Assessing the Risks of Bleeding vs Thrombotic Events in Patients at High Bleeding Risk After Coronary Stent Implantation: The ARC-High Bleeding Risk Trade-off Model

Antithrombotic Therapy in High Bleeding Risk, Part I: Percutaneous Cardiac Interventions

Antithrombotic therapy after cardiac percutaneous interventions is key for the prevention of thrombotic events but is inevitably associated with increased bleeding, proportional to the number, duration, and potency of the antithrombotic agents used. Bleeding complications have important clinical implications, which in some cases may outweigh the expected benefit of reducing thrombotic events. Because the response to antithrombotic agents varies widely among patients, there has been a relentless effort toward the identification of patients at high bleeding risk (HBR), in whom modulation of antithrombotic therapy may be needed to optimize the balance between safety and efficacy. Among patients undergoing cardiac percutaneous interventions, recent advances in technology have allowed for strategies of de-escalation to reduce bleeding without compromising efficacy, and HBR patients are expected to benefit the most from such approaches. Guidelines do not extensively expand upon the topic of de-escalation strategies of antithrombotic therapy in HBR patients. In this review, we discuss the evidence and provide practical recommendations on optimal antithrombotic therapy in HBR patients undergoing various cardiac percutaneous interventions.

High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Coronary and Structural Heart Interventions

Percutaneous coronary and structural heart interventions are increasingly preferred over cardiac surgery due to reduced rates of periprocedural complications and faster recovery but often require postprocedural antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of local thrombotic events. Antithrombotic therapy is inevitably associated with increased bleeding, the extent of which is proportional to the number, duration, and potency of the antithrombotic agents used. Bleeding complications have important clinical implications, which may outweigh the expected benefit of reducing thrombotic events. Herein, we provide a comprehensive description of the classification and clinical relevance of high bleeding risk in patients undergoing coronary and structural heart interventions.

Considerations in Antiplatelet Therapy in Women Undergoing Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Antiplatelet therapy is integral to reduce the risk of future ischemic events following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); this aim must be balanced by limiting the risk of bleeding. Women with ACS or undergoing PCI have distinct platelet physiology, vascular anatomy, and clinical profiles that can influence the selection of an appropriate regimen. There are procedural techniques that can enhance safety in women. The poor inclusion of women in ACS and PCI trials limits our understanding of the ideal antiplatelet regimen in women, and future studies must find ways to increase the participation of female patients.

Regulation of Platelet Activation and Coagulation: Current Concepts, Novel Targets, and Therapies

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies are cornerstones of secondary prevention in high-risk cardiovascular patients. Whereas in former days the focus was set on effective antithrombotic effects, more recent trials and guidelines placed emphasis on a more balanced approach, thus including the bleeding risk for an individualized therapy. Type, strength, combination, and duration are important components to modify the individual bleeding risk. Novel antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents have shown promising results that might offer safer options in the future for high-risk cardiovascular patients. This review aims to give an overview about established drug target and pharmacologic approaches that are currently in the pipeline.

Transfusion and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention

We investigated the long-term patterns and effects of transfusion on the clinical outcome of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using a nationwide registry. Five-year clinical outcome of all Koreans undergoing PCI using stent in year 2011 (n = 48,786) was investigated. Primary outcome was the incidence density of transfusion. The association of transfusion with major adverse clinical event (MACE) consisting all-cause death, revascularization, critically ill cardiovascular status, or stroke was assessed after adjusting the propensity of each patient for transfusion. The 5-year incidence density of transfusion was 4.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.70-4.79) per 100 person-year. Patients who received transfusion were older and had higher frequency of clinical risk factors (p < 0.001, all). Transfusion was associated with MACE (hazard ratio [HR] 3.2, 95% CI 3.2-3.3, p < 0.001) and all other clinical events (HR 1.5-6.9, p < 0.001, all). The period of transfusion coincided with the period of highest MACE incidence density. Subgroup analyses showed consistent results. Within 5 years after PCI, a total of 22.9% of patients received transfusion and had a 3.2-fold higher risk of MACE compared to patients without transfusion.

Real-World Implementation of a Genotype-Guided P2Y12 Inhibitor De-Escalation Strategy in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients

BACKGROUND

CYP2C19 genotype-guided de-escalation from ticagrelor or prasugrel to clopidogrel may optimize the balance between ischemic and bleeding risk in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare bleeding and ischemic event rates in genotyped patients vs standard care.

METHODS

Since 2015, ACS patients in the multicenter FORCE-ACS (Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome) registry received standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Since 2021, genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibitor de-escalation was recommended at a single center, switching noncarriers of the loss-of-function allele CYP2C19∗3 or CYP2C19∗2 from ticagrelor or prasugrel to clopidogrel, whereas loss-of-function carriers remained on ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary ischemic endpoint, a composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and the primary bleeding endpoint, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, were compared between a genotyped cohort and a cohort treated with standard DAPT after 1 year.

RESULTS

Among 5,321 enrolled ACS patients, 406 underwent genotyping compared with 4,915 nongenotyped ACS patients on standard DAPT. In the genotyped cohort, 65.3% (n = 265) were noncarriers, 88.7% (n = 235) of whom were switched to clopidogrel. The primary ischemic endpoint occurred in 5.2% (n = 21) of patients in the genotyped cohort compared to 6.9% (n = 337) in the standard care cohort (adjusted HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.53-1.28). The primary bleeding rate was significantly lower in the genotyped cohort compared to the standard care cohort (4.7% vs 9.8%; adjusted HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.30-0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a CYP2C19 genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibitor de-escalation strategy in a real-world ACS population resulted in lower bleeding rates without an increase in ischemic events compared to a standard DAPT regimen.

Demystifying the Contemporary Role of 12-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome

For almost two decades, 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been the only class I recommendation on DAPT in American and European guidelines, which has resulted in 12-month durations of DAPT therapy being the most frequently implemented in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) across the globe. Twelve-month DAPT was initially grounded in the results of the CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events) trial, which, by design, studied DAPT versus no DAPT rather than the optimal DAPT duration. The average DAPT duration in this study was 9 months, not 12 months. Subsequent ACS studies, which were not designed to assess DAPT duration, rather its composition (aspirin with prasugrel or ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel) were further interpreted as supportive evidence for 12-month DAPT duration. In these studies, the median DAPT duration was 9 or 15 months for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively. Several subsequent studies questioned the 12-month regimen and suggested that DAPT duration should either be fewer than 12 months in patients at high bleeding risk or more than 12 months in patients at high ischemic risk who can safely tolerate the treatment. Bleeding, rather than ischemic risk assessment, has emerged as a treatment modifier for maximizing the net clinical benefit of DAPT, due to excessive bleeding and no clear benefit of prolonged treatment regimens in high bleeding risk patients. Multiple DAPT de-escalation treatment strategies, including switching from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel, reducing the dose of prasugrel or ticagrelor, and shortening DAPT duration while maintaining monotherapy with ticagrelor, have been consistently shown to reduce bleeding without increasing fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular or cerebral ischemic risks compared with 12-month DAPT. However, 12-month DAPT remains the only class-I DAPT recommendation for patients with ACS despite the lack of prospectively established evidence, leading to unnecessary and potentially harmful overtreatment in many patients. It is time for clinical practice and guideline recommendations to be updated to reflect the totality of the evidence regarding the optimal DAPT duration in ACS.

One-month DAPT after biodegradable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent implantation in patients at high-bleeding risk: an individual patient data pooled analysis of the SENIOR and POEM trials

Aims

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) can be shortened up to 1 month in high-bleeding risk (HBR) patients receiving a contemporary biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent. We aimed to summarize the evidence on a similar DAPT regimen after biodegradable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation in patients at HBR.

Methods and results

We pooled the individual participant data from the available trials evaluating this strategy, namely, the SENIOR and the POEM trials. Inclusion criteria were ≥1 biodegradable-polymer EES implantation and ≤1-month duration of DAPT. The primary endpoint was the 1-year composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Major bleeding was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3-5 bleeding. Landmark analyses were performed at 1 month, the time point for intended DAPT interruption. We included 766 participants (age 77.5 ± 8.2 years, women 31.9%), 323 from the SENIOR and 443 from the POEM trial. The primary endpoint occurred in 45 participants (6.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3-7.7%) through 1 year of follow-up, with 21 (2.8%; 95% CI, 1.6-3.9%) events during the first month and 24 (3.4%; 95% CI, 2.0-4.7%) thereafter. The incidences of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were 2.2% (95% CI, 0.36-2.50%), 3.1% (95% CI, 1.8-4.3%), and 1.2% (95% CI, 0.4-2.0%), respectively. BARC type 3-5 bleeding ocuurred in 1.1% (95% CI, 0.3-1.8%) at 1 month and 2.9% (95% CI, 1.6-4.1%) at 1 year.

Conclusion

HBR patients receiving biodegradable-polymer EES had few ischemic and bleeding events when given 1 month of DAPT. One-month DAPT after biodegradable-polymer EES implantation seems safe in patients at HBR.

Therapeutic strategies aiming at the reduction of the antiplatelet intensity should not overlook the ischemic risk in patients with coronary syndromes

De-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is gaining traction as a strategy to reduce bleeding risks while ensuring ischemic outcomes. Undiscriminating de-escalation, notably in patients with high ischemic risk, might expose them to major adverse cardiac events. Platelet function and genetic tests are emerging tools to guide de-escalation, but both present specific drawbacks. Recent meta-analyses have aimed to consolidate the findings of individual trials to provide clearer insights. Yet, limitations remain for patients with concomitant high bleeding and ischemic risks. These high-risk patients are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials, and, therefore, currently available guidelines lack evidence-based recommendations for this subset. While DAPT de-escalation strategies hold promise, the choice of approach, whether clinically or assay-guided, remains complex and should be individualized.

Antiplatelet therapy for treatment of coronary artery disease in older patients

Coronary artery disease in older patients is more frequently diffuse and complex, and is often treated by percutaneous coronary intervention on top of medical therapy. There are currently no specific recommendations for antiplatelet therapy in patients aged≥75 years. Aspirin remains pivotal, and is still indicated as a long-term treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention. In addition, a P2Y12 inhibitor is administered for 6-12 months according to clinical presentation. Age is a minor bleeding risk factor, but because older patients often have several co-morbidities, they are considered as having a high bleeding risk according to different scoring systems. This increased bleeding risk has resulted in different therapeutic strategies for antithrombotic treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention; these include short dual antiplatelet therapy, a switch from potent to less potent antiplatelet therapy or single antiplatelet therapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor instead of aspirin, among others. A patient-centred approach, taking into account health status, functional ability, frailty, cognitive skills, bleeding and ischaemic risks and patient preference, is essential when caring for older adults with coronary artery disease. The present review focuses on the knowledge base, specificities of antiplatelet therapies, a balance between haemorrhagic and ischaemic risk, strategies for antiplatelet therapy and directions for future investigation pertaining to coronary artery disease in older patients.

Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a VARC-HBR consensus document

The identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are of major importance, but the lack of standardised definitions is challenging for trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Valve Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (VARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organisations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from Europe, the USA, and Asia, with a major focus on TAVI-related bleeding. VARC-HBR is an initiative of the CERC (Cardiovascular European Research Center), aiming to develop a consensus definition of TAVI patients at HBR, based on a systematic review of the available evidence, to provide consistency for future clinical trials, clinical decision-making, and regulatory review. This document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of HBR evaluating the safety and effectiveness of procedures, devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing TAVI..

Risk Burden of Cancer in Patients Treated With Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: Analysis of Multicenter Controlled High-Bleeding Risk Trials

BACKGROUND

Oncological patients with coronary artery disease face an elevated risk of hemorrhagic and ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite medical guidelines recommending minimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for patients with cancer, dedicated data on abbreviated DAPT in this population is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with cancer compared with other high-bleeding risk individuals.

METHODS

Patient-level data from 4 high-bleeding risk coronary drug-eluting stent studies (ONYX One, LEADERS FREE, LEADERS FREE II, and SENIOR trials) treated with short DAPT were analyzed. The comparison focused on patients with high-bleeding risk with and without cancer, assessing 1-year rates of net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and major adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke).

RESULTS

A total of 5232 patients were included, of whom 574 individuals had cancer, and 4658 were at high-bleeding risk without previous cancer. Despite being younger with fewer risk factors, patients with cancer had higher net adverse clinical event (HR, 1.25; P=0.01) and major adverse clinical event (HR, 1.26; P=0.02), primarily driven by all-cause mortality and major bleeding (BARC 3-5), but not myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization. Cancer was an independent predictor of net adverse clinical event (P=0.005), major adverse clinical event (P=0.01), and major bleeding (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The present work is the first report on abbreviated DAPT dedicated to patients with cancer. Cancer is a major marker of adverse outcomes and these events had high lethality. Despite short DAPT, patients with cancer experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients without cancer with high-bleeding risk, which occurred mainly after DAPT discontinuation. These findings reinforce the need for a more detailed and individualized stratification of those patients.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03344653, NCT01623180, NCT02843633, NCT0284.

1- Versus 3-Month DAPT in Older Patients at a High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI: Insights from the XIENCE Short DAPT Global Program

This analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of 1- versus 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in older patients. Data from 3 prospective, single-arm studies (XIENCE Short DAPT Program), including patients with high bleeding risk successfully treated with an everolimus-eluting stent (XIENCE, Abbott) were analyzed. DAPT was discontinued at 1 or at 3 months in patients free from ischemic events and adherent to DAPT. Patients were stratified according to age (≥75 and <75 years). The primary end point was all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI). The key secondary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 to 5 bleeding. The outcomes were assessed from 1 to 12 months after index PCI. Of 3,364 patients, 2,241 (66.6%) were aged ≥75 years. The risk of death or MI was similar with 1- versus 3-month DAPT in patients aged ≥75 (8.5% vs 8.0%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69 to 1.30) and <75 years (6.9% vs 7.8%, adjusted HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.57, interaction p = 0.478). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 to 5 bleeding was consistently lower with 1- than with 3-month DAPT in patients aged ≥75 years (7.2% vs 9.4%, adjusted HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.91) and <75 years (9.7% vs 11.9%, adjusted HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.29, interaction p = 0.737). In conclusion, in patients at high bleeding risk who underwent PCI, patients older and younger than 75 years derived a consistent benefit from 1- compared with 3-month DAPT in terms of bleeding reduction, with no increase in all-cause death or MI at 1 year.

The Combinations of the Patterns of Non-adherence to Anti-platelet Regimen in Stented Patients (PARIS) and Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto (CREDO-Kyoto) Thrombotic and Bleeding Risk Scores on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

Objective The Patterns of Non-adherence to Anti-platelet Regimen in Stented Patients (PARIS) and Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto (CREDO-Kyoto) thrombotic and bleeding risk scores were established to predict ischemic and bleeding events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, whether or not the combination of these risk scores is predictive of clinical outcomes is unclear. Methods This bicenter registry included a total of 1,098 patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing primary PCI. Patients were divided into three groups according to the PARIS and CREDO-Kyoto thrombotic and bleeding risk scores. The study endpoints included the rates of both ischemic (cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, and ischemic stroke) and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5) events at two years. Results Two years after primary PCI, ischemic and major bleeding events occurred in 17.3% and 10.2% of patients, respectively. The higher-risk categories of PARIS and CREDO-Kyoto scores were associated with increased risks of ischemic and bleeding events. The rates of ischemic and major bleeding events progressively increased with the increase in risk categories in the two risk scoring systems. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the addition of CREDO-Kyoto thrombotic and bleeding risk scores to PARIS scores significantly improved diagnostic ability in predicting ischemic (area under the curve: 0.59 vs. 0.63, p=0.01) and bleeding (area under the curve: 0.65 vs. 0.68, p=0.01) events. Conclusion The combinations of the PARIS and CREDO-Kyoto risk scores might be useful for evaluating ischemic and bleeding risks in patients with acute MI undergoing primary PCI.

Balancing Benefits and Risks of Oral Antiplatelet Strategies in patients With Coronary Artery Diseases: An Evolving Issue

Identifying the most appropriate antiplatelet therapy for each patient to prevent ischemic events while minimizing the risk of bleeding is an integral part of the short- and long-term management of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). This review aims to summarize the available evidence on the contemporary use of P2Y12 inhibitors in CAD patients, focusing on strategies aimed at providing adequate ischemic protection while preventing bleeding risk through dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) modulation. Randomized trials and observational studies have been reviewed to determine the most appropriate antiplatelet treatment for CAD patients with different risk profiles. Both ischemic and bleeding events have a significant prognostic impact and should be carefully considered in clinical decision-making. Current guidelines recommend the use of third-generation PY2Y12 inhibitors (prasugrel or ticagrelor) over clopidogrel, as a part of DAPT, in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Newer P2Y12 inhibitors have a more rapid onset of action and less interindividual variability in platelet inhibition than clopidogrel but are associated with an increased risk of bleeding that may limit their benefit. Importantly, the anti-ischemic benefit of ticagrelor and prasugrel is mainly observed in the first weeks after ACS, whereas clopidogrel seems to provide the best balance between ischemic protection and bleeding as long-term maintenance therapy. These concepts support DAPT modulation after the acute phase, by de-escalating from full-dose to low-dose newer P2Y12 inhibitors, by switching to clopidogrel, or by early withdrawing aspirin to maximize both the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet therapy in patients with CAD.

Bleeding and Ischemic Risk Prediction in Patients With High Bleeding Risk (an EVOLVE Short DAPT Analysis)

The EVOLVE Short DAPT study demonstrated the safety of truncated dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with a high bleeding risk (HBR) treated with SYNERGY stent(s) (Boston Scientific Company, Marlborough, Massachusetts). In this population, bleeding and ischemic risk prediction may further inform DAPT decisions. This post hoc analysis of the EVOLVE Short DAPT study identified predictors of ischemic and bleeding events up to 15 months using Cox proportional hazard models. The predicted probabilities of bleeding were calculated using the Breslow method. Of 2,009 enrolled patients, 96.9% of the patients met at least 1 HBR criteria. At 15 months, the cumulative incidences of bleeding and ischemic events were 6.3% and 6.0%, respectively. The risk of bleeding was increased in patients who received oral anticoagulants (hazard ratio [HR] 2.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50 to 3.36, p <0.001) or had peripheral vascular disease (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.56, p = 0.045). The risk of ischemic events was increased in patients with diabetes (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.78, p <0.01) or congestive heart failure (HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.04, p <0.001). Renal insufficiency/failure was associated with both endpoints. There was a strong positive correlation between the predicted probability of ischemic and bleeding events (R = 0.77, p <0.001). In 617 patients with a predicted bleeding risk <4%, ischemic events predominated, and the ischemic and bleeding rates were higher in patients with a predicted bleeding risk ≥4%. Within an HBR cohort, specific characteristics identify patients at a higher risk for ischemic and separately, bleeding events. Increased bleeding risk is tied to increased ischemic risk. In conclusion, standardized risk models are needed to inform DAPT decisions in patients with a higher risk. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02605447.

GDF-15 at admission predicts cardiovascular death, heart failure, and bleeding outcomes in patients with CAD

AIMS

We aimed to investigate the independent associations between growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) level at admission and cardiovascular (CV) death, thrombotic events, heart failure (HF), and bleeding outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We measured the plasma concentrations of GDF-15 centrally in patients from the BIomarker-based Prognostic Assessment for patients with Stable angina and acute coronary Syndrome (BIPass) registry, which consecutively enrolled patients with CAD from November 2017 to September 2019 at five tertiary hospitals in China. The outcomes included CV death, thrombotic events [myocardial infarction (MI) and ischaemic stroke], HF events [acute HF during hospitalization and hospitalization for HF post-discharge (A/H HF) and cardiogenic shock], and bleeding outcomes [non-coronary artery bypass grafting-related major bleeding and clinically significant bleeding (CSB)] during the 12 month follow-up period after hospitalization. Among 6322 patients with CAD {65.4% male, median age 63.7 [inter-quartile range (IQR)] 56.0-70.1 years}, the median concentration of plasma GDF-15 at admission was 1091 (IQR 790.5-1635.0) ng/L. Higher concentrations of GDF-15 were associated with an increased risk of CV death [hazard ratio (HR) 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35-2.88, P < 0.001], A/H HF (HR 2.69, 95% CI 1.92-3.77, P < 0.001), cardiogenic shock (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04-2.05, P = 0.029), and CSB (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.22-1.79, P < 0.001), but not for MI or stroke, after adjusting for clinical risk factors and prognostic biomarkers. Adding GDF-15 to the model with risk factors and biomarkers improved the net reclassification for CV death, A/H HF, cardiogenic shock, and CSB.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CAD, admission levels of GDF-15 were associated with an increased 1 year risk of CV death, HF, and bleeding outcomes, but not with thrombotic events. GDF-15 may be a prognostic biomarker for CV death, HF, and bleeding outcomes and could be used to refine the risk assessment of these specific clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04044066.

Appropriate design and reporting of superiority, equivalence and non-inferiority clinical trials incorporating a benefit-risk assessment: the BRAINS study including expert workshop

Background

Randomised controlled trials are designed to assess the superiority, equivalence or non-inferiority of a new health technology, but which trial design should be used is not always obvious in practice. In particular, when using equivalence or non-inferiority designs, multiple outcomes of interest may be important for the success of a trial, despite the fact that usually only a single primary outcome is used to design the trial. Benefit-risk methods are used in the regulatory clinical trial setting to assess multiple outcomes and consider the trade-off of the benefits against the risks, but are not regularly implemented in publicly funded trials.

Objectives

The aim of the project is to aid the design of clinical trials with multiple outcomes of interest by defining when each trial design is appropriate to use and identifying when to use benefit-risk methods to assess outcome trade-offs (qualitatively or quantitatively) in a publicly funded trial setting.

Methods

A range of methods was used to elicit expert opinion to answer the project objectives, including a web-based survey of relevant researchers, a rapid review of current literature and a 2-day consensus workshop of experts (in 2019).

Results

We created a list of 19 factors to aid researchers in selecting the most appropriate trial design, containing the following overarching sections: population, intervention, comparator, outcomes, feasibility and perspectives. Six key reasons that indicate a benefit-risk method should be considered within a trial were identified: (1) when the success of the trial depends on more than one outcome; (2) when important outcomes within the trial are in competing directions (i.e. a health technology is better for one outcome, but worse for another); (3) to allow patient preferences to be included and directly influence trial results; (4) to provide transparency on subjective recommendations from a trial; (5) to provide consistency in the approach to presenting results from a trial; and (6) to synthesise multiple outcomes into a single metric. Further information was provided to support the use of benefit-risk methods in appropriate circumstances, including the following: methods identified from the review were collated into different groupings and described to aid the selection of a method; potential implementation of methods throughout the trial process were provided and discussed (with examples); and general considerations were described for those using benefit-risk methods. Finally, a checklist of five pieces of information that should be present when reporting benefit-risk methods was defined, with two additional items specifically for reporting the results.

Conclusions

These recommendations will assist research teams in selecting which trial design to use and deciding whether or not a benefit-risk method could be included to ensure research questions are answered appropriately. Additional information is provided to support consistent use and clear reporting of benefit-risk methods in the future. The recommendations can also be used by funding committees to confirm that appropriate considerations of the trial design have been made.

Limitations

This research was limited in scope and should be considered in conjunction with other trial design methodologies to assess appropriateness. In addition, further research is needed to provide concrete information about which benefit-risk methods are best to use in publicly funded trials, along with recommendations that are specific to each method.

Study registration

The rapid review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019144882.

Funding

Funded by the Medical Research Council UK and the National Institute for Health and Care Research as part of the Medical Research Council-National Institute for Health and Care Research Methodology Research programme.

Fatal, ischemic and bleeding risk of patients meeting the selection criteria of the TWILIGHT trial: Insights from a large PCI registry

BACKGROUND

The TWILIGHT trial (NCT02270242) demonstrated that in selected high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced bleeding complications without ischemic harm as compared to ticagrelor plus aspirin after 3-month of dual antiplatelet therapy. The aim of this analysis was to assess the applicability of the findings TWILIGHT trial to a real-world population.

METHODS

Patients undergoing PCI at a tertiary center between 2012 and 2019 and not meeting any TWILIGHT exclusion criterion (oral anticoagulation treatment, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [MI], cardiogenic shock, dialysis, prior stroke, or thrombocytopenia) were included. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on whether they fulfilled the TWILIGHT inclusion criteria (high-risk) or not (low-risk). The primary outcome was all-cause death; the key secondary outcomes were MI and major bleeding at 1 year after PCI.

RESULTS

Out of 13,136 included patients, 11,018 (83%) were at high risk. At 1-year, these patients had an approximately 3 folds greater hazard of death (1.4% vs 0.4%, HR 3.63, 95% CI 1.70-7.77) and MI (1.8% vs 0.6%, HR 2.81, 95% CI 1.56-5.04) and a nearly 2 folds higher risk of major bleeding (3.3% vs 1.8%, HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.32-2.62) as compared to low-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

Among patients not meeting the TWILIGHT exclusion criteria from a large PCI registry, the high-risk inclusion criteria of the TWILIGHT trial were met by the majority of patients and were associated with an increased risk of mortality and MI and a moderately elevated risk of bleeding.

Impact of heart failure severity and major bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention on subsequent major adverse cardiac events

Background

Heart failure (HF) is associated with a high bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Additionally, major bleeding events increase the risk of subsequent major adverse cardiac events (MACE). However, whether brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels and major bleeding events following PCI are associated with MACE and all-cause death remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the impact of HF severity or bleeding on subsequent MACE and all-cause death.

Methods

The Clinical Deep Data Accumulation System (CLIDAS), a multicenter database involving seven hospitals in Japan, was developed to collect data from electronic medical records. This retrospective analysis included 7160 patients who underwent PCI between April 2014 and March 2020 and completed a three-year follow-up. Patients were divided according to the presence of HF with high BNP (HFhBNP) (>100 pg/ml) and major bleeding events within 30 days post-PCI (30-day bleeding): HFhBNP with bleeding (n = 14), HFhBNP without bleeding (n = 370), non-HFhBNP with bleeding (n = 74), and non-HFhBNP without bleeding (n = 6702).

Results

In patients without 30-day bleeding, HFhBNP was a risk factor for MACE (hazard ratio, 2.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-3.07) and all-cause death (hazard ratio, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.60-2.23). Among HFhBNP patients, MACE incidence was higher in patients with 30-day bleeding than in those without bleeding, but the difference was not significant (p = 0.075). The incidence of all-cause death was higher in patients with bleeding (p = 0.001).

Conclusions

HF with high BNP and bleeding events in the early stage after PCI might be associated with subsequent MACE and all-cause death.

Bleeding and Ischemic Risks of Ticagrelor Monotherapy After Coronary Interventions

BACKGROUND

In TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention), among high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), ticagrelor monotherapy vs continuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor after completing a 3-month course of DAPT was associated with reduced bleeding, without an increase in ischemic events.

OBJECTIVES

This investigation sought to study the clinical benefit of ticagrelor monotherapy vs DAPT by simultaneously modeling its associated potential bleeding benefits and ischemic harms on an individual patient basis.

METHODS

Multivariable Cox regression models for: 1) Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 (BARC-2/3/5); and 2) cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal ischemic stroke (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event [MACCE]) were developed using stepwise forward variable selection. The coefficients in the BARC-2/3/5 and MACCE models were used to calculate bleeding and ischemic risk scores, respectively, for each patient (excluding the coefficient for randomized treatment).

RESULTS

In the total study group (N = 7,119), BARC-2/3/5 occurred in 391 (5.5%) patients, and MACCE occurred in 258 (3.6%). There was a consistent reduction in bleeding events associated with ticagrelor monotherapy compared with DAPT across both bleeding and ischemic risk strata (P interaction = 0.54 and 0.11, respectively). Importantly, this benefit associated with ticagrelor monotherapy was not offset by an increase in MACCE at any level of bleeding or ischemic risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Three months after PCI, discontinuing aspirin and maintaining ticagrelor monotherapy reduces bleeding in both higher-bleeding risk and lower-bleeding risk patients compared with continued DAPT. This benefit does not appear to be offset by greater ischemic risk. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242).

Personalised antiplatelet therapies for coronary artery disease: what the future holds

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the leading causes of death globally, and antiplatelet therapy is crucial for both its prevention and treatment. Antiplatelet drugs such as aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors are commonly used to reduce the risk of thrombotic events, including myocardial infarction, stroke, and stent thrombosis. However, the benefits associated with the use of antiplatelet drugs also come with a risk of bleeding complications. The ever-growing understanding of the poor prognostic implications associated with bleeding has set the foundations for defining strategies that can mitigate such safety concern without any trade-off in antithrombotic protection. To this extent, personalised antiplatelet therapy has emerged as a paradigm that optimizes the balance between safety and efficacy by customizing treatment to the individual patient's needs and risk profile. Accurate risk stratification for both bleeding and thrombosis can aid in selecting the optimal antiplatelet therapy and prevent serious and life-threatening outcomes. Risk stratification has traditionally included clinical and demographic characteristics and has expanded to incorporate angiographic features and laboratory findings. The availability of bedside platelet function testing as well as rapid genotyping assays has also allowed for a more individualized selection of antiplatelet therapy. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of the art and future trends in personalised antiplatelet therapy for patients with CAD, with emphasis on those presenting with an acute coronary syndrome and undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization. The aim is to provide clinicians with a comprehensive understanding of personalised antiplatelet therapy and facilitate informed clinical decision-making.

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.

Bleeding in acute coronary syndrome: from definitions, incidence, and prognosis to prevention and management

INTRODUCTION

In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the ischemic benefit of antithrombotic treatment is counterbalanced by the risk of bleeding. The recognition that bleeding events have prognostic implications (i.e. mortality) similar to recurrent ischemic events led to the development of treatment regimens aimed at balancing both ischemic and bleeding risks.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims at describing definitions, incidence, and prognosis related to bleeding events in ACS patients as well as bleeding-avoidance strategies for their prevention and management of bleeding complications.

EXPERT OPINION

Management of ACS patients has witnessed remarkable progress after the shift in focusing on the trade-off between ischemia and bleeding. Efforts in standardizing bleeding definitions will allow for better defining the prognostic impact of different types of bleeding events and enable to identify the high-bleeding risk patient. Such efforts will allow to balance the trade-off between the thrombotic and bleeding risk of the individual patient translating into better downward diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making. Novel strategies aiming at maximizing the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens as well as the development of novel antithrombotic drugs and reversal agents and technological advances will allow for optimization of bleeding-avoidance strategies and management of bleeding complications.

Validation of Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk Definition in East-Asian Patients

Background

Clinical applicability of the Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) criteria in East-Asian patients receiving potent antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is still undetermined.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to validate the ARC definition for HBR in East-Asian patients with ACS for invasive management.

Methods

We analyzed data from the TICAKOREA (Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Asian/Korean Patients With ACS Intended for Invasive Management) trial and randomly assigned 800 Korean ACS subjects to receive, in a 1:1 ratio, ticagrelor or clopidogrel. Patients were considered HBR if they met at least 1 major or 2 minor ARC-HBR criteria. The primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding and the primary ischemic endpoint was a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) at 12 months.

Results

Among 800 randomized patients, 129 (16.3%) were categorized HBR patients. HBR patients, compared with non-HBR patients, had a higher incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding (10.0% vs 3.7%; HR: 2.98; 95% CI: 1.52-5.86; P < 0.001) and MACE (14.3% vs 6.1%; HR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.35-4.10; P = 0.002). The relative treatment effect of ticagrelor or clopidogrel on primary bleeding and ischemic outcomes were different between each group.

Conclusions

This study validates the ARC-HBR definition in Korean ACS patients. Approximately 15% of patients qualified as HBR patients who were at increased risk not only for bleeding but also for thrombotic events. The clinical application of ARC-HBR to determine the relative effect of different antiplatelet regiments should be further investigated. (Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Asian/KOREAn Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Intended for Invasive Management [TICA KOREA]; NCT02094963).

Genetic-Guided Oral P2Y12 Inhibitor Selection and Cumulative Ischemic Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Genetic-guided P2Y12 inhibitor selection has been proposed to reduce ischemic events by identifying CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) carriers at increased risk with clopidogrel treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A prespecified analysis of TAILOR-PCI (Tailored Antiplatelet Therapy Following PCI) evaluated the effect of genetic-guided P2Y12 inhibitor therapy on cumulative ischemic and bleeding events.

OBJECTIVES

Here, the authors detail a prespecified analysis of cumulative endpoints. The primary endpoint was cumulative incidence rate of ischemic events at 12 months. Cumulative incidence of major and minor bleeding was a secondary endpoint. Cox proportional hazards models as adapted by Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld were used to estimate the effect of this strategy on all observed events.

METHODS

The TAILOR-PCI trial was a prospective trial including 5,302 post-PCI patients with acute and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) who were randomized to genetic-guided P2Y12 inhibitor or conventional clopidogrel therapy. In the genetic-guided group, LOF carriers were prescribed ticagrelor, whereas noncarriers received clopidogrel. TAILOR-PCI's primary analysis was time to first event in LOF carriers.

RESULTS

Among 5,276 patients (median age 62 years; 25% women; 82% acute CAD; 18% stable CAD), 1,849 were LOF carriers (903 genetic-guided; 946 conventional therapy). The cumulative primary endpoint was significantly reduced in the genetic-guided group compared with the conventional therapy (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.41-0.89; P = 0.011) with no significant difference in cumulative incidence of major or minor bleeding (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.67-2.76; P = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Among CYP2C19 LOF carriers undergoing PCI, a genetic-guided strategy resulted in a statistically significant reduction in cumulative ischemic events without a significant difference in bleeding. (Tailored Antiplatelet Therapy Following PCI [TAILOR-PCI]; NCT01742117).

Individual acute-phase bleeding and thrombotic risk balance assessment in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction

Background

Individualized treatment approach based on pre-procedural precise risk balance assessment between bleeding and thrombosis would be desirable for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing emergent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in this ultra-short dual antiplatelet therapy era. We aimed to develop and validate a quick thrombosis/bleeding risk-balance assessment tool.

Methods

We developed and validated a novel thrombosis/bleeding risk-balance assessment tool using individual patient data from the prospective multicenter MI registry. Individual risks of thrombosis and bleeding within 7 days of the index PCI were estimated using a multinomial logistic regression model. The model was developed in the derivation cohort (4554 patients enrolled during 2003-2009) and validated in the validation cohort (2215 patients during 2010-2014).

Results

A total of 6769 patients (66 ± 12 years, 5175 men) were eligible in this analysis. Predictive performance of the multinomial logistic regression models for bleeding and thrombosis assessed by calibration plots was good both in the derivation and validation cohorts. The net predicted probability (NPP) was defined as predicted probability of bleeding event (%) - predicted probability of thrombotic event (%). The NPP successfully stratified patients into those with a higher risk of bleeding than thrombosis and those with a higher risk of thrombosis than bleeding. This finding was consistent between the derivation and validation cohorts.

Conclusions

We have established the risk balance assessment model for bleeding and thrombosis. Pre-procedural quick and precise assessment of the risk balance may help a decision making of procedural strategy and antithrombotic regimens in STEMI/non-STEMI patients undergoing PCI.

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

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

Antithrombotic Management in AF Patients Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A European Perspective

AF is a highly prevalent disease, often requiring long-term oral anticoagulation to prevent stroke or systemic embolism. Coronary artery disease, which is common among AF patients, is often referred for myocardial revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which requires dual antiplatelet therapy to minimise the risk of stent-related complications. The overlap of AF and PCI is a clinical conundrum, especially in the early post-procedural period, when both long-term oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy are theoretically indicated as a triple antithrombotic therapy. However, stacking drugs is not a desirable option because of the increased bleeding risk. Several strategies have been investigated to mitigate this concern, including shortening triple antithrombotic therapy duration and switching to a dual antithrombotic regimen. This review analyses the mechanisms underlying thrombotic complications in AF-PCI, summarises evidence surrounding antithrombotic therapy regimens and reports and comments on the latest European guidelines.

Resumption of Antiplatelet Therapy after Major Bleeding

Major bleeding is a common threat in patients requiring antiplatelet therapy. Timing and intensity with regard to resumption of antiplatelet therapy represent a major challenge in clinical practice. Knowledge of the patient's bleeding risk, defining transient/treatable and permanent/untreatable risk factors for bleeding, and weighing these against thrombotic risk are key to successful prevention of major adverse events. Shared decision-making involving various disciplines is essential to determine the optimal strategy. The present article addresses clinically relevant questions focusing on the most life-threatening or frequently occurring bleeding events, such as intracranial hemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding, and discusses the evidence for antiplatelet therapy resumption using individual risk assessment in high-risk cardiovascular disease patients.

Tailoring oral antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndromes: from guidelines to clinical practice

The assessment of bleeding and ischemic risk is a crucial step in establishing appropriate composition and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with percutaneous coronary angioplasty. Evidence from recent randomized clinical trials led to some paradigm shifts in current guidelines recommendations. Options alternative to the standard 12-month DAPT duration include shorter periods of DAPT followed by single antiplatelet treatment with either aspirin or P2Y12 monotherapy, guided or unguided de-escalation DAPT, prolonged DAPT beyond the 12-month treatment period. Although DAPT composition and duration should be selected for each ACS patient on an individual basis weighing clinical and procedural variables, data from latest trials and meta-analyses may permit suggesting the most appropriate DAPT strategy according to the ischemic and bleeding risk assessed using validated tools and scores.

Acute, periprocedural and longterm antithrombotic therapy in older adults: 2022 Update by the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis

The first international guidance on antithrombotic therapy in the elderly came from the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis in 2015. This same group has updated its previous report on antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs for older patients with acute or chronic coronary syndromes, atrial fibrillation, or undergoing surgery or procedures typical of the elderly (transcatheter aortic valve implantation and left atrial appendage closure). The aim is to provide a succinct but comprehensive tool for readers to understand the bases of antithrombotic therapy in older patients, despite the complexities of comorbidities, comedications and uncertain ischaemic- vs. bleeding-risk balance. Fourteen updated consensus statements integrate recent trial data and other evidence, with a focus on high bleeding risk. Guideline recommendations, when present, are highlighted, as well as gaps in evidence. Key consensus points include efforts to improve medical adherence through deprescribing and polypill use; adoption of universal risk definitions for bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke and cause-specific death; multiple bleeding-avoidance strategies, ranging from gastroprotection with aspirin use to selection of antithrombotic-drug composition, dosing and duration tailored to multiple variables (setting, history, overall risk, age, weight, renal function, comedications, procedures) that need special consideration when managing older adults.

Timing, Selection, Modulation, and Duration of P2Y12 Inhibitors for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing PCI

Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and the oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitor clopidogrel as the cornerstone of treatment for patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was firstly established in 2001. Soon thereafter, the newer-generation P2Y₁₂ inhibitors prasugrel and ticagrelor became commercially available. The clinical management of ACS patients undergoing PCI has evolved significantly in the last 2 decades, with a shift toward more rapid invasive management, broader use of drug-eluting stents, and the increasing recognition that major bleeding due to antiplatelet therapy is detrimental. In this ever-changing scenario, numerous studies have addressed 4 main questions regarding P2Y₁₂ inhibition in ACS patients undergoing PCI: timing, selection, modulation, and duration. This paper reviews the latest evidence surrounding these topical questions, with a focus on efficacy and safety data, practice guidelines, and residual areas of uncertainty.

Comparison of outcomes in patients with or without ARC-HBR criteria undergoing PCI with polymer-free biolimus coated stents: The BioFreedom France study

BACKGROUND

The polymer-free biolimus coated stent (BioFreedom) was shown to be superior to bare metal stents in the LEADERS FREE randomized trial in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients treated with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, there is limited outcome data with this device in an all-comers' population.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective single-arm study of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with the polymer-free biolimus coated stent in 25 centers in France with wide inclusion criteria including multivessel disease, complex lesions, and acute coronary syndromes. The primary endpoint was the incidence of target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death or target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI) or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (ci-TLR) at 1-year. The patient population was classified according to the presence (or not) of HBR criteria according to the recent ARC-HBR definition.

RESULTS

Between April 2019 and April 2020, 1497 patients were enrolled. TLF occurred in 101 (6.9%) patients, including cardiac death in 35 (2.4%), target vessel MI in 20 (1.4%) and ci-TLR in 65 (4.5%) of them. There were 491 HBR patients (32.8%) and 1006 non-HBR patients. The median duration of DAPT was 74 days in the HBR group versus 348 days in the non-HBR group (p < 0.0001). TLF occurred in 44 (9.2%) of the HBR group and in 57 (5.8%) of the non-HBR group (relative risk 1.62 [95% confidence interval: 1.10-2.41], p = 0015). Compared to the non-HBR group, HBR patients had higher rates of cardiac death (4.4% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.0005) and target vessel MI (2.9% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.0003), but similar rates of ci-TLR. BARC 3-5 bleeding occurred in 6.2% of the HBR group versus 1.4% of the non-HBR group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter all-comers study, HBR patients treated with a polymer-free biolimus coated stent had, compared to non-HBR patients, an increased risk of cardiac death and MI, and despite a shorter duration of DAPT, continued to have higher rates of BARC 3-5 bleeding.

High bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation: ReCre8 subanalysis

Objectives

In an all-comers cohort undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), we aimed to assess prevalence of high bleeding risk (HBR) patients and impact of HBR and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) on clinical events.

Background

HBR represents a complex subgroup of patients undergoing PCI.

Methods

In the ReCre8 trial, patients undergoing PCI were stratified for troponin status and diabetes and randomized to a permanent polymer zotarolimus-eluting- or polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stent. Patients were treated with 12 months (troponin-positive) or one month (troponin-negative) of DAPT. We evaluated clinical outcomes in patients with and without HBR according to the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk criteria.

Results

From a total of 1488 patients included in this subanalysis, 406 patients (27.3 %) were identified as being at HBR. Among HBR patients, target-lesion failure (TLF) was similar after one year yet was higher after three years (13.3 % vs. 9.1 %; p = 0.013), compared to non-HBR patients. There was no difference in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 to 5 bleeding, however BARC 2 to 5 bleeding was higher after three years with 4.9 % vs. 3.0 % (p = 0.037). There were no differences between troponin-positive (12-months DAPT) and -negative (1-month DAPT) HBR patients with respect to ischemic and bleeding outcomes.

Conclusions

In this all-comers population of PCI patients, a higher TLF rate among HBR patients at long-term follow-up was found, underlining the complexities involving treatment of HBR patients. We did not observe statistically significant differences in BARC 3 to 5 bleeding between HBR and non-HBR patients regardless of DAPT duration.

Clinical trial registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, unique identifier: NCT02328898.

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and High Bleeding Risk

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy and safety of more potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndrome and high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains unclear. We aimed to study the treatment effect of ticagrelor and prasugrel in percutaneous coronary intervention patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and HBR.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5) included patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel, in whom HBR was defined as per Academic Research Consortium criteria. The primary (efficacy) end point was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary (safety) end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed 12 months after randomization.

RESULTS

Out of the 3239 patients included in this analysis, 486 fulfilled the criteria for Academic Research Consortium-HBR definition (HBR group; ticagrelor, n=230 and prasugrel, n=256), while 2753 did not (non-HBR group; ticagrelor, n=1375 and prasugrel, n=1378). Compared with the non-HBR group, the HBR group had a higher risk for the primary (hazard ratio [HR]=3.57 [95% CI, 2.79-4.57]; P<0.001) and secondary end point (HR=2.94 [2.17-3.99]; P<0.001). In the HBR group, the primary (HR=1.09 [0.73-1.62]) and secondary (HR=1.18 [0.67-2.08]) end points were not significantly different between patients assigned to ticagrelor and prasugrel. In the non-HBR group, the primary end point (HR=1.62 [1.19-2.20]) occurred more frequently in patients assigned to ticagrelor as compared to patients assigned to prasugrel, without difference in safety (HR=1.08 [0.74-1.58]). There was no significant treatment allocation-by-HBR status interaction with respect to the primary (P for interaction=0.12) or secondary (P for interaction=0.80) end points.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, HBR status increased both ischemic and bleeding risk without significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of either ticagrelor or prasugrel. These results warrant confirmation in larger cohorts.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.

Ticagrelor monotherapy versus aspirin monotherapy at 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention: a landmark analysis of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal antiplatelet strategy in the second year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear.

AIMS

We aimed to compare ticagrelor monotherapy with aspirin monotherapy on clinical outcomes beyond 1 year post-PCI.

METHODS

This post hoc subanalysis of the open-label, all-comers, randomised GLOBAL LEADERS trial, which compared 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with 12-month aspirin monotherapy following 12-month DAPT, only included patients who, at 12 months, were free from ischaemic and bleeding events and were adherent to their assigned antiplatelet therapy. The incidences of ischaemic events (all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any stroke) and bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] type 3 or 5 bleeding) during the second year (12-24 months) were compared between patients receiving either ticagrelor or aspirin monotherapy.

RESULTS

The present analysis included 11,121 (ticagrelor monotherapy n=5,308, and aspirin monotherapy n=5,813) of the 15,991 patients enrolled in GLOBAL LEADERS. During the second year, the ischaemic composite endpoint was lower with ticagrelor monotherapy compared to aspirin monotherapy (1.9% vs 2.6%: log-rank p=0.014, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-0.96; p=0.022), which was primarily driven by a reduced risk of myocardial infarction. In contrast, BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding was numerically higher with ticagrelor monotherapy (0.5% vs 0.3%: log-rank p=0.051, adjusted HR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.03-3.45; p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients free from events at the end of the first year post-PCI and who adhered to their prescribed regimen had a reduced risk of ischaemic events compared to aspirin monotherapy in the second year post-PCI.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT01813435.

Antiplatelet Therapy in High-Bleeding Risk Patients Undergoing PCI: Walking a Tightrope

Historically, prevention from ischemic events with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) took precedence over protection from bleeding. However, increasing data suggest that major bleeding complications are as detrimental as ischemic events. Awareness about the prognostic impact of bleeding prompted the search for new strategies aimed at maximizing both ischemic and bleeding protection. This is noteworthy because patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) have generally been underrepresented in clinical trials on DAPT and they often are at increased risk of ischemic events as well. The present review discusses the evidence base for new pharmacotherapeutic strategies to decrease bleeding risk without compromising ischemic protection among HBR patients undergoing PCI, including shortening DAPT duration, early aspirin withdrawal, and P2Y 12 inhibitor de-escalation.

Antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention

Antiplatelet therapy is key to reducing local thrombotic complications and systemic ischaemic events among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), but it is inevitably associated with increased bleeding. The continuous refinement in stent technologies, together with the high incidence of ischaemic recurrences after PCI and the understanding of prognostic implications associated with bleeding, have led to a substantial evolution in antiplatelet treatment regimens over the past decades. Numerous investigations have been conducted to better stratify patients undergoing PCI according to their ischaemic and bleeding risks and to implement antithrombotic regimens accordingly. Evidence from these investigations have resulted in a number of antithrombotic treatment options as recommended by recent guidelines. In this State-of-the-Art review we provide the rationale, summarise the evidence, and discuss current and future directions of antiplatelet treatment regimens after PCI.

Angiography-derived physiology guidance vs usual care in an All-comers PCI population treated with the healing-targeted supreme stent and Ticagrelor monotherapy: PIONEER IV trial design

BACKGROUND

Current ESC guidelines recommend the use of intra-coronary pressure guidewires for functional assessment of intermediate-grade coronary stenoses. Angiography-derived quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel method of assessing these stenoses, and guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS/DESIGN

The PIONEER IV trial is a prospective, all-comers, multi-center trial, which will randomize 2,540 patients in a 1:1 ratio to PCI guided by angiography-derived physiology or usual care, with unrestricted use in both arms of the Healing-Targeted Supreme sirolimus-eluting stent (HT Supreme). The stent's fast, biologically healthy, and robust endothelial coverage allows for short dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT); hence the antiplatelet regimen of choice is 1-month DAPT, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy. In the angiography-derived physiology guided arm, lesions will be functionally assessed using on-line QFR, with stenting indicated in lesions with a QFR ≤0.80. Post-stenting, QFR will be repeated in the stented vessel(s), with post-dilatation or additional stenting recommended if the QFR<0.91 distal to the stent, or if the delta QFR (across the stent) is >0.05. Usual care PCI is performed according to standard clinical practice. The primary endpoint is a non-inferiority comparison of the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) of all-cause death, any stroke, any myocardial infarction, or any clinically, and physiologically driven revascularization with a non-inferiority risk-difference margin of 3.2%, at 1-year post-procedure. Clinical follow-up will be up to 3 years.

SUMMARY

The PIONEER IV trial aims to demonstrate non-inferiority of QFR-guided PCI to usual care PCI with respect to POCE at 1-year in patients treated with HT Supreme stents and ticagrelor monotherapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: NCT04923191 CLASSIFICATIONS: Interventional Cardiology.