Pharmacodynamic evaluation of switching from ticagrelor to prasugrel in patients with stable coronary artery disease: Results of the SWAP-2 Study (Switching Anti Platelet-2)

Ticagrelor inverse agonist activity at the P2Y12 receptor is non-reversible versus its endogenous agonist adenosine 5´-diphosphate

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Ticagrelor is labelled as a reversible, direct-acting platelet P2Y12 receptor (P2Y12 R) antagonist that is indicated clinically for the prevention of thrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). As with many antiplatelet drugs, ticagrelor therapy increases bleeding risk in patients, which may require platelet transfusion in emergency situations. The aim of this study was to further examine the reversibility of ticagrelor at the P2Y12 R.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Studies were performed in human platelets, with P2Y12 R-stimulated GTPase activity and platelet aggregation assessed. Cell-based bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays were undertaken to assess G protein-subunit activation downstream of P2Y12 R activation.

KEY RESULTS

Initial studies revealed that a range of P2Y12 R ligands, including ticagrelor, displayed inverse agonist activity at P2Y12 R. Only ticagrelor was resistant to washout and, in human platelet and cell-based assays, washing failed to reverse ticagrelor-dependent inhibition of ADP-stimulated P2Y12 R function. The P2Y12 R agonist 2MeSADP, which was also resistant to washout, was able to effectively compete with ticagrelor. In silico docking revealed that ticagrelor and 2MeSADP penetrated more deeply into the orthosteric binding pocket of the P2Y12 R than other P2Y12 R ligands.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Ticagrelor binding to P2Y12 R is prolonged and more akin to that of an irreversible antagonist, especially versus the endogenous P2Y12 R agonist ADP. This study highlights the potential clinical need for novel ticagrelor reversal strategies in patients with spontaneous major bleeding, and for bleeding associated with urgent invasive procedures.

Switching From Cangrelor to Prasugrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Switching Antiplatelet-6 (SWAP-6) Study

BACKGROUND

A drug-drug interaction (DDI) may occur when transitioning from intravenous P2Y12 inhibition with cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibition with prasugrel. However, this has never been tested in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to rule out a DDI when cangrelor and prasugrel are concomitantly administered in PCI patients.

METHODS

SWAP-6 (Switching Antiplatelet-6) was a prospective, randomized, 3-arm, open-label pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study. Patients (N = 77) were randomized to 1) prasugrel only at the start of PCI, 2) cangrelor plus prasugrel concomitantly at the start of PCI, or 3) cangrelor at the start of PCI plus prasugrel at the end of infusion. Cangrelor infusion was maintained for 2 hours. PK/PD assessments were performed at baseline and 6 time points postrandomization. The primary endpoint was noninferiority in VerifyNow (Werfen) P2Y12 reaction units measured at 4 hours after randomization between cangrelor plus prasugrel concomitantly administered vs prasugrel only. PK assessments included plasma levels of the active metabolite of prasugrel.

RESULTS

Compared with prasugrel, cangrelor further enhances P2Y12 inhibitory effects. At 4 hours postrandomization, P2Y12 reaction unit levels were significantly lower with prasugrel only compared to cangrelor and prasugrel concomitantly administered (least squares means difference = 130; 95% CI: 85-176), failing to meet the prespecified noninferiority margin. Findings were corroborated by multiple PD assays. The active metabolite of prasugrel levels were not affected by concomitant administration of cangrelor and were low at the end of cangrelor infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PCI, concomitant administration of prasugrel with cangrelor leads to a marked increase in platelet reactivity after stopping cangrelor infusion, supporting the presence of a DDI. (Switching Antiplatelet Therapy-6 [SWAP-6]; NCT04668144).

Cangrelor in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Pretreated With Ticagrelor: The Switching Antiplatelet (SWAP)-5 Study

BACKGROUND

There are no studies specifically designed to rule out a drug-drug interaction (DDI) when cangrelor is used among patients who have been pretreated with ticagrelor.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to rule out a DDI among cangrelor-treated patients who have been pretreated with ticagrelor.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study, patients with coronary artery disease (N = 20) were pretreated with a 180-mg ticagrelor loading dose and after 1 hour randomized to placebo or cangrelor (bolus and infusion for 2 hours). Patients crossed over after 1 to 4 weeks of washout. PK analysis included ticagrelor plasma levels and its active metabolite. PD assessments included VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ reaction units (PRU), light transmittance aggregometry, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, and Total Thrombus-Formation Analysis System. PK/PD assessments were performed at 7 time points.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, adding cangrelor to patients pretreated with ticagrelor resulted in a significant reduction in PRU at 30 minutes and 1 hour after starting infusion. At 2 hours after stopping cangrelor/placebo infusion, PRU were low and similar in both groups (16.9 vs 12.6; mean difference: 4.3; 95% CI: -28.6 to 37.3), meeting the noninferiority primary endpoint (predefined noninferiority margin 45 PRU). Consistent findings were shown with all PD assays. PK tracked PD findings with no differences between groups in plasma levels of ticagrelor and its metabolite.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, the use of cangrelor in patients pretreated with ticagrelor results in enhanced platelet inhibition with no differences in PK/PD profiles after discontinuation of drug infusion indicating the absence of a DDI. (PD and PK Profiles of Switching Between Cangrelor and Ticagrelor Following Ticagrelor Pre-treatment [SWAP-5]; NCT04634162).

Clinical pharmacology of antiplatelet drugs

INTRODUCTION

Platelets play a key role in arterial thrombosis and antiplatelet therapy is pivotal in the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Current antiplatelet drugs target different pathways of platelet activation and show specific pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic characteristics, implicating clinically relevant drug-drug interactions.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the role of platelets in hemostasis and cardiovascular thrombosis, and discusses the key pharmacodynamics, drug-drug interactions and reversal strategies of clinically used antiplatelet drugs.

EXPERT OPINION

Antiplatelet therapies target distinct pathways of platelet activation: thromboxane A₂ synthesis, adenosine diphosphate-mediated signaling, integrin α_IIbβ₃ (GPIIb/IIIa), thrombin-mediated platelet activation via the PAR1 receptor and phosphodiesterases. Key clinical drug-drug interactions of antiplatelet agents involve acetylsalicylic acid - ibuprofen, clopidogrel - omeprazole, and morphine - oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, all of which lead to an attenuated antiplatelet effect. Platelet function and genetic testing and the use of scores (ARC-HBR, PRECISE-DAPT, ESC ischemic risk definition) may contribute to a more tailored antiplatelet therapy. High on-treatment platelet reactivity presents a key problem in the acute management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). A treatment strategy involving early initiation of an intravenous antiplatelet agent may be able to bridge the gap of insufficient platelet inhibition in high ischemic risk patients with STEMI.

Ticagrelor and prasugrel in acute coronary syndrome: a single-arm crossover platelet reactivity study

AIM

To compare the degree of platelet inhibition between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome.

METHODS

Platelet function was assessed by impedance aggregometry after 30-90 days of therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and ticagrelor and over 15 days after switching to prasugrel. High-on-treatment platelet reactivity (HRPR) was defined for ADP test results above the upper limit of normal.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients were included, 81.9% males and 33.3% people with diabetes, with a mean age of 60.8 ± 8.1 years. Mean platelet reactivity was not significantly different between the two antiplatelet strategies, as the prevalence of HRPR (8.6 vs 12.3%, P = 0.50). Switching between the two antiplatelet agents was safe and well tolerated, and effectively reduced platelet reactivity in over 95% of the patients (only 3.8% of the study population displaying ineffective response to both drugs).

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor and prasugrel have a similar effect on platelet reactivity. Switching between the two drugs can be safely done.

Insights from In Vitro and Clinical Data to Guide Transition from the Novel P2Y12 Antagonist Selatogrel to Clopidogrel, Prasugrel, and Ticagrelor

Reduced pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of irreversible oral P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists have been reported when administered during cangrelor infusion. Therefore, the PD interaction liability of the novel P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist selatogrel with irreversible (i.e., clopidogrel, prasugrel) and reversible (i.e., ticagrelor) oral P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists was investigated in vitro and in healthy subjects. In vitro, selatogrel reduced the effects of clopidogrel and prasugrel in a concentration-dependent manner, while additive effects were observed for the combination of selatogrel and ticagrelor. Accordingly, a single-center, randomized, double-blind, two-way crossover study was conducted consisting of six groups. In each group (N = 12), an open-label loading dose of 300 or 600 mg clopidogrel, 60 mg prasugrel, or 180 mg ticagrelor was administered 30 minutes (i.e., at t _max of selatogrel) or 12 hours after a single subcutaneous dose of 16 mg selatogrel or placebo. Inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) was assessed at various time points up to 48 hours. Reduced IPA was determined when clopidogrel or prasugrel was administered 30 minutes after selatogrel (∼40 and 70% lower IPA, respectively, at 24 hours postdosing). However, when administering prasugrel 12 hours after selatogrel, IPA was not impacted (>90% IPA) and in the case of clopidogrel reduced effects were partially mitigated. Similar IPA was determined for ticagrelor when administered 30 minutes after selatogrel or placebo. In conclusion, reduced IPA was observed for clopidogrel and prasugrel when administered after selatogrel, which can be mitigated by applying an appropriate time interval. No PD interaction with ticagrelor was observed.

Comparison of platelet reactivity between prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis

Background

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of prasugrel and ticagrelor on high (HTPR) and low on-treatment platelet reactivity (LTPR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Methods

Eligible studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. HTPR and LTPR were evaluated on the basis of the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein platelet reactivity index (VASP-PRI) and P2Y12 reaction units (PRUs). HTPR and LTPR were analyzed using risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% CI were used to calculate the pooled effect size of platelet reactivity (PR).

Results

Fourteen eligible studies were obtained, which included 2629 patients treated with ticagrelor (n = 1340) and prasugrel (n = 1289). The pooled results showed that the prasugrel-treated patients had higher platelet reactivity than the ticagrelor-treated patients (PRU: WMD = − 32.26; 95% CI: − 56.48 to − 8.76; P < 0.01; VASP-PRI: WMD = − 9.61; 95% CI: − 14.63 to − 4.60; P = 0.002). No significant difference in HTPR based on PRU was identified between the ticagrelor and prasugrel groups (P = 0.71), whereas a lower HTPR based on VASP-PRI was found in the ticagrelor-treated patients than in the prasugrel-treated patients (RR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.12–0.75; P = 0.010). In addition, the results showed a lower LTPR was observed in the prasugrel group than in the ticagrelor group (RR = 1.40; 95% CI: 1.08–1.81; P = 0.01).

Conclusions

Prasugrel might enable higher platelet reactivity than ticagrelor. Ticagrelor could lead to a decrease in HTPR and increase in LTPR. However, this result was only obtained in pooled observational studies. Several uncertainties such as the nondeterminancy of the effectiveness of ticagrelor estimated using VASP-PRI or the definition of HTPR (a high or modifiable risk factor) might have affected our results.

Ticagrelor Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics in Chinese Patients with STEMI and NSTEMI Without Opioid Administration

INTRODUCTION

The pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) study of ticagrelor loading dose (LD) in Chinese patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without opioid administration has never been investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the antiplatelet effects and the PK parameters of ticagrelor in Chinese patients with ACS without opioid administration.

METHODS

A sample size of 30 eligible patients with ACS were enrolled in this study. Blood samples were obtained predose and 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h after 180 mg LD of ticagrelor. P2Y₁₂ reactivity units (PRU) and plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and its two metabolites were measured.

RESULTS

In total, 15 patients were admitted to ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) groups, respectively. For patients with NSTEMI, PRU declined significantly during the first 4 h and maintained a relatively stable antiplatelet effect from 4 to 12 h after LD. A similar trend was found in the STEMI group without significant differences of PRU in each designed time compared with patients with NSTEMI (P > 0.05). T_max of metabolite AR-C124910XX was 4 h after LD for both groups. There were no significant differences for drug concentration, C_max, or AUC of ticagrelor and AR-C124910XX between patients with STEMI and NSTEMI (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For Chinese patients with ACS, at least 4 h was needed to achieve an adequate antiplatelet effect for ticagrelor LD. There were no differences in PK or PD between Chinese patients with STEMI and NSTEMI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1800014764.

Clopidogrel drug interactions: a review of the evidence and clinical implications

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cardiovascular disease are commonly affected by a number of comorbidities leading to a high prevalence of polypharmacy. Polypharmacy increases the probability of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Amongst these, DDIs involving clopidogrel, the most commonly utilized platelet P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, is a topic of potential clinical concern.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews DDIs between clopidogrel and drugs which are widely used in clinical practice. In particular, drugs shown to interfere with the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic effects of clopidogrel and the clinical implications of these findings are reviewed. These drugs include inhibitors of gastric acid secretion, statins, calcium channel blockers, antidiabetic agents, and antimicrobial agents. For the references, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, or the Cochrane Library.

EXPERT OPINION

Clopidogrel-drug interactions are common. Most of these DDIs are limited to laboratory findings showing an impact on clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects. While variability in clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects is known to affect clinical outcomes, with high platelet reactivity being associated with thrombotic complications among patients undergoing coronary stenting, most studies assessing the clinical implications of clopidogrel-drug interactions have not shown to significantly affect outcomes. However, awareness of these DDIs remains important for optimizing the selection of concomitant therapies.

Evaluation of Microvascular Injury in Revascularized Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel

BACKGROUND

Despite successful restoration of epicardial vessel patency with primary percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary microvascular injury occurs in a large proportion of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, adversely affecting clinical and functional outcome. Ticagrelor has been reported to increase plasma adenosine levels, which might have a protective effect on the microcirculation. We investigated whether ticagrelor maintenance therapy after revascularized ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction is associated with less coronary microvascular injury compared to prasugrel maintenance therapy.

METHODS

A total of 110 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction received a loading dose of ticagrelor and were randomized to maintenance therapy of ticagrelor (n=56) or prasugrel (n=54) after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary outcome was coronary microvascular injury at 1 month, as determined with the index of microcirculatory resistance in the infarct-related artery. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging was performed during the acute phase and at 1 month.

RESULTS

The primary outcome of index of microcirculatory resistance was not superior in ticagrelor- or prasugrel-treated patients (ticagrelor, 21 [interquartile range, 15-39] U; prasugrel, 18 [interquartile range, 11-29] U; P=0.08). Recovery of microcirculatory resistance over time was not better in patients with ticagrelor versus prasugrel (ticagrelor, -13.9 U; prasugrel, -13.5 U; P=0.96). Intramyocardial hemorrhage was observed less frequently in patients receiving ticagrelor (23% versus 43%; P=0.04). At 1 month, no difference in infarct size was observed (ticagrelor, 7.6 [interquartile range, 3.7-14.4] g, prasugrel 9.9 [interquartile range, 5.7-16.6] g; P=0.17). The occurrence of microvascular obstruction was not different in patients on ticagrelor (28%) or prasugrel (41%; P=0.35). Plasma adenosine concentrations were not different during the index procedure and during maintenance therapy with ticagrelor or prasugrel.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, ticagrelor maintenance therapy was not superior to prasugrel in preventing coronary microvascular injury in the infarct-related territory as assessed by the index of microcirculatory resistance, and this resulted in a comparable infarct size at 1 month.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02422888.

Pharmacodynamics During Transition Between Platelet P2Y12 Inhibiting Therapies

Several platelet P2Y₁₂ inhibiting agents, both oral and intravenous, are available for clinical use. The oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors comprise clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor. Cangrelor is the only intravenous P2Y₁₂ inhibitor. Numerous pharmacodynamic studies have been performed to assess the impact of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor switching on platelet reactivity profiles and to define the optimal strategy if switching is needed, with the goal of minimizing the risk of having inadequate platelet inhibition due to potential drug-drug interactions occurring during the drug overlap phase. This article provides an overview of pharmacodynamic studies assessing switching between P2Y₁₂ inhibitors and recommendations on switching modalities based on these findings.

De-escalation of anti-platelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a narrative review

Objective:

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and in those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In current clinical situation, availability of different oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) has enabled physicians to switch among therapies owing to specific clinical scenarios. Although optimum time, loading dose and interval of transition between P2Y₁₂ inhibitors is still controversial and needs further evidence, switching between oral inhibitors frequently occurs in clinical practice for several reasons.

Data sources:

This review was based on data in articles published in PubMed up to June 2018, with the following keywords “antiplatelet therapy”, “ACS”, “PCI”, “ticagrelor”, and “clopidogrel”.

Study selection:

Original articles and critical reviews on de-escalation strategy in ACS patients after PCI were selected. References of the retrieved articles were also screened to search for potentially relevant papers.

Results:

Safety concerns associated with switching between antiplatelet agents, has prompted the use of clopidogrel for patients with ACS especially after PCI as a de-escalation strategy. Practical considerations for de-escalating therapies in patients with ACS such as reducing dose of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors or shortening duration of DAPT (followed by aspirin or P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor monotherapy) as potential options are yet to be standardized and validated.

Conclusions:

Current review will provide an overview of the pharmacology of common P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, definitions of de-escalation and different de-escalating strategies and its outcomes, along with possible direction to be explored in de-escalation.

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.

Long-term pharmacodynamic effects of Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in fibrinolytic-treated STEMI patients undergoing early PCI

The long-term pharmacodynamic effects of Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in patients undergoing early percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after fibrinolytic therapy is unknown. From May 2014 to August 2016, 212 patients undergoing PCI within 24 h of Tenecteplase (TNK), Aspirin, and Clopidogrel for ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) were randomized at four Canadian sites to receive additional Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor initiated prior to PCI. The platelet reactivity units (PRU) were measured with the VerifyNow Assay before study drug administration (baseline), at 4 and 24 h post PCI, and follow-up appointment. A mixed-model analysis with time as the repeated measure and drug as the between-subjects factor was calculated using 2 separate 1 × 4 ANOVAs, with students t-tests used to compare drugs within each time point. Complete clinical follow-up data (median 115.0 days; IQR 80.3-168.8) was available in 50 patients (23.6%) randomized to either Clopidogrel (n = 23) or Ticagrelor (n = 27). Analyses revealed significant decreases in PRU from baseline to 4 h (261.4 vs. 71.7; Mdiff = - 189.7; p < 0.001) to 24 h (71.7 vs. 27.7; Mdiff = - 44.0; p < 0.001) to end of follow-up (27.7 vs.17.9; Mdiff = - 9.9. p = 0.016) for those randomized to Ticagrelor and significant decreases in PRU only from baseline to 4 h (271.3 vs. 200.8; Mdiff = - 70.5, p = < 0.001) in patients receiving Clopidogrel, and a significantly greater proportion of patients with adequate platelet inhibition (PRU < 208) on long-term follow-up (Clopidogrel, 82.6% vs. Ticagrelor, 100.0%; p = 0.038). Our results demonstrate that in patients undergoing PCI within 24 h of fibrinolysis for STEMI, Ticagrelor provides prolonged platelet inhibition compared with Clopidogrel.

Consensus Document ANMCO/ANCE/ARCA/GICR-IACPR/GISE/SICOA: Long-term Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of pharmacologic management of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or those receiving coronary stents. Long-term (>1 year) DAPT may further reduce the risk of stent thrombosis after a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and may decrease the occurrence of non-stent-related ischaemic events in patients with ACS. Nevertheless, compared with aspirin alone, extended use of aspirin plus a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor may increase the risk of bleeding events that have been strongly linked to adverse outcomes including recurrent ischaemia, repeat hospitalisation and death. In the past years, multiple randomised trials have been published comparing the duration of DAPT after PCI and in ACS patients, investigating either a shorter or prolonged DAPT regimen. Although the current European Society of Cardiology guidelines provide a backup to individualised treatment, it appears to be difficult to identify the ideal patient profile which could safely reduce or prolong the DAPT duration in daily clinical practice. The aim of this consensus document is to review contemporary literature on optimal DAPT duration, and to guide clinicians in tailoring antiplatelet strategies in patients undergoing PCI or presenting with ACS.

Association of different antiplatelet therapies with mortality after primary percutaneous coronary intervention

OBJECTIVES

Prasugrel and ticagrelor both reduce ischaemic endpoints in high-risk acute coronary syndromes, compared with clopidogrel. However, comparative outcomes of these two newer drugs in the context of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear. We sought to examine this question using the British Cardiovascular Interventional Society national database in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI.

METHODS

Data from January 2007 to December 2014 were used to compare use of P2Y12 antiplatelet drugs in primary PCI in >89 000 patients. Statistical modelling, involving propensity matching, multivariate logistic regression (MLR) and proportional hazards modelling, was used to study the association of different antiplatelet drug use with all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

In our main MLR analysis, prasugrel was associated with significantly lower mortality than clopidogrel at both 30 days (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, P=0.014) and 1 year (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97, P=0.011) post PCI. Ticagrelor was not associated with any significant differences in mortality compared with clopidogrel at either 30 days (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21, P=0.237) or 1 year (OR 1.058, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, P=0.247). Finally, ticagrelor was associated with significantly higher mortality than prasugrel at both time points (30 days OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.44, P=0.020; 1 year OR 1.19 95% CI 1.04 to 1.35, P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of over 89 000 patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI in the UK, prasugrel is associated with a lower 30-day and 1-year mortality than clopidogrel and ticagrelor. Given that an adequately powered comparative randomised trial is unlikely to be performed, these data may have implications for routine care.

P2Y12 receptor inhibitors: an evolution in drug design to prevent arterial thrombosis

INTRODUCTION

P2Y12 inhibitors are a critical component of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), which is the superior strategy to prevent arterialthrombosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and undergoing stent implantation.. Areas covered: Basic science articles, clinical studies, and reviews from 1992-2017 were searched using Pubmed library to collet impactful literature. After an introduction to the purinergic receptor biology, this review summarizes current knowledge on P2Y12 receptor inhibitors. Furthermore, we describe the subsequent improvements of next-generation P2Y12 receptor inhibitors facing the ambivalent problem of bleeding events versus prevention of arterial thrombosis in a variety of clinical settings. Therefore, we summarize data from relevant preclinical and clinical trials of currently approved P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor, cangrelor) and provide strategies of drug switching and management of bleeding events. Expert opinion: An enormous amount of pharmacologic and clinical data is available for the application of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors. Today prasugrel, ticagrelor and clopidogrel are the standard of care drugs during dual antiplatelet therapy for ACS patients, but have considerable rates of bleeding. Recent and future clinical trials will provide evidence for subsequent escalation and de-escalation strategies of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. These data may pave the way for an evidence-based, individualized P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy.

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.

Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Pivotal clinical trials found that ticagrelor reduced ischaemic complications to a greater extent than clopidogrel, and also that the benefit gradually increased with the reduction in creatinine clearance. However, the underlying mechanisms remains poorly explored.

METHODS

This was a single-centre, prospective, randomized clinical trial involving 60 hospitalized Adenosine Diphosphate (ADP) P2Y12 receptor inhibitor-naïve patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml min^-1 1.73 m^-2 ) and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose, then followed by 90 mg twice daily) or clopidogrel (600 mg loading dose, then followed by 75 mg once daily). The primary endpoint was the P2Y12 reactive unit (PRU) value assessed by VerifyNow at 30 days. The plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and clopidogrel and their active metabolites were measured in the first 10 patients in each group at baseline, and at 1 h, 2 h, 4 h, 8 h, 12 h and 24 h after the loading dose.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were well matched between the two groups. Our results indicated a markedly lower PRU in patients treated with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel at 30 days (32.6 ± 11.29 vs. 203.7 ± 17.92; P < 0.001) as well as at 2 h, 8 h and 24 h after the loading dose (P < 0.001). Ticagrelor and its active metabolite AR-C124910XX showed a similar time to reach maximum concentration (C_max ) of 8 h, with the maximum concentration (C_max ) of 355 (242.50-522.00) ng ml^-1 and 63.20 (50.80-85.15) ng ml^-1 , respectively. Both clopidogrel and its active metabolite approached the C_max at 2 h, with a similar C_max of 8.67 (6.64-27.75) ng ml^-1 vs. 8.53 (6.94-15.93) ng ml^-1 .

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor showed much more potent platelet inhibition in comparison with clopidogrel in patients with CKD and NSTE-ACS.

Combination antiplatelet treatment in coronary artery disease patients: A necessary evil or an overzealous practice?

In seeking to improve care in coronary artery disease patients, further platelet inhibition has been occasionally applied beyond that provided by aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist. This review aims to offer insights about the rationale, the efficacy and safety of combination antiplatelet therapy, involving three or more agents. Overall, the use of glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors did not significantly modify the treatment effect of different antiplatelet strategies, including double vs standard clopidogrel, prasugrel vs clopidogrel, ticagrelor vs clopidogrel, cangrelor vs clopidogrel, and vorapaxar vs placebo. With the caveat that the use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor was not randomized, adding such an agent to aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist appears to carry a significantly increased bleeding potential. Moreover, adding vorapaxar to aspirin- and clopidogrel-treated patients is associated with more bleeding events, while the bleeding potential is further exacerbated in cases of quadruplicate antiplatelet treatment including aspirin, clopidogrel, vorapaxar, and a GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor. In ST-segment elevation, myocardial infarction patients' administration of an intravenous antiplatelet agent (GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor or cangrelor), in addition to aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist, efficiently bridges the pharmacodynamic gap of oral agents. Cilostazol on top of aspirin and clopidogrel appears to be safe, although of questionable clinical benefit. In conclusion, combination antiplatelet therapy should be reserved only for selected cases and following thoughtful consideration of the associated risk/benefit ratio.

Randomized Comparison of Oral P2Y12-Receptor Inhibitor Loading Strategies for Transitioning From Cangrelor: The ExcelsiorLOAD2 Trial

OBJECTIVES

This randomized trial tested whether early loading with prasugrel can provide sufficient platelet inhibition even when given at the start of a 2-h infusion of cangrelor.

BACKGROUND

Effective platelet inhibition with intravenous cangrelor reduces the risk of ischemic complications during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Transitioning to oral therapy with clopidogrel or prasugrel is only recommended after discontinuation of cangrelor due to drug interactions. Given the long half-life of prasugrel, this drug could achieve effective platelet inhibition even when given early under cangrelor and thereby prevent a transient gap in platelet inhibition.

METHODS

This trial randomized 110 P2Y₁₂-receptor blocker-naive patients undergoing PCI with use of cangrelor to loading with prasugrel 60 mg or ticagrelor 180 mg at the start of cangrelor (n = 45 each) or loading with clopidogrel 600 mg after discontinuation of cangrelor (n = 20). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients without high on-treatment platelet reactivity 1 h after stopping cangrelor.

RESULTS

The 3 groups were well balanced with respect to clinical parameters. One hour following discontinuation of cangrelor, the primary endpoint was seen in 65.0% of patients on clopidogrel versus 95.6% with ticagrelor and 93.3% with prasugrel (p for superiority of prasugrel vs. clopidogrel = 0.003; p of prasugrel vs. ticagrelor = 0.65). The 30-day incidence of ischemic and bleeding events was similar in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prasugrel 60 mg given at the start of a 2-h infusion of cangrelor can provide a sufficient platelet inhibition post-cangrelor. This approach prevents the transient gap in platelet inhibition seen with oral loading after discontinuation of cangrelor. (Impact of Extent of Clopidogrel-Induced Platelet Inhibition during Elective Stent Implantation on Clinical Event Rate - Advanced Loading Strategies [ExcelsiorLOAD2]; DRKS00009739).

PRotective Effect on the coronary microcirculation of patients with DIabetes by Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor (PREDICT): study rationale and design. A randomized multicenter clinical trial using intracoronary multimodal physiology

Background

In diabetic patients a predisposed coronary microcirculation along with a higher risk of distal particulate embolization during primary percutaneous intervention (PCI) increases the risk of peri-procedural microcirculatory damage. However, new antiplatelet agents, in particular Ticagrelor, may protect the microcirculation through its adenosine-mediated vasodilatory effects.

Methods

PREDICT is an original, prospective, randomized, multicenter controlled study designed to investigate the protective effect of Ticagrelor on the microcirculation during PCI in patient with diabetes mellitus type 2 or pre-diabetic status. The primary endpoints of this study aim to test (i) the decrease in microcirculatory resistance with antiplatelet therapy (Ticagrelor > Clopidogrel; mechanistic effect) and (ii) the relative microcirculatory protection of Ticagrelor compared to Clopidogrel during PCI (Ticagrelor < Clopidogrel; protective effect).

Conclusions

PREDICT will be the first multicentre clinical trial to test the adenosine-mediated vasodilatory effect of Ticagrelor on the microcirculation during PCI in diabetic patients. The results will provide important insights into the prospective beneficial effect of this drug in preventing microvascular impairment related to PCI (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov No. NCT02698618).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12933-017-0543-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The clinical efficacy and safety evaluation of ticagrelor for acute coronary syndrome in general ACS patients and diabetic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

In this study, a systematic evaluation was conducted to estimate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor for treating acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in general ACS patients and a diabetes mellitus (DM) group.

Methods

A search of PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CNKI databases was conducted to analyze relevant randomized controlled trails (RCTs) of ticagrelor treating ACS during 2007 to 2015. Article screening, quality accessing and data extracting was independently undertaken by two reviewers. A meta-analysis was performed to clarify the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor in general ACS patients, and a meta-regression analysis was taken to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor in DM patients compared with general ACS patients.

Result

Twenty-two studies with 35004 participants were included. The meta-analysis result implicated that ticagrelor could: 1) reduce the incidence of the composite endpoint [OR = 0.83, 95%CI (0.77, 0.90), P<0.00001] and the incidence of myocardial infarction [OR = 0.81, 95%CI (0.74, 0.89), P = 0.0001]; 2) not statistically reduce the incidence of cardiovascular death, the incidence of stroke and the incidence of bleeding events; 3) increase the incidence of dyspnea [OR = 1.90, 95%CI (1.73, 2.08), P<0.00001] compared with clopidogrel. Meanwhile, compared with prasugrel, ticagrelor could 1) reduce the platelet reactivity of patients at maintenance dose [MD = -44.59, 95%CI (-59.16, -30.02), P<0.00001]; 2) not statistically reduce the incidence of cardiovascular death, the platelet reactivity of patients 6 hours or 8 hours after administration, or the incidence of bleeding events; 3) induce the incidence of dyspnea [OR = 13.99, 95%CI (2.58, 75.92), P = 0.002]. Furthermore, the result of meta-regression analysis implicated that there was a positive correlation between DM patients and the platelet reactivity of patients 6 hours and 8 hours after administration, but there was no obvious correlation between DM patients and general ACS patients in other endpoints.

Conclusion

Ticagrelor could reduce the incidence of composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke as well as platelet reactivity in DM patients with ACS, while not increasing the risk of bleeding. Because there are differences in platelet reactivity between DM patients and general ACS patients, we suggest that caution is needed when using ticagrelor in clinical applications.

A Critical Appraisal of Aspirin in Secondary Prevention: Is Less More?

Aspirin represents the sine qua non for antiplatelet pharmacotherapy in patients with cardiovascular diseases because of its well-established role in secondary prevention and its widespread availability and affordability. Historical studies, conducted in an era that bears little resemblance to contemporary clinical practice, demonstrated large reductions in thrombotic risk when aspirin was compared with placebo, thus forming the evidence base promulgated in practice guidelines and recommendations. P2Y₁₂ inhibitors have mostly been studied in addition to aspirin; dual-antiplatelet therapy proved superiority compared with aspirin monotherapy for the prevention of ischemic events, despite increased bleeding risks. An alternative approach currently under investigation includes evaluation of single-antiplatelet therapy with P2Y₁₂ inhibitors alone versus dual-antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndromes or coronary stent implantation. As the availability of more effective antiplatelet agents increases, it is time to revisit the existing and long-standing paradigm supporting aspirin use for secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events. Ongoing trials will provide new evidence whether the less-is-more strategy is justified.

Incomplete reversibility of platelet inhibition following prolonged exposure to ticagrelor

Essentials Irreversible platelet inhibition persists after reversibly-binding ticagrelor is discontinued. Reversibility of platelet inhibition by ticagrelor and its active metabolite was assessed. Incomplete recovery was observed after prolonged exposure to ticagrelor. Activated GPIIb-IIIa and P-selectin, not platelet reactivity index, showed irreversibility.

SUMMARY

Introduction Ticagrelor is described as a reversible P2Y12 antagonist. However, residual platelet inhibition persists after discontinuation of ticagrelor when plasma levels are undetectable. We assessed the reversibility of platelet inhibition by ticagrelor and its active metabolite (T-AM) in comparison with cangrelor and prasugrel's active metabolite (P-AM). Methods Whole blood was treated in vitro with ~ 50% inhibitory concentrations of ticagrelor, T-AM, cangrelor, P-AM and assessed for ADP-stimulated activated GPIIb-IIIa and P-selectin and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) platelet reactivity index (PRI) before and after 100-fold dilution. Results Platelets exposed for 30 min to ticagrelor, T-AM or cangrelor showed full recovery of activated GPIIb-IIIa but only partial recovery of P-selectin. Longer exposure (24 h) to the drug decreased reversibility of activated GPIIb-IIIa by ticagrelor (65.1% [49.5-80.6], % of vehicle with 95% confidence interval [CI]) and T-AM (88.8% [79.2-98.3]), but not by cangrelor (101.4% [96.4-106.4]). Compared with 30 min exposure, the reversibility of P-selectin further decreased after 24 h exposure to ticagrelor (from 91.8% [82.1-101.5] to 51.8% [45.5-85.0]), but not T-AM (from 79.0% [67.8-90.3] to 77.4% [61.8-93.1]) or cangrelor (from 76.0% [67.6-84.4] to 76.2% [70.6-81.8]). In contrast, 24 h exposure to ticagrelor, T-AM and cangrelor resulted in full recovery of platelet reactivity as measured by PRI. Platelets exposed to P-AM showed no recovery of ADP reactivity. Conclusions Incomplete recovery after prolonged exposure to ticagrelor, observed by activated GPIIb-IIIa and P-selectin but not upstream VASP signaling, suggests that P2Y12 regains functionality and irreversible changes occur independent of VASP signaling.

Current controversies in the use of aspirin and ticagrelor for the treatment of thrombotic events

INTRODUCTION

A P2Y₁₂ inhibitor plus aspirin is the most widely used antiplatelet strategy to prevent adverse outcomes in the setting of atherothrombotic vascular disease. Areas covered: A paucity of robust evidence for an optimal dose, gastrointestinal toxicity, ineffectiveness in high-risk patients and interactions with other antiplatelet agents, are major controversies associated with aspirin therapy. Ticagrelor is a reversibly binding oral P2Y₁₂ receptor blocker that mediates potent inhibition of adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet function. It is more effective than clopidogrel in preventing thrombotic events in acute coronary syndrome patients. The absence of a beneficial effect for ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in ACS observed in the North American subgroup of the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial has been attributed to a higher concomitant aspirin dose. Expert commentary: Ongoing studies are now investigating the plausibility of removing aspirin therapy in the setting of potent P2Y₁₂ receptor blockade via ticagrelor monotherapy or replacing aspirin with an oral anticoagulant.

Antithrombotic therapy before, during and after emergency angioplasty for ST elevation myocardial infarction

The first three hours after symptom onset hold the maximum potential for myocardial reperfusion and salvage in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. During this period timely primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) or, when PPCI is not promptly feasible, pre-hospital administration of fibrinolyis or a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa-inhibitor (GPI) have been shown to restore coronary patency and reperfusion and even result in myocardial infarction (MI) abortion. On the other hand, oral antiplatelet therapy may not yet guarantee sufficient platelet inhibition. Patients presenting after this golden time have less, if any, benefit from an aggressive antithrombotic treatment prior to PPCI. Antithrombotic treatment during primary angioplasty should be tailored on the basis of the coronary thrombotic burden, vascular approach and the patient's risk of bleeding complications. A GPI-based approach may be favourable in patients presenting early with large MI and high thrombus burden, whereas a bivalirudin-based approach without GPI may be preferred in patients with higher bleeding risk. There are no data to support the use of GPI in bailout conditions. The powerful oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, prasugrel and ticagrelor, have been clearly shown to prevent stent thrombosis and recurrent ischaemic events after emergency percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI patients. Open issues remaining are the treatment of patients with high bleeding risk, such as the elderly and those requiring anticoagulation, as well as the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after STEMI.

Impact of Escalating Loading Dose Regimens of Ticagrelor in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results of a Prospective Randomized Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Investigation

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of escalating ticagrelor loading dose (LD) regimens in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).

BACKGROUND

Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing PPCI frequently have suboptimal platelet inhibition in the early hours after ticagrelor LD. The use of high ticagrelor LD regimens has been hypothesized to optimize platelet inhibition in PPCI.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized study of escalating ticagrelor LD regimens (180 mg, 270 mg, or 360 mg) in PPCI (N = 52). PK/PD analyses were performed before and 30 min, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 h post-LD. PK assessments included exposure to ticagrelor and its metabolite (AR-C124910XX). PD assessments included P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) measured by VerifyNow P2Y12 and platelet reactivity index (PRI) measured by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP).

RESULTS

Platelet reactivity was elevated during the first 2 h post-LD. There were no differences in PRU between groups during the study time course (p = 0.179). There were no significant differences in PRU levels across groups at all time points, except at 1 h (p = 0.017) where platelet reactivity was lowest with a 270-mg LD. No differences were found between the 180-mg and 360-mg groups (primary endpoint; p > 0.999). High on-treatment platelet reactivity rates were not different across groups, except at 1 hour (p = 0.038). Parallel PD findings were observed with VASP-PRI. PK analysis showed a delay in ticagrelor absorption and generation of AR-C124910XX, irrespective of dose. Although morphine was associated with a delay in ticagrelor PK/PD, it was not an independent predictor of high on-treatment platelet reactivity.

CONCLUSIONS

ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing PPCI frequently exhibit impaired response to ticagrelor in the early hours after drug administration, which cannot be overcome by increasing LD regimens. These PD findings are largely attributed to an impaired PK profile, indicating a delay in drug absorption compared with that reported in stable clinical settings. (High Ticagrelor Loading Dose in STEMI; NCT01898442).

Ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with high on-clopidogrel treatment platelet reactivity after PCI: The ISAR-ADAPT-PF study

Patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) on clopidogrel are at high risk for adverse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of the ISAR-ADAPT-PF study was to assess the antiplatelet efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with HTPR on clopidogrel. In a prospective and randomized clinical study, 70 patients with HTPR on clopidogrel loading dose (LD) within 24 h post PCI were assigned to receive either ticagrelor [180 mg LD followed by 90 mg maintenance dose (MD) twice daily] or prasugrel (60 mg LD followed by 10 mg MD once daily). The adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation assessed on the Multiplate analyzer on day 2 after randomization (primary end point) was as follows: the mean difference between the two treatment groups was 6 aggregation units (AU) × min with an upper 95% confidence interval (CI) of 41 AU × min, which was greater than the predefined noninferiority margin of 18 AU × min (P for noninferiority = 0.29). However, no significant differences in absolute platelet reactivity levels between ticagrelor- versus prasugrel-treated patients at that time point were observed (138 ± 100 AU × min vs. 132 ± 64 AU × min, P for superiority = 0.77). In conclusion, neither drug was statistically more effective for inhibition of platelet aggregation in patients with HTPR on clopidogrel post PCI, although the study could not formally demonstrate the assumed noninferiority of ticagrelor versus prasugrel.

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.