Outcomes in patients treated with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel after acute myocardial infarction stratified by renal function

Medical Management of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease patients are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, which is the leading cause of mortality among this population. In addition, chronic kidney disease is a major risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease and is widely regarded as a coronary artery disease risk equivalent. Medical therapy is the cornerstone of coronary artery disease management in the general population. However, there are few trials to guide medical therapy of coronary artery disease in chronic kidney disease, with most data extrapolated from clinical trials of mainly non-chronic kidney disease patients, which were not adequately powered to evaluate this subgroup. There is some evidence to suggest that the efficacy of certain therapies such as aspirin and statins is attenuated with declining estimated glomerular filtration rate, with questionable benefit among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Furthermore, chronic kidney disease and ESRD patients are at higher risk of potential side effects with therapy, which may limit their use. In this review, we summarize the available evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of medical therapy of coronary artery disease in chronic kidney disease and ESRD patients. We also discuss the data on new emerging therapies, including PCSK9i, SGLT2i, GLP1 receptor agonists, and nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, which show promise at reducing risk of cardiovascular events in the chronic kidney disease population and may offer additional treatment options. Overall, dedicated studies directly evaluating chronic kidney disease patients, particularly those with advanced chronic kidney disease and ESRD, are greatly needed to establish the optimal medical therapy for coronary artery disease and improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Real-World Evidence on Disparities on the Initiation of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background Management of patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is based on 2020 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, which recommend the preferential use of prasugrel over ticagrelor. Because the selection of the respective P2Y12 inhibitor has to consider label restrictions, we sought to evaluate the proportion of patients qualifying for either ticagrelor or prasugrel and reasons for noneligibility in an unselected cohort of patients with acute coronary syndrome. Methods and Results In this retrospective observational study, patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or NSTE-ACS presenting consecutively during a 24-month period were enrolled. The eligibility of patients for a dual antiplatelet therapy option was assessed retrospectively. A total of 1502 patients had confirmed acute coronary syndrome (287 STEMI and 1215 NSTE-ACS). Eligibility for ticagrelor and full-dose prasugrel differed significantly for STEMI and NSTE-ACS (93% versus 51%, P<0.0001 versus 80% versus 31%, P<0.0001). Eligibility remained significantly lower (STEMI 78% versus NSTE-ACS 52%) if low-dose prasugrel was considered. Patients eligible for full-dose prasugrel had lower ischemic risk per GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) score (109 points [90-129 points] versus 121 points [98-146 points], P<0.0001) and lower bleeding risk (14 points [13-15 points] versus 20 points [12-29 points], P<0.0001) per PRECISE-DAPT (Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) score. Conclusions In real life, eligibility for prasugrel in patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy is considerably lower than for ticagrelor, even in a cohort with high rates of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary interventions. The recommended use of prasugrel over ticagrelor in current acute coronary syndrome guidelines contrasts with our observations of a substantial disparity on the eligibility. This important aspect has not received appropriate attention yet. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05774431.

Prasugrel-Based De-Escalation in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome According to Renal Function

Background

Patients with coronary artery disease and impaired renal function are at higher risk for both bleeding and ischemic adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Objectives

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of a prasugrel-based de-escalation strategy in patients with impaired renal function.

Methods

We conducted a post hoc analysis of the HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS study. Patients with available estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (n = 2,311) were categorized into 3 groups. (high eGFR: >90 mL/min; intermediate eGFR: 60 to 90 mL/min; and low eGFR: <60 mL/min). The end points were bleeding outcomes (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher), ischemic outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, repeated revascularization, and ischemic stroke), and net adverse clinical event (including any clinical event) at 1-year follow-up.

Results

Prasugrel de-escalation was beneficial regardless of baseline renal function (P for interaction = 0.508). The relative reduction in bleeding risk from prasugrel de-escalation was higher in the low eGFR group than in both the intermediate and high eGFR groups (relative reductions, respectively: 64% (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.15-0.83) vs 50% (HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.90) and 52% (HR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.21-1.13) (P for interaction = 0.646). Ischemic risk from prasgurel de-escalation was not significant in all eGFR groups (HR: 1.18 [95% CI: 0.47-2.98], HR: 0.95 [95% CI: 0.53-1.69], and HR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.26-1.39]) (P for interaction = 0.119).

Conclusions

In patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving PCI, prasugrel dose de-escalation was beneficial regardless of the baseline renal function.

Ticagrelor inhibits platelet aggregation and reduces inflammatory burden more than clopidogrel in patients with stages 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

No study has compared pharmacologic properties of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in non-dialysis patients with stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

We conducted a double-blind RCT to compare effects of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in 48 CKD, with the primary outcome of ADP-induced platelet aggregation (WBPA) after 2 weeks of DAPT. In a parallel arm, we compared effects of 2 weeks of ticagrelor plus aspirin on mean changes in WBPA and markers of thromboinflammation among non-CKD controls (n = 26) with that of CKD in the ticagrelor-arm.

RESULTS

Average age of CKD was 53.7 years, with 62% women, 54% African American, and 42% with stage 5 CKD. Ticagrelor generated statistically lower WBPA values post treatment [median 0 Ω (IQR 0, 2)] vs. clopidogrel [median 0 Ω (IQR 0, 5)] (P = 0.002); percent inhibition of WBPA was greater (87 ± 22% vs. 63 ± 50%; P = 0.04; and plasma IL-6 levels were much lower (8.42 ± 1.73 pg/ml vs. 18.48 ± 26.56 pg/ml; P = 0.04). No differences in mean changes in WBPA between CKD-ticagrelor and control groups were observed. Ticagrelor- DAPT reduced levels of IL-1α and IL-1β in CKD-ticagrelor and control groups, attenuated lowering of TNFα and TRAIL levels in CKD-ticagrelor (vs controls), and had global changes in correlation between various cytokines in a subgroup of CKD-ticagrelor subjects not on statins (n = 10). Peak/trough levels of ticagrelor/metabolite were not different between CKD-ticagrelor and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We report significant differences in platelet aggregation and anti-inflammatory properties between ticagrelor- and clopidogrel-based DAPT in non-dialysis people with stage 4-5 CKD. These notable inflammatory responses suggest ticagrelor-based DAPT might lower inflammatory burden of asymptomatic patients with stage 4 or 5 CKD. (clinicaltrials.gov # NCT03649711).

[Heart and diabetes : Platelet function and antiplatelet therapy in chronic kidney disease]

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased risk of thrombosis and approximately 50% of patients with advanced CKD die because of a cardiovascular disease. In addition to an increased risk of thrombosis, patients with CKD and particularly with advanced CKD, have an increased risk of hemorrhage, which increases parallel to the decline of kidney function. Due to this parallel existence of the prohemorrhagic and prothrombotic phenotype, antiplatelet treatment is difficult in the daily routine and data show that CKD patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are less likely to receive guideline-conform treatment. The underlying mechanisms are currently insufficiently understood and both platelet-dependent mechanisms and also platelet-independent mechanisms are under discussion. Accordingly, there is currently no specific treatment or treatment strategy for patients with CKD. In addition, CKD patients are underrepresented in registration studies on antiplatelet treatment and there are no data from randomized trials for patients with advanced CKD (CKD ≥ 4). Current guideline recommendations are therefore based on subgroup analyses and observational studies. In addition, questions on the duration of treatment, on risk scores for estimation of the risk of hemorrhage and on potential benefits of escalation and de-escalation strategies remain largely unanswered and should therefore be the focus of future studies.

Age Modifies Intracranial and Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk from P2Y12 Inhibitors in Patients Receiving Dialysis

Background

Individuals aged ≥75 years are the fastest-growing population starting dialysis for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) due to living longer with coronary artery disease. ESKD alone can increase bleeding risk, but P2Y₁₂ inhibitor (P2Y12-I) antiplatelet medications prescribed for cardiovascular treatment can exacerbate this risk in patients with ESKD. The age-specific rates of bleeding complications in dialysis patients with ESKD on P2Y12-I remain unclear, as does how age modifies the bleeding risk from P2Y12-I use in these patients.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort study, we collected data on 40,972 patients receiving maintenance hemo- or peritoneal dialysis who were newly prescribed P2Y12-I therapy between 2011 and 2015 from the USRDS registry. We analyzed the effect of age on the time to first bleed and the interactions between age and P2Y12-I type on modifying the effects of a bleed.

Results

Twenty percent of the cohort were aged ≥75 years. There were 3096 (8%) gastrointestinal (GI) and 1298 (3%) intracranial (IC) bleeding events during a median follow-up of 1 year. Annual incidence rates for IC bleeds were 2% in those aged <55 years and 3% in those aged ≥75 years. Rates for GI bleeds were 4% in those aged <55 years and 9% in those aged ≥75 years. On clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor, for every decade increase in age of the cohort members, the risk of IC bleed increased by 9%, 55%, and 59%, and the risk of GI bleed increased by 21%, 28%, and 39%, respectively. At age ≥75 years, prasugrel was associated with a greater risk of IC bleed than clopidogrel. At age ≥60 years, ticagrelor was associated with a greater risk of GI bleed than clopidogrel.

Conclusions

More potent P2Y12-Is (prasugrel and ticagrelor) were associated with a disproportionately higher risk of IC bleed with increasing age compared with that of clopidogrel-prasugrel was much worse than clopidogrel at age ≥75 years. All three drugs were associated with only modest increase in the risk of GI bleed with every decade increase in age-ticagrelor was much worse than clopidogrel at ≥60 years of age. These results highlight the need for head-to-head clinical trials for the use of P2Y12-Is in patients with ESKD to determine age cutoffs where the risk of bleeding outweighs the benefits of thrombosis prevention.

Optimizing the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is one of the most common procedures performed in medicine. However, its net benefit among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is less well established than in the general population. The prevalence of patients suffering from both CAD and CKD is high, and is likely to increase in the coming years. Planning the adequate management of this group of patients is crucial to improve their outcome after PCI. This starts with proper preparation before the procedure, the use of all available means to reduce contrast during the procedure, and the implementation of modern strategies such as radial access and drug-eluting stents. At the end of the procedure, personalized antithrombotic therapy for the patient’s specific characteristics is advisable to account for the elevated ischemic and bleeding risk of these patients.

Kidney Function According to Different Equations in Patients Admitted to a Cardiology Unit and Impact on Outcome

Background: This paper aims to evaluate the concordance between the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) formula and alternative equations and to assess their predictive power for all-cause mortality in unselected patients discharged alive from a cardiology ward. Methods: We retrospectively included patients admitted to our Cardiology Division independently of their diagnosis. The total population was classified according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) categories, as follows: G1 (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m²); G2 (eGFR 89–60 mL/min/1.73 m²); G3a (eGFR 59–45 mL/min/1.73 m²); G3b (eGFR 44–30 mL/min/1.73 m²); G4 (eGFR 29–15 mL/min/1.73 m²); G5 (eGFR <15 mL/min/1.73 m²). Cockcroft-Gault (CG), CG adjusted for body surface area (CG-BSA), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Berlin Initiative Study (BIS-1), and Full Age Spectrum (FAS) equations were also assessed. Results: A total of 806 patients were included. Good agreement was found between the CKD-EPI formula and CG-BSA, MDRD, BIS-1, and FAS equations. In subjects younger than 65 years or aged ≥85 years, CKD-EPI and MDRD showed the highest agreement (Cohen’s kappa (K) 0.881 and 0.588, respectively) while CG showed the lowest. After a median follow-up of 407 days, overall mortality was 8.2%. The risk of death was higher in lower eGFR classes (G3b HR4.35; 95%CI 1.05–17.80; G4 HR7.13; 95%CI 1.63–31.23; G5 HR25.91; 95%CI 6.63–101.21). The discriminant capability of death prediction tested with ROC curves showed the best results for BIS-1 and FAS equations. Conclusion: In our cohort, the concordance between CKD-EPI and other equations decreased with age, with the MDRD formula showing the best agreement in both younger and older patients. Overall, mortality rates increased with the renal function decreasing. In patients aged ≥75 years, the best discriminant capability for death prediction was found for BIS-1 and FAS equations.

Predictors and long-term outcomes of in-hospital switching from clopidogrel to ticagrelor among patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

This study evaluated clinical outcomes of switching from clopidogrel to ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The clinical benefit of in-hospital switching from clopidogrel to ticagrelor in these patients remains unclear. Among patients with ACS initially receiving clopidogrel, logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of switching to ticagrelor. Multivariable Cox regression was used to compare efficacy and safety between switching to ticagrelor and continuing clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was net adverse clinical events (NACEs) at 12 months, a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2/3/5 bleeding. Among 10,519 patients initially receiving clopidogrel, 1405 (13.4%) were switched to ticagrelor at discharge. Stent number, left main artery lesions, diabetes, male sex, age, estimated glomerular filtration rate of <45 ml/min/1.73 m² , and history of PCI or stroke were identified as independent predictors of switching to ticagrelor. The rate of NACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-1.91) or BARC type 2/3/5 bleeding (HR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.52-2.66) was significantly higher in patients switching to ticagrelor than in those continuing clopidogrel. The risk of MACE was comparable between both the groups (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.41-1.22). In real-world practice, in-hospital switching from clopidogrel to ticagrelor was independently associated with several clinical factors. Patients switching to ticagrelor had a higher rate of NACE or BARC type 2/3/5 bleeding than those continuing clopidogrel, without any reduction in the MACE rate.

Ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease After New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation

Background: The impact of ticagrelor-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) on acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains unclear.

Methods: Data on a total of 1,067 ACS patients with CKD including end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who underwent new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation were extracted from a multicenter registry. This study aimed to compare outcomes of patients treated with ticagrelor- (n = 449) and those treated with clopidogrel-based (n = 618) DAPT. Outcomes of interest included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium grade 3 or 5) at 12 months. Propensity-score matching (346 pairs) analysis was performed.

Results: The patients with ESRD showed the highest MACCE and bleeding rates (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the rate of MACCEs between the treatment groups (7.8% vs. 8.4%; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.56–1.61, P = 0.855); however, a trend toward an increased bleeding rate was observed in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group (6.8% vs. 3.8%, HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 0.93–3.63, P = 0.079). Among patients with CKD stage III/IV but without ESRD (277 pairs), the ticagrelor-based DAPT group showed a reduced MACCE rate (3.6% vs. 8.7%, HR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.19–0.86, P = 0.018) and a similar bleeding rate (5.1% vs. 3.2%, HR = 1.61, 95% CI = 0.70–3.71, P = 0.267), compared with those of the clopidogrel-based DAPT group.

Conclusion: The effects of ticagrelor-based DAPT on ischemic and bleeding outcomes of ACS patients with CKD varied according to CKD stage; in ACS patients with CKD without ESRD, ticagrelor-based DAPT reduced MACCE risk without increasing bleeding risks, relative to those observed with clopidogrel-based DAPT.

Outcomes after ticagrelor versus clopidogrel treatment in end-stage renal disease patients with acute myocardial infarction: a nationwide cohort study

Clinical outcomes are unknown after ticagrelor treatment in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who are diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). ESRD patients who were on hemodialysis and received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for AMI between July 2013 and December 2016 were identified in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting, patients receiving aspirin plus ticagrelor (n = 530) were compared with those receiving aspirin plus clopidogrel (n = 2462) for the primary efficacy endpoint, a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, and bleeding, defined according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Study outcomes were compared between the two groups using Cox proportional hazards model or competing risk model for the hazard ratio or subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR). During 9 months of follow-up, ticagrelor was comparable to clopidogrel with respect to the risks of primary efficacy endpoint [11.69 vs. 9.28/100 patient-months; SHR, 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97–1.4] and bleeding (5.55 vs. 4.36/100 patient-months; SHR 1.14; 95% CI 0.88–1.47). In conclusion, among hemodialysis patients receiving DAPT for AMI, ticagrelor was comparable to clopidogrel with regard to the composite efficacy endpoint and bleeding.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Patients on Chronic Dialysis

Introduction

Although oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors (P2Y12-Is) are one of the most commonly prescribed medication classes in patients with end stage kidney disease on dialysis (ESKD), scarce data exist regarding their benefits and risks.

Methods

We compared effectiveness and safety of clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor in a longitudinal study using the United States Renal Data System registry of Medicare beneficiaries with ESKD. Individuals who filled new P2Y12-I prescriptions between 2011 and 2015 were included and followed until death or censoring. The primary exposure variable was P2Y12-I assignment. The primary outcome variable was death. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular (CV) death, coronary revascularization, and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage. Survival analyses were performed after propensity matching.

Results

Of 44,619 patients with ESKD who received P2Y12-Is, 95% received clopidogrel (n = 42,523), 3% prasugrel (n = 1205), and 2% ticagrelor (n = 891). To balance baseline differences, propensity-matching was performed: 1:6 for prasugrel (n = 1189) versus clopidogrel (n = 7134); 1:4 for ticagrelor (n = 880) versus clopidogrel (n = 3520); and 1:1 for ticagrelor versus prasugrel (n = 880). Prasugrel was associated with a reduced risk for death versus clopidogrel and ticagrelor (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.73–0.93 and 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64–0.95). Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel reduced risk for coronary revascularization (HR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86–0.96). There were no differences in GI hemorrhage between P2Y12-Is.

Conclusion

In patients with ESKD, prasugrel compared with others reduced risk of death possibly by reducing risk for coronary revascularizations and without worsening gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Future trials are imperative to compare efficacy and safety of P2Y12-Is in patients with ESKD.

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome in Relation to Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to their estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs).

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to eGFR have not been defined.

METHODS

Patients (n = 4,012) were categorized into 3 groups: low eGFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m²), intermediate eGFR (≥60 and <90 mL/min/1.73 m²), and high eGFR (≥90 mL/min/1.73 m²). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding, both at 1 year.

RESULTS

Patients with low eGFRs had a higher risk for the primary endpoint compared with patients with intermediate eGFRs (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.46-2.46]) and those with high eGFRs (adjusted HR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.57-3.46). A risk excess for low eGFR was also observed for bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.12-2.13] vs intermediate eGFR; adjusted HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.01-2.50] vs high eGFR). However, eGFR did not affect the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. In patients with low eGFR, the primary endpoint occurred in 20.5% with ticagrelor and in 14.7% with prasugrel (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; P = 0.029); there was no significant difference in bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that among patients with ACS, reduction of eGFR is associated with increased risk for ischemic and bleeding events but has no significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800).

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.

Prasugrel and Ticagrelor in Patients with Drug-Eluting Stents and Kidney Failure

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Prasugrel and ticagrelor have superior efficacy compared with clopidogrel in moderate CKD but have not been studied in kidney failure. The study objective is to determine the effectiveness and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor in kidney failure.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

This retrospective cohort study used United States Renal Data System data from 2012 to 2015. We identified all patients on dialysis who received a drug-eluting stent and were alive at 90 days after stent implantation. Inverse probability-weighted Cox proportional hazard models were used. Weights were estimated with propensity scores for multiple treatments.

RESULTS

This cohort included 6648 patients on clopidogrel, 621 on prasugrel, and 449 on ticagrelor. A total of 3279 primary composite (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and 2120 clinically relevant bleeding events were observed. The incidence of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 12 months was similar across the three treatment groups. The absolute event rate in the unweighted cohort was 144 events per 100 patient-years for clopidogrel, 126 for prasugrel, and 161 for ticagrelor. For prasugrel versus clopidogrel, the weighted hazard ratio was 0.96 (95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.11; P=0.58). For ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, the hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.20; P=0.98). A numerically higher incidence of clinically relevant bleeding was seen with prasugrel or ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel (weighted hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.95 to 1.38 and weighted hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.40, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Prasugrel or ticagrelor does not seem to be associated with significant benefits compared with clopidogrel in patients with kidney failure treated with drug-eluting stents.

PODCAST

This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2021_04_02_CJN12120720.mp3.

Ticagrelor or aspirin after coronary artery bypass in patients with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

The optimal antiplatelet therapy for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains unknown.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis of the Ticagrelor in Coronary Artery Bypass (TiCAB) trial examined the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus aspirin in patients with or without CKD. Primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction or revascularization (MACCE) at 1 year after CABG. Secondary endpoints included individual components of the primary endpoint, all-cause death, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

CKD was present in 276 of 1,843 randomized patients (15.0%). Patients with CKD versus those without CKD had higher 1-year rates of MACCE (13.0% vs. 8.3%, HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12-2.39, P=0.01) and major bleeding (5.6% vs. 3.1%, HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.03-3.28, P=0.04). The 1-year rate of MACCE was increased with ticagrelor versus aspirin in patients with CKD (18.2% vs. 8.9%, HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.08-4.30, P=0.03), but not in patients without CKD (8.5% vs. 8.1%, HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.74-1.49, P=0.79) (P_interaction=0.067). There was no difference in the 1-year rate of major bleeding with ticagrelor versus aspirin in patients with CKD (6.6% vs. 4.7%, HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.52-3.97, P=0.48) and without CKD (3.3% vs. 2.9%, HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.64-2.01, P=0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CKD and CABG, those who received ticagrelor had a higher incidence of MACCE but a similar incidence of major bleeding compared to those who received aspirin.

P2Y12 Antiplatelet Choice for Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This study aims to evaluate potentially appropriate antiplatelet therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease. A systematic analysis was conducted to identify the clinical outcomes of available antiplatelet therapy regimens with enhanced platelet inhibition activity (intervention of 5 regimens) over the standard dose of clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with renal insufficiency. An electronic keyword search was performed on Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library per PRISMA guidelines. We performed a prespecified net clinical benefit analysis (a composite of the rates of all-cause or cardiac-related death, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiac outcomes, and minor and major bleeding), and included 12 studies. The intervention substantially lowered the incidence of all-cause mortality (RR 0.67; p = 0.003), major adverse cardiac outcomes (RR 0.79; p < 0.00001), and myocardial infarction (RR 0.28; p = 0.00007) without major bleeding (RR 1.14; p = 0.33) in patients with renal insufficiency, but no significant differences were noticed with cardiac-related mortality and stent thrombosis. The subgroup analysis revealed substantially elevated bleeding risk in patients with severe renal insufficiency or on hemodialysis (RR 1.68; p = 0.002). Our study confirmed that the intervention considerably enhances clinical outcomes in patients with renal insufficiency, however, a standard dose of clopidogrel-based antiplatelet therapy is favorable in patients with severe renal insufficiency.

Gastroprotection in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy: a position paper of National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO)

Aspirin and P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists are widely used across the spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Gastrointestinal complications, including ulcer and bleeding, are relatively common during antiplatelet treatment and, therefore, concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed. However, potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested for PPIs, and, in recent years, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection by aspirin and, even more so, clopidogrel. Indeed, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies suggested an interaction through hepatic CYP2C19 between PPIs and clopidogrel, which could translate into clinical inefficacy, leading to higher rates of cardiovascular events. The FDA and the EMA sent a warning in 2010 discouraging the concomitant use of clopidogrel with omeprazole or esomeprazole. In addition, whether the use of PPIs may affect the clinical efficacy of the new P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists, ticagrelor and prasugrel, remains less known. According to current guidelines, PPIs in combination with antiplatelet treatment are recommended in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori infection. Like vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), DOACs can determine gastrointestinal bleeding. Results from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies suggest that high-dose dabigatran (150 mg bid), rivaroxaban and high-dose edoxaban (60 mg daily) are associated with a higher risk of GI bleeding as compared with apixaban and warfarin. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with GI risk factor, PPI could be recommended, even if usefulness of PPIs in these patients deserves further data. Helicobacter pylori should always be searched, and treated, in patients with history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication). Given the large number of patients treated with antithrombotic drugs and PPIs, even a minor reduction of platelet inhibition or anticoagulant effect potentially carries a considerable clinical impact. The present joint statement by ANMCO and AIGO summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs in combination. Moreover, it outlines evidence supporting or opposing drug interactions between these drugs and discusses consequent clinical implications.

Use of proteomics to identify biomarkers associated with chronic kidney disease and long-term outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have poor outcomes following myocardial infarction (MI). We performed an untargeted examination of 175 biomarkers to identify those with the strongest association with CKD and to examine the association of those biomarkers with long-term outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 175 different biomarkers from MI patients enrolled in the Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) registry were analysed either by a multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry assay or by a multiplex assay (proximity extension assay). Random forests statistical models were used to assess the predictor importance of biomarkers, CKD and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1098 MI patients with a median estimated glomerular filtration rate of 85 mL min^-1 /1.73 m² were followed for a median of 3.2 years. The random forests analyses, without and with adjustment for differences in demography, comorbidities and severity of disease, identified six biomarkers (adrenomedullin, TNF receptor-1, adipocyte fatty acid-binding protein-4, TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor 2, growth differentiation factor-15 and TNF receptor-2) to be strongly associated with CKD. All six biomarkers were also amongst the 15 strongest predictors for death, and four of them were amongst the strongest predictors of subsequent MI and heart failure hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

In patients with MI, a proteomic approach could identify six biomarkers that best predicted CKD. These biomarkers were also amongst the most important predictors of long-term outcomes. Thus, these biomarkers indicate underlying mechanisms that may contribute to the poor prognosis seen in patients with MI and CKD.

TicagRelor Or Clopidogrel in severe or terminal chronic kidney patients Undergoing PERcutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome: The TROUPER trial

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with an increased risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and cardiovascular death. CKD patients suffering from ACS are exposed to an increased risk of thrombotic recurrences and a higher bleeding rate than patients with normal renal function. However, CKD patients are excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials. Therefore, determining the optimal antiplatelet strategy in this population is of utmost importance. We designed the TicagRelor Or Clopidogrel in severe or terminal chronic kidney patients Undergoing PERcutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome (TROUPER) trial: a prospective, controlled, multicenter, randomized trial to investigate the optimal P2Y12 antagonist in CKD patients with ACS. Patients with stage ≥3b CKD are eligible if the diagnosis of ACS is made and invasive strategy scheduled. Patients are randomized 1:1 between a control group with a 600-mg loading dose of clopidogrel followed by a 75-mg/d maintenance dose for 1 year and an experimental group with a 180-mg loading dose of ticagrelor followed by a 90-mg twice daily maintenance dose for the same duration. The primary end point is defined by the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events, including death, myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, and stroke at 1 year. Safety will be evaluated by the bleeding rate (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium). To demonstrate the superiority of ticagrelor on major adverse cardiovascular events, we calculated that 508 patients are required. The aim of the TROUPER trial is to compare the efficacy of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in stage >3b CKD patients presenting with ACS and scheduled for an invasive strategy. RCT# NCT03357874.

Trends for and Clinical Factors Associated with Choice of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors for Patients on Chronic Dialysis

Background

Trends and clinical factors associated with prescribing choices for oral P2Y12 inhibitors (P2Y12-I) remain unknown for patients on chronic dialysis, i.e., with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

Methods

From 2011–2014 U.S. Renal Data System registry, we identified 36,542 ESRD patients who received new prescriptions for P2Y12-I (median age 64.0 years and 54% males). Of the cohort, 93% were receiving hemodialysis and 7% on peritoneal dialysis. We analyzed trends and investigated clinical factors associated with specific P2Y12-I prescribed.

Results

Clopidogrel was prescribed for 95%, prasugrel for 3%, and ticagrelor for 2%. Clopidogrel was favored for those ≥75 years (18% of cohort). Compared to Caucasians, African Americans (36% of cohort) and Hispanics (19% of cohort) were less likely to receive prasugrel and ticagrelor (P<0.05). Patients receiving hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis were less likely to receive prasugrel over clopidogrel, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.67 (0.55-0.82). Each additional year of dialysis decreased the odds of receiving prasugrel over clopidogrel, aOR 0.91 (0.85-0.98). History of atrial fibrillation reduced the odds of receiving ticagrelor or prasugrel over clopidogrel, aOR 0.69 (0.54-0.89) and 0.73 (0.60-0.89), respectively. Concomitant oral anticoagulant use was not associated with choice of P2Y12-I. Occurrence of non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention within the 6-month period prior to the index date favored ticagrelor over prasugrel, aOR 1.31 (1.06-1.62) and 1.29 (1.01-1.66), respectively. However, prescribing trends favoring ticagrelor over prasugrel were not observed for deployment of drug-eluting, or multiple coronary stents.

Conclusion

Between 2011 and 2014, clopidogrel remained the most common P2Y12-I whereas ticagrelor and prasugrel remained underutilized in ESRD patients. Prescribing practices for these drugs were based upon clinically approved indication for their use in the general population as well as perceived complexity of an ESRD patient including demographics, dialysis-related factors and comorbidities. Comparative effectiveness studies involving ESRD patients are needed to prove that ticagrelor and prasugrel are just as safe and effective as clopidogrel before clinicians can make informed decisions for choice of P2Y12-I in this patient population.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10557-019-06913-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

P2Y12 inhibitors in acute coronary syndrome patients with renal dysfunction: an analysis from the RENAMI and BleeMACS projects

Aims

The aim of the present study was to establish the safety and efficacy profile of prasugrel and ticagrelor in real-life acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with renal dysfunction.

Methods and results

All consecutive patients from RENAMI (REgistry of New Antiplatelets in patients with Myocardial Infarction) and BLEEMACS (Bleeding complications in a Multicenter registry of patients discharged with diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome) registries were stratified according to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) lower or greater than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Death and myocardial infarction (MI) were the primary efficacy endpoints. Major bleedings (MBs), defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding types 3 to 5, constituted the safety endpoint. A total of 19 255 patients were enrolled. Mean age was 63 ± 12; 14 892 (77.3%) were males. A total of 2490 (12.9%) patients had chronic kidney disease (CKD), defined as eGFR &lt;60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Mean follow-up was 13 ± 5 months. Mortality was significantly higher in CKD patients (9.4% vs. 2.6%, P &lt; 0.0001), as well as the incidence of reinfarction (5.8% vs. 2.9%, P &lt; 0.0001) and MB (5.7% vs. 3%, P &lt; 0.0001). At Cox multivariable analysis, potent P2Y12 inhibitors significantly reduced the mortality rate [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54–0.96; P = 0.006] and the risk of reinfarction (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30–0.95; P = 0.033) in CKD patients as compared to clopidogrel. The reduction of risk of reinfarction was confirmed in patients with preserved renal function. Potent P2Y12 inhibitors did not increase the risk of MB in CKD patients (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.59–1.68; P = 0.985).

Conclusion

In ACS patients with CKD, prasugrel and ticagrelor are associated with lower risk of death and recurrent MI without increasing the risk of MB.