Switching from high-dose clopidogrel to prasugrel in ACS patients undergoing PCI: a single-center experience

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

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

Impact of body mass index on clinical outcome among elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the ELDERLY ACS 2 trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Elderly patients are at increased risk of hemorrhagic and thrombotic complications after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Frailty, comorbidities and low body weight have emerged as conditioning the prognostic impact of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The aim of the present study was to investigate the prognostic impact of body mass index (BMI) on clinical outcome among patients included in the Elderly-ACS 2 trial, a randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint study comparing low-dose (5 mg) prasugrel vs clopidogrel among elderly patients with ACS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Our population is represented by 1408 patients enrolled in the Elderly-ACS 2 trial. BMI was calculated at admission. The primary endpoint of this analysis was cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Secondary endpoints were all-cause death, recurrent MI, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2 or 3 bleeding, and re-hospitalization for cardiovascular reasons or stent thrombosis within 12 months after index admission. Patients were grouped according to median values of BMI (<or ≥ 25.7 kg/m2). BMI was associated with hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, estimated glomerular filtration rate and hemoglobin (p < 0.001), and inversely with age (p = 0.005). Overweight patients displayed larger use of diuretics at admission (p = 0.03), aspirin pre-randomization (p = 0.01) and radial access (p = 0.04). At a median follow-up of 367 [337-378] days, BMI did not affect CV mortality in the overall population 4% vs 3.8%; adjusted HR [95%CI] = 2.3 [0.8-6.5], p = 0.12. Similar findings were observed for our secondary efficacy and safety endpoints. Results did not change when considering separately higher risk subsets of patients, (female gender, diabetics, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or the type of DAPT treatment allocation), with no significant interaction between these population characteristics and BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Among elderly patients with ACS, BMI did not condition the survival or the risk of major cardiovascular and bleeding complications. The results were consistent across several patient risk categories.

Switching of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitor Treatment in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Prevalence, Predictors, and Prognosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Dual antiplatelet therapy is one of the main treatments in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Switching antiplatelet agents may be necessary in some patients to improve efficacy or safety. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence, predictors, and implications of clinical switching in patients during hospital admission and 1-year follow-up at discharge.

METHODS

Observational, prospective, multicenter registry study in patients discharged following an admission for ACS and followed up for 1 year. We analyzed ischemic and bleeding events as well as treatment changes.

RESULTS

We recruited 1717 patients; in-hospital switching occurred in 425 (24.8%): 15.1% to clopidogrel and 84.9% to newer antiplatelet drugs (prasugrel or ticagrelor). Those switched to newer antiplatelets were younger, with lower scores on the GRACE and CRUSADE scales, admitted more frequently for ST-elevation myocardial infarction and underwent more invasive management and percutaneous revascularization. The clinical cardiologist was responsible for most in-hospital switching to newer antiplatelets (79.6%). The loading dose of the second antiplatelet did not affect incidence of bleeding events. Post-discharge switching was infrequent (2%) and depended mainly on clinical indications; only 30% was related to a new ACS.

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary registry with ACS, in-hospital switching of antiplatelet drugs was frequent. Those switched to newer antiplatelets were younger and admitted more frequently for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Post-discharge switching was infrequent.

Short term outcome following acute phase switch among P2Y12 inhibitors in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome treated with PCI: A systematic review and meta-analysis including 22,500 patients from 14 studies

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of switching P2Y12 receptor antagonists in patients admitted for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remain unclear. We assessed the short-term clinical outcomes (in-hospital and within 30 days) of switching P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12I) drugs versus maintaining the same regimen by performing a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of available data.

METHODS

MEDLINE/PubMed/SCOPUS/Cochrane databases were screened for studies regarding switching of P2Y12I in patients with ACS that reported 30 days follow-up. Major cardiac events (MACE) and bleeding were compared between patients who were switched/not switched.

RESULTS

22,500 patients from 14 studies were included. Unstable angina/non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (62.0%, interquartile range, 52.8%-68.0%) was the most common clinical presentation. The total number switched was 4294 (19.1%); escalation in 3416 (79.5%) patients (from clopidogrel to prasugrel, 62.9%) and de-escalation in 18.5%. Pooled analysis revealed no significant differences in MACE for any comparison; risk of bleeding was significantly increased among switched patients overall (odds ratio [OR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.10) and increased in the escalation group (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.06-2.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients presenting with ACS, switching from one P2Y12I agent to another in the acute phase seems associated with a short-term increased risk of bleeding. Accurate upfront selection and prescription of a P2Y12I based on ischemic and bleeding risks is paramount to avoid adverse events switching-related during hospitalization and in the first 30 days.

Switching P2Y12 Receptor Inhibiting Therapies

Antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of treatment of patients with atherothrombotic disease manifestations. Switching between P2Y₁₂ inhibitors occurs commonly in clinical practice for a variety of reasons, including safety, efficacy, adherence, and economic considerations. There are concerns about the optimal approach for switching because of potential drug interactions, which may lead to ineffective platelet inhibition and thrombotic complications, or potential overdosing due to overlap in drug therapy, which might cause excessive platelet inhibition and increased bleeding. This review provides practical considerations of switching based on pharmacodynamic and clinical data available from the literature.

2018 Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology Focused Update of the Guidelines for the Use of Antiplatelet Therapy

Antiplatelet therapy (APT) has become an important tool in the treatment and prevention of atherosclerotic events, particularly those associated with coronary artery disease. A large evidence base has evolved regarding the relationship between APT prescription in various clinical contexts and risk/benefit relationships. The Guidelines Committee of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society and Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology publishes regular updates of its recommendations, taking into consideration the most recent clinical evidence. The present update to the 2011 and 2013 Canadian Cardiovascular Society APT guidelines incorporates new evidence on how to optimize APT use, particularly in situations in which few to no data were previously available. The recommendations update focuses on the following primary topics: (1) the duration of dual APT (DAPT) in patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome and non-acute coronary syndrome indications; (2) management of DAPT in patients who undergo noncardiac surgery; (3) management of DAPT in patients who undergo elective and semiurgent coronary artery bypass graft surgery; (4) when and how to switch between different oral antiplatelet therapies; and (5) management of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in patients who undergo PCI. For PCI patients, we specifically analyze the particular considerations in patients with atrial fibrillation, mechanical or bioprosthetic valves (including transcatheter aortic valve replacement), venous thromboembolic disease, and established left ventricular thrombus or possible left ventricular thrombus with reduced ejection fraction after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. In addition to specific recommendations, we provide values and preferences and practical tips to aid the practicing clinician in the day to day use of these important agents.

Switching of platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Review of the literature and practical considerations

The combination of aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) and in those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). At the present time, 3 different oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors are available on the market; 2 have obtained the indication for ACS (clopidogrel and ticagrelor) and 1 for ACS with planned PCI (prasugrel). An intravenous direct acting P2Y12 inhibitor, cangrelor, has also been recently approved by US and European regulatory agencies for patients undergoing PCI. Although the correct timing and modality of transition from intravenous cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibitors is still controversial and needs further evidence, switching between oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors frequently occurs in clinical practice for several reasons. This practice raises the question of the relative safety of this strategy and of which switching approaches are preferable. In this article, we review the data on switching antiplatelet treatment strategies with P2Y12 receptor inhibitors and discuss practical considerations for switching therapies in patients with ACS undergoing PCI.

Impact of an integrated treatment algorithm based on platelet function testing and clinical risk assessment: results of the TRIAGE Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions To Improve Clinical Outcomes Through Optimal Platelet Inhibition study

Assessment of platelet reactivity alone for thienopyridine selection with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been associated with improved outcomes. In TRIAGE, a prospective multicenter observational pilot study we sought to evaluate the benefit of an integrated algorithm combining clinical risk and platelet function testing to select type of thienopyridine in patients undergoing PCI. Patients on chronic clopidogrel therapy underwent platelet function testing prior to PCI using the VerifyNow assay to determine high on treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR, ≥230 P2Y12 reactivity units or PRU). Based on both PRU and clinical (ischemic and bleeding) risks, patients were switched to prasugrel or continued on clopidogrel per the study algorithm. The primary endpoints were (i) 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) composite of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or definite or probable stent thrombosis; and (ii) major bleeding, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3 or 5. Out of 318 clopidogrel treated patients with a mean age of 65.9 ± 9.8 years, HTPR was noted in 33.3 %. Ninety (28.0 %) patients overall were switched to prasugrel and 228 (72.0 %) continued clopidogrel. The prasugrel group had fewer smokers and more patients with heart failure. At 1-year MACE occurred in 4.4 % of majority HTPR patients on prasugrel versus 3.5 % of primarily non-HTPR patients on clopidogrel (p = 0.7). Major bleeding (5.6 vs 7.9 %, p = 0.47) was numerically higher with clopidogrel compared with prasugrel. Use of the study clinical risk algorithm for choice and intensity of thienopyridine prescription following PCI resulted in similar ischemic outcomes in HTPR patients receiving prasugrel and primarily non-HTPR patients on clopidogrel without an untoward increase in bleeding with prasugrel. However, the study was prematurely terminated and these findings are therefore hypothesis generating.

Safety and Efficacy of Switching From Clopidogrel to Prasugrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Study-level Meta-analysis From 15 Studies

BACKGROUND

There is poor evidence on clinical outcome of switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVES

Data on the topic are limited and we performed a study-level meta-analysis to assess safety and efficacy of such strategy.

METHODS

A total of 15 studies and 3974 patients were included. The following comparisons were performed: prasugrel switching versus prasugrel only therapy; and prasugrel switching versus clopidogrel only therapy. Outcome measures were overall bleeding, major bleeding, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant increased bleeding risk in the prasugrel switching versus prasugrel only group [overall bleeding: OR 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69-1.66; P = 0.77; major bleeding: OR 0.69, 95% CI, 0.32-1.49; P = 0.34]; MACE rates were also comparable. Incidence of safety end points was similar in the prasugrel switching and clopidogrel only groups (overall bleeding: OR 1.27, 95% CI, 0.75-2.15; P = 0.37; major bleeding: OR 0.70, 95% CI, 0.29-1.68; P = 0.42); occurrence of MACE was 3.8% in the prasugrel switching versus 8.3% in the clopidogrel only group (P = 0.23). No statistically significant difference in the safety outcomes was present stratifying by clinical presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel does not increase bleeding complications during follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention; however, the strength of the data is not sufficient to make definitive clinical recommendations.

Advanced age and high-residual platelet reactivity in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel or ticagrelor

ESSENTIALS: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in elderly patients requires balancing bleedings and thrombosis. Impact of age on high residual on-treatment platelet reactivity (HRPR) on DAPT was studied. A reduced effectiveness of adenosine diphosphate antagonists was observed over 70 years of age. The occurrence of HRPR was increased among elderly patients with both clopidogrel and ticagrelor.

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of age on platelet function and the occurrence of high residual on-treatment platelet reactivity (HRPR) in patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) using acetylsalicilic acid (ASA) and clopidogrel or ticagrelor.

METHODS

Patients treated with DAPT (ASA and clopidogrel or ticagrelor) were scheduled for platelet function assessment at 30-90 days post-discharge. By whole blood impedance aggregometry, HRPR was considered for ASPI test values > 862 AU*min (for ASA) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP) test values > 417 AU*min (for ADP antagonists). Elderly patients were defined as those aged ≥ 70 years.

RESULTS

Among 494 patients on DAPT, 224 (45.3%) were ≥ 70 years old. ADP-mediated platelet aggregation increased with decades of age (279.3 ± 148.6 vs. 319.6 ± 171.1 vs. 347.3 ± 190.1 vs. 345.7 ± 169.2), whereas no difference was observed for ASA response. A reduced effectiveness of ADP antagonists was observed among elderly patients; in fact, among the 117 patients displaying HRPR (23.7%), a higher prevalence was observed among patients over 70 years old (30.4% vs. 18.1%; adjusted odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 2.19 [1.29-3.71]). Similar results were obtained among the 266 clopidogrel-treated patients (38.5% vs. 27.9%; adjusted OR [95% CI] = 2.91 [1.46-5.8]) and in the 228 patients receiving ticagrelor (19.1% vs. 8.1%; adjusted OR [95% CI] = 2.55 [1.02-8.59]).

CONCLUSION

In patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy, advanced age is independently associated with a reduced effectiveness of ADP antagonists and a higher rate of HRPR with both clopidogrel and ticagrelor.

The impact of switching P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy during index hospitalization: a systematic review

PURPOSE

With the availability of novel P2Y12 receptor inhibitors, patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may receive more than one type of this drug during index hospitalization. We sought to determine the effect of switching from clopidogrel to a novel P2Y12 receptor inhibitor on the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and bleeding.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on SCOPUS for English language entries until 7 March 2015. Out of 188 citations, seven studies encompassing 16,431 patients were selected for analysis of (i) switching to a novel P2Y12 agent (switching group) versus continued clopidogrel or (ii) switching to a novel P2Y12 agent (switching group) versus upfront novel agent initiation during index hospitalization

RESULTS

MACE was significantly lower in the switching group (odds ratio (OR) 0.77, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.63-0.96, p = 0.02), whereas bleeding was higher (OR 1.55, 1.29-1.85, p < 0.01) compared with continued clopidogrel. Conversely, MACE was similar with switching to a novel agent and upfront novel therapy initiation (OR 1.01, 95 % CI 0.8-1.29, p = 0.90), but bleeding was higher in the switching group (OR 1.24, 95 % CI 1.03-1.48, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study suggests that switching to a novel P2Y12 agent in patients with ACS and/or patients undergoing coronary stenting is more efficacious than continuing clopidogrel. In this cohort, switching to a novel agent did not result in worse ischemic outcomes than upfront initiation of novel therapies. However, switching was associated with greater bleeding compared with both continued clopidogrel as well as upfront use of novel P2Y12 agents.

Switching from Clopidogrel to Prasugrel in patients undergoing PCI: A meta-analytic overview

Despite the demonstrated benefits of Prasugrel, a new generation thienopyridine, in the prevention of thrombotic complications after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for Acute Coronary Syndromes (ACS), its use is still precluded to those many patients arriving to the cath lab pre-treated with Clopidogrel. Conclusive data on the strategy of switching from Clopidogrel to Prasugrel are still missing, therefore we aimed to perform a meta-analysis of current studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of switching from Clopidogrel to Prasugrel (PS) as compared to a standard thienopyridine therapy with Clopidogrel or Prasugrel in patients undergoing PCI. Literature archives and main scientific sessions' abstracts were scanned for studies comparing a switching strategy from Clopidogrel to Prasugrel vs. Prasugrel or Clopidogrel. Primary efficacy endpoint was overall mortality. Secondary endpoints were: non-fatal myocardial infarction and definite/probable stent thrombosis. Safety endpoint was the rate of major bleedings according to a per-protocol definition. A total of 12 studies, involving 3956 patients, were included. Among them, 1396 patients (35.3%), received Prasugrel after a Clopidogrel treatment (PS), while 2560 (64.7%) received either Prasugrel or Clopidogrel. The switch from Clopidogrel to Prasugrel was in the majority of the studies periprocedural. The mortality was numerically lower, but not statistically significant, in the PS group as compared with patients who did not switch (1.7% vs. 3.8%, OR [95% CI] = 0.68 [0.40,1.15], p = 0.15, phet = 0.61), without any relationship with patients' risk profile (r = -0.68 [-2.09, 0.73], p = 0.35). Similar results were obtained for secondary efficacy endpoints and at sensitivity analysis in the majority of subgroups evaluated. Moreover, the PS strategy did not increase major bleedings as compared with standard therapy (1.4% vs. 2.5%, OR [95% CI = 0.70 [0.39, 1.25], p = 0.23, phet = 0.6). The present meta-analysis confirms that, among patients undergoing PCI, switching from Clopidogrel to Prasugrel may be safely performed and therefore should be encouraged among patients eligible to Prasugrel.