PA32540 (a coordinated-delivery tablet of enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg and immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg) versus enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg alone in subjects at risk for aspirin-associated gastric ulcers: results of two 6-month, phase 3 studies

Combinatorial approaches for novel cardiovascular drug discovery: a review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

In this article, authors report an inclusive discussion about the combinatorial approach for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and for counteracting the cardiovascular risk factors. The mentioned strategy was demonstrated to be useful for improving the efficacy of pharmacological treatments and in CVDs showed superior efficacy with respect to the classical monotherapeutic approach.

AREAS COVERED

According to this topic, authors analyzed the combinatorial treatments that are available on the market, highlighting clinical studies that demonstrated the efficacy of combinatorial drug strategies to cure CVDs and related risk factors. Furthermore, the review gives an outlook on the future perspective of this therapeutic option, highlighting novel drug targets and disease models that could help the future cardiovascular drug discovery.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of specifically designed and increasingly rational and effective drug combination therapies can therefore be considered the evolution of polypharmacy in cardiometabolic and CVDs. This approach can allow to intervene on multiple etiopathogenetic mechanisms of the disease or to act simultaneously on different pathologies/risk factors, using the combinations most suitable from a pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and toxicological perspective, thus finding the most appropriate therapeutic option.

The Safety of Long-Term Proton Pump Inhibitor Use on Cardiovascular Health: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most prescribed classes of drugs worldwide as a first-line treatment of acid-related disorders. Although adverse effects are rare and rapidly reversible after a short exposure, concerns have been recently raised about a greater toxicity on cardiovascular health after a longer exposure, especially when combined with clopidogrel. We aimed to evaluate the safety of long-term PPI use on cardiovascular health in patients with known atheromatous cardiovascular disease. Methods: A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and grey literature in April 2022. Articles published between 2014 and 2022 were considered relevant if they were designed as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included post hoc analyses or prospective observational studies and if they investigated clinical cardiovascular outcomes associated with PPI use for 6 months or more in patients suffering from cardiovascular disease requiring antiplatelet agent therapy and/or coronary angioplasty. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 software (Computer program, the Cochrane Collaboration, 2020, London, UK). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for the RCTs and the Newcastle−Ottawa scale for the observational studies. Results: A total of 10 full-text articles involving 53,302 patients were included. Substantial heterogeneity was found among the 10 included studies. The primary analysis showed no significant differences between the PPI group and the control group for the risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), all-cause death (ACD), or target vessel revascularization (TVR) using a random-effects model (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98−1.35, p = 0.08, I2 = 73%; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.94−1.65, p = 0.13, I2 = 63%; and OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.76−1.87, p = 0.45, I2 = 61%, respectively). The primary analysis yielded similar results for the risks of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and cardiovascular death (CVD) using a fixed-effects model (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88−1.09, p = 0.66, I2 = 0%; OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90−1.17, p = 0.73, I2 = 0%; and OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.94−1.16, p = 0.44, I2 = 35%, respectively). Likewise, a subgroup analysis based on eight randomized controlled trials failed to identify any association between PPI use and the risks of MACEs, MI, stroke, TVR, ACD, or CVD using a fixed-effects model (overall pooled OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96−1.06; p = 0.66; I2 = 0%). The pulled data from the two included observational studies (OS) demonstrated a significantly increased risk of MACEs in the PPI group (OR 1.42, 95% CI [1.29−1.57], p <0.001; I2 = 0%). In another subgroup analysis, no evidence of an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events in the co-therapy PPI/clopidogrel versus clopidogrel alone groups was found with the exception of the risk of ACD (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.23−1.82, p = 0.001, I2 = 0%). Nevertheless, after performing a sensitivity analysis reaching heterogeneity I2 = 0%, the co-prescription of PPIs and clopidogrel was at increased risk of MACEs (p < 0.001), CVD (p = 0.008), and TVR (p < 0.001) but remained statistically non-significant for the risk of MI (p = 0.11). Conclusions: The overall results of this meta-analysis showed that long-term PPI use was not associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. However, inconsistent results were found for combined PPI/clopidogrel therapy. These results should be considered with caution in light of the significant heterogeneity, the limited number of included studies, and the lack of adjustment for potential confounders.

Efficacy and safety of alogliptin versus acarbose in Chinese type 2 diabetes patients with high cardiovascular risk or coronary heart disease treated with aspirin and inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy or drug-naive: A multicentre, randomized, open-label, prospective study (ACADEMIC)

AIMS

To demonstrate the noninferiority of alogliptin to acarbose, in terms of antidiabetic efficacy, in Chinese people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) and high cardiovascular risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

ACADEMIC (NCT03794336) was a randomized, open-label, phase IV study conducted at 46 sites in China. Antidiabetic treatment-naive or metformin-treated adults with uncontrolled T2D (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 58.0-97.0 mmol/mol) were randomized 2:1 to alogliptin 25 mg once daily or acarbose 100 mg three times daily for 16 weeks. All participants had a documented history of coronary heart disease or high cardiovascular risk at screening and received aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) 100 mg daily throughout the trial. The primary endpoints were change in HbA1c versus baseline, and the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs). Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 1088 participants were randomized. Alogliptin was noninferior to acarbose for the change in Week-16 HbA1c (least-squares mean change [standard error] -11.9 [0.4] vs. -11.4 [0.5] mmol/mol, respectively; difference between arms -0.5 [0.7] mmol/mol; 95% confidence interval -1.9 to 0.8 mmol/mol), and was associated with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal AEs (8.9% vs. 33.6%, respectively; P < 0.0001). More alogliptin than acarbose recipients achieved HbA1c <53.0 mmol/mol without gastrointestinal AEs (48.0% vs. 32.7%; P < 0.0001). Discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs were less frequent with alogliptin than acarbose (0.3% vs. 2.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Glycaemic control was comparable between alogliptin and acarbose, but the gastrointestinal tolerability of alogliptin was better. More patients achieved target HbA1c without gastrointestinal AEs with alogliptin, suggesting that this agent may be preferred in clinical practice.

Enteric-Coated Aspirin and the Risk of Gastrointestinal Side Effects: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Aspirin appeared as a medicine to deal with aches and inflammation, but due to its antiplatelet properties, it has evolved into a drug mainly used to avert cardiovascular disease. Regardless of its therapeutic uses, the limiting aspect for aspirin use has been its affiliation with gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, classifying from acute mucosal damage to GI problems and death.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review is to address the question regarding the ECA effect on the gastric mucosa.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the PubMed electronic databases from April 10th to April 23rd, 2020. Eligibility has been set, and based on those criteria, initially a total of 637 results were obtained, from these 58 of them were not written in English. Then, 168 articles which were free from duplication were screened and all the included articles were RCTs published after 2000. Based on these, final number of articles included on this review was 6.

Results

Data were obtained from 6 published articles which reported on 15,621 participants. The reports were from 3 different countries. Most of the studies revealed that enteric-coated aspirin (ECA) treatment was not an effective mechanism against GI protection. ECA administration with omeprazole can hugely reduce the incidence of endoscopic GI damage compared to the impact of ECA used alone. Even short-term administration of a low dose of ECA was significantly associated with an apparent small bowel injury.

Conclusion

ECA treatment is not an effective mechanism against GI protection, and it is highly associated with small bowel injury. So the coating does not reduce risk of GI complications.

Clinical Guidelines for Drug-Related Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition

Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcer were previously developed in 2009 with the collaboration of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology. However, the previous guidelines were based mainly upon a review of the relevant literature and expert opinion. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. We organized a guideline Development Committee for drug-related peptic ulcer under the auspices of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017 and developed nine statements, including four for NSAIDs, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through a de novo process founded on evidence-based medicine that included a literature search and a meta-analysis, A consensus was reached through the application of the modified Delphi method. The primary target of these guidelines is adult patients undergoing long-term treatment with NSAIDs, aspirin or other antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the expert consensus and is intended to assist clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcer and associated conditions.

[Clinical Guidelines for Drug-induced Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition]

The Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcers were previously developed under co-work with the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology at 2009. On the other hand, the previous guidelines were based mainly on a literature review and expert opinions. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. In this study, a guideline development committee for drug-induced peptic ulcers was organized under the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017. Nine statements were developed, including four for NSAID, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through de novo processes based on evidence-based medicine, such as a literature search, meta-analysis, and the consensus was established using the modified Delphi method. The primary target of this guideline was adult patients taking long-term NSAIDs, aspirin, or other antiplatelet agent and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the consensus of expert opinions and are intended to assist relevant clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcers and associated conditions.

Prevention of Peptic Ulcer Associated with Aspirin and Antiplatelet Agent

The Korean guidelines for the Clinical Guidelines for Drug-related Peptic Ulcer were revised under the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2020. In these revised guidelines, treatment for Helicobacter pylori infections is recommended in patients with a history of peptic ulcers and are receiving long-term low-dose aspirin therapy to prevent peptic ulcers and complications. The maintenance of anti-ulcer drugs, such as proton pump inhibitors, is also recommended after H. pylori eradication if patients require other antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants. Regardless of H. pylori eradication, when patients with a history of peptic ulcer take long-term low dose aspirin, the concomitant use of a proton pump inhibitor according to the severity of the peptic ulcer is recommended.

Effects of aspirin on the gastrointestinal tract: Pros vs. cons

Acetylsalicylic acid, also known as aspirin, is often used in clinical antipyretic, analgesic and antiplatelet therapy. Aspirin can cause numerous side effects in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, ranging from unpleasant GI symptoms without gastric mucosal lesions to ulcer bleeding and even death. However, recent studies have found that aspirin can significantly prevent GI tumors. Despite impressive advances in cancer research, screening and treatment options, GI tumors remain a leading cause of death worldwide. Prevention is a far better option than treatment for tumors. Therefore, the present review assesses the pros and cons of aspirin on the GI tract and, on this the basis, the appropriate dose of aspirin to protect it.

Antithrombotic Treatments in Patients with Chronic Coronary Artery Disease or Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

Aims

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is widely used for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD), but the risk of vascular events remains high. We aimed at identifying randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on antithrombotic treatments in patients with chronic CAD or PAD.

Methods

Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL on March 1^st, 2018. This systematic review (SR) uses a narrative synthesis to summarize the evidence for the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies in the population of both chronic CAD or PAD patients.

Results

Four RCTs from 27 publications were included. Study groups included 15,603 to 27,395 patients. ASA alone was the most extensively studied (n = 3); other studies included rivaroxaban with or without ASA (n = 1), vorapaxar alone (n = 1), and clopidogrel with (n = 1) or without ASA (n = 1). Clopidogrel alone and clopidogrel plus ASA compared to ASA presented similar efficacy with comparable safety profile. Rivaroxaban plus ASA significantly reduced the risk of the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke compared to ASA alone, although major bleeding with rivaroxaban plus ASA increased.

Conclusion

There is limited and heterogeneous evidence on the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with chronic CAD or PAD. Clopidogrel alone and clopidogrel plus ASA did not demonstrate superiority over ASA alone. A combination of rivaroxaban plus ASA may offer significant additional benefit in reducing cardiovascular outcomes, yet it may increase the risk of bleeding, compared to ASA alone.

Yosprala: Coordinated Delivery of a Proton Pump Inhibitor and Aspirin

Objective: Review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of Yosprala (aspirin and omeprazole). Data Sources: A literature search was conducted using PubMed with the terms "Yosprala," "PA8140," and "PA32540" from the initial year through May, 2019. Additional sources were gathered through bibliographies. Aralez Pharmaceuticals Inc was contacted for manufacturer information. Study Selection and Data Extraction: The sources were narrowed to studies done in English language between 1990 and 2019. All viable clinical trials for the use of Yosprala in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events were included. Data Synthesis: Yosprala is a coordinated delivery system of immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg and enteric-coated aspirin (325 mg or 81 mg). In 2016, the Food and Drug Administration approved Yosprala for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (ie, stroke or myocardial infarction). While it is recommended that patients take low-dose aspirin for secondary prevention of these events, many patients cannot tolerate the gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effect profile of the drug. Phase 3 clinical trials have proven that Yosprala significantly lowers the occurrence of GI bleeds and ulcers versus aspirin alone (3.2% and 8.6%, respectively; P ≤ .001). The most common adverse effects include infection, diarrhea, and dyspepsia. Conclusion: Yosprala significantly reduces the occurrence of GI ulcers and seems to be a safe and effective option for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events.

Meta-analysis of risk and protective factors for gastrointestinal bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention

AIM

To quantitatively analyse factors related to gastrointestinal bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention and provide evidence for the prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding.

DATA SOURCES AND REVIEW METHODS

Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Embase, and Ovid databases were searched from inception to 31 May 2018; case-control and cohort studies published in English were included. The methodological quality of each study was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using Revman version 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 16 publications yielded data about risk factors. It was found that age older than 70 years, age (per 10-year increase), female sex, baseline anaemia, history of smoking, history of using alcohol, history of peptic ulcer disease, chronic renal failure, previous bleeding, shock, congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, prior use of inotropic medications, and prior use of antithrombotic medications were positively associated with gastrointestinal bleeding. Four articles yielded data about protective factors. It was found that proton-pump inhibitor and bivalirudin therapy were negatively associated with gastrointestinal bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention.

CONCLUSION

This research found risk and protective factors which can assist in effective management of this potentially fatal complication.

Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors in the Long-Term Aspirin Users: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Long-term aspirin use in cardiovascular disease prevention may result in gastrointestinal bleeding. Although proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have been shown to reduce the risks of peptic ulcers and dyspeptic symptoms in long-term aspirin users in the randomized controlled trials, there are safety concerns about the long-term use of PPI.

STUDY QUESTION

What is the safety and efficacy of PPI in patients using aspirin in long term for prevention of cardiovascular diseases and stroke?

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ProQuest, and relevant references from inception through February 2015, and used random-effects model for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 10 publications from 9 studies (n = 6382) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with control, PPI reduced the risks of peptic ulcers [risk ratio (RR): 0.19; 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.26; P < 0.00001], gastric ulcers [0.24 (0.16-0.35); P < 0.00001], duodenal ulcers [0.12 (0.05-0.29); P < 0.00001], bleeding ulcers [0.22 (0.10-0.51); P = 0.0004], and erosive esophagitis [0.14 (0.07-0.28); P < 0.00001]. PPI increased the resolution of epigastric pain [1.13 (1.03-1.25); P = 0.01], heartburn [1.24 (1.18-1.31); P < 0.00001], and regurgitation [1.26 (1.13-1.40); P < 0.0001], but did not increase the risks of all-cause mortality [1.72 (0.61-4.87); P = 0.31], cardiovascular mortality [1.80 (0.59-5.44); P = 0.30], nonfatal myocardial infarction/ischemia [0.56 (0.22-1.41); P = 0.22], ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack [1.09 (0.34-3.53); P = 0.89] and other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The PPI seems to be effective in preventing peptic ulcers and erosive esophagitis and in resolution of dyspeptic symptoms without increasing adverse events, cardiac risks or mortality in long-term aspirin users.

Aspirin Use in Secondary Cardiovascular Protection and the Development of Aspirin-Associated Erosions and Ulcers

Aspirin for secondary cardiovascular disease prevention is well established, but treatment discontinuation, often because of gastrointestinal mucosal injury or symptoms, can lead to increased risk for cardiovascular events. Proton pump inhibitor therapy is recommended for aspirin-treated patients at gastrointestinal risk. PA32540 [enteric-coated aspirin (EC-ASA) 325 mg + immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg] was compared with EC-ASA 325 mg alone once daily for 6 months in 2 duplicate, randomized double-blind trials in gastrointestinal-risk patients taking aspirin for ≥3 months for secondary prevention. In this post hoc analysis, we determined the prevalence of endoscopic upper gastrointestinal ulcers at screening and whether baseline endoscopic gastric erosions impacted subsequent ulcer development. At the screening endoscopy, 6% of subjects had upper gastrointestinal ulcers (not eligible for randomization) and 40% had gastric erosions. Conditional logistic regression modeling showed that baseline gastric erosions are significantly associated with endoscopic gastric ulcer development (OR = 2.12, 95% confidence interval, 1.26-3.57). In subjects with baseline gastric erosion, 4.2% of PA32540-treated versus 13.0% of EC-ASA-treated subjects (P = 0.001) subsequently developed endoscopic gastric ulcers. These data suggest that gastric injury predisposes to gastric ulcer development when taking EC-ASA, and exposure to immediate-release omeprazole in the presence of aspirin therapy significantly reduces the likelihood of progressing to gastric ulcers.

Usefulness of PA32540 in Protecting the Gastric Layer While Providing Secondary Prevention for Coronary Artery Disease

Aspirin has been the mainstay for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease to decrease early recurrence and severity of recurrent cardiovascular events. However, an increase in gastrointestinal bleeding due to aspirin is preventing many patients from adhering to this daily regimen. PA32540, a combination pill with aspirin and omeprazole, is a newly emerging intervention that has the potential to reinforce patient compliance with the aspirin regimen due to fewer gastrointestinal adverse effects. This systematic review assessed three recent phase 3 clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of PA32540. Clinical trials were chosen based on inclusion criteria such as phase 3, randomized, open-label or blinded studies, utilization of enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg dose, and measured GI adverse effects and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as primary outcomes. Study A, a 6-month phase-3 study by Whellan et al., used two identically designed, randomized, double-blind trials to compare the GI adverse events and MACE after the use of PA32540 to 325mg of enteric coated Aspirin (EC-ASA) in subjects at risk for aspirin-associated gastric ulcers. Results showed fewer upper GI symptoms, decreased size of ulcers, and improved heartburn symptoms in subjects receiving PA32540 compared to EC-ASA. Study B, a 12-month phase-3 study by Hatoum et al., assessed secondary cardiovascular event prevention in a study population that was treated with PA32540 in comparison to a community setting (CS) group that was started on a standard antiplatelet treatment. Results indicated a 28% reduction of CV events in subjects treated with PA32540 compared to the CS group. Study C, a phase-3 open-label study by Goldstein et al., evaluating secondary prevention of cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events with the use of PA32450 for 12 months found that none of the 12-month completers were reported to have new-onset gastric ulcers. In conclusion, PA32540 could be an effective therapy for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease as studies are showing similar efficacy in preventing MACE with reduced GI side effects.

The budget impact of using enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg + immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg to prevent recurrent cardiovascular events

OBJECTIVE

Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid; ASA) is commonly used for secondary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events, but may be associated with gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events, which can reduce adherence. Use of ASA co-therapy with proton pump inhibitors in patients at risk may be suboptimal. PA32540 (Yosprala™) is a coordinated-delivery tablet combining EC-ASA 325 mg and immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg. The objective of this flexible budget impact model was to project the financial consequences of introducing PA32540 325 mg/40 mg to prevent recurrent CV events, while reducing ASA-associated GI events in US adults.

METHODS

A Markov Model was employed to estimate health state transitions associated with ASA 75-325 mg, ASA 75-325 mg + generic delayed-release omeprazole 40 mg, PA32540, or clopidogrel 75 mg to prevent recurrent CV events. Health states included ulcers, GI bleeding, CV events, and death. Model inputs included demographics, treatment dosages, treatment costs, adverse GI and CV events, and premature death. Data from peer-reviewed literature and censuses enabled appropriate allocation of CV and GI disease prevalence and mortality. The PA32540 non-adherence rate was conservatively set at 20%. PA32540 market share was set to 50%.

RESULTS

The model projected annual savings of $81.0 million to $190.9 million within 1-5 years after PA32540 introduction to the plan, which included 134,558 members at risk for recurrent CV events. These values translate into savings of $602 (year 5) to $1,419 (year 1) per patient per year, and $81 (year 5) to $191 (year 1) per member per year. These values were robust to variations in parameters under a deterministic sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

PA32540 use to prevent recurrent CV events was associated with cost reductions in each year examined with the model. From a health plan perspective, PA32540 is likely to have a net overall effect, resulting in significant cost savings.

Upper Gastrointestinal Toxicity Associated With Long-Term Aspirin Therapy: Consequences and Prevention

Antiplatelet therapy represents a fundamental part of preventive management for patients who are at risk of a secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) event. In most cases, the antiplatelet regimen is based on low-dose aspirin, a drug that is highly effective in reducing the incidence of CVD events, but is associated with a substantial risk of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. The dyspeptic symptoms, which can result from aspirin administration, and which may occur with or without associated ulceration and bleeding, may lead patients to discontinue therapy, thus increasing their CVD risk. For patients in whom aspirin is indicated and who are deemed to be at increased risk of upper GI events, concomitant therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is currently recommended. These agents are highly effective in reducing the upper GI lesions associated with aspirin therapy and have been associated with increased aspirin adherence. However, widespread under-prescribing of PPIs and potential noncompliance with their use means that substantial numbers of patients are at unnecessary risk of upper GI toxicity and-if aspirin therapy is discontinued-CVD events. Provision of aspirin and an immediate-release PPI as a coordinated-delivery combination tablet has been shown to both reduce the risk of gastric ulcer formation and improve patient compliance. This strategy, which may ultimately reduce the incidence of CVD outcomes because of the associated reduction in GI symptoms and the potential for greater patient adherence to aspirin, warrants further investigation under both randomized controlled conditions (explanatory trials), and in real-life settings (pragmatic trials).

Long-Term Safety of a Coordinated Delivery Tablet of Enteric-Coated Aspirin 325 mg and Immediate-Release Omeprazole 40 mg for Secondary Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Patients at GI Risk

Introduction

In two, 6‐month, randomized, double‐blind Phase 3 trials, PA32540 (enteric‐coated aspirin 325 mg and immediate‐release omeprazole 40 mg) compared to aspirin alone was associated with fewer endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcers in patients requiring aspirin therapy for secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention who were at risk for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) events.

Aims

In this 12‐month, open‐label, multicenter Phase 3 study, we evaluated the long‐term cardiovascular and gastrointestinal safety of PA32540 in subjects who were taking aspirin 325 mg daily for ≥3 months for secondary CVD prevention and were at risk for aspirin‐associated UGI events. Enrolled subjects received PA32540 once daily for up to 12 months and were assessed at baseline, month 1, month 6, and month 12.

Results

The overall safety population consisted of 379 subjects, and 290 subjects (76%) were on PA32540 for ≥348 days (12‐month completers). Adverse events (AEs) caused study withdrawal in 13.5% of subjects, most commonly gastroesophageal reflux disease (1.1%). Treatment‐emergent AEs occurred in 76% of the safety population (11% treatment‐related) and 73% of 12‐month completers (8% treatment‐related). The most common treatment‐related AE was dyspepsia (2%). One subject had a gastric ulcer observed on for‐cause endoscopy. There were five cases of adjudicated nonfatal myocardial infarction, one nonfatal stroke, and one cardiovascular death, but none considered treatment‐related.

Conclusions

Long‐term treatment with PA32540 once daily for up to 12 months in subjects at risk for aspirin‐associated UGI events is not associated with any new or unexpected safety events.

Proton-Pump Inhibitors Reduce Gastrointestinal Events Regardless of Aspirin Dose in Patients Requiring Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

BACKGROUND

The COGENT (Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial) showed that proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) safely reduced rates of gastrointestinal (GI) events in patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, utilization of appropriate prophylactic PPI therapy remains suboptimal, especially with low-dose aspirin.

OBJECTIVES

The authors investigated the safety and efficacy of PPI therapy in patients receiving DAPT in low- and high-dose aspirin subsets.

METHODS

Randomized patients with available aspirin dosing information in COGENT (N = 3,752) were divided into "low-dose" (≤ 100 mg) and "high-dose" (>100 mg) aspirin groups. The primary GI and cardiovascular endpoints were composite upper GI events and major adverse cardiac events, respectively. All events were adjudicated by independent, blinded gastroenterologists and cardiologists.

RESULTS

Median duration of follow-up was 110 days. Low-dose aspirin users (n = 2,480; 66.1%) were more likely to be older, female, and have higher rates of peripheral artery disease, prior stroke, and hypertension, whereas high-dose aspirin users (n = 1,272; 33.9%) had higher rates of hyperlipidemia, smoking, a history of percutaneous coronary intervention, and were more than twice as likely to be enrolled from sites within the United States (80.4% vs. 39.8%). High-dose aspirin was associated with similar 180-day Kaplan-Meier estimates of adjudicated composite GI events (1.7% vs. 2.1%; adjusted hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.46 to 1.66) and major adverse cardiac events (4.8% vs. 5.5%; adjusted hazard ratio: 0.73; 95% confidence interval: 0.48 to 1.11) compared with low-dose aspirin. Randomization to PPI therapy reduced 180-day Kaplan-Meier estimates of the primary GI endpoint in low-dose (1.2% vs. 3.1%) and high-dose aspirin subsets (0.9% vs. 2.6%; p for interaction = 0.80), and did not adversely affect the primary cardiovascular endpoint in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastroprotection with PPI therapy should be utilized in appropriately selected patients with coronary artery disease requiring DAPT, even if the patients are on low-dose aspirin. (Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial [COGENT]; NCT00557921).

Proton Pump Inhibitors in Cardiovascular Disease: Drug Interactions with Antiplatelet Drugs

Aspirin and P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists are widely used across the spectrum of cardiovascular diseases. Upper gastrointestinal complications, including ulcer and bleeding, are relatively common during antiplatelet treatment and, therefore, concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed.PPIs provide gastroprotection by changing the intragastric milieu, essentially by raising intragastric pH. In recent years, it has been heavily discussed whether PPIs may reduce the cardiovascular protection by aspirin and, even more so, clopidogrel. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies suggested an interaction between PPIs and clopidogrel, and subsequent clinical studies were conducted to evaluate the clinical impact of this interaction. More recently, it was reported that PPIs may also attenuate the antiplatelet effect of aspirin. This may be clinically important, because a fixed combination of aspirin and a PPI (esomeprazole) has recently been approved and because aspirin is the most widely used drug in patients with cardiovascular disease. The antiplatelet effect of the new P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists, ticagrelor and prasugrel, seems less influenced by PPI co-treatment.Given the large number of patients treated with antithrombotic drugs and PPIs, even a minor reduction of platelet inhibition potentially carries considerable clinical impact. The present book chapter summarizes the evidence regarding the widespread use of platelet inhibitors and PPIs in combination. Moreover, it outlines current evidence supporting or opposing drug interactions between these drugs and discusses clinical implications.

PA32540 for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients at risk for aspirin-associated gastric ulcers

Prescribed in patients with a history of myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischemic attack, coronary intervention or bypass surgery, aspirin is one of the medications most commonly used in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. It has become a mainstay of therapy after years of solid evidence supporting its efficacy in clinical trials. However, a number of risks and side effects accompany its benefits, including the notable risk of bleeding and gastrointestinal side effects. Numerous mechanisms have been proposed to attenuate these effects to promote adherence and to expand the population for which aspirin is a reasonable treatment option. A polypill or combination formulation that includes a proton pump inhibitor, a drug commonly prescribed alongside aspirin, is one potential avenue of therapy. One such combination pill, PA32540, has undergone Phase I and Phase III trials and shows promising safety and efficacy results in these preliminary trials.