Blunting periprocedural myocardial necrosis: Rationale and design of the randomized ALPHEUS study

Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel in Clopidogrel-Naive Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Whether ticagrelor may reduce periprocedural myocardial necrosis after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with and without chronic clopidogrel therapy is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in patients with and without chronic clopidogrel therapy before undergoing elective PCI.

METHODS

In this prespecified analysis of the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading With the P2Y12 Inhibitor Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel to Halt Ischemic Events in Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Stenting) trial, patients were defined as clopidogrel(+) and clopidogrel(-) according to the presence and absence of clopidogrel treatment for ≥7 days before PCI, respectively. The primary endpoint was the composite of PCI-related myocardial infarction and major injury as defined by the third and fourth universal definition 48 hours after PCI.

RESULTS

A total of 1,882 patients were included, 805 (42.7%) of whom were clopidogrel(+). These patients were older, had more comorbidities, and had more frequent features of complex PCI. The primary endpoint was less frequently present in clopidogrel(-) compared to clopidogrel(+) patients (32.8% vs 40.0%; OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.60-0.88), but no significant differences were reported for the risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient ischemic attack at 48 hours or 30 days. Ticagrelor did not reduce periprocedural myocardial necrosis or the risk of adverse outcomes, and there was no significant interaction regarding the presence of chronic clopidogrel treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Clopidogrel-naive patients presented less periprocedural complications compared to clopidogrel(+) patients, a difference related to a lower risk profile and less complex PCI. The absence of clopidogrel at baseline did not affect the absence of a difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in terms of PCI-related complications supporting the use of clopidogrel as the standard of care in elective PCI in patients with or without chronic clopidogrel treatment.

Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chronic Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Whether ticagrelor in chronic coronary syndrome patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can prevent cardiovascular events is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to evaluate outcomes of complex PCI and the efficacy of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in stable patients randomized in the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading with the P2Y12 inhibitor ticagrelor or clopidogrel to Halt ischemic Events in patients Undergoing elective coronary Stenting) trial.

METHODS

All PCI procedures were blindly reviewed and classified as complex if they had at least 1 of the following criteria: stent length >60 mm, 2-stent bifurcation, left main, bypass graft, chronic total occlusion, use of atherectomy or guiding catheter extensions, multiwire technique, multiple stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of type 4a or b myocardial infarction (MI) and major myocardial injury during the 48 hours after PCI. We compared the event rates according to the presence or not of complex PCI criteria and evaluated the interaction with ticagrelor or clopidogrel.

RESULTS

Among the 1,866 patients randomized, 910 PCI (48.3%) were classified as complex PCI. The primary endpoint was more frequent in complex PCI (45.6% vs 26.6%; P < 0.001) driven by higher rates of type 4 MI and angiographic complications (12.2% vs 4.8 %; P < 0.001 and 19.3% vs 8.6%; P < 0.05, respectively). The composite of death, MI, and stroke at 48 hours (12.7% vs 5.1 %; P < 0.05) and at 30 days (13.4% vs 5.3%; P < 0.05) was more frequent in complex PCI. No interaction was found between PCI complexity and the randomized treatment for the primary endpoint (Pinteraction = 0.47) nor the secondary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

In chronic coronary syndrome, patients undergoing a complex PCI have higher rates of periprocedural and cardiovascular events that are not reduced by ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel.

P2Y12 Inhibitor Loading Time Before Elective PCI and the Prevention of Myocardial Necrosis

BACKGROUND

There are dated and conflicting data about the optimal timing of initiation of P2Y12 inhibitors in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Peri-PCI myocardial necrosis is associated with poor outcomes. We aimed to assess the impact of the P2Y12 inhibitor loading time on periprocedural myocardial necrosis in the population of the randomized Assessment of Loading With the P2Y12 Inhibitor Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel to Halt Ischemic Events in Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Stenting (ALPHEUS) trial, which compared ticagrelor with clopidogrel in high-risk patients who received elective PCI.

METHODS

The ALPHEUS trial divided 1809 patients into quartiles of loading time. The ALPHEUS primary outcome was used (type 4 [a or b] myocardial infarction or major myocardial injury) as well as the main secondary outcome (type 4 [a or b] myocardial infarction or any type of myocardial injury).

RESULTS

Patients in the first quartile group (Q1) presented higher rates of the primary outcome (P = 0.01). When compared with Q1, incidences of the primary outcome decreased in patients with longer loading times (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR], 0.70 [0.52.-0.95]; P = 0.02 for Q2; adjOR 0.65 [0.48-0.88]; P < 0.01 for Q3; adjOR 0.66 [0.49-0.89]; P < 0.01 for Q4). Concordant results were found for the main secondary outcome. There was no interaction with the study drug allocated by randomization (clopidogrel or ticagrelor). Bleeding complications (any bleeding ranging between 4.9% and 7.3% and only 1 major bleeding at 48 hours) and clinical ischemic events were rare and did not differ among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In elective PCI, administration of the oral P2Y12 inhibitor at the time of PCI could be associated with more frequent periprocedural myocardial necrosis than an earlier administration. The long-term clinical consequences remain unknown.

Procedural myocardial injury, infarction and mortality in patients undergoing elective PCI: a pooled analysis of patient-level data

AIMS

The prognostic importance of cardiac procedural myocardial injury and myocardial infarction (MI) in chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is still debated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed individual data of 9081 patients undergoing elective PCI with normal pre-PCI baseline cardiac troponin (cTn) levels. Multivariate models evaluated the association between post-PCI elevations in cTn and 1-year mortality, while an interval analysis evaluated the impact of the size of the myocardial injury on mortality. Our analysis was performed in the overall population and also according to the type of cTn used [52.0% had high-sensitivity cTn (hs-cTn)]. Procedural myocardial injury, as defined by the Fourth Universal Definition of MI (UDMI) [post-PCI cTn elevation ≥1 × 99th percentile upper reference limit (URL)], occurred in 52.8% of patients and was not associated with 1-year mortality [adj odds ratio (OR), 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.84-1.77), P = 0.21]. The association between post-PCI cTn elevation and 1-year mortality was significant starting ≥3 × 99th percentile URL. Major myocardial injury defined by post-PCI ≥5 × 99th percentile URL occurred in 18.2% of patients and was associated with a two-fold increase in the adjusted odds of 1-year mortality [2.29, 95% CI (1.32-3.97), P = 0.004]. In the subset of patients for whom periprocedural evidence of ischaemia was collected (n = 2316), Type 4a MI defined by the Fourth UDMI occurred in 12.7% of patients and was strongly associated with 1-year mortality [adj OR 3.21, 95% CI (1.42-7.27), P = 0.005]. We also present our results according to the type of troponin used (hs-cTn or conventional troponin).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis has demonstrated that in CCS patients with normal baseline cTn levels, the post-PCI cTn elevation of ≥5 × 99th percentile URL used to define Type 4a MI is associated with 1-year mortality and could be used to detect 'major' procedural myocardial injury in the absence of procedural complications or evidence of new myocardial ischaemia.

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related myonecrosis is frequent and can affect the long-term prognosis of patients. To our knowledge, ticagrelor has not been evaluated in elective PCI and could reduce periprocedural ischaemic complications compared with clopidogrel, the currently recommended treatment. The aim of the ALPHEUS study was to examine if ticagrelor was superior to clopidogrel in reducing periprocedural myocardial necrosis in stable coronary patients undergoing high-risk elective PCI.

METHODS

The ALPHEUS study, a phase 3b, randomised, open-label trial, was done at 49 hospitals in France and Czech Republic. Patients with stable coronary artery disease were eligible for the study if they had an indication for PCI and at least one high-risk characteristic. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily thereafter for 30 days) or clopidogrel (300-600 mg loading dose, 75 mg daily thereafter for 30 days) by use of an interactive web response system, and stratified by centre. The primary outcome was a composite of PCI-related type 4 (a or b) myocardial infarction or major myocardial injury and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding, both of which were evaluated within 48 h of PCI (or at hospital discharge if earlier). The primary analysis was based on all events that occurred in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02617290.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 9, 2017, and May 28, 2020, 1910 patients were randomly assigned at 49 sites, 956 to the ticagrelor group and 954 to the clopidogrel group. 15 patients were excluded from the ticagrelor group and 12 from the clopidogrel group. At 48 h, the primary outcome was observed in 334 (35%) of 941 patients in the ticagrelor group and 341 (36%) of 942 patients in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio [OR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·80-1·17; p=0·75). The primary safety outcome did not differ between the two groups, but minor bleeding events were more frequently observed with ticagrelor than clopidogrel at 30 days (105 [11%] of 941 patients in the ticagrelor group vs 71 [8%] of 942 patients in the clopidogrel group; OR 1·54, 95% CI 1·12-2·11; p=0·0070).

INTERPRETATION

Ticagrelor was not superior to clopidogrel in reducing periprocedural myocardial necrosis after elective PCI and did not cause an increase in major bleeding, but did increase the rate of minor bleeding at 30 days. These results support the use of clopidogrel as the standard of care for elective PCI.

FUNDING

ACTION Study Group and AstraZeneca.

An updated drug profile of ticagrelor with considerations on the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Ticagrelor is an antiplatelet agent acting through direct and reversible competitive inhibition of the platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor. While the clinical merits of ticagrelor in patients who experienced an acute coronary syndrome are widely accepted, its role in stable coronary artery disease is less established. Recently, large-scale trials of ticagrelor have been published in this setting, including a trial in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM).

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to inform about recent findings on ticagrelor, by appraising the current body of evidence on its use in different clinical scenarios, particularly in DM, ranging from pharmacology to clinical outcomes and future directions.

EXPERT OPINION

The results of the THEMIS trial, conducted in DM patients with stable coronary artery disease and no prior stroke or myocardial infarction, showed that although ticagrelor in addition to aspirin reduced the risk of ischemic events, this was associated with a parallel increase in bleeding complications. However, patients with history of percutaneous coronary intervention seemed to benefit more from adjunctive ticagrelor therapy. Careful bleeding and ischemic risk stratification remains crucial to define the best antithrombotic strategy for the individual patient.