The Clinical Value of Syntax Scores in Predicting Coronary Artery Disease Outcomes

The Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score (SS) hassignificantly improved angiographic risk stratification. By analyzing angiographic variables, this score characterizescoronary artery disease qualitatively and quantitatively. To date, combining this score with other non-angiographic clinicalscores has broadened perspectives regarding risk estimation, and future research on this topic appears promising.

'Ticagrelor alone vs. dual antiplatelet therapy from 1 month after drug-eluting coronary stenting among patients with STEMI': a post hoc analysis of the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy beyond 1 month and up to 24 months vs. standard 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor followed by aspirin monotherapy among ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the GLOBAL LEADERS trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a post hoc analysis of STEMI patients in the GLOBAL LEADERS trial comparing experimental ticagrelor monotherapy (1062 patients) with standard 12-month DAPT (1030 patients). We evaluated predefined primary and secondary endpoints in both treatment arms. Rates of net adverse clinical events (NACE), patient-oriented composite endpoints (POCE), and bleeding academic research consortium (BARC)-defined bleeding Type 3 or 5 were also evaluated. At 2 years, there were no significant differences in rates of primary endpoints in patients who had STEMI [0.89 (0.61-1.31)]. There were similar rates of NACE and POCE in both experimental and reference treatment groups at 2 years post-PCI [hazard ratio (HR) 0.96 (0.77-1.20) and 0.96 (0.77-1.21), respectively]. BARC 3 or 5 bleeding events were numerically less in experimental compared to reference treatment groups at 1 year [HR 0.55 (0.27-1.13)] and 2 years [0.61 (0.32-1.16)].

CONCLUSION

Presentation with STEMI has not influenced the incidence of GLOBAL LEADERS defined primary endpoints. There were no significant differences in rates of NACE, POCE, and BARC bleeding between the two treatment groups up to 2 years of follow-up. Although these findings should be viewed as exploratory, they expand the evidence on potential safety of aspirin-free antiplatelet strategies after PCI in STEMI.

External validation of the GRACE risk score 2.0 in the contemporary all-comers GLOBAL LEADERS trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the predictive ability of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score 2.0 in contemporary acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, and its relation to antiplatelet strategies.

BACKGROUND

The predictive value of the GRACE risk score in the contemporary ACS cohort and the appropriate antiplatelet regimen according to the risk remain unclear.

METHODS

This is a subgroup analysis of the all-comers, randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial, comparing ticagrelor monotherapy versus conventional dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The GRACE risk score 2.0 with 1-year mortality prediction was implemented. The randomized antiplatelet effect was assessed in predefined three GRACE risk-groups; low-risk (GRACE <109), moderate-risk (GRACE 109-140), and high-risk (GRACE >140).

RESULTS

The GRACE risk score was available in 6,594 out of 7,487 ACS patients among whom 1,743, 2,823, and 2,028 patients were classified as low-risk, moderate-risk, and high-risk, respectively. At 1 year, all-cause mortality occurred in 120 patients (1.8%). The discrimination ability of the GRACE model was moderate (C-statistic = 0.742), whereas 1-year mortality risk was overestimated (mean predicted mortality rate: 3.9%; the Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square: 21.47; p = 0.006). There were no significant interactions between the GRACE risk strata and effects of the ticagrelor monotherapy on ischemic or bleeding outcomes at 1 year compared to the reference strategy.

CONCLUSION

The GRACE risk score 2.0 is valuable in discriminating high risk ACS patients, however, the recalibration of the score is recommended for better risk stratification. There is no significant differences in efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy across the three GRACE risk strata.