Impact of abciximab versus eptifibatide on length of hospital stay for PCI patients

Switch from abciximab to eptifibatide during percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Treatment with glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduce ischemic complications and improve outcome. Of the GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors abciximab is better documented than eptifibatide, but the former is more expensive. The aim of this study was to monitor a switch from abciximab to eptifibatide with respect to clinical outcome up to six months after PCI.

METHODS

All consecutive patients that six months before and six months after a switch from abciximab to eptifibatide received GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors during and after de novo PCIs were followed for six months with respect to clinical outcome.

RESULTS

310 patients received abciximab and 350 eptifibatide. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. 55% of the patients underwent PCI for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and 41% for unstable coronary artery disease. There were trends for lower mortality among abciximab-treated than among the eptifibatide-treated patients during in-hospital stay (0.6% vs 2.0%:NS) as well as during the six month follow up (2.3% vs 3.7%:NS). The combined endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, repeated revascularisation and serious bleeding occurred in 14.9% in the abciximab group vs 16.8% in the eptifibatide group (NS).

CONCLUSION

The study could not demonstrate any significant deterioration of clinical results after a switch from abciximab to eptifibatide as routine GPIIb/IIIa inhibition during PCI. With respect to the limited number of patients a clinical significant difference between the two GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors cannot, however, be excluded.

A longitudinal analysis of outcomes associated with abciximab and eptifibatide in a consecutive series of 3074 percutaneous coronary interventions

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIIb/IIIa) in reducing complication rates during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is well established, comparative studies assessing currently approved agents as administered in current practice are limited. We studied the clinical and length of stay (LOS) outcomes of patients undergoing PCI who received either abciximab or eptifibatide.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective, urgent, or emergency PCI at Mayo Clinic Rochester between November 17, 2000 and August 31, 2004 who received either abciximab or eptifibatide were included. Clinical, angiographic, and follow-up data were prospectively recorded in the Mayo Clinic PCI Registry; administrative data recorded LOS. We used logistic and Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the risk of adverse events and generalized linear modeling to predict LOS. Propensity score and standard risk adjustments were used to account for baseline differences.

RESULTS

A total of 2123 PCI patients received eptifibatide and 951 received abciximab. The adjusted odds ratio for in-hospital death and myocardial infarction (MI) with eptifibatide was 0.80 (95% CI 0.56-1.14, P = 0.21) versus abciximab. Adjusted hazard ratios for death and MI and for death, MI, or target vessel revascularization during a median follow-up of 24.6 months were 0.84 (95% CI 0.68-1.02, P = 0.08) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.81-1.11, P = 0.53), respectively. Adjusted postprocedural LOS was similar at 3.4 days.

CONCLUSION

This large observational study found no evidence of a clinical or LOS advantage to physician choice of either abciximab or eptifibatide during PCI in contemporary practice.

Variation in pediatric intensive care therapies and outcomes by race, gender, and insurance status

CONTEXT

The differential allocation of medical resources to adult patients according to characteristics such as race, gender, and insurance status raises the serious concern that such issues apply to critically ill children as well.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined whether medical resources and outcomes for children admitted to pediatric intensive care units differed according to race, gender, or insurance status.

DESIGN

An observational analysis was conducted with use of prospectively collected data from a multicenter cohort. Data were collected on 5,749 consecutive admissions for children from three pediatric intensive care units located in large urban children's hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Children aged </=18 years admitted over an 18-month period beginning in June 1996 formed the study sample.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, and overall resource use were examined in relation to severity of illness. Standardized ratios were formed with generalized regression analyses that included the Pediatric Index of Mortality for risk adjustment.

RESULTS

After adjustment for differences in illness severity, standardized mortality ratios and overall resource use were similar with regard to race, gender, and insurance status, but uninsured children had significantly shorter lengths of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit. Uninsured children also had significantly greater physiologic derangement on admission (mortality probability, 8.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2-10.0) than did publicly insured (3.6%; 95% CI, 3.2-4.0) and commercially insured patients (3.7%; 95% CI, 3.3-4.1). Consistent with greater physiologic derangement, hospital mortality was higher among uninsured children than insured children.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk-adjusted mortality and resource use for critically ill children did not differ according to race, gender, or insurance status. Policies to expand health insurance to children appear more likely to affect physiologic derangement on admission rather than technical quality of care in the pediatric intensive care unit setting.

Abciximab: an updated review of its therapeutic use in patients with ischaemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularisation

Abciximab (Reopro) is an antibody fragment that dose-dependently inhibits platelet aggregation and leucocyte adhesion by binding to the glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa, vitronectin and Mac-1 receptors. Abciximab (0.25 mg/kg bolus plus infusion of 0.125 micro g/kg/min for 12 hours) showed greater efficacy than tirofiban in reducing the 30-day composite endpoint of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or urgent target-vessel revascularisation in the randomised, double-blind TARGET study in patients scheduled for stent placement. In addition, the beneficial effects of treatment with abciximab previously observed in the randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled EPILOG and EPISTENT studies have been maintained to 1 year, with a significantly reduced incidence of ischaemic complications relative to placebo consistently observed across a range of subgroups including age, sex, bodyweight and indication for revascularisation. The incidence of the composite endpoint was reduced in patients presenting with acute MI of <48 hours' duration in comparison with either fibrinolytic therapy or stenting alone in the randomised STOPAMI and ADMIRAL trials, primarily because of a reduced requirement for urgent repeat revascularisation and reduced incidence of mortality. In the randomised, nonblind, multicentre CADILLAC trial in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), stenting alone was superior to percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and stenting alone was not inferior to PTCA plus abciximab. Recent large randomised, multicentre studies (ASSENT-3 and GUSTO-V) have shown higher efficacy (on various ischaemic endpoints) of abciximab in combination with either a reduced dose of tenecteplase or reteplase compared with the fibrinolytic drug alone. TIMI grade 3 flow rates at 60 and 90 minutes in the TIMI-14 and SPEED trials were higher in patients who received abciximab in combination with either alteplase or reteplase than abciximab alone and were similar to that seen with the full-dose fibrinolytic alone. In the randomised, multicentre GUSTO IV-ACS study, no significant differences in any of the ischaemic endpoints at either 7 or 30 days in patients with acute coronary syndromes who were not scheduled to undergo early revascularisation (within 12 hours of end of infusion) were apparent between those who received abciximab (bolus and either 24- or 48-hour infusion) and those who received placebo in addition to aspirin and heparin. The most common adverse events associated with the use of abciximab are bleeding complications and thrombocytopenia, although the risk of major bleeding can be limited through adhering to current administration protocols. Treatment costs are generally higher in both stent plus abciximab and angioplasty plus abciximab groups than stent plus placebo, primarily because of the acquisition cost of abciximab. Abciximab appeared most cost beneficial in high-risk patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary revascularisation; among lower risk patients, abciximab therapy has been associated with higher total in-hospital and 6-month medical costs than eptifibatide.

CONCLUSION

The GP IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist abciximab, when used with aspirin and heparin, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing the short- and long-term risk of ischaemic complications in patients with ischaemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, when used with aspirin and heparin. High-risk patients (including those with diabetes mellitus) derive particular benefits from abciximab treatment. Abciximab remains an important therapeutic option for the prevention of complications in patients with ischaemic heart disease.

Eptifibatide: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in percutaneous coronary intervention and acute coronary syndromes

Eptifibatide (Integrilin) is a selective inhibitor of platelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptors used as adjunctive therapy for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), particularly those requiring PCI. Most economic analyses of eptifibatide have incorporated clinical and healthcare resource use data from either the ESPRIT (Enhanced Suppression of the Platelet IIb/IIIa Receptor with Integrilin Therapy) study in low- to moderate-risk patients undergoing selective PCI with stent implantation or the PURSUIT (Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin Therapy) trial in patients with ACS. Eptifibatide achieved statistically significant reductions in combined endpoints of death and ischaemic complications in both of these large multicentre clinical trials, in which patients were randomised to receive intravenous eptifibatide or placebo as adjunctive therapy to heparin and aspirin (plus a thienopyridine in ESPRIT). In US economic analyses using ESPRIT trial data, approximately 40% and 70% of the acquisition cost of eptifibatide was offset by reduced medical resource consumption during the initial hospitalisation period and over a 1-year period, respectively. Eptifibatide was associated with a favourable cost-effectiveness ratio of $US1407 (year 2000 costs) per life-year gained (LYG) in a retrospective US cost-effectiveness analysis that incorporated data from the ESPRIT trial and modelled life expectancy using a large cardiovascular database.Several cost-effectiveness analyses used prospectively collected data from the PURSUIT trial and modelled survival projections using similar methods. These analyses, conducted in the US, Canada and Western Europe, also showed favourable results ($US3761-$US18 774 per LYG; various years of costing). Cost-utility ratios reported in US analyses varied somewhat, but remained <$US20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (1996 values) when clinical efficacy data were derived from the US cohort of PURSUIT.

CONCLUSION

Significant clinical benefits have been demonstrated with eptifibatide as adjunctive therapy in patients undergoing selective PCI with stent implantation in the ESPRIT trial and in patients with ACS in the PURSUIT trial. Pharmacoeconomic analyses using data from either ESPRIT or PURSUIT have demonstrated favourable cost-effectiveness ratios for both indications in various countries. ESPRIT-based results from the limited number of available economic analyses are particularly favourable. The cost-effectiveness of eptifibatide in ACS (i.e. PURSUIT-based results) may be further improved by targeting the drug for patients in whom catheterisation and PCI are planned, although further analyses are required to confirm this.