Outcomes Among Clopidogrel, Prasugrel, and Ticagrelor in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Who Underwent Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention From the TOTAL Trial

Progress in the clinical effects and adverse reactions of ticagrelor

BACKGROUND

Ticagrelor is a novel receptor antagonist that selectively binds to the P2Y12 receptor, thereby inhibiting adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-mediated platelet aggregation. Compared to clopidogrel, ticagrelor has the advantages of a fast onset, potent effects, and a reversible platelet inhibition function, which make this drug clinically suitable for treating acute coronary syndrome (ACS), especially acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

OBJECTIVE

This review was performed to determine the basic characteristics, clinical effects, and adverse reactions of ticagrelor.

METHODS

Relevant trials and reports were obtained from the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases.

RESULTS

Ticagrelor is rapidly absorbed by the body after oral administration, exhibits inherent activity without requiring metabolic activation, and binds reversibly to the P2Y12 receptor. Ticagrelor has been recommended in ACS treatment guidelines worldwide due to its advantageous pharmacological properties and significant clinical benefits. Ticagrelor inhibits platelet aggregation, inhibits inflammatory response, enhances adenosine function, and has cardioprotective effects. However, ticagrelor also causes adverse reactions such as bleeding tendency, dyspnea, ventricular pause, gout, kidney damage, and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura in clinical treatment. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to risk assessments when using ticagrelor.

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor is a promising drug for the effective treatment of ACS. When using ticagrelor, individualized treatment should be provided based on the specific conditions of the patients to avoid serious adverse events.

Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Limited data comparing prasugrel and ticagrelor in acute coronary syndrome are available. Online databases, including MEDLINE and Cochrane Central, were queried to compare these drugs. The primary outcomes of this meta-analysis are myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, noncardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, and stroke. The secondary outcome is major bleeding. A total of 9 studies, including 94,590 patients (prasugrel group = 32,759; ticagrelor group = 61,831), were included in this meta-analysis. The overall mean age was 62.73 years, whereas the mean age for the ticagrelor and prasugrel groups was 63.80 and 61.65 years, respectively. Prasugrel is equally effective as compared with ticagrelor in preventing MI. There was no difference between the 2 groups regarding all-cause mortality, stent thrombosis, stroke, or major bleeding. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, prasugrel is equally effective when compared with ticagrelor in preventing MI.

P2Y12 receptor residues crucial for thrombosis regulation

Thrombosis, or the formation of blood clots, can lead to serious medical conditions such as stroke, heart attack, and deep vein thrombosis. The purinoreceptor P2Y12 plays a critical role in the thrombotic pathway and is targeted for therapy to prevent clot formation. However, it is essential to balance the regulation of thrombosis to avoid adverse situations. This study focuses on the P2Y12 receptor and aims to discern the protein residue network and differentiate residues based on their intramolecular interactions. The study utilized a statistical analysis to characterize the significant residues involved in ligand interaction, which helps to identify critical residues that are essential for the function of the receptor. A parametric analysis of interactions of residues in the intraprotein interaction was conducted, which revealed significant residue-based contacts that facilitate protein interactions. By examining the interactions between residues, the mechanisms underlying protein interactions were studied and the importance of specific residues in facilitating these interactions was determined. This research provides important information on P2Y12, and the findings based on the network based significance of interacting residues may contribute to the development of new therapies that target the receptor to prevent clot formation while maintaining a balance in thrombosis regulation to avoid adverse outcomes. Ultimately, this study could lead to improved treatments for thrombotic disorders and better patient outcomes.

What do we know about platelets in myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury and why is it important?

Myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury (MIRI), the joint result of ischemic injury and reperfusion injury, is associated with poor outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Accumulating evidence demonstrates that activated platelets directly contribute to the pathogenesis of MIRI through participating in the formation of microthrombi, interaction with leukocytes, secretion of active substances, constriction of microvasculature, and activation of spinal afferent nerves. The molecular mechanisms underlying the above detrimental effects of activated platelets include the homotypic and heterotypic interactions through surface receptors, transduction of intracellular signals, and secretion of active substances. Revealing the roles of platelet activation in MIRI and the associated mechanisms would provide potential targets/strategies for the clinical evaluation and treatment of MIRI. Further studies are needed to characterize the temporal (ischemia phase vs. reperfusion phase) and spatial (systemic vs. local) distributions of platelet activation in MIRI by multi-omics strategies. To improve the likelihood of translating novel cardioprotective interventions into clinical practice, basic researches maximally replicating the complexity of clinical scenarios would be necessary.

The Evolution of Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A 40-Year Journey

Antiplatelet therapy has a critical role to play in the successful management of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Over the past 40 years, a multitude of participants worldwide have been enrolled in trials evaluating the impact of antiplatelet agents on clinical outcomes. The use of aspirin in unstable angina in the Canadian Aspirin trial was key to establishing the benefit of aspirin in acute coronary syndrome. The Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial demonstrated that the P2Y12 inhibitor clopidogrel, when added to aspirin, reduced major cardiovascular events. While the use of antiplatelet agents in coronary artery disease antedates the introduction of PCI and remains the cornerstone of secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, strategies aiming to optimise their best use are still constantly evolving. In this review, the major randomised trials shaping current clinical practice for the use of aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors in patients undergoing PCI are summarised, with a focus on aspirin-free strategies and on the role of P2Y12 inhibitor treatment before PCI, two major topics of ongoing investigation that are critical to patient care but that are not addressed in current practice guidelines. Multiple questions remain regarding the use of antiplatelet agents after PCI, including the personalisation of dosing, intensity, pharmacologic formulation, and duration of antiplatelet therapy based on individual patient characteristics and the optimal treatment of patients at high bleeding risk.

Clinical Characteristics and Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Differing Haemoglobin Levels Undergoing Semi-Urgent and Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in an Asian Population

Introduction

This study aimed to investigate the impact of anaemia on long-term clinical outcomes in patients who underwent semi-urgent and elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in an Asian population. Although the effects of anaemia on outcomes in Asian patients are well studied for acute coronary syndrome, its impact on Asian patients undergoing semi-urgent and elective PCI is unclear.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent semi-urgent and elective PCI from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015, at a tertiary academic centre. A total of 1,685 patients were included. They were stratified into three groups: normal (≥12 g/dL), intermediate (10–11.9 g/dL), and low (<10 g/dL) haemoglobin levels. Demographics, risk factors, and end-points including the 5-point major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (all-cause death, subsequent stroke, myocardial infarction, congestive cardiac failure, and target lesion revascularisation), cardiovascular death, and bleeding events were analysed.

Results

Patients in intermediate and low haemoglobin level groups were older with more comorbidities. Compared to the normal haemoglobin level group, low haemoglobin level group patients were associated with an increased risk of composite endpoints of all-cause death, subsequent stroke, myocardial infarction, congestive cardiac failure, and target lesion revascularisation [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.22, 2.92; p = 0.004]. This was driven by the increased risk of target lesions revascularisation observed in the low haemoglobin level group compared to the normal haemoglobin level group (aHR 17.74, 95% CI: 1.74, 180.80; p = 0.015). The patients in the low haemoglobin level group were also associated with a higher risk of bleeding events compared to the normal haemoglobin level group (aHR 7.18, 95% CI: 1.13, 45.40; p = 0.036).

Conclusion

In our Asian cohort, patients with anaemia undergoing PCI were associated with a higher comorbid burden. Despite adjustments for comorbidities, these patients had higher mortality and worse cardiovascular outcomes following contemporary PCI.

Diurnal Variability of Platelet Aggregation in Patients with Myocardial Infarction Treated with Prasugrel and Ticagrelor

Background: Contemporary antiplatelet treatment in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is based on one of two P2Y12 receptor inhibitors, prasugrel or ticagrelor. The aim of this study was to compare diurnal variability of platelet reactivity between patients receiving prasugrel and ticagrelor during the initial phase of maintenance treatment after AMI. Methods: It was a prospective, two-center, pharmacodynamic, observational study. Blood for platelet testing was sampled at four time points on day four after AMI (8:00, 12:00, 16:00, 20:00). Diurnal variability of platelet reactivity was expressed as a coefficient of variation (CV) of the above-mentioned measurements. Results: 73 invasively-treated patients were enrolled (ticagrelor: n = 47, prasugrel: n = 26). CV was greater in patients treated with ticagrelor compared with prasugrel according to a VASP assay (47.8 [31.6–64.6]% vs. 21.3 [12.9–25.5]%, p < 0.001), while no statistical differences were detected when the CVs of platelet aggregation according to Multiplate were compared between ticagrelor- and prasugrel-treated patients. Ticagrelor-treated patients showed more pronounced platelet inhibition than prasugrel at 16:00 and 20:00 (VASP_16:00: 20.6 ± 15.0 vs. 24.9 ± 12.8 PRI, p = 0.049; VASP_20:00: 18.6 ± 17.7 vs. 26.0 ± 11.7 PRI, p = 0.002). Conclusions: Ticagrelor shows greater diurnal variability in platelet aggregation than prasugrel during the initial maintenance phase of AMI treatment, and this is due to the continuous increase of platelet inhibition after the morning maintenance dose. Both drugs provide an adequate antiplatelet effect early after AMI. Evaluation of the clinical significance of these findings warrants further investigation.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

Background

Ticagrelor is currently recommended for patients with the acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, recent studies have yielded controversial results.

Objective

To compare the clinical outcomes between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in patients with ACS.

Methods

Three electronic databases were queried until April 25, 2021. We defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) as the primary efficacy endpoint. The secondary efficacy endpoints included stroke, stent thrombosis, cardiovascular death, all-cause death, and myocardial infarction. The safety endpoints were (major and minor) bleeding. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated to represent the estimated effect sizes.

Results

A total of 270,937 patients with ACS from 10 clinical trials and 18 observational studies were included. No significant difference was detected in MACE (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.60–1.08, p = 0.15, I2 = 64.83%). However, ticagrelor introduced a higher risk of bleeding (1.46, 1.17–1.83, 0.00, 61.66%) and minor bleeding (1.71, 1.33–2.21, 0.00, 4.65%) in clinical trials. The results of secondary efficacy endpoints differed in the clinical trials and observational studies. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that ticagrelor showed better therapeutic effects in patients who underwent the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (0.38, 0.23–0.63, 0.00, 0) than those intended for PCI (1.03, 0.76–1.38, 0.87, 64.26%). Meanwhile, ticagrelor showed different therapeutic effects on patients with ACS of different ethnicities and different countries.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrated that ticagrelor is not superior to clopidogrel in MACE but is associated with a higher risk of bleeding in patients with ACS. Different PCI strategies, ethnicities, and countries may be the factors that contribute to different therapeutic effects of ticagrelor.

Systematic Review Registration

This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021251212).

Ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Ticagrelor and prasugrel are the mainstay of antithrombotic therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). However, direct comparative data on clinical outcomes of potent P2Y12 inhibitors are limited, especially in East Asian populations. We aimed to evaluate the effect of ticagrelor versus prasugrel on clinical outcomes in patients with acute MI.

METHODS

From the Korean nationwide National Health Insurance database, 10,797 patients with acute MI who received either ticagrelor or prasugrel in combination with aspirin after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled. The primary outcome was net clinical benefit, defined as a composite of death, MI, stroke, or major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome as effectiveness and safety measures.

RESULTS

Among 10,797 patients, 9591 (88.8%) received ticagrelor and 1206 (11.2%) received prasugrel. During a median follow-up of 1.8 years, the primary outcome occurred in 1051 (16.6%) and 131 (14.4%) patients in the ticagrelor and prasugrel groups, respectively. In the propensity score matched cohort (n = 5979), the risk for the primary outcome was similar between the two groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.949 for prasugrel; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.780-1.154). The risks for the composite of death, MI, or stroke (HR 0.938; 95% CI: 0.752-1.169) and major bleeding (HR 1.022; 95% CI: 0.709-1.472) were also comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute MI undergoing PCI, ticagrelor and prasugrel appeared to have similar net clinical benefits. The risks for death, MI, or stroke and major bleeding were not significantly different between the two groups.

De-escalation of P2Y12 Inhibitor Use After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Acute Coronary Syndromes

Background

De-escalation from potent platelet P2Y12 inhibitors to clopidogrel is common. Despite having a clinical rationale, non-bleeding-related de-escalation when a lateral change between potent agents is an option may put patients at increased ischemic risk. We set out to define the scope of P2Y12 inhibitor de-escalation in a large clinical registry and evaluate the potential impact of non-bleeding-related de-escalation on clinical outcomes.

Methods

: A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients in the Cardiovascular Percutaneous Intervention Trial (CAPITAL) registry to identify those who underwent a switch in therapy within 1 year of percutaneous coronary intervention. The de-escalations were categorized as bleeding-related or non-bleeding-related. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Secondary outcomes included individual components of major adverse cardiovascular events and a safety endpoint of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction bleeding.

Results

Of 1854 patients, 209 (11.3%) underwent de-escalation: 24.9% of cases were bleeding-related, 37.8% were non-bleeding-related, and 37.3% were for unknown reasons. All patients with non-bleeding-related de-escalation were switched from ticagrelor to clopidogrel. The primary outcome occurred in 14 (6.7%) patients, of which 50% underwent non-bleeding-related de-escalation (P = 0.430). Among those with non-bleeding-related de-escalation, 7.6% were hospitalized for myocardial infarction, compared to 1.9% and 3.8% among those with a bleeding-related and unknown rationale, respectively (P = 0.293).

Conclusions

De-escalation, particularly non-bleeding-related de-escalation, of P2Y12 inhibitors is common. A substantial proportion of such de-escalation may be avoidable. Given the potential risk of ischemic complications, strategies should be considered to encourage both the upfront use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors and alternative strategies to de-escalation.

NSTE-ACS ESC Guidelines Recommend Prasugrel as the Preferred P2Y12 Inhibitor: A Contrarian View

In the 2020 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), the experts proposed to put an end to the equipoise of ticagrelor and prasugrel in addition to aspirin in patients with NSTE-ACS who proceed to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). They gave a strong level of recommendation (IIa) in favor of prasugrel over ticagrelor in these patients. We challenge this proposition, which was mainly driven by the results of ISAR-REACT 5, an open-label prospective head-to-head study of a prasugrel-based strategy compared with a ticagrelor-based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. In addition to the methodological concerns regarding the ISAR-REACT 5 study, we also question this decision in light of the ISAR-REACT 5 diabetes mellitus subgroup analysis and previous studies and meta-analysis that showed no difference between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ACS. Although we agree with the "one size does not fit all" concept for antiplatelet regimens in patients with ACS who proceed to PCI, we believe that the decision to strongly favor prasugrel was premature and not supported enough by the ISAR-REACT 5 results. In our opinion, equipoise remains between the ticagrelor- and prasugrel-based strategies and more data are needed to settle the debate.

Focus on the Lymphatic Route to Optimize Drug Delivery in Cardiovascular Medicine

While oral agents have been the gold standard for cardiovascular disease therapy, the new generation of treatments is switching to other administration options that offer reduced dosing frequency and more efficacy. The lymphatic network is a unidirectional and low-pressure vascular system that is responsible for the absorption of interstitial fluids, molecules, and cells from the peripheral tissue, including the skin and the intestines. Targeting the lymphatic route for drug delivery employing traditional or new technologies and drug formulations is exponentially gaining attention in the quest to avoid the hepatic first-pass effect. The present review will give an overview of the current knowledge on the involvement of the lymphatic vessels in drug delivery in the context of cardiovascular disease.

Clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor for all-comers with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

To compare effectiveness and safety of clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor among all-comers with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and extend the knowledge from randomized clinical trials.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with STEMI admitted to Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, from 2009 to 2016 were identified via the Eastern Danish Heart Registry. By individual linkage to Danish nationwide registries, claimed drugs and end points were obtained. Patients alive a week post-discharge were included, stratified according to clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor treatment, and followed for a year. The effectiveness end point (a composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke) and safety end point (a composite of bleedings leading to hospitalization) were assessed by multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models.

RESULTS

In total, 5123 patients were included (clopidogrel [1245], prasugrel [1902], ticagrelor [1976]) with ≥95% treatment persistency. Concomitant use of aspirin was ≥95%. Females accounted for 24% and elderly for 17%. Compared with clopidogrel, the effectiveness end point occurred less often for ticagrelor (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.70) and prasugrel (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33-0.68) without differences in bleedings leading to hospitalization. No differences in comparative effectiveness or safety were found between prasugrel and ticagrelor. Sensitivity analyses with time-dependent drug exposure and the period 2011-2015 showed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Among all-comers with STEMI, ticagrelor and prasugrel were associated with reduced incidence of the composite end point of all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke without an increase in bleedings leading to hospitalization compared with clopidogrel. No differences were found between prasugrel and ticagrelor.

Prasugrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

PURPOSE

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor or prasugrel is the mainstay of treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to systematically perform a head-to-head comparison of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in terms of efficacy and safety.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for relevant published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was adverse cardiovascular events and secondary outcome was bleeding events. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain the pooled estimate of each outcome.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with a total number of 6990 patients (3550 treated with prasugrel and 3481 treated with ticagrelor) were included. No significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor was observed in terms of mortality (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.13, P = 0.28), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.03, P = 0.10), non-fatal myocardial infarction (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.06, P = 0.11), stroke (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.72, P = 0.95), stent thrombosis (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.21, P = 0.25), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) defined major (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.19 to 4.67, P = 0.94), minor (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.62, P = 0.18) and minimal (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.18, P = 0.11) bleeding and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) defined bleeding (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.36, P = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, both prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar cardiovascular outcomes and adverse bleeding events.

Effects of clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor on prevention of stent thrombosis in patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis

Background

Clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor, acting on platelet P2Y12 receptor, are commonly used for prevention of stent thrombosis (ST) among patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to compare the effects of these drugs by a systematic review and network meta‐analysis.

Hypothesis

Efficacies of clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor on preventing ST are not the same.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor on prevention of ST in patients who underwent PCI. The efficacies between groups were compared by a Bayesian network meta‐analysis, by which the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated.

Results

Fourteen studies and 46 983 participants were included in this study. The pooled results illustrated that clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor were effective on prevention of ST. Patients treated with prasugrel (OR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.052 ~ 0.73, P < 0.05) and ticagrelor (OR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.035 ~ 0.65, P < 0.05) had lower incidence of ST compared to those treated with clopidogrel. Patients treated with ticagrelor showed similar frequency with those in prasugrel group (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.22 ~ 2.3, P > 0.05). No significant heterogeneity was observed across included studies.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that prasugrel and ticagrelor are more effective than clopidogrel on prevention of ST among patients underwent PCI. Simultaneously, there is no significant difference in the prevention of ST between prasugrel and ticagrelor.

Implications of the Antiplatelet Therapy Gap Left With Discontinuation of Prasugrel in Canada

Background

The current Canadian Cardiovascular Society antiplatelet therapy guidelines recommend the use of ticagrelor or prasugrel over clopidogrel as first-line platelet P2Y12 receptor antagonists for treatment of moderate- to high-risk acute coronary syndromes. Recently, Effient (prasugrel [Eli Lilly Canada Inc, Toronto, Canada]) was discontinued by its distributor in Canada.

Methods

Five members of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society antiplatelet therapy 2018 guidelines committee undertook an independent, evidence-based review to outline patients for whom prasugrel should be the optimal P2Y12 agent and discuss alternative strategies to consider without prasugrel.

Results

Several clinical scenarios where prasugrel should be indicated are identified and discussed. Considerations to be undertaken for alternative therapies are summarized, including a review of national and international guidelines for de-escalation of P2Y12 receptor antagonists.

Conclusions

The discontinuation of prasugrel poses a challenge for clinicians. Clinicians must consider key factors in determining the best alternate therapy.

Meta-Analysis Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Prasugrel and Ticagrelor in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Prasugrel and ticagrelor are preferred over clopidogrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. We sought to determine the relative merits of 1 agent over the other. Multiple databases were queried to identify relevant randomized control trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies. Random-effects model was used to calculate an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for major adverse cardiovascular and cerbrovascular events (MACCE) and its components. A total of 27 (7 RCTs, 20 observational cohort studies) studies comprising 118,266 (prasugrel 62,716, ticagrelor 51,196) patients were included. At 30 days, prasugrel was associated with a significantly lower odds of MACCE (OR 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 0.85, p ≤0.0001) and mortality (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.71, p ≤0.0001). At 1 year, the overall odds of mortality favored prasugrel (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92, p = 0.002), but no significant interdrug difference was seen in terms of MACCE (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.05, p = 0.16). There was no significant difference in the odds of overall myocardial infarction, revascularization, stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding events between the 2 groups on both 30-day and 1-year follow-up. A subgroup analysis of RCTs data showed no significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor in terms of any end point at all time points. In conclusion, prasugrel might have lower odds of MACCE and mortality at 30 days. However, there was no difference in the safety and efficacy end points of 2 drugs at 1 year. The observed transient prasugrel-related mortality benefits were subject to the bias of nonrandomized assignment.

Risk of bradyarrhythmia related to ticagrelor: A systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Ticagrelor was related to bradycardia in DISPERSE-II trial. This risk has been integrated into the European risk-management plan, and its use is warned in at-risk patients. Nevertheless, this risk was not systematically assessed nor measured.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the risk of bradyarrhythmia associated with ticagrelor.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA-SOURCE

MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ISI web of Science, clinicaltrial.gov, clinicaltrialsregister.eu.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in patients treated with ticagrelor or comparator(s).

META-ANALYSIS

Risk of bias in each RCT was assessed using Cochrane tool. Relative Risks (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI) were calculated for each RCT, and pooled using fixed-effect or random-effects models, when appropriate. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. A potential publication bias was searched.

RESULTS

Among 82 eligible studies, event data were missing for 56 studies, due to detected reporting bias (i.e. inability to confirm zero events). Fifteen RCTs were selected and the combined RR of bradyarrhythmia was 1.15 (95 %CI 1.05-1.26), and 1.29 (1.02-1.65) for severe bradyarrhythmia. The risk appeared to be dose dependent. Restricting the analysis only to RCTs performed in patients without previous bradyarrhythmia resulted in a non-increased risk.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis confirmed the risk of bradyarrhythmia or severe bradyarrhythmia related to ticagrelor, and its use in patients without previous bradycardia was effective in preventing it. The evidence coming from this meta-analysis was low to moderate due to missing outcome in 2/3 of eligible studies. Waiting for access to these data, the use of ticagrelor in patients with risk factors of bradycardias should be avoided.

Meta-Analysis Comparing P2Y12 Inhibitors in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Dual antiplatelet therapy combining aspirin with a P2Y₁₂-receptor inhibitor reduces atherothrombotic events following an acute coronary syndromes (ACS), but the relative merits of different P2Y₁₂ inhibitors remain unclear, despite several recent large-scale trials. We performed a network meta-analysis, representing the largest evidence to date to inform P2Y₁₂ inhibitor choice in patients with ACS. Fourteen studies were included, for a total population of 145,019 patients. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used in this systematic review. A network meta-analysis using a frequentist approach with surface under the cumulative ranking probability calculation was performed. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST) and major bleeding at 30-day and 1-year all-cause death and MI were the study endpoints. At 30-day, prasugrel was superior to both clopidogrel and ticagrelor in MACE, all-cause death and definite ST endpoints. Both prasugrel and ticagrelor were superior to clopidogrel in MI endpoint. Ticagrelor also reduced all-cause death compared with clopidogrel. Ticagrelor, prasugrel, and clopidogrel resulted equivalent in terms of the safety outcome of 30-day major bleeding. No significant difference was found among clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor with respect to 1-year MACE outcome. Both prasugrel and ticagrelor reduced the occurrence of 1-year all-cause death compared with clopidogrel. Prasugrel reduced 1-year MI rate as compared with clopidogrel, while ticagrelor did not. At probability analyses, prasugrel ranked best in all 30-day and 1-year efficacy and safety endpoints. In conclusion, in this network meta-analysis, prasugrel showed the highest efficacy in reducing adverse outcomes in ACS patients and had the highest probability of being the best P2Y₁₂ inhibitor to reduce hard adverse events both at 30-day and 1-year follow-up.