Impact of Age on the Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients Undergoing PCI

1- Versus 3-Month DAPT in Older Patients at a High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI: Insights from the XIENCE Short DAPT Global Program

This analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of 1- versus 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in older patients. Data from 3 prospective, single-arm studies (XIENCE Short DAPT Program), including patients with high bleeding risk successfully treated with an everolimus-eluting stent (XIENCE, Abbott) were analyzed. DAPT was discontinued at 1 or at 3 months in patients free from ischemic events and adherent to DAPT. Patients were stratified according to age (≥75 and <75 years). The primary end point was all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI). The key secondary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 to 5 bleeding. The outcomes were assessed from 1 to 12 months after index PCI. Of 3,364 patients, 2,241 (66.6%) were aged ≥75 years. The risk of death or MI was similar with 1- versus 3-month DAPT in patients aged ≥75 (8.5% vs 8.0%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69 to 1.30) and <75 years (6.9% vs 7.8%, adjusted HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.57, interaction p = 0.478). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 to 5 bleeding was consistently lower with 1- than with 3-month DAPT in patients aged ≥75 years (7.2% vs 9.4%, adjusted HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.91) and <75 years (9.7% vs 11.9%, adjusted HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.29, interaction p = 0.737). In conclusion, in patients at high bleeding risk who underwent PCI, patients older and younger than 75 years derived a consistent benefit from 1- compared with 3-month DAPT in terms of bleeding reduction, with no increase in all-cause death or MI at 1 year.

Age and Aspirin Dosing in Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, increasing age is concurrently associated with higher risks of ischemic and bleeding events. The objectives are to determine the impact of aspirin dose on clinical outcomes according to age in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-Centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness) trial, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomized to daily aspirin doses of 81 mg or 325 mg. The primary effectiveness end point was death from any cause, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke. The primary safety end point was hospitalization for bleeding requiring transfusion. A total of 15 076 participants were randomized to aspirin 81 mg (n=7540) or 325 mg (n=7536) daily (median follow-up: 26.2 months; interquartile range: 19.0-34.9 months). Median age was 67.6 years (interquartile range: 60.7-73.6 years). Among participants aged <65 years (n=5841 [38.7%]), a primary end point occurred in 226 (7.54%) in the 81 mg group, and in 191 (6.80%) in the 325 mg group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.23 [95% CI, 1.01-1.49]). Among participants aged ≥65 years (n=9235 [61.3%]), a primary end point occurred in 364 (7.12%) in the 81 mg group, and in 378 (7.96%) in the 325 mg group (adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.82-1.10]). The age-dose interaction was not significant (P=0.559). There was no significant interaction between age and the randomized aspirin dose for the secondary effectiveness and the primary safety bleeding end points (P>0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Age does not modify the impact of aspirin dosing (81 mg or 325 mg daily) on clinical end points in secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Tailoring antiplatelet therapy in older patients with coronary artery disease

The older population represents a unique subset of patients due to a higher rate of comorbidities and risk factors, which can lead to a higher rate of ischemic and bleeding events. As a result, older adults are mainly underrepresented or excluded from randomized trials. Although the advancement in the percutaneous coronary intervention field with the development of new technologies, techniques, and potent antiplatelet therapy led to a reduction of ischemic risk, there is still a concern regarding bleeding hazards. Apart from the global utilization of less invasive trans-radial approach and proton pump inhibitors to reduce bleeding risk, proper tailoring of antiplatelet therapy in the older person is imperative. So far, several antiplatelet drugs have been introduced in different clinical scenarios, with dual antiplatelet therapy (combination of acetylsalicylic acid and P2Y12 inhibitor) recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention. The decision on the choice of antiplatelet drug and the DAPT duration is challenging and should be based on the relationship between ischemia and bleeding with the purpose of reducing ischemic events but not at the expense of increased bleeding complications. This is particularly important in the older population, where the evidence is obscure. The main objective of this review is to summarize the available evidence on contemporary antiplatelet therapy and different approaches of de-escalation strategies in older patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

For 20 years, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of the combination of aspirin and a platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor, has been the gold standard of antithrombotic pharmacology after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the past 5 years, several investigations have challenged this paradigm by testing the efficacy and safety of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy (that is, without aspirin) following a short course of DAPT. Collectively, these studies suggested a reduction in the risk of major bleeding and no significant increase in thrombotic or ischaemic events compared with guideline-recommended DAPT. Current recommendations are evolving to inform clinical practice on the ideal candidates for P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after PCI. Generalizing the results of studies of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy requires a thorough understanding of their design, populations, interventions, comparators and results. In this Review, we provide an up-to-date overview on the use of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after PCI, including supporting pharmacodynamic and clinical evidence, practical recommendations and future directions.

P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

In patients with acute and chronic coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been the cornerstone of pharmacotherapy for the past two decades. Although its antithrombotic benefit is well established, DAPT is associated with an increased risk of bleeding, which is independently associated with poor prognosis. The improvement of the safety profiles of drug-eluting stents has been critical in investigating and implementing shorter DAPT regimens. The introduction into clinical practice of newer generation oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors such as prasugrel and ticagrelor, which provide more potent and predictable platelet inhibition, has questioned the paradigm of standard DAPT durations after coronary stenting. Over the last five years, several trials have assessed the safety and efficacy of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of DAPT in patients treated with PCI. Moreover, ongoing studies are testing the role of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy immediately after PCI in selected patients. In this review, we provide up-to-date evidence on the efficacy and safety of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after a short period of DAPT compared to DAPT in patients undergoing PCI as well as outcomes associated with P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy compared to aspirin for long-term prevention.

Ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel in Older Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From a Real-World Registry

Background and Objectives

It is unclear whether more potent P2Y12 inhibitors are of benefit to older patients who are at high risk for both ischemia and bleeding. We conducted an observational study to compare the clinical outcomes of clopidogrel and ticagrelor uses in older patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Methods

Older patients (aged ≥65 years) with ACS who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were divided into clopidogrel-treated and ticagrelor-treated groups. The primary observational endpoint was the occurrence of net adverse clinical and cerebral events (NACCEs) during a 12-month period, which is defined as the composite endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, stent thrombosis, urgent coronary revascularization, and clinically significant bleeding. The secondary endpoints were clinically significant bleeding and major adverse clinical and cerebral events (MACCEs).

Results

This study included a total of 2,611 patients. Of them, 1,636 received clopidogrel and 975 received ticagrelor. Between patients receiving clopidogrel and those receiving ticagrelor, no significant differences were noted in NACCE (8.4 vs. 9.7%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.12) or MACCE (7.1 vs. 7.0%, respectively; adjusted HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.83-1.55) during the 12-month follow-up period. In contrast, the occurrence of clinically significant bleeding was significantly less in clopidogrel-treated patients compared with that in ticagrelor-treated patients (27, 1.7%, vs. 31, 3.2%, respectively; adjusted HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25-0.69). Stratified analyses revealed no significant association between age (≥75 years vs. <75 years) and treatment condition in terms of primary or secondary endpoints.

Conclusion

This study showed that clopidogrel and ticagrelor had comparable net clinical benefits in patients with ACS aged ≥65 years. Additionally, clopidogrel was associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding than ticagrelor without an increase in ischemic risk. These findings suggest that clopidogrel is an effective alternative to the more potent P2Y12 inhibitor ticagrelor in older patients.

Is the contemporary care of the older persons with acute coronary syndrome evidence-based?

Globally, ischaemic heart disease is the leading cause of death, with a higher mortality burden amongst older adults. Although advancing age is associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes following acute coronary syndrome (ACS), older patients are less likely to receive evidence-based medications and coronary angiography. Guideline recommendations for managing ACS are often based on studies that exclude older patients, and more contemporary trials have been underpowered and produced inconsistent findings. There is also limited evidence for how frailty and comorbidity should influence management decisions. This review focuses on the current evidence base for the medical and percutaneous management of ACS in older patients and highlights the distinct need to enrol older patients with ACS into well-powered, large-scale randomized trials.