Indobufen or Aspirin on Top of Clopidogrel After Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation (OPTION): A Randomized, Open-Label, End Point-Blinded, Noninferiority Trial

Indobufen-based dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with multivessel coronary disease undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation insight from the OPTION trial

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether indobufen-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) preserves ischemic protection while limiting bleeding risk in patients with multivessel coronary disease (MVD). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of indobufen-based DAPT in patients with MVD.

METHODS

Patients in the OPTION trial were stratified based on the presence of MVD. We compared the ischemic and bleeding risks of indobufen-based DAPT (indobufen 100mg twice a day plus clopidogrel 75 mg/d for 12 months) vs conventional DAPT (aspirin 100 mg/d plus clopidogrel 75 mg/d for 12 months) in patients with and without MVD, using landmarks at 6 months and 1-year post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

RESULTS

Patients with MVD tended to be older and contained a higher prevalence of high-risk features. Compared with patients without MVD, those with MVD were at higher risk for net adverse clinical events and ischemic events. The risk of ischemic events between indobufen-based DAPT vs conventional DAPT was similar either in patients with MVD or without MVD during the first and second 6 months. During the first 6 months, indobufen-based DAPT decreased the risk of bleeding events consistently in patients with and without MVD. Of note, during the second 6 months, indobufen-based DAPT continually decreased the risk of bleeding events in patients with MVD but not in those without MVD.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with MVD, indobufen plus clopidogrel DAPT compared to aspirin plus clopidogrel DAPT could reduce the risk of bleeding events while preserving ischemic protection during both the first and second 6 months post-PCI. Indobufen presents an effective option for patients with MVD, especially those at high ischemic risk requiring DAPT beyond 6 months post-PCI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at www.chictr.org. A Randomized Controlled Trial of Indobufen vs Aspirin after Coronary Drug-eluting Stent Implantation: the OPTION Trial (ChiCTR-IIR-17013505).

Indobufen versus aspirin in patients with indication for antiplatelet therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Aspirin is commonly recommended for individuals who have experienced stroke or myocardial infarction (MI). Indobufen, a cyclooxygenase-1 inhibitor, has been studied as a potential alternative. We conducted a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) to compare indobufen with aspirin in patients requiring antiplatelet therapy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central for studies that compared indobufen and aspirin antiplatelet therapies. We focused on efficacy outcomes, such as composite vascular events, MI, and ischemic stroke, and safety outcomes, such as major bleeding and any bleeding. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics, and our analysis followed the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

The review included 5 studies with 11,943 patients (indobufen n = 5952, 49.84 %), three involving post-MI and two involving post-stroke patients. No significant differences were found between the groups in composite vascular events at 90 days (RR 0.84; 95 % CI 0.46-1.53; p = 0.560; I2 = 53 %) and 1-year (RR 1.13; 95 % CI 0.99-1.29; p = 0.08; I2 = 0 %). MI (RR 0.73; 95 % CI 0.43-1.22; p = 0.22; I2 = 0 %), ischemic stroke (RR 1.16; 95 % CI 0.99-1.37; p = 0.06; I2 = 0 %), and cardiovascular death (RR 1.35; 95 % CI 0.80-2.26; p = 0.257; I2 = 0 %) at 1-year also showed no significant differences. Major bleeding at 1 year (RR 0.73; 95 % CI 0.41-1.31; p = 0.297; I2 = 64 %) was comparable, but any bleeding at 1 year showed a significant difference (RR 0.65; 95 % CI 0.43-0.98; p = 0.03; I2 = 87 %) favoring indobufen. Subgroup analysis of RCTs showed marginally significant increased risk regarding ischemic stroke with indobufen (RR 1.18; 95 % CI 1.00-1.39; p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and safety of antiplatelet therapy with indobufen were comparable to those of aspirin alone. Therefore, indobufen can be considered as a suitable alternative for patients who are intolerant or hypersensitive to aspirin. Nevertheless, additional trials involving larger populations are required to establish their clinical applicability.

Understanding Drug Interactions in Antiplatelet Therapy for Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet drugs are a cornerstone in managing atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASVD). However, their interactions with other medications present significant challenges to treatment efficacy and safety. Patients with ASVD often require multiple treatment regimens due to complex comorbidities, which increases the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). These interactions can lead to drug resistance, reduced therapeutic outcomes, or adverse effects. A thorough understanding of DDIs is crucial for optimizing patient care.

AIMS

This review aims to explore the clinical significance. mechanisms, and implications of DDIs in antiplatelet therapy Additionally, it seeks to identify future research directions to advance personalized treatment strategies and improve therapeutic outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using key databases, focusing on clinical studies, mechanistic research, and guidelines related to antiplatelet therapy and DDIs. Findings were analyzed to identify common interaction patterns, associated risks, and management strategies.

RESULTS

The review identifies common DDIs involving antiplatelet drugs, particularly with anticoagulants, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and proton pump inhibitors. These interactions primarily occur through pharmacokinetic mechanisms, such as alterations in drug metabolism via cytochrome P450 enzymes, and pharmacodynamic mechanisms, including synergistic or antagonistic effects on platelet inhibition. Clinically, DDIs can increase bleeding risk, reduce antiplatelet efficacy, and contribute to adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Strategies to mitigate these risks include individualized drug selection, dose adjustments, genetic testing, and therapeutic drug monitoring.

DISCUSSION

Effective management of DDIs in antiplatelet therapy is essential to improve clinical outcomes. A patient-specific approach, considering comorbidities, genetic predispositions, and concurrent medications, is crucial. The review categorizes DDIs based on clinical settings and underscores the need for further research on predictive biomarkers, pharmacogenomics, and advanced monitoring techniques.

CONCLUSION

DDIs significantly impact the effectiveness and safety of antiplatelet therapy, necessitating a comprehensive understanding of their mechanisms and clinical implications. Future research should focus on developing personalized treatment approaches, integrating genetic testing, and optimizing pharmacological monitoring to minimize risks and improve therapeutic outcomes. This review provides a foundation for advancing clinical practice and enhancing the management of patients with ASVD.

The efficacy and safety of indobufen in patients with ischemic cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of indobufen in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, cerebrovascular diseases, and thromboembolic disorders. The primary focus is on the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), thrombosis, bleeding events, and adverse reactions. The results are intended to provide a reference for the clinical application of indobufen and suggest directions for further large-scale, multi-center, prospective studies.

METHODS

This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify all relevant studies on indobufen. Twelve trials, all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), met the inclusion criteria. The results were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 18.0 software.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 12 randomized controlled trials. Regarding safety, indobufen showed superior clinical outcomes compared to other antiplatelet agents regarding bleeding events, gastrointestinal adverse reactions, and overall adverse reactions, with these differences being more pronounced in cardiovascular diseases. However, the effects of both treatments on efficacy outcomes, including MACE, myocardial infarction, angina, mortality, and thrombotic events, were similar. For stroke events, particularly in patients with cerebrovascular diseases, the use of indobufen was associated with some risk.

CONCLUSION

Indobufen is associated with a lower risk of adverse reactions and bleeding, making it a viable option for patients at risk of bleeding or adverse effects, particularly in those with cardiovascular diseases. However, compared to anticoagulants such as aspirin and clopidogrel, indobufen has a shorter history of use, and its evidence base is relatively limited, highlighting the need for further research. Currently, indobufen is widely used in secondary cardiovascular and cerebrovascular prevention and provides some guidance for antiplatelet therapy in patients with gastrointestinal discomfort or bleeding risk. However, due to the potential risks in MACE, stroke, and other events, further clinical trials are needed to assess the clinical applicability of indobufen.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, identifier (CRD42024587938).

The safety and efficacy of indobufen or aspirin combined with clopidogrel in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention

Currently, the standard treatment for patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following acute myocardial infarction (MI) involves dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a combination of aspirin and a potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. However, the potential benefits of aspirin were partially constrained by the intolerance of some patients. The safety and efficacy of indobufen, an alternative antiplatelet agents to aspirin, in patients with AMI after PCI are yet to be thoroughly investigated.This retrospective study was conducted at a single center and utilized propensity score matching. The enrollment spanned from January 2019 to June 2022, incorporating patients with AMI after PCI. The participants were categorized into two groups based on discharged prescriptions: the aspirin DAPT group and the indobufen DAPT group. The primary endpoint focused on net adverse clinical event (NACE), defined as a composite outcome, including cardiac death, recurrence of MI, definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization (TLR), ischemic stroke and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria type 2, 3, or 5. All the patients underwent a one-year follow-up period.A total of 1451 patients were enrolled in this study, with 258 assigned to the indobufen DAPT group and 1193 to the aspirin DAPT group. Following 1:1 propensity score matching, 224 patients were retained in each group. In the indobufen DAPT group, 58 individuals (25.9%) experienced the primary endpoint within one year, compared to 52 individuals (23.2%) in the aspirin DAPT group (HR 1.128, 95% CI 0.776-1.639, p = .527). Specifically, no significant differences were observed in either the efficacy endpoint (MACCE, 20.1% vs. 14.7%, HR 1.392, 95% CI 0.893-2.170, p = .146) or the safety endpoint (BARC 2,3 or 5, 8.04% vs. 10.30%, HR 0.779, p = .427). These findings remained consistent at 1, 3, or 6 months. Additionally, the incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly lower in indobufen DAPT group compared to the aspirin DAPT group (7.1% vs. 14.3%, p = .022).Our research reveals that the efficacy and safety of indobufen are comparable to aspirin in Chinese patients with AMI following PCI. Given the potential advantages of indobufen in alleviating gastrointestinal symptoms, we propose it as a viable alternative for individuals intolerant to aspirin.

Aspirin Hypersensitivity in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

Low-dose aspirin remains the most commonly used antiplatelet agent among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Aspirin hypersensitivity occurs in 1% to 5% of patients and is among the most frequent causes for prohibiting the use of aspirin, posing a significant dilemma on how to manage these patients in clinical practice. Aspirin hypersensitivity is often misinterpreted and confused with aspirin intolerance, with treatment approaches being often unclear and lacking specific recommendations. Aspirin desensitization and low-dose aspirin challenge have emerged as pragmatic, effective, and safe approaches in patients with suspected or confirmed aspirin hypersensitivity who require aspirin therapy, but they are underused systematically in clinical practice. Furthermore, there is confusion over alternative antiplatelet agents to be used in these patients. The pathophysiological mechanisms and classification of aspirin hypersensitivity, as well as alternative strategies and practical algorithms to overcome the need for aspirin use in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with suspected aspirin hypersensitivity, are discussed.

Aspirin Hypersensitivity in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: An Updated Review and Practical Recommendations

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) represents a cornerstone of antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD). ASA is in fact indicated in case of an acute coronary syndrome or after a percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation. Aspirin hypersensitivity is frequently reported by patients, and this challenging situation requires a careful evaluation of the true nature of the presumed sensitivity and of its mechanisms, as well as to differentiate it from a more frequent (and more easily manageable) aspirin intolerance. Two main strategies are available to allow ASA administration for patients with CAD and suspected ASA hypersensitivity: a low-dose ASA challenge, aimed at assessing the tolerability of ASA at the antiplatelet dose of 100 mg, and desensitization, a therapeutic procedure which aims to induce tolerance to ASA. For those patients who cannot undergo ASA challenge and desensitization due to previous serious adverse reactions, or for those in whom desensitization was unsuccessful, a number of further alternative strategies are available, even if these have not been validated and approved by guidelines. The aim of this state-of-the-art review is therefore to summarize the established evidence regarding pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of aspirin hypersensitivity and to provide a practical guide for cardiologists (and clinicians) who have to face the not uncommon situation of a patient with concomitant coronary artery disease and aspirin hypersensitivity.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndromes

The antithrombotic management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) involves a 6-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), followed by chronic aspirin therapy. In patients with a baseline indication for anticoagulation, a variable duration of triple antithrombotic therapy is administered, followed by dual antithrombotic therapy until the sixth month post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and ultimately a transition to chronic anticoagulation. However, advancements in stent technology reducing the risk of stent thrombosis and a growing focus on the impact of bleeding on prognosis have prompted the development of new therapeutic strategies. These strategies aim to enhance protection against ischemic events in the initial stages after PCI while mitigating the risk of bleeding in the long term. This article delineates the therapeutic strategies outlined in European and American guidelines for CCS management, with special attention to investigational strategies.

Nickel-catalysed reductive C-N bond cross-coupling between aryl halides and N-chloroamides

A method for the direct synthesis of N-aryl lactams and amides with aryl halides and N-chloroamides through a Ni-catalyzed reductive C-N coupling reaction has been developed. The reaction features the advantages of mild conditions, good functional group tolerance and broad substrate scope including drug-derived substrates, and also provided direct access to the key synthetic intermediates for some bioactive molecules, suggesting the practicability of this method. Finally, DFT calculations were performed to shed further light on the reaction mechanism and it was found that an amidyl radical might be involved.

Safety and efficacy of aspirin and indobufen in the treatment of coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of aspirin and indobufen in patients with coronary heart disease. The primary focus was on the incidence of cardiovascular events, bleeding events, and gastrointestinal reactions. Given the relatively limited research on indobufen, this study utilized aspirin as a control drug and employed meta-analysis to integrate existing clinical studies. The goal was to provide a reference for the clinical use of indobufen and to suggest directions for further largescale, multicenter prospective studies.

Methods

This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, WOS, and Cochrane Library databases to identify all relevant literature on indobufen. A total of nine trials met the inclusion criteria, encompassing seven randomized controlled trails (RCTs) and two retrospective studies. Categorical variables were analyzed using odds ratio and random effects models.

Results

The meta-analysis included nine trials, comprising seven RCTs and two retrospective studies. The pooled results indicated that indobufen significantly reduced the incidence of minor bleeding events, and gastrointestinal discomfort compared to aspirin. However, both drugs had similar effects on the incidence of recurrent angina pectoris, myocardial infarction and mortality due to coronary heart disease.

Conclusion

Indobufen was associated with fewer gastrointestinal reactions and a low risk of bleeding, making it a viable option for patients with high-risk factors for bleeding and gastric ulcers. Despite this, indobufen's short history and limited evidence base compared to aspirin highlight the need for further research. Aspirin remains widely available, cost-effective, and the preferred drug for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Indobufen or other antiplatelet agents should only be considered when aspirin is not tolerated or contraindicated. Further clinical trials are necessary to determine whether indobufen can replace aspirin.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, identifier [CRD42024523477].

The pharmacology of antiplatelet agents for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of ischemic stroke

INTRODUCTION

Ischemic etiology accounts for two thirds of all strokes in which platelet activation and aggregation play a major role. A variety of antiplatelet therapies have been tested for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention, with certain patient subtypes benefiting more than others from a specific regimen.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims at synthetizing current evidence on pharmacology of antiplatelet agents approved for primary, secondary, and tertiary stroke prevention and their application among possible patient subtypes that may benefit more from their administration.

EXPERT OPINION

Management of ischemic stroke has largely evolved over the past decades. A better understanding of stroke pathophysiology has allowed to identify patients who can benefit most from antiplatelet therapies, with varying degrees of benefit depending on whether these agents are being used for primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention. Importantly, the antiplatelet treatment regimens currently available have expanded and no longer limited to aspirin but include other drugs such as P2Y12 and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, also used in combination, as well as precision medicine approaches using genetic testing aiming at optimizing the safety and efficacy in this population.

Real-world performance of indobufen versus aspirin after percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the ASPIRATION registry

BACKGROUND

Indobufen is widely used in patients with aspirin intolerance in East Asia. The OPTION trial launched by our cardiac center examined the performance of indobufen based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the vast majority of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and aspirin intolerance were excluded. We aimed to explore this question in a real-world population.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the ASPIRATION registry were grouped according to the DAPT strategy that they received after PCI. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. Propensity score matching (PSM) was adopted for confounder adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 7135 patients were reviewed. After one-year follow-up, the indobufen group was associated with the same risk of MACCE versus the aspirin group after PSM (6.5% vs. 6.5%, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65 to 1.52, P = 0.978). However, BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding was significantly reduced (3.0% vs. 11.9%, HR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40, P < 0.001). These results were generally consistent across different subgroups including aspirin intolerance, except that indobufen appeared to increase the risk of MACCE in patients with ACS.

CONCLUSIONS

Indobufen shared the same risk of MACCE but a lower risk of bleeding after PCI versus aspirin from a real-world perspective. Due to the observational nature of the current analysis, future studies are still warranted to further evaluate the efficacy of indobufen based DAPT, especially in patients with ACS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Register ( https://www.chictr.org.cn ); Number: ChiCTR2300067274.

The effects of CYP2C19 genotype polymorphism and clopidogrel resistance on ischemic event occurrence in patients with peripheral arterial disease undergoing revascularization: A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) affects approximately 236 million people worldwide. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between CYP2C19 genotype polymorphisms and clopidogrel resistance (CR) following revascularization in patients with PAD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 345 patients who underwent PAD revascularization were monitored for five years and risk factors for ischemic events were identified. Platelet reactivity and CYP2C19 genotypes were measured, and patients were classified as normal, intermediate, or poor metabolizers based on their genotypes. The study endpoint was defined as an ischemic event, that encompassed major adverse cardiovascular or limb events, or all-cause death.

RESULTS

In this study, ischemic events following PAD revascularization were associated with patient age, prior minor amputation, the Rutherford category before revascularization, indications for revascularization, index ankle-branchial index before revascularization, CYP2C19 phenotypes, and CR. Intermediate and poor metabolism, the Rutherford category before revascularization, and CR were independent risk factors for ischemic events in patients after PAD revascularization. Similarly, intermediate and poor metabolism, the Rutherford category before revascularization, and CR were independent risk factors for ischemic events in patients with PAD after revascularization within five years. Intermediate and poor metabolizers had a higher platelet reactivity and risk of CR than normal metabolizers. However, poor metabolizers had a higher platelet reactivity and risk of CR than intermediate metabolizers. Furthermore, the hazard ratio for ischemic events increased with platelet reactivity. This effect was more prevalent in intermediate and poor metabolizers than in normal metabolizers.

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic events in patients after PAD revascularization were affected by independent risk factors. Decreased clopidogrel metabolism increased the platelet reactivity and CR in patients after PAD revascularization. Furthermore, high platelet reactivity was associated with an increased risk of ischemic events in patients with intermediate and poor metabolism.

Chinese expert consensus on anti-thrombotic therapy for pan-vascular diseases (2023 edition)

Pan-vascular disease is a systemic condition characterized by vascular lesions, with atherosclerosis comprising 95% of cases, manifesting as coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral artery disease, or combinations thereof, known as multivascular disease. In China, the burden of pan-vascular diseases is substantial, necessitating urgent improvements in patient prognosis. Despite being managed by different disciplines, pan-vascular diseases often share common risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms, underscoring the need for standardized treatment strategies. Anti-thrombotic therapy for pan-vascular diseases primarily involves antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy. Currently, there is a lack of unified guidance across various disciplines for patients with differing ischemic and bleeding risks and disease stages. Recognizing the pivotal role of standardized anti-thrombotic therapy in pan-vascular disease treatment, the Chinese College of Cardiovascular Physicians organized a consensus working group comprising 33 senior experts from cardiology, vascular surgery, neurology, and endocrinology. The “Chinese expert consensus on anti-thrombotic therapy for pan-vascular diseases (2023 Edition)” was developed based on specific treatment needs in China, incorporating published clinical research evidence, specialized guidelines and consensus, and recommendations from the consensus expert group. The primary aim of this consensus is to standardize the application of anti-thrombotic therapy in pan-vascular diseases, thereby optimizing clinical outcomes, improving patient prognosis, and mitigating the economic and societal burdens associated with pan-vascular disease.

Clopidogrel with indobufen or aspirin in minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack: a randomized controlled clinical study

BACKGROUND

Ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) are the most prevalent cerebrovascular diseases. The conventional antiplatelet drugs are associated with an inherent bleeding risk, while indobufen is a new antiplatelet drug and has the similar mechanism of antiplatelet aggregation as aspirin with more safety profile. However, there have been no studies evaluating the combination therapy of indobufen and clopidogrel for antiplatelet therapy in cerebrovascular diseases.

OBJECTIVE

The CARMIA study aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of a new dual antiplatelet therapy consisting of indobufen and clopidogrel comparing with the conventional dual antiplatelet therapy consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel in patients with minor ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA.

METHODS

An open-label randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at a clinical center. We randomly assigned patients who had experienced a minor stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) within 72 h of onset, or within 1 month if they had intracranial stenosis (IS), to receive either indobufen 100 mg twice daily or aspirin 100 mg once daily for 21 days. For patients with IS, the treatment duration was extended to 3 months. All patients received a loading dose of 300 mg clopidogrel orally on the first day, followed by 75 mg once daily from the second day to 1 year. We collected prospective data using paper-based case report forms, and followed up on enrolled patients was conducted to assess the incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke or TIA, mRS score, NIHSS (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale) score, and any bleeding events occurring within 3 month after onset.

RESULTS

We enrolled 202 patients diagnosed with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. After applying the criteria, 182 patients were eligible for data analysis. Endpoint events (recurrence of ischemic stroke/TIA, myocardial infarction, or death) were observed in 6 patients (6.5%) receiving aspirin and clopidogrel, including 4 (4.3%) with stroke recurrence, 1 (1.1%) with TIA recurrence, and 1 (1%) with death. In contrast, no endpoint events were reported in the indobufen and clopidogrel group (P = 0.029). The group of patients receiving indobufen and clopidogrel exhibited significantly lower modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating more severe disability) compared to the aspirin and clopidogrel group (common odds ratio 3.629, 95% CI 1.874-7.036, P < 0.0001). Although the improvement rate of NIHSS score in the indobufen and clopidogrel group was higher than that in the aspirin and clopidogrel group, the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Bleeding events were observed in 8 patients (8.6%) receiving aspirin and clopidogrel, including 4 (4.3%) with skin bleeding, 2 (2.2%) with gingival bleeding, 1 (1.1%) with gastrointestinal bleeding, and 1 (1.1%) with urinary system bleeding. On the other hand, only 1 patient (1.1%) in the indobufen and clopidogrel group experienced skin bleeding (P = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

The combination of indobufen and clopidogrel has shown non-inferior and potentially superior effectiveness and safety compared to aspirin combined with clopidogrel in patients with minor ischemic stroke and high-risk TIA in the CARMIA study (registered under chictr.org.cn with registration number ChiCTR2100043087 in 01/02/2021).

Comparative efficacy of different Chinese patent medicines in preventing restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background: Chinese patent medicines (CMPs) have curative effectiveness in preventing coronary restenosis. However, the relative efficacy between different CPMs has not been sufficiently investigated. Methods: Randomized clinical trials were searched from electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VIP, WanFang, SinoMed, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to analyze CPMs' efficacy in preventing angiographic restenosis, recurrence angina, acute myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention. Results: This network meta-analysis included 47 trials with 5,077 patients evaluating 11 interventions. Regarding angiographic restenosis, the efficacy of CPMs (except Xuezhikang capsule) combined with standard treatment (Std) was superior to Std alone, and Guanxin Shutong capsule plus Std reduced the risk of angiographic restenosis by 76% (relative risk 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.45, and very low to moderate certainty of evidence), most likely the best intervention. Fufang Danshen dripping pill combined with Std showed superiority over other interventions for relieving recurrence angina, which can reduce the risk by 83% (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.51, very low to moderate certainty of evidence) compared to Std alone. In acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention, compared with Std alone, Danhong injection plus Std displayed a significant effect (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.00-0.69, very low to moderate certainty of evidence) and was the best treatment probably. Chuanxiongqin tablet plus Std was the most effective treatment for reducing target lesion revascularization by 90% (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.00-0.60, very low to moderate certainty of evidence) compared with Std alone. Conclusion: The results indicated that CPMs combined with Std reduced the risk of coronary restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to significant data limitations.

Comparison of the Effects of Indobufen and Aspirin in Older Patients with Coronary Artery Disease After Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Prospective Randomized Single-Center Study

After coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT, usually aspirin in combination with a P2Y12 inhibitor) is necessary. However, older patients are prone to aspirin intolerance or resistance. Indobufen has been reported as an ideal alternative to aspirin. To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of indobufen-based DAPT in this population, a total of 251 older patients (aged ≥65 years) undergoing coronary DES implantation in a tertiary healthcare facility in Quzhou, China, were enrolled, of which 110 received indobufen-based DAPT and 141 received aspirin-based DAPT. Baseline data, adverse reactions, adverse events, angina attacks, and repeated revascularization during 1-year follow-up were collected. At 1-year follow-up, creatinine, and left ventricular ejection fraction levels in the indobufen group were higher than those in the aspirin group, whereas estimated glomerular filtration rate levels were lower than those in the aspirin group. No significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions or adverse events was found between the two groups. At 1-year follow-up, the incidence of angina in the indobufen group was significantly lower than that in the aspirin group, and the repeated revascularization rate was lower than that in the aspirin group. Indobufen-based DAPT was beneficial in avoiding repeated revascularizations (odds ratio 0.433, 95% CI 0.229-0.821, P = 0.010). These findings highlight that, for older patients who underwent coronary DES implantation, indobufen-based DAPT may be a better choice, which can effectively improve patients' symptoms and prognosis. However, application to older patients with potential renal insufficiency requires caution.

Case report: Fatal traumatic coronary artery dissection-an overlooked complication of chest fracture

Coronary artery dissection caused by trauma is a rare occurrence that can be life-threatening. Accordingly, its rapid identification and treatment are essential to improve patient outcomes. Here, we present a case of a patient who suffered multiple rib and femur fractures after falling from a height of eighteen meters and subsequently experienced persistent chest pain. After the initial diagnostic workup, the medical team diagnosed the patient's chest pain as rib fractures and failed to consider the potential of a cardiac injury as the underlying cause. No emphasis was placed on monitoring changes in myocardial enzymes and ECG, which could have indicated coronary artery dissection. The dissection was confirmed and treated with a stent only after the subsequent coronary angiography (CAG) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) examinations, gradually relieving the patient's chest pain. In this case report, we discuss the management of fractures complicated by traumatic coronary artery dissection and highlight the benefits of OCT in diagnosing and treating this condition. The case also emphasizes the importance of considering coronary artery injury in patients with chest pain due to trauma.

Reversible and Non-Competitive Inhibition of Cyclooxygenase by Indobufen for Efficient Antiplatelet Action and Relief of Gastrointestinal Irritation

Clinically, indobufen is widely used for the treatment of antiplatelet aggregation and anticoagulation. Prior studies have discovered that abnormal platelet function can be promptly restored to normal when the drug is stopped. Herein, through the study of the enzyme reaction kinetics, we demonstrated that the inhibitory effect of indobufen on cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) was reversible and non-competitive. Specifically, the cyclooxygenase inhibition experiment showed that the level of 6-keto-PGF1α in the gastric mucosa of the indobufen-treated groups was significantly higher than that of the aspirin group (###p < 0.001), indicating a higher level of PGI2 in and a better physiological state of the gastric mucosa. Moreover, the rat gastric ulcer index and mucosal section experiments further confirmed the relief of gastrointestinal irritation and the adverse reaction rate of the indobufen-treated group compared to those of the aspirin group. Furthermore, indobufen was verified to exert reversible inhibitory activity on the heme group of COX-1 and thus reversibly inhibit COX-1 activity. In general, compared with aspirin, the long-term oral administration of indobufen yields a lower risk of gastrointestinal symptoms, such as ulcers.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Concise Review for Clinicians

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) combines two antiplatelet agents to decrease the risk of thrombotic complications associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. Emerging data about the duration of DAPT is being published continuously. New approaches are trying to balance the time, benefits, and risks for patients taking DAPT for established cardiovascular diseases. Short-term dual DAPT of 3-6 months, or even 1 month in high-bleeding risk patients, is equivalent in terms of efficacy and effectiveness compared to long-term DAPT for patients who experienced percutaneous coronary intervention in an acute coronary syndrome setting. Prolonged DAPT beyond 12 months reduces stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiovascular events, and myocardial infarction rates but increases bleeding risk. Extended DAPT does not significantly benefit stable coronary artery disease patients in reducing stroke, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. Ticagrelor and aspirin reduce cardiovascular events in stable coronary artery disease with diabetes but carry a higher bleeding risk. Antiplatelet therapy duration in atrial fibrillation patients after percutaneous coronary intervention depends on individual characteristics and bleeding risk. Antiplatelet therapy is crucial for post-coronary artery bypass graft and transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Aspirin (ASA) monotherapy is preferred. Antiplatelet therapy duration in peripheral artery disease depends on the scenario. Adding vorapaxar and cilostazol may benefit secondary prevention and claudication, respectively. Carotid artery disease patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke benefit from antiplatelet therapy and combining ASA and clopidogrel is more effective than ASA alone. The optimal duration of DAPT after carotid artery stenting is uncertain. Resistance to ASA and clopidogrel poses an incremental risk of deleterious cardiovascular events and stroke. The selection and duration of antiplatelet therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease requires careful consideration of both efficacy and safety outcomes. The use of combination therapies may provide added benefits but should be weighed against the risk of bleeding. Further research and clinical trials are needed to optimize antiplatelet treatment in different patient populations and clinical scenarios.

Indobufen versus aspirin in patients with acute ischaemic stroke in China (INSURE): a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active control, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Aspirin is recommended for secondary stroke prevention in patients with moderate-to-severe ischaemic stroke but can lead to gastrointestinal intolerance and bleeding. Indobufen is used as an alternative antiplatelet agent in some countries, despite an absence of large-scale clinical trials for this indication. We tested the hypothesis that indobufen is non-inferior to aspirin in reducing the risk of new stroke at 90 days in patients with moderate-to-severe ischaemic stroke.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active control, non-inferiority trial at 163 tertiary and district general hospitals in China. Eligible participants were aged 18-80 years with acute moderate-to-severe ischaemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 4-18). We randomly assigned (1:1) participants within 72 h of the onset of symptoms to receive either indobufen (100 mg tablet twice per day) or aspirin (100 mg tablet once per day) for 90 days. The randomisation sequence was computer generated centrally and stratified by local participating centres. Masked local investigators assigned the random code to patients in ascending order and provided a treatment kit corresponding to the random code. The primary efficacy outcome was new stroke and the primary safety outcome was severe or moderate bleeding, both within 90 days. This primary efficacy outcome was assessed in all randomly assigned and consenting patients and in a per-protocol group (ie, all patients finishing the treatment without major violation of the trial protocol). Safety analyses were done in the safety-analysis population (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a safety assessment available). We assessed the non-inferiority of indobufen versus aspirin using the one-sided upper limit of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·25. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03871517).

FINDINGS

This trial took place between June 2, 2019, and Nov 28, 2021. Of 84 093 patients screened, 5438 patients were randomly assigned to receive either indobufen (n=2715) or aspirin (n=2723), all of whom were included in the primary analyses. Median age was 64·2 years (IQR 56·1-70·6); 1921 (35·3%) were women and 3517 (64·7%) were men. Stroke occurred within 90 days in 213 (7·9%) patients in the indobufen group versus 175 (6·4%) in the aspirin group (HR 1·23, 95% CI 1·01-1·50; pnon-inferiority=0·44). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 18 (0·7%) patients in the indobufen group and in 28 (1·0%) in the aspirin group (0·63, 95% CI 0·35 to 1·15; p=0·13). Adverse events within 90 days occurred in 666 (24·5%) patients in the indobufen group and 679 (24·9%) patients in the aspirin group (p=0·73).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with acute moderate-to-severe ischaemic stroke, indobufen was not non-inferior to aspirin because the upper limit of the 95% CI was greater than 1·25. Furthermore, indobufen seemed to be inferior to aspirin in reducing the risk of recurrent stroke at 90 days because the lower limit of the 95% CI was greater than 1·00. Although moderate or severe bleeding did not differ between groups, these findings do not support the use of indobufen for secondary stroke prevention in patients with moderate-to-severe ischaemic stroke.

FUNDING

Hangzhou Zhongmei Huadong Pharmaceutical and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences.

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2022: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Over the course of 2022, numerous key clinical trials with valuable contributions to clinical cardiology were published or presented at major international conferences. This review seeks to summarise these trials and to reflect on their clinical context.

METHODS

The authors reviewed clinical trials presented at major cardiology conferences during 2022, including the American College of Cardiology (ACC), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EuroPCR), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT), American Heart Association (AHA), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), TVT-The Heart Summit (TVT) and Cardiovascular Research Technologies (CRT). Trials with a broad relevance to the cardiology community and those with potential to change current practice were included.

RESULTS

A total of 93 key cardiology clinical trials were identified for inclusion. Interventional cardiology data included trials evaluating the use of new generation novel stent technology and new intravascular physiology strategies such as quantitative flow ratio (QFR) to guide revascularisation in stable and unstable coronary artery disease. New trials in acute coronary syndromes and intervention focused on long-term outcomes of optimal medical therapy (OMT), revascularisation in ischaemic dysfunction and left main (LM) intervention. Structural intervention trials included latest data on optimal timing and anticoagulation strategies in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in addition to expanding evidence in mitral and tricuspid valve interventions. Heart failure data included trials with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, iron replacement and novel drugs such as omecamtiv. Prevention trials included new data on proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and polypill strategies. In electrophysiology, new data regarding optimal timing of ablative therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in addition to novel screening strategies were evaluated.

CONCLUSION

This article presents a summary of key clinical cardiology trials published and presented during the past year and should be of interest to both practising clinicians and researchers.