P2Y12 inhibitors monotherapy after short course of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials including 29 089 patients

Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy following a brief DAPT vs. prolonged 12-month DAPT in ACS patients post-PCI: a meta-analysis of RCTs

BACKGROUND

As per current guidelines, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should be started on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for a period of 12 months.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of brief DAPT (up to 3 months) succeeded by ticagrelor monotherapy compared with a 12-month DAPT in ACS patients following PCI.

METHODS

We systematically searched Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed to find relevant randomized clinical trials. Examined outcomes included the incidence of major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events (MACCE), bleeding events, and the composite incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE).

RESULTS

Our primary analysis included 21,927 ACS patients from six RCTs. Our pooled results indicate that following PCI in individuals with ACS, brief DAPT followed by ticagrelor did not increase the risk of MACCE (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.07) but significantly reduced the risk of minor or major bleeding (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.44-0.62) and NACE (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86) compared with a long-term DAPT within a follow-up of 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Brief DAPT followed by ticagrelor monotherapy is superior to a 12-month DAPT in offering a net clinical advantage in ACS patients following PCI.

Predicting Individual Treatment Effects to Determine Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Stent Implantation

BACKGROUND

After coronary stent implantation, prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) increases bleeding risk, requiring personalization of DAPT duration. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a machine learning model to predict optimal DAPT duration after contemporary drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The One-Month DAPT, RESET (Real Safety and Efficacy of 3-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Endeavor Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation), and IVUS-XPL (Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance on Outcomes of Xience Prime Stents in Long Lesion) trials provided a derivation cohort (n=6568). Using the X-learner approach, an individualized DAPT score was developed to determine the therapeutic benefit of abbreviated (1-6 months) versus standard (12-month) DAPT using various predictors. The primary outcome was major bleeding; the secondary outcomes included 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and 1-year net adverse clinical events. The risk reduction with abbreviated DAPT (3 months) in the individualized DAPT-determined higher predicted benefit group was validated in the TICO (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial (n=3056), which enrolled patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with ticagrelor. The validation cohort comprised 1527 abbreviated and 1529 standard DAPT cases. Major bleeding occurred in 25 (1.7%) and 45 (3.0%) patients in the abbreviated and standard DAPT groups, respectively. The individualized DAPT score identified 2582 (84.5%) participants who would benefit from abbreviated DAPT, which was significantly associated with a lower major bleeding risk (absolute risk difference [ARD], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.15-2.36]) and net adverse clinical events (ARD, 1.59 [95% CI, 0.07-3.10]) but not major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (ARD, 0.63 [95% CI, -0.34 to 1.61]), compared with standard DAPT in the higher predicted benefit group. Abbreviated DAPT had no significant difference in clinical outcomes of major bleeding (ARD, 1.49 [95% CI, -1.74 to 4.72]), net adverse clinical events (ARD, 2.57 [95% CI, -1.85 to 6.99]), or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (ARD, 1.54 [95% CI, -1.26 to 4.34]), compared with standard DAPT in the individualized DAPT-determined lower predicted benefit group.

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning using the X-learner approach identifies patients with acute coronary syndrome who may benefit from abbreviated DAPT after drug-eluting stent implantation, laying the groundwork for personalized antiplatelet therapy.

Current Strategies to Guide the Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndromes

The role of antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes is a moving target with considerable novelty in the last few years. The pathophysiological basis of the treatment depends on platelet biology and physiology, and the interplay between these aspects and clinical practice must guide the physician in determining the best therapeutic options for patients with acute coronary syndromes. In the present narrative review, we discuss the latest novelties in the antiplatelet therapy of patients with acute coronary syndromes. We start with a description of platelet biology and the role of the main platelet signal pathways involved in platelet aggregation during an acute coronary syndrome. Then, we present the latest evidence on the evaluation of platelet function, focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of each platelet's function test. We continue our review by describing the role of aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes, critically appraising the available evidence from clinical trials, and providing current international guidelines and recommendations. Finally, we describe alternative therapeutic regimens to standard dual antiplatelet therapy, in particular for patients at high bleeding risk. The aim of our review is to give a comprehensive representation of current data on antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes that could be useful both for clinicians and basic science researchers to be up-to-date on this complex topic.

PAR4 Antagonism in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Receiving Antiplatelet Therapies

BACKGROUND

BMS-986141 is a novel potent highly selective antagonist of PAR (protease-activated receptor) type 4. PAR4 antagonism has been demonstrated to reduce thrombus formation in isolation and in combination with factor Xa inhibition in high shear conditions in healthy people. We sought to determine whether PAR4 antagonism had additive antithrombotic effects in patients with coronary artery disease who were receiving antiplatelet therapy.

METHODS

Forty-five patients with stable coronary heart disease and 10 healthy volunteers completed a phase 2a open-label 4-arm single-center study. Patients were allocated to 1 of 3 treatment arms for 7 days: (1) ticagrelor (90 mg BID), (2) aspirin (75 mg QD), or (3) the combination of ticagrelor and aspirin. Agonist-induced platelet aggregation, platelet activation, and ex vivo thrombus formation were measured before and 2 and 24 hours after a single oral 4-mg dose of BMS-986141 on the first study visit day in all participants.

RESULTS

BMS-986141 demonstrated highly selective inhibition of PAR4-AP (agonist peptide)-induced platelet aggregation, P-selectin expression, and platelet-monocyte aggregate expression (P≤0.001 for all), which were unaffected by concomitant antiplatelet therapies. PAR4 antagonism reduced ex vivo thrombus area in high shear conditions in healthy volunteers (-21%; P=0.001) and in patients receiving ticagrelor alone (-28%; P=0.001), aspirin alone (-23%; P=0.018), or both in combination (-24%; P≤0.001). Plasma concentration of BMS-986141 correlated with PAR4-AP-induced platelet responses (P≤0.001 for all) and total thrombus area under high shear stress conditions (P≤0.01 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

PAR4 antagonism has additive antithrombotic effects when used in addition to ticagrelor, aspirin, or their combination, in patients with stable coronary heart disease.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05093790.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after complex percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

It remains unknown whether the recent trend of short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy can simply be applied to patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs. conventional DAPT in patients undergoing complex PCI and non-complex PCI (PROSPERO: CRD42022335723). Primary endpoint was the 1-year Net Adverse Clinical Event (NACE). Among 5,323 screened studies, six randomized trials fulfilled the eligibility criteria. A total of 10,588 complex PCI patients (5,269 vs. 5,319 patients) and 25,618 non-complex PCI patients (12,820 vs 12,798 patients) were randomly assigned to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs. conventional DAPT. In complex PCI patients, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of NACE than conventional DAPT [Odds ratio (OR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-0.91, P = 0.003], whereas in non-complex PCI patients, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a trend toward lowering the risk of NACE (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72-1.02, P = 0.09). This meta-analysis across randomized trials demonstrated that a strategy of short DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy reduces the risk of 1-year NACE in patients undergoing complex PCI.

What Is the Optimal Duration of Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients with Coronary Heart Disease?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy continues to attract extensive debates and has been progressively adjusted in the setting of advancements in stent design and assessment of patient clinical characteristics. Given the ever-changing landscape of antiplatelet therapy and the multitude of clinical trials that have examined this duration, there are varying scenarios for optimal duration based on patient presentation and risk profile. This review highlights the current concepts and recommendations regarding duration of antiplatelet therapy in coronary heart disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

In particular, we review the current data on the use of dual antiplatelet therapy in the different clinical scenarios. Relatively longer dual antiplatelet therapy is perhaps limited to patients with higher risk for cardiovascular events and/or high-risk lesions and shorter durations of dual antiplatelet therapy have been shown to reduce bleeding complications at the same time as stabilization of ischemic endpoints. More recent trials have demonstrated the safety of shorter durations of dual antiplatelet therapy in appropriate patients with coronary heart disease.

The association of PRECISE-DAPT score with ischaemic outcomes in patients taking dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis

AIMS

The PRECISE-DAPT (Predicting Bleeding Complication in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) score identifies patients at high risk of bleeding complications following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). International guidelines recommend the PRECISE-DAPT score to identify patients at high risk for bleeding, who may benefit from shortened dual antiplatelet therapy. The association of the PRECISE-DAPT score with ischaemic outcomes remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis investigating the association between a high PRECISE-DAPT score and ischaemic outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted on articles published between 11 March 2017 and 5 June 2021. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion using pre-defined criteria. The outcome measures extracted included composite ischaemic events, major bleeding events, and all-cause mortality. A random effects model was applied to obtain combined risk estimates for outcomes. From 12 included studies, there were 39 459 patients with PRECISE-DAPT <25 and 14 761 patients with PRECISE-DAPT ≥25. PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 was associated with increased risk of composite ischaemic events [odds ratio (OR) 2.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.77-2.65], myocardial infarction (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.38-3.08), and ischaemic stroke (OR 2.90; 95% CI 1.76-4.78). Patients with a PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 had increased risk of major bleeding (OR 3.62; 95% CI 2.62-4.99). Patients with a PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 had higher risk of all-cause mortality (OR 5.83; 95% CI 5.37-6.33).

CONCLUSION

Patients with a PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 are at increased risk for ischaemic events, bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Prospective evaluation of a PRECISE-DAPT guided approach to antiplatelet therapy is required to demonstrate benefit in this high-risk population.

2022 Prevention of chronic non-communicable diseases in Of the Russian Federation. National guidelines

.

Outcomes of prolonged dual anti-platelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A nationwide registry-based study

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials have shown a reduced risk of ischemic events and an increased risk of bleeding in patients treated with prolonged dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) beyond 12 months following acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to investigate outcomes of prolonged DAPT vs aspirin monotherapy (ASA) in a real-world population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using nationwide registries, we identified all patients with ACS who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and received 12-month DAPT between January 2013 and October 2016. Patients still on DAPT were compared to patients on ASA at index date (15 months after ACS-date) and followed for up to 2 years. Cox regression models were employed to calculate standardized risks of all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and major bleeding. The study included 7,449 patients, 1,901 on DAPT (median age 66, 72.1% male) and 5,548 on ASA (median age 65, 75.1% male). Standardized absolute 2-year risk of all-cause mortality, MACE, and major bleeding was 2.7%, 3.7%, and 5.4% for DAPT vs 2.2%, 3.8%, and 1.3% for ASA. DAPT was not associated with a significant standardized 2-year risk difference (SRD) of all-cause mortality (SRD: 0.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.9 to 1.7) or MACE (SRD: -0.1%, 95% CI -1.8 to 1.6), but a significantly higher risk of major bleeding (SRD: 4.1%, 95% CI 1.8-6.6).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide cohort of ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, prolonged DAPT was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality or MACE, but an increased risk of major bleeding. Future randomized controlled trials should investigate the optimal anti-platelet regimen in this patient group.

De-escalation of antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention among East Asians and non-East Asians: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To study the impact of de-escalation antiplatelet therapy retaining P2Y12 inhibition on major bleeding and ischemic outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among East Asians and non-East Asians was unclear.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials through September 2020. Eight trials were included, which studied de-escalation of DAPT (D-DAPT, switching to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, or switching to clopidogrel or dose reduction of the P2Y12 inhibitor after 1 to 3 months) versus 12 months standard DAPT (S-DAPT). The primary outcomes data was conducted using random effects models.

RESULTS

Among the 8 included trials consisting of 37,775 patients, 62.6% presented with acute coronary syndrome. The median follow-up duration ranged from 12 to 24 months. Compared with S-DAPT, D-DAPT was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.93, p = 0.02); however, this was only observed among East-Asians (RR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.37-0.99, p = 0.048). Among non-East Asians, the rate of major bleeding was similar between the two groups (RR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.46-1.14, p = 0.17, p for interaction = 0.59). There were no significant differences in the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) between D-DAPT and S-DAPT treatment among both East Asians (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.66-1.08, p = 0.18) and non-East Asians (RR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.79-1.00, p = 0.059, p for interaction = 0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

The De-escalation strategy that retains P2Y12 inhibition after a PCI was associated with reduced risk of bleeding events, which was only demonstrated in East Asians patients, and not in non-East Asian patients.

Ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel After Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Background: Patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Whether potent antiplatelet therapy after complex PCI improves outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) remains unclear. Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with SCAD undergoing complex PCI. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of SCAD and undergoing PCI during January 2016 to December 2018 were selected from an institutional registry. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 12 months after PCI. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Results: Among 15,459 patients with SCAD included in this analysis, complex PCI was performed in 6,335 (41.0%) patients. Of patients undergoing complex PCI, 1,123 patients (17.7%) were treated with ticagrelor. The primary efficacy outcome after complex PCI occurred in 8.6% of patients in the ticagrelor group and 11.2% in the clopidogrel group. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor decreased the risk of MACE in patients undergoing complex PCI [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.764; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.615 to 0.949; p = 0.015], but not in non-complex PCI (p for interaction = 0.001). There was no significant difference in incidence of major bleeding between patients treated with ticagrelor and clopidogrel (p = 0.221), while ticagrelor was associated with an increased risk of minor bleeding (adjusted HR: 3.099; 95% CI: 2.049 to 4.687; p < 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with SCAD and undergoing complex PCI, ticagrelor could substantially reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes without increasing the risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel.

Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel After an Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Elderly: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis from 16,653 Patients Treated with PCI Included in Two Large Multinational Registries

PURPOSE

Higher risk of bleeding with ticagrelor over clopidogrel in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been suggested. We assessed the incidence of major bleedings (MB), reinfarction (re-MI), and all-cause death to evaluate safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in such population.

METHODS

Real-world registries RENAMI and BleeMACS were merged. The pooled cohort was divided into two groups, clopidogrel versus ticagrelor. Statistical analysis considered patients <75 versus ≥75 years old. Endpoints were BARC 3-5 MB, re-MI, and all-cause death at 1-year follow-up. The study included 16,653 patients (13,153 < 75 and 3500 ≥ 75 years). Ticagrelor was underused in elderly patients (16.3% versus 20.8%, P < 0.001). Using propensity score matching (PSM), two treatment groups of 1566 patients were included in the final analysis.

RESULTS

Ticagrelor was able to prevent re-MI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-0.6; P < 0.001) and all-cause death (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9; P = 0.026) irrespective of age. In patients ≥75 years, ticagrelor reduced all-cause death (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.1-0.8; P = 0.012) and re-MI (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.1-1.1, P = 0.072). Moreover, even with the limit of the low number of events, ticagrelor did not significantly increase the incidence of MB (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.70-3.0; P = 0.257). At multiple Cox regression, age (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.05; P < 0.001) resulted an independent risk factor for bleeding.

CONCLUSION

In our study, reflecting the results from two large retrospective, real-world registries, Ticagrelor did not significantly increase MB compared with clopidogrel in elderly patients with ACS treated with PCI, while significantly improving 1-year survival. Further studies on elderly patients are suggested.

Patient-tailored antithrombotic therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention

Dual antiplatelet therapy has long been the standard of care in preventing coronary and cerebrovascular thrombotic events in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, but choosing the optimal treatment duration and composition has become a major challenge. Numerous studies have shown that certain patients benefit from either shortened or extended treatment duration. Furthermore, trials evaluating novel antithrombotic strategies, such as P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, low-dose factor Xa inhibitors on top of antiplatelet therapy, and platelet function- or genotype-guided (de-)escalation of treatment, have shown promising results. Current guidelines recommend risk stratification for tailoring treatment duration and composition. Although several risk stratification methods evaluating ischaemic and bleeding risk are available to clinicians, such as the use of risk scores, platelet function testing , and genotyping, risk stratification has not been broadly adopted in clinical practice. Multiple risk scores have been developed to determine the optimal treatment duration, but external validation studies have yielded conflicting results in terms of calibration and discrimination and there is limited evidence that their adoption improves clinical outcomes. Likewise, platelet function testing and genotyping can provide useful prognostic insights, but trials evaluating treatment strategies guided by these stratification methods have produced mixed results. This review critically appraises the currently available antithrombotic strategies and provides a viewpoint on the use of different risk stratification methods alongside clinical judgement in current clinical practice.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy and dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: An updated meta-analysis of randomized trials

INTRODUCTION

Long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has substantially reduced the risk of post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis at the expense of major bleeding. We hypothesized that a short-term DAPT followed by extended P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy might be appropriate for patients with both high ischemic and bleeding risks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the databases: Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify randomized trials assessing the antiplatelet strategies after PCI. The primary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding. The efficacy outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality/cardiovascular disease (CVD) death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. A random-effect model was used to calculate the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

We identified 5 randomized trials comparing P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy with standard DAPT (12 months) (16,057 versus 16,088). P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy following short-term DAPT (1 to 3 months) significantly reduced the risk of BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding compared to standard DAPT (pooled HR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.46-0.86). The difference between P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy and standard DAPT in reducing the composite CVD outcomes was not statistically significant (HR: 0.88, 95%CI: 0.77-1.01).

CONCLUSIONS

P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy might be an effective strategy for lowering severe bleeding complications and simultaneously preserving the ischemic benefit in patients receiving PCI.