, ticagrelor n = 29).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared P2Y₁₂ -, PAR-1- and PAR-4-mediated platelet aggregation as assessed by multiple electrode platelet aggregometry between prasugrel- and ticagrelor-treated patients without and with type 2 diabetes who underwent acute PCI.

RESULTS

Overall, there were no differences of P2Y₁₂ -, PAR-1- and PAR-4-mediated platelet aggregation between prasugrel- and ticagrelor-treated patients. However, both drugs inhibited P2Y₁₂ -mediated platelet aggregation stronger, and thereby to a similar extent in patients with type 2 diabetes than in those without diabetes. There was no correlation between either P2Y₁₂ -, or PAR-1- or PAR-4-mediated platelet aggregation and levels of HbA1c or the body mass index (BMI). However, we observed patients with high residual platelet reactivity in response to PAR-1 and PAR-4 stimulation in all cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Prasugrel and ticagrelor inhibit P2Y₁₂ - and PAR-mediated platelet aggregation in individuals with diabetes to a similar extent, irrespective of HbA_1c levels and BMI.

Efficacy and Safety of De-escalation of Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

ABSTRACT

Considering that there is no definite conclusion on the efficacy and safety of switching from potent P2Y 12 inhibitors to clopidogrel, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and compared the efficacy and safety of de-escalation or not of antiplatelet therapy. The relevant randomized controlled trials were included by searching several databases. Net adverse clinical events were identified as the composite end point, which was defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, and bleeding at 12 months after acute coronary syndromes. The efficacy end points were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, all-cause death, and stent thrombosis. Bleeding was designed as the safety end point. The risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals of end point events were calculated by the fixed-effects model. Six randomized controlled trials with 7627 patients met inclusion criteria. There were significant differences in the risk of net adverse clinical events (RR, 0.67, CI, 0.58-0.78, P < 0.00001) and bleeding end point (0.61, 0.52-0.71, P < 0.00001) between the 2 groups. However, there were no significant differences in the risk of all efficacy end points. In general, the strategy of de-escalation from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel can reduce the incidence of net adverse clinical events and bleeding events in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

De-escalation of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Updated Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of 21 Studies and 38,741 Patients

ABSTRACT

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended among patients with established acute coronary syndrome. In this meta-analysis, we sought to compare the clinical outcomes between de-escalation versus unchanged DAPT based on both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events for observational studies and net clinical events for RCTs. Four RCTs and 17 observational studies with a total of 38,741 patients were included. Net clinical events were more common with unchanged DAPT than with de-escalation in RCTs [odd ratio (OR): 1.71; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.21-2.43; I2 = 69.4%], which was mainly due to higher risks of any bleeding (OR: 1.81; 95% CI, 1.14-2.88; I2 = 75.5%) and major bleeding (OR: 1.58; 95% CI, 1.02-2.46; I2 = 0), without significant differences in ischaemic events. However, trial sequential analysis revealed that sufficient information was obtained just for net clinical events, not for respective ischaemic or bleeding events in RCTs. In the analysis based on real-world observational studies, the risks of myocardial infarction (OR: 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98; I2 = 0) and stroke (OR: 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81; I2 = 0) were lower with the unchanged DAPT group. Therefore, de-escalation of DAPT led to a marked reduction in net clinical events compared with unchanged DAPT in RCTs, which was mainly due to reduced bleeding events. However, sufficient information for ischaemic events was not obtained. In the analysis based on real-world observational studies, myocardial infarction and stroke were more common with de-escalation, which should arise our attention.

Comparative efficacy and safety of oral P2Y12 inhibitors after non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, potent P2Y12 inhibition with the use of prasugrel or ticagrelor is the mainstay of treatment after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The 2020 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines recommend the use of prasugrel over ticagrelor in patients with non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) intended to receive invasive management (class IIa recommendation), however there are contradictory views regarding this recommendation.

AIM

To compare oral P2Y12 inhibitors in NSTE-ACS in terms of efficacy and safety with a focus on patients intended to proceed to invasive management.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science to identify studies that compared different oral P2Y12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor) in patients with NSTE-ACS. Efficacy outcomes included the major adverse cardiovascular events outcome and safety outcomes included minor and major bleedings. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Nine studies (n=35 441 patients) were included in the systematic review. There was no difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor in the composite cardiovascular end point (prasugrel vs ticagrelor HR=0.80, 95% CI=0.61 to 1.06) in all patients with NSTE-ACS. In patients intended to receive invasive management, prasugrel resulted in a reduction of the composite cardiovascular end point both versus clopidogrel (HR=0.76, 95% CI=0.61 to 0.95) and ticagrelor (HR=0.74, 95% CI=0.56 to 0.98). Inconsistency was moderate and non-significant (I2=27%, total Q p=0.2). Prasugrel ranked as the most efficient treatment in the composite cardiovascular efficacy outcome, all-cause death, myocardial infarction and definite stent thrombosis, while clopidogrel ranked as safest in the bleeding outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In patients with NSTE-ACS intended to receive invasive management, an antiplatelet strategy based on prasugrel is more efficient than a similar strategy based on ticagrelor on a moderate level of evidence. This analysis supports the current recommendations by the ESC guidelines.

The current status and outcomes of in-hospital P2Y12 receptor inhibitor switching in Korean patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND/AIMS

While switching strategies of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (RIs) have sometimes been used in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients, the current status of in-hospital P2Y12RI switching remains unknown.

METHODS

Overall, 8,476 AMI patients who underwent successful revascularization from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institute of Health (KAMIR-NIH) were divided according to in-hospital P2Y12RI strategies, and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACEs), defined as a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding during hospitalization were compared.

RESULTS

Patients with in-hospital P2Y12RI switching accounted for 16.5%, of which 867 patients were switched from clopidogrel to potent P2Y12RI (C-P) and 532 patients from potent P2Y12RI to clopidogrel (P-C). There were no differences in NACEs among the unchanged clopidogrel, the unchanged potent P2Y12RIs, and the P2Y12RI switching groups. However, compared to the unchanged clopidogrel group, the C-P group had a higher incidence of non-fatal MI, and the P-C group had a higher incidence of TIMI major bleeding. In clinical events of in-hospital P2Y12RI switching, 90.9% of non-fatal MI occurred during pre-switching clopidogrel administration, 60.7% of TIMI major bleeding was related to pre-switching P2Y12RIs, and 71.4% of TIMI major bleeding was related to potent P2Y12RIs. Only 21.6% of the P2Y12RI switching group switched to P2Y12RIs after a loading dose (LD); however, there were no differences in clinical events between patients with and without LD.

CONCLUSION

In-hospital P2Y12RI switching occurred occasionally, but had relatively similar clinical outcomes compared to unchanged P2Y12RIs in Korean AMI patients. Non-fatal MI and bleeding appeared to be mainly related to pre-switching P2Y12RIs.

Cost Effectiveness of a CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Strategy in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results from the POPular Genetics Trial

INTRODUCTION

The POPular Genetics trial demonstrated that a CYP2C19 genotype-guided P2Y₁₂ inhibitor strategy reduced bleeding rates compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel without increasing thrombotic event rates after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

OBJECTIVE

In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel.

METHODS

A 1-year decision tree based on the POPular Genetics trial in combination with a lifelong Markov model was developed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between a genotype-guided and a standard P2Y₁₂ inhibitor strategy in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a Dutch healthcare system perspective. Within-trial survival and utility data were combined with lifetime projections to evaluate lifetime cost effectiveness for a cohort of 1000 patients. Costs and utilities were discounted at 4 and 1.5%, respectively, according to Dutch guidelines for health economic studies. Besides deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, several scenario analyses were also conducted (different time horizons, different discount rates, equal prices for P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, and equal distribution of thrombotic events between the two strategies).

RESULTS

Base-case analysis with a hypothetical cohort of 1000 subjects demonstrated 8.98 QALYs gained and €725,550.69 in cost savings for the genotype-guided strategy (dominant). The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model and the cost-effectiveness results. In scenario analyses, the genotype-guided strategy remained dominant.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing primary PCI, a CYP2C19 genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel resulted in QALYs gained and cost savings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01761786, Netherlands trial register number: NL2872.

Optimal P2Y12 inhibition in older adults with acute coronary syndromes: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a P2Y12 inhibitor on top of aspirin is the cornerstone of therapy after acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Nonetheless, the safest and most efficacious P2Y12 for older patients who are both at high ischaemic and bleeding risk remains uncertain. We aimed to examine the effect of available P2Y12 inhibitors on ischaemic and bleeding endpoints in older adults with ACS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Randomized clinical trials that reported separately the results of adults older >70 years for at least the primary endpoint [composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke]. Seven studies (14 485 patients-years) were included. Network meta-analysis showed that prasugrel was associated with similar occurrence of the primary endpoint and of a secondary ischaemic endpoint (composite of MI and stroke) and was most likely the best treatment [Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve Analysis (SUCRA) 54.5 and 59.8, respectively]. With regards to major bleedings, clopidogrel showed the highest likelihood of event reduction (SUCRA 70.1%), while ticagrelor of stent thrombosis (SUCRA 55.6%). Our meta-regression with a fixed proportion of patients managed invasively of 100% confirmed these trends with increasing SUCRA.

CONCLUSION

Among older subjects with ACS, DAPT should be balanced upon ischaemic and bleeding risks as prasugrel is associated with the highest probability of reduction of ischaemic events and clopidogrel of bleedings. Ticagrelor had highest SUCRA for stent thrombosis reduction but seems suboptimal in older adults.

Comparative efficacy and safety of oral P2Y12 inhibitors for patients with chronic kidney disease and acute coronary syndrome: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is a paucity of data concerning the safety and effectiveness of P2Y12 inhibitors in the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with chronic kidney disease (CKD) population. The aim of this study is to compare the different oral P2Y12 inhibitors in terms of efficacy and safety, focusing exclusively on patients with CKD who were treated for ACS.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science to identify studies that compared different oral P2Y12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) in patients with ACS with CKD. Efficacy outcomes included the major adverse cardiovascular events composite outcome and safety outcomes included major bleedings and major or minor bleedings combined. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the systematic review, 7 CKD subgroup analyses of RCTs (8878 patients) and 5 observational studies (20175 patients). After the exclusion of studies with conservative management, prasugrel resulted in significant primary endpoint reduction versus clopidogrel (HR 0.80 and 95% CI 0.64 - 0.99), while ticagrelor did not (HR 0.88 and 95% CI 0.73 - 1.06). Major bleedings did not differ between the interventions. Ticagrelor resulted in more major or minor bleedings than clopidogrel (HR 1.21 and 95% CI 1.06 - 1.38), whereas prasugrel did not (HR 1.12 and 95% CI 0.84 - 1.49).

CONCLUSION

In patients with ACS with underlying CKD, who are intended to receive invasive management, there may be a significant reduction of the primary efficacy outcome with prasugrel as compared to clopidogrel but not with ticagrelor as compared to clopidogrel. There probably exists no difference among interventions in the major bleedings. Dedicated RCTs are needed to confirm these results.

Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as Marker of Platelet Activation in Patients on Potent P2Y12 Inhibitors

A high platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) has recently been associated with ischemic outcomes in cardiovascular disease. Increased platelet reactivity and leukocyte-platelet aggregate formation are directly involved in the progress of atherosclerosis and have been linked to ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In order to understand the relation of PLR with platelet reactivity, we assessed PLR as well as agonist-inducible platelet aggregation and neutrophil-platelet aggregate (NPA) formation in 182 acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and prasugrel (n = 96) or ticagrelor (n = 86) 3 days after PCI. PLR was calculated from the blood count. Platelet aggregation was measured by multiple electrode aggregometry and NPA formation was determined by flow cytometry, both in response to ADP and SFLLRN. A PLR ≥91 was considered as high PLR based on previous data showing an association of this threshold with adverse ischemic outcomes. In the overall cohort and in prasugrel-treated patients, high PLR was associated with higher SFLLRN-inducible platelet aggregation (67 AU [50-85 AU] vs 59.5 AU [44.3-71.3 AU], P = .01, and 73 AU [50-85 AU] vs 61.5 AU [46-69 AU], P = .02, respectively). Further, prasugrel-treated patients with high PLR exhibited higher ADP- (15% [11%-23%] vs 10.9% [7.6%-15.9%], P = .007) and SFLLRN-inducible NPA formation (64.3% [55.4%-73.8%] vs 53.8% [44.1%-70.1%], P = .01) as compared to patients with low PLR. These differences were not seen in ticagrelor-treated patients. In conclusion, high PLR is associated with increased on-treatment platelet reactivity in prasugrel-treated patients, but not in patients on ticagrelor.

The relationship between symptom onset-to-needle time and ischemic outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI: Observations from Prague-18 Study

OBJECTIVES

Based on previous studies with clopidogrel, the time between acute myocardial infarction (AMI) symptoms onset and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was proven as important prognostic factor. Our aim was to assess the relationship between symptoms onset to needle time (SNT) and procedural results and the occurrence of ischemic endpoints in primary angioplasty patients treated with potent P2Y12 inhibitors.

METHODS

A total of 1,131 out of 1,230 patients randomized to the Prague-18 study (prasugrel vs. ticagrelor in primary PCI) were divided into a high and a low-risk group. The effect of defined SNT on patients' ischemic endpoints and prognosis by their risk status at admission was tested.

RESULTS

The median SNT was 3.2 hours. Longer SNTs resulted in a more frequent incidence of TIMI flow <3 post PCI (p=0.015). There were significant differences in the occurrence of the combined ischemic endpoint among the compared SNT groups at 30 days (p=0.032), and 1 year (p=0.011), with the highest incidence in the ≤1 h SNT group of patients. "Latecomers" (SNT>4 hs) in the high-risk group experienced more reinfarction within 1 year [OR (95% CI) 3.23 (1.09-9.62) p=0.035]; no difference was found in the low-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of intense antithrombotic medication, stratification of MI patients undergoing primary angioplasty, based on initial ischemic risk assessment affected prognosis more than symptom onset to needle time. Longer time delay was significantly related to increased incidence of ischemic events and all-cause mortality only in patients with high ischemic risk.

Ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Ticagrelor and prasugrel are the mainstay of antithrombotic therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). However, direct comparative data on clinical outcomes of potent P2Y12 inhibitors are limited, especially in East Asian populations. We aimed to evaluate the effect of ticagrelor versus prasugrel on clinical outcomes in patients with acute MI.

METHODS

From the Korean nationwide National Health Insurance database, 10,797 patients with acute MI who received either ticagrelor or prasugrel in combination with aspirin after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled. The primary outcome was net clinical benefit, defined as a composite of death, MI, stroke, or major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome as effectiveness and safety measures.

RESULTS

Among 10,797 patients, 9591 (88.8%) received ticagrelor and 1206 (11.2%) received prasugrel. During a median follow-up of 1.8 years, the primary outcome occurred in 1051 (16.6%) and 131 (14.4%) patients in the ticagrelor and prasugrel groups, respectively. In the propensity score matched cohort (n = 5979), the risk for the primary outcome was similar between the two groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.949 for prasugrel; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.780-1.154). The risks for the composite of death, MI, or stroke (HR 0.938; 95% CI: 0.752-1.169) and major bleeding (HR 1.022; 95% CI: 0.709-1.472) were also comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute MI undergoing PCI, ticagrelor and prasugrel appeared to have similar net clinical benefits. The risks for death, MI, or stroke and major bleeding were not significantly different between the two groups.

Ticagrelor versus Prasugrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - analysis from the Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS)

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to compare the outcomes of ACS (acute coronary syndrome) patients undergoing in-hospital PCI (percutaneous coronary intervention) treated with prasugrel versus ticagrelor.

METHODS

Among 7,233 patients enrolled to the ACSIS (Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey) between 2010 and 2018, we identified 1126 eligible patients treated with prasugrel and 817 with ticagrelor. Comparison between the groups was preformed separately in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, propensity score matched (PSM) STEMI patients, and non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) patients.

RESULTS

In-hospital complication rates, including rates of stent thrombosis, were not significantly different between groups. In PSM STEMI patients, 30-day re-hospitalization rate (p <0.05), 30-day MACE (the composite of death, MI, stroke and urgent revascularization; p=0.006), and 1-year mortality rates (p = 0.08) were higher in the ticagrelor group compared to the prasugrel group; In NSTE-ACS patients, outcomes were not associated with drug choice. In cox regression analysis applied on the entire cohort, prasugrel was associated with lower 1-year mortality in STEMI patient but not in NSTE-ACS patients (p for interaction 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to ticagrelor, prasugrel was associated with superior clinical outcomes in STEMI patients, but not in NSTE-ACS patients.

Stent Selection for Primary Angioplasty and Outcomes in the Era of Potent Antiplatelets. Data from the Multicenter Randomized Prague-18 Trial

Drug-eluting stents (DES) are the recommended stents for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to determine why interventional cardiologists used non-DES and how it influenced patient prognoses. The efficacy and safety outcomes of the different stents were also compared in patients treated with either prasugrel or ticagrelor. Of the PRAGUE-18 study patients, 749 (67.4%) were treated with DES, 296 (26.6%) with bare-metal stents (BMS), and 66 (5.9%) with bioabsorbable vascular scaffold/stents (BVS) between 2013 and 2016. Cardiogenic shock at presentation, left main coronary artery disease, especially as the culprit lesion, and right coronary artery stenosis were the reasons for selecting a BMS. The incidence of the primary composite net-clinical endpoint (EP) (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, serious bleeding, or revascularization) at seven days was 2.5% vs. 6.3% and 3.0% in the DES, vs. with BMS and BVS, respectively (HR 2.7; 95% CI 1.419–5.15, p = 0.002 for BMS vs. DES and 1.25 (0.29–5.39) p = 0.76 for BVS vs. DES). Patients with BMS were at higher risk of death at 30 days (HR 2.20; 95% CI 1.01–4.76; for BMS vs. DES, p = 0.045) and at one year (HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.19–3.69; p = 0.01); they also had a higher composite of cardiac death, reinfarction, and stroke (HR 1.66; 95% CI 1.0–2.74; p = 0.047) at one year. BMS were associated with a significantly higher rate of primary EP whether treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor. In conclusion, patients with the highest initial risk profile were preferably treated with BMS over BVS. BMS were associated with a significantly higher rate of cardiovascular events whether treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor.

Efficacy and Safety of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Older Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Frequentist Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Previous studies and meta-analyses have assessed optimal P2Y12 inhibitors following acute coronary syndrome in overall trial cohorts. However, there are insufficient data for the elderly cohort who are prone to high bleeding and ischemic events. We aimed to assess the optimal P2Y12 inhibitor therapy for older patients.

METHODS

PubMed, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception through July 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched observational studies including older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) that reported study-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or major bleeding events. Outcomes at the mid-term follow-up were pooled to conduct a frequentist network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies involving 12,953 older patients were included in our analysis. No significant difference was observed with MACE when all three P2Y12 inhibitors were compared with each other. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor significantly increased the risk of major bleeding (risk ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.67) while prasugrel did not (risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.67-1.57). A sensitivity analysis of only randomized controlled trials yielded similar results for both MACE and major bleeding. The P score displayed prasugrel (0.5871) as the best treatment for MACE, while clopidogrel (0.7701) was the best P2Y12 inhibitor to decrease the risk of major bleeding. Ticagrelor (0.0634) was ranked the lowest because of an increased bleeding risk.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference is observed between the three P2Y12 inhibitors in study-defined MACE. Ranking by p-score suggests prasugrel as the best P2Y12 inhibitor to reduce the risk of MACE while clopidogrel is a better alternative than ticagrelor in older patients with acute coronary syndrome to decrease the risk of major bleeding. Because of a lack of individual-patient data analysis and heterogeneity amongst studies, future studies representing older patients with acute coronary syndrome are required to strengthen evidence regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in this cohort.

Unguided de-escalation from ticagrelor to clopidogrel in stabilised patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (TALOS-AMI): an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute myocardial infarction receiving potent antiplatelet therapy, the bleeding risk remains high during the maintenance phase. We sought data on a uniform unguided de-escalation strategy of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) from ticagrelor to clopidogrel after acute myocardial infarction.

METHODS

In this open-label, assessor-masked, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised trial (TALOS-AMI), patients at 32 institutes in South Korea with acute myocardial infarction receiving aspirin and ticagrelor without major ischaemic or bleeding events during the first month after index percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a de-escalation (clopidogrel plus aspirin) or active control (ticagrelor plus aspirin) group. Unguided de-escalation without a loading dose of clopidogrel was adopted when switching from ticagrelor to clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or bleeding type 2, 3, or 5 according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria from 1 to 12 months. A non-inferiority test was done to assess the safety and efficacy of de-escalation DAPT compared with standard treatment. The hazard ratio (HR) for de-escalation versus active control group in a stratified Cox proportional hazards model was assessed for non-inferiority by means of an HR margin of 1·34, which equates to an absolute difference of 3·0% in the intention-to-treat population and, if significant, a superiority test was done subsequently. To ensure statistical robustness, additional analyses were also done in the per-protocol population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02018055.

FINDINGS

From Feb 26, 2014, to Dec 31, 2018, from 2901 patients screened, 2697 patients were randomly assigned: 1349 patients to de-escalation and 1348 to active control groups. At 12 months, the primary endpoints occurred in 59 (4·6%) in the de-escalation group and 104 (8·2%) patients in the active control group (p_{non-inferiority}<0·001; HR 0·55 [95% CI 0·40-0·76], p_superiority=0·0001). There was no significant difference in composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke between de-escalation (2·1%) and the active control group (3·1%; HR 0·69; 95% CI 0·42-1·14, p=0·15). Composite of BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding occurred less frequently in the de-escalation group (3·0% vs 5·6%, HR 0·52; 95% CI 0·35-0·77, p=0·0012).

INTERPRETATION

In stabilised patients with acute myocardial infarction after index PCI, a uniform unguided de-escalation strategy significantly reduced the risk of net clinical events up to 12 months, mainly by reducing the bleeding events.

FUNDING

ChongKunDang Pharm, Medtronic, Abbott, and Boston Scientific.

NSTE-ACS ESC Guidelines Recommend Prasugrel as the Preferred P2Y12 Inhibitor: A Contrarian View

In the 2020 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), the experts proposed to put an end to the equipoise of ticagrelor and prasugrel in addition to aspirin in patients with NSTE-ACS who proceed to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). They gave a strong level of recommendation (IIa) in favor of prasugrel over ticagrelor in these patients. We challenge this proposition, which was mainly driven by the results of ISAR-REACT 5, an open-label prospective head-to-head study of a prasugrel-based strategy compared with a ticagrelor-based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. In addition to the methodological concerns regarding the ISAR-REACT 5 study, we also question this decision in light of the ISAR-REACT 5 diabetes mellitus subgroup analysis and previous studies and meta-analysis that showed no difference between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ACS. Although we agree with the "one size does not fit all" concept for antiplatelet regimens in patients with ACS who proceed to PCI, we believe that the decision to strongly favor prasugrel was premature and not supported enough by the ISAR-REACT 5 results. In our opinion, equipoise remains between the ticagrelor- and prasugrel-based strategies and more data are needed to settle the debate.

Ticagrelor and prasugrel in acute coronary syndrome: a single-arm crossover platelet reactivity study

AIM

To compare the degree of platelet inhibition between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome.

METHODS

Platelet function was assessed by impedance aggregometry after 30-90 days of therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and ticagrelor and over 15 days after switching to prasugrel. High-on-treatment platelet reactivity (HRPR) was defined for ADP test results above the upper limit of normal.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients were included, 81.9% males and 33.3% people with diabetes, with a mean age of 60.8 ± 8.1 years. Mean platelet reactivity was not significantly different between the two antiplatelet strategies, as the prevalence of HRPR (8.6 vs 12.3%, P = 0.50). Switching between the two antiplatelet agents was safe and well tolerated, and effectively reduced platelet reactivity in over 95% of the patients (only 3.8% of the study population displaying ineffective response to both drugs).

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor and prasugrel have a similar effect on platelet reactivity. Switching between the two drugs can be safely done.

Ticagrelor for the primary prevention of stroke in patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Coronary artery disease (CAD) patients had a higher risk of first-ever stroke than general population even when they were on antiplatelet treatment. It was unknown whether more potent antiplatelet inhibitor ticagrelor which also provided adenosine-mediated protection would improve the primary stroke prevention for CAD. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CERNTRAL were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy and safety outcomes of over 30-day use of ticagrelor versus other antiplatelet drugs or placebo in patients with acute or chronic coronary syndrome. RCTs involving patients with any stroke history were excluded. Based on 5 RCTs with 45,843 patients, ticagrelor-involving regimens significantly reduced first-ever strokes (risk ratio [RR] 0.81; 95% confidential interval [CI] 0.71-0.94; I² = 0%) in comparison to other antiplatelet regimens in CAD, where the benefits in reducing ischemic strokes (IS) (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.68-0.94; I² = 0%) was not canceled out by the increase of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (RR 1.41; 95% CI 1.05-1.89; I² = 0%). According to results of subgroup analyses, the protective effects of ticagrelor on first-ever stroke were more significant with treatment duration of more than 1 year, dosage of 60 mg twice daily, and in clinical settings of chronic coronary syndrome. In conclusion, available evidence from aggregate data supported a modest advantage of ticagrelor-involving regimens for the primary stroke prevention in CAD compared with other antiplatelet regimens after the trade-off between reducing IS and inducing ICH, where more benefits might be expected from long-term and low-dose use of ticagrelor among patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Further collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from well-designed and statistically-powered trials would be needed to generate high quality evidence on this issue.

Hospitalization for Myocardial Infarction with Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: An On-Treatment Comparative Effectiveness Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Prescribing patterns and suboptimal adherence present methodological challenges for real-world head-to-head comparisons of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in intent-to-treat studies. The aim of this study was to compare ticagrelor and clopidogrel in an on-treatment population.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the Optum™ Clinformatics™ database to identify patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) discharged on ticagrelor or clopidogrel between January 1, 2012 and September 30, 2019. The primary end point was hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI); the secondary end point was hospitalization for major bleeding. The ticagrelor and clopidogrel cohorts were balanced by propensity score matching (PSM) 1:3 for demographic and clinical characteristics. Outcomes were ascertained from day 31 until day 365 or end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 339,387 patients with ACS, 14,110 ticagrelor- and 57,482 clopidogrel-treated patients met the study criteria. After PSM, 13,373 ticagrelor- and 29,656 clopidogrel-treated patients provided 4945 and 13,895 patient-years of data, respectively, for the primary end point. Hospitalization for MI was significantly lower in the ticagrelor compared to the clopidogrel cohort (2.22 vs. 3.52 per 100 patient-years; 36.8% relative risk reduction [RRR]; P < 0.0001). Hospitalization for major bleeding was similar in the ticagrelor and clopidogrel cohorts (2.04 vs. 2.06 per 100 patient-years; 1.1% RRR, P = 0.9214).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world on-treatment analysis, hospitalization for MI was significantly lower with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel, with similar rates of hospitalization for major bleeding. Study findings underscore the importance of being on the appropriate guideline-recommended therapy and support the use of ticagrelor over clopidogrel.

Antiplatelet strategies in acute coronary syndromes: design and methodology of an international collaborative network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The optimal choice of oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors has the potential to significantly influence outcomes. We seek to compare the safety and efficacy of the three most commonly used oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) via a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

In line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines, we performed a comprehensive search for RCTs which compared cardiovascular and hemorrhagic outcomes after use of at least two of the distinct oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (i.e. clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor). A search strategy has been designed to systematically search multiple databases, including MEDLINE with PubMed interface, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase. In addition, key inclusion criteria will be trial size of at least 100 patients and at least 1 month of follow-up time. Several prespecified subgroups will be explored, including Asian patients, patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, patients of advanced age, and others.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Exploratory frequentist pairwise meta-analyses will be based primarily on a random-effects method, relying on relative risks (RR) for short-term outcomes and incidence rate ratios (IRR) for long-term outcomes. Inferential frequentist network meta-analysis will be based primarily on a random-effects method, relying on RR and IRR as specified above. Results will be reported as point summary of effect, 95% CI, and P values for effect, and graphically represented using forest plots.

CONCLUSIONS

An international collaborative network meta-analysis has begun to comprehensively analyze the safety and efficacy of prasugrel, ticagrelor and clopidogrel, each on a background of aspirin, for management of patients with ACS. It is our hope that the rigor and breadth of the undertaking described herein will provide novel insights that will inform optimal patient care for patients with ACS treated conservatively, or undergoing revascularization.

Network Meta-Analysis of Ticagrelor for Stroke Prevention in Patients at High Risk for Cardiovascular or Cerebrovascular Events

Background and Purpose

Preventive antiplatelet therapy is recommended for patients with cardiac or cerebrovascular atherosclerosis. Ticagrelor has an improved safety and efficacy profile in patients with acute coronary syndrome; however, data regarding stroke prevention remain controversial. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare ticagrelor with other receptor antagonists (P2Y12) inhibitors and aspirin in monotherapy or combination in the treatment of patients with high risk for cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease, defined as coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndrome, stroke or transient ischemic attack, or peripheral artery disease.

Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were conducted until August 1, 2020. Search terms included ticagrelor, AZD 6140, and stroke. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration assessment tool. Random-effects model was used to combine risk estimates across trials and risk ratio with 95% CIs served as summary statistics. The influence of individual components was evaluated in an additive network meta-analysis model. The primary efficacy end point was the occurrence of stroke. The safety end points included bleeding and all-cause mortality.

Twenty-six randomized clinical trials comprising 124 495 patients were analyzed. When compared with controls, ticagrelor plus aspirin significantly reduced the risk of ischemic stroke by 20% (risk ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.71–0.89]). Treatment with ticagrelor monotherapy did not significantly affect ischemic stroke (risk ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.77–1.00]; P=0.05). Compared with aspirin alone, major bleeding was in similar ranges with antiplatelet monotherapies while the relative risk was twice higher with combined antiplatelet therapies. There was no considerable difference in the risk of mortality with ticagrelor plus aspirin (risk ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.91–1.07]).

Ticagrelor on top of aspirin may provide more favorable outcomes on secondary stroke prevention in patients with vascular risk factors; however, this benefit may come with the price of increased bleeding risk including intracranial bleeding.

De-Escalation of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes

BACKGROUND

Balancing the effects of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in the era of potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitors has become a cornerstone of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) management. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated DAPT de-escalation to decrease the risk of bleeding outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of various DAPT strategies in patients with ACS, including de-escalation from a potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitor to clopidogrel or low-dose prasugrel.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through January 2021 for RCTs investigating the efficacy and safety of DAPT in patients with ACS, and a network meta-analysis was conducted. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. The primary bleeding outcome was trial-defined major or minor bleeding.

RESULTS

Our search identified 15 eligible RCTs, including 55,798 patients with ACS. De-escalation therapy was associated with reduced risk of primary bleeding outcomes (HR: 0.48 [95% CI: 0.30-0.77] vs clopidogrel; HR: 0.32 [95% CI: 0.20-0.52] vs ticagrelor; HR: 0.36 [95% CI: 0.24-0.55] vs standard-dose prasugrel; and HR: 0.40 [95% CI: 0.22-0.75] vs low-dose prasugrel) without negatively affecting primary efficacy outcomes. There were no significant differences in ischemic or bleeding outcomes between de-escalation to clopidogrel or low-dose prasugrel.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with other established uses of DAPT, de-escalation was the most effective strategy for ACS treatment, resulting in fewer bleeding events without increasing ischemic events.

Prasugrel versus ticagrelor in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

OBJECTIVE

The comparative efficacy and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain unclear. We aimed to investigate the association of treatment with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

In the SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies) registry, all patients with MI treated with PCI and discharged on prasugrel or ticagrelor from 2010 to 2016 were included. Outcomes were 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE, death, MI or stroke), individual components and bleeding. Multivariable adjustment, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to adjust for confounders.

RESULTS

We included 37 990 patients, 2073 in the prasugrel group and 35 917 in the ticagrelor group. Patients in the prasugrel group were younger, more often admitted with ST elevation MI and more likely to have diabetes. Six to twelve months after discharge, 20% of patients in each group discontinued the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor they received at discharge. The risk for MACCE did not significantly differ between prasugrel-treated and ticagrelor-treated patients (adjusted HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.24). We found no significant difference in the adjusted risk for death, recurrent MI or stroke alone between the two treatments. There was no significant difference in the risk for bleeding with prasugrel versus ticagrelor (2.5% vs 3.2%, adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.22). IPTW and PSM analyses confirmed the results.

CONCLUSION

In patients with MI treated with PCI, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar efficacy and safety during 1-year follow-up.

Reducing Cardiac Injury during ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Reasoned Approach to a Multitarget Therapeutic Strategy

The significant reduction in ‘ischemic time’ through capillary diffusion of primary percutaneous intervention (pPCI) has rendered myocardial-ischemia reperfusion injury (MIRI) prevention a major issue in order to improve the prognosis of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. In fact, while the ischemic damage increases with the severity and the duration of blood flow reduction, reperfusion injury reaches its maximum with a moderate amount of ischemic injury. MIRI leads to the development of post-STEMI left ventricular remodeling (post-STEMI LVR), thereby increasing the risk of arrhythmias and heart failure. Single pharmacological and mechanical interventions have shown some benefits, but have not satisfactorily reduced mortality. Therefore, a multitarget therapeutic strategy is needed, but no univocal indications have come from the clinical trials performed so far. On the basis of the results of the consistent clinical studies analyzed in this review, we try to design a randomized clinical trial aimed at evaluating the effects of a reasoned multitarget therapeutic strategy on the prevention of post-STEMI LVR. In fact, we believe that the correct timing of pharmacological and mechanical intervention application, according to their specific ability to interfere with survival pathways, may significantly reduce the incidence of post-STEMI LVR and thus improve patient prognosis.

Potent P2Y12 inhibitors versus Clopidogrel in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Potent P2Y12 inhibitors reduce cardiovascular events but increase bleeding in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Elderly patients are at increased risk of bleeding and whether the benefit-risk ratio of potent P2Y12 inhibitors remains favorable is not known.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of potent P2Y12 inhibitors versus clopidogrel in elderly patients with ACS.

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE were searched through July 2020 for randomized control trials (RCTs) or subgroup analyses of RCTs investigating potent P2Y12 inhibitors (prasugrel or ticagrelor) or clopidogrel in elderly (age ≥ 65 years) patients with ACS. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

RESULTS

Our search identified 9 RCTs with a total of 10,792 elderly patients. When compared with clopidogrel, potent P2Y12 inhibitors had similar risk of MACE (hazard ratio (HR): 0.94; 95%; confidence interval (CI) [0.85-1.06], P = .31, I² = 9%), all-cause mortality (HR: 0.89; 95% CI [0.74-1.07], P = .22, I² = 29%), reduced the risk of cardiovascular death (HR: 0.82; 95% CI [0.68-0.98], P = .03, I² = 16%) but increased the risk of major bleeding (HR: 1.27; 95% CI [1.04-1.56], P = .02, I² = 0%). In a subgroup analysis, ticagrelor reduced all-cause mortality (HR: 0.73; 95% CI [0.55-0.98]) and cardiovascular death (HR: 0.70; 95% CI [0.54-0.90]) compared with clopidogrel.

CONCLUSIONS

Among elderly patients with ACS, potent P2Y12 inhibitors reduce cardiovascular death but increase bleeding with no difference in MACE or all-cause death when compared with clopidogrel. Further RCTs are needed to refine P2Y12 inhibitor selection for elderly patients with ACS.

Factors that predict ventricular arrhythmias in the late phase after acute myocardial infarction

Aims

Little is known regarding factors that predict the occurrence of lethal ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) occurring after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This observational cohort study aimed to identify factors that predicted lethal VAs during the late phase after AMI in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

Methods and results

Data were collected from our AMI database regarding consecutive patients with an LVEF of ≤40% after AMI (January 2012 to July 2018). The ‘late phase’ was defined as ≥7 days after AMI onset, and the primary endpoint was defined as lethal VAs in the late phase. The study included 136 patients (82% men; mean age: 66 ± 13 years). The average LVEF at admission was 32.7 ± 8.2%. During a mean follow‐up period of 20.7 months, 14 patients (10%) experienced lethal VAs, including ventricular fibrillation (n = 8) and sustained ventricular tachycardia (n = 10). Univariate analyses revealed that lethal VAs were predicted by age and LVEF at admission. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that the optimal cut‐off value was 23% for using the LVEF at admission to predict the primary endpoint (area under the curve: 0.77, P < 0.0001). Multivariable analysis also demonstrated that LVEF at admission was an independent predictor of the primary endpoint (risk ratio = 7.12, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Lethal VAs in the late phase are common in patients with AMI, and reduced LVEF and cardiac function at admission play a significant role in the risk stratification for future lethal VAs in this population.

Ticagrelor versus prasugrel in acute coronary syndrome: sex-specific analysis from the RENAMI Registry

BACKGROUND

The use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor & prasugrel) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is a class I recommendation. We performed a sex-specific analysis comparing the difference in efficacy and safety outcomes between ticagrelor and prasugrel in a real-world ACS population.

METHODS

Data from the multicenter REgistry of New Antiplatelets in patients with Myocardial Infarction (RENAMI) for 4424 ACS patients who underwent PCI and were treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel between 2012 to 2016 were analyzed. Mean follow-up was 17±9 months.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of primary endpoint of net adverse cardiac events between ticagrelor and prasugrel in men (HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.69-1.29; P=0.71), or women (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.63-2.20; P=0.62; P interaction [sex] = 0.40). Similarly, no differences were found in the occurrence of any of the secondary endpoints (MACE, all cause death, re-infarction, stent thrombosis, BARC major bleeding and BARC any bleeding) between the two P2Y12 groups between men and women.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world ACS population, no relative difference in efficacy or safety outcomes were found between ticagrelor and prasugrel between sexes.

MiR-126-3p and MiR-223-3p as Biomarkers for Prediction of Thrombotic Risk in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Primary Angioplasty

Aim. This study was designed to evaluate the relationship between microRNAs (miRNAs), miR-126-3p and miR-223-3p, as new biomarkers of platelet activation, and predicting recurrent thrombotic events after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods and Results. The analysis included 598 patients randomized in the PRAGUE-18 study (ticagrelor vs. prasugrel in AMI). The measurements of miRNAs were performed by using a novel miRNA immunoassay method. The association of miRNAs with the occurrence of the ischemic endpoint (EP) (cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or stroke) and bleeding were analyzed. The miR-223-3p level was significantly related to an increased risk of occurrence of the ischemic EP within 30 days (odds ratio (OR) = 15.74, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.07-119.93, p = 0.008) and one year (OR = 3.18, 95% CI: 1.40-7.19, p = 0.006), respectively. The miR-126-3p to miR-223-3p ratio was related to a decreased risk of occurrence of EP within 30 days (OR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.03-0.61, p = 0.009) and one year (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.17-0.82, p = 0.014), respectively. MiRNAs were identified as independent predictors of EP even after adjustment for confounding clinical predictors. Adding miR-223-3p and miR-126-3p to miR-223-3p ratios as predictors into the model calculating the ischemic risk significantly increased the predictive accuracy for combined ischemic EP within one year more than using only clinical ischemic risk parameters. No associations between miRNAs and bleeding complications were identified. Conclusion. The miR-223-3p and the miR-126-3p are promising independent predictors of thrombotic events and can be used for ischemic risk stratification after AMI.