Prasugrel versus clopidogrel for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with or without angiography: a secondary, prespecified analysis of the TRILOGY ACS trial

Antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: similarities and differences between a European expert consensus document and the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines

Antithrombotic therapy represents the cornerstone of the pharmacological treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The optimal combination and duration of antithrombotic therapy is still matter of debate requiring a critical assessment of patient comorbidities, clinical presentation, revascularization modality, and/or optimization of medical treatment. The 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for the management of patients with ACS encompassing both patients with and without ST segment elevation ACS have been recently published. Shortly before, a European expert consensus task force produced guidance for clinicians on the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients with ACS as well as chronic coronary syndrome. The scope of this manuscript is to provide a critical appraisal of differences and similarities between the European consensus paper and the latest ESC recommendations on oral antithrombotic regimens in ACS patients.

Tailored antiplatelet therapy in stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms: a nationwide registry study

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet therapy, where regimens are tailored based on platelet function testing, has been introduced into neurointerventional surgery. This nationwide registry study evaluated the effect and safety of tailored antiplatelet therapy in stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms compared with conventional therapy using a standard regimen.

METHODS

This study enrolled 1686 patients in 44 participating centers who received stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019. The standard regimen (aspirin and clopidogrel) was used for all patients in the conventional group (924, 19 centers). The regimen was selected based on platelet function testing (standard regimen for clopidogrel responders; adding cilostazol or replacing clopidogrel with other thienopyridines (ticlopidine, prasugrel, or ticagrelor) for clopidogrel non-responders) in the tailored group (762, 25 centers). The primary outcome was thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes were bleeding and poor outcomes (increase in modified Rankin Scale score). Outcomes within 30 days after coiling were compared using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The thromboembolic event rate was lower in the tailored group than in the conventional group (30/762 (3.9%) vs 63/924 (6.8%), adjusted OR 0.560, 95% CI 0.359 to 0.875, P=0.001). The bleeding event rate was not different between the study groups (62/762 (8.1%) vs 73/924 (7.9%), adjusted OR 0.790, 95% CI 0.469 to 1.331, P=0.376). Poor outcomes were less frequent in the tailored group (12/762 (1.6%) vs 34 (3.7%), adjusted OR 0.252, 95% CI 0.112 to 0.568, P=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Tailored antiplatelet therapy in stent assisted coiling for unruptured aneurysms reduced thromboembolic events and poor outcomes without increasing bleeding.

The Signaling Pathway of the ADP Receptor P2Y12 in the Immune System: Recent Discoveries and New Challenges

P2Y12 is a G-protein-coupled receptor that is activated upon ADP binding. Considering its well-established role in platelet activation, blocking P2Y12 has been used as a therapeutic strategy for antiplatelet aggregation in cardiovascular disease patients. However, receptor studies have shown that P2Y12 is functionally expressed not only in platelets and the microglia but also in other cells of the immune system, such as in monocytes, dendritic cells, and T lymphocytes. As a result, studies were carried out investigating whether therapies targeting P2Y12 could also ameliorate inflammatory conditions, such as sepsis, rheumatoid arthritis, neuroinflammation, cancer, COVID-19, atherosclerosis, and diabetes-associated inflammation in animal models and human subjects. This review reports what is known about the expression of P2Y12 in the cells of the immune system and the effect of P2Y12 activation and/or inhibition in inflammatory conditions. Lastly, we will discuss the major problems and challenges in studying this receptor and provide insights on how they can be overcome.

Novel Aspects Targeting Platelets in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease—A Translational Perspective

Platelets are important cellular targets in cardiovascular disease. Based on insights from basic science, translational approaches and clinical studies, a distinguished anti-platelet drug treatment regimen for cardiovascular patients could be established. Furthermore, platelets are increasingly considered as cells mediating effects “beyond thrombosis”, including vascular inflammation, tissue remodeling and healing of vascular and tissue lesions. This review has its focus on the functions and interactions of platelets with potential translational and clinical relevance. The role of platelets for the development of atherosclerosis and therapeutic modalities for primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic disease are addressed. Furthermore, novel therapeutic options for inhibiting platelet function and the use of platelets in regenerative medicine are considered.

Antithrombotic Treatment in Coronary Artery Disease

Coronary artery disease exhibits growing mortality and morbidity worldwide despite the advances in pharmacotherapy and coronary intervention. Coronary artery disease is classified in the acute coronary syndromes and chronic coronary syndromes according to the most recent guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. Antithrombotic treatment is the cornerstone of therapy in coronary artery disease due to the involvement of atherothrombosis in the pathophysiology of the disease. Administration of antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants and fibrinolytics reduce ischemic risk, which is amplified early post-acute coronary syndromes or post percutaneous coronary intervention; though, antithrombotic treatment increases the risk for bleeding. The balance between ischemic and bleeding risk is difficult to achieve and is affected by patient characteristics, procedural parameters, concomitant medications and pharmacologic characteristics of the antithrombotic agents. Several pharmacological strategies have been evaluated in patients with coronary artery disease, such as the effectiveness and safety of antithrombotic agents, optimal dual antiplatelet treatment schemes and duration, aspirin de-escalation strategies of dual antiplatelet regimens, dual inhibition pathway strategies as well as triple antithrombotic therapy. Future studies are needed in order to investigate the gaps in our knowledge, including special populations.

Independent Clinical Impacts of Procedural Complexity on Ischemic and Bleeding Events in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Long-Term Clinical Study

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between a complex percutaneous coronary intervention (C-PCI) and long-term clinical outcomes in the AMI cohort. A total of 10,329 patients were categorized into the C-PCI and non-C-PCI groups. The primary ischemic endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and revascularization). The primary bleeding endpoint was the risk of overt bleeding (BARC 2, 3 or 5). The median follow-up duration was 4.9 (2.97, 7.16) years. The risks of MACEs and bleeding were significantly higher in the C-PCI group (hazard ratio (HR): 1.72; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.60 to 1.85; p < 0.001; and HR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.50; p < 0.001, respectively). After propensity score matching, compared to the non-C-PCI group, the adjusted MACE rate in C-PCI remained significantly higher (p < 0.001), but no significant interaction (p = 0.273) was observed for bleeding. Significant differences in overt bleeding were observed only within the first three months (p = 0.024). The MACEs were consistently higher in the C-PCI group with or without severe comorbid conditions (p < 0.001 for both). Patients with AMI who undergo C-PCI experience worse long-term ischemic outcomes after successful PCI, regardless of the presence of severe comorbidities.

Current Perspectives on Antithrombotic Therapy for the Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the treatment of choice for ACS as this procedure reduces the morbidity and mortality rates of patients in clinical trials and daily practice. However, patients with a history of prior ACS who undergo PCI are still at high risk for recurrent major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Because the antithrombotic drugs reduce the rate of MACE and minimize stent-related complications such as target vessel failure or stent thrombosis, the utilization of these agents is the cornerstone treatment for secondary prevention of ACS patients after PCI. Unfortunately, using the antithrombotic agents may be associated with bleeding complications, including major or fatal bleeding. Therefore, premature discontinuation of antithrombotic regimens regarding the hemorrhagic events is sometimes inevitable and possibly leads to fatal complications such as stent thrombosis. To minimize the bleeding issues, shorten antithrombotic regimens have been proposed, which theoretically offers improved safety. Nevertheless, inappropriate withdrawal of antithrombotic drugs may increase the rate of ischemic events. On the other hand, an unnecessary prolonged antithrombotic regimen may cause avoidable bleeding. Balancing the risk of bleeding against the benefits of using antithrombotic drugs is therefore challenging especially for the patients who contain both bleeding and ischemic risks such as ACS patients who are concomitant using the anticoagulants. Currently, the treatment paradigms are shifting from the "one size fits all approach" toward the "tailored approach". This means that the antithrombotic regimens can be adjustable individually. As a result, various clinical risk scoring systems have been established to help physicians with their decision-making. However, besides the development of these dedicated scoring tools, clinical judgment for balancing the safety versus the efficacy before deciding on the antithrombotic plan is still imperative.

Antiplatelet agents for chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet agents are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events. The risks and benefits of antiplatelet agents may be different in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for whom occlusive atherosclerotic events are less prevalent, and bleeding hazards might be increased. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents in people with any form of CKD, including those with CKD not receiving renal replacement therapy, patients receiving any form of dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials of any antiplatelet agents versus placebo or no treatment, or direct head-to-head antiplatelet agent studies in people with CKD. Studies were included if they enrolled participants with CKD, or included people in broader at-risk populations in which data for subgroups with CKD could be disaggregated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently extracted data from primary study reports and any available supplementary information for study population, interventions, outcomes, and risks of bias. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from numbers of events and numbers of participants at risk which were extracted from each included study. The reported RRs were extracted where crude event rates were not provided. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies, enrolling 51,959 participants; 90 studies (40,597 CKD participants) compared an antiplatelet agent with placebo or no treatment, and 29 studies (11,805 CKD participants) directly compared one antiplatelet agent with another. Fifty-six new studies were added to this 2021 update. Seven studies originally excluded from the 2013 review were included, although they had a follow-up lower than two months. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in 16 and 22 studies, respectively. Sixty-four studies reported low-risk methods for blinding of participants and investigators; outcome assessment was blinded in 41 studies. Forty-one studies were at low risk of attrition bias, 50 studies were at low risk of selective reporting bias, and 57 studies were at low risk of other potential sources of bias. Compared to placebo or no treatment, antiplatelet agents probably reduces myocardial infarction (18 studies, 15,289 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, I² = 0%; moderate certainty). Antiplatelet agents has uncertain effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke (12 studies, 10.382 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.59, I² = 37%; very low certainty) and may have little or no effect on death from any cause (35 studies, 18,241 participants: RR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.84 to 1.06, I² = 14%; low certainty). Antiplatelet therapy probably increases major bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with haemodialysis (HD) (29 studies, 16,194 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65, I² = 12%; moderate certainty). In addition, antiplatelet therapy may increase minor bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with HD (21 studies, 13,218 participants: RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.90, I² = 58%; low certainty). Antiplatelet treatment may reduce early dialysis vascular access thrombosis (8 studies, 1525 participants) RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.70; low certainty). Antiplatelet agents may reduce doubling of serum creatinine in CKD (3 studies, 217 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.86, I² = 8%; low certainty). The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents on stroke, cardiovascular death, kidney failure, kidney transplant graft loss, transplant rejection, creatinine clearance, proteinuria, dialysis access failure, loss of primary unassisted patency, failure to attain suitability for dialysis, need of intervention and cardiovascular hospitalisation were uncertain. Limited data were available for direct head-to-head comparisons of antiplatelet drugs, including prasugrel, ticagrelor, different doses of clopidogrel, abciximab, defibrotide, sarpogrelate and beraprost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antiplatelet agents probably reduced myocardial infarction and increased major bleeding, but do not appear to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular death among people with CKD and those treated with dialysis. The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents compared with each other are uncertain.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Coronary Artery Disease

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is principally driven by platelet aggregation. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has demonstrated a reduction in recurrent ischemic events. The newer antiplatelets ticagrelor and prasugrel have demonstrated superiority over clopidogrel. While prasugrel demonstrated benefit in patients scheduled for percutaneous intervention (PCI), benefits of ticagrelor were seen irrespective of the treatment strategy. Current guidelines recommend the use of DAPT for 1 year in all patients with ACS. Ticagrelor 60 mg is recommended for up to 3 years in high-risk patients. DAPT and Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (PRECISE DAPT) scores are tools to support decision-making in deciding duration of dual antiplatelet therapy.

Prasugrel-based de-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome (HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS): an open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised trial

BACKGROUND

A potent P2Y12 inhibitor-based dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended for up to 1 year in patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The greatest benefit of the potent agent is during the early phase, whereas the risk of excess bleeding continues in the chronic maintenance phase. Therefore, de-escalation of antiplatelet therapy might achieve an optimal balance between ischaemia and bleeding. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of a prasugrel-based dose de-escalation therapy.

METHODS

HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority trial done at 35 hospitals in South Korea. We enrolled patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving PCI. Patients meeting the core indication for prasugrel were randomly assigned (1:1) to the de-escalation group or conventional group using a web-based randomisation system. The assessors were masked to the treatment allocation. After 1 month of treatment with 10 mg prasugrel plus 100 mg aspirin daily, the de-escalation group received 5 mg prasugrel, while the conventional group continued to receive 10 mg. The primary endpoint was net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, repeat revascularisation, stroke, and bleeding events of grade 2 or higher according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] criteria) at 1 year. The absolute non-inferiority margin for the primary endpoint was 2·5%. The key secondary endpoints were efficacy outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and ischaemic stroke) and safety outcomes (bleeding events of BARC grade ≥2). The primary analysis was in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02193971.

RESULTS

From Sept 30, 2014, to Dec 18, 2018, 3429 patients were screened, of whom 1075 patients did not meet the core indication for prasugrel and 16 were excluded due to randomisation error. 2338 patients were randomly assigned to the de-escalation group (n=1170) or the conventional group (n=1168). The primary endpoint occurred in 82 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate 7·2%) in the de-escalation group and 116 patients (10·1%) in the conventional group (absolute risk difference -2·9%, p_{non-inferiority}<0·0001; hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·52-0·92], p_equivalence=0·012). There was no increase in ischaemic risk in the de-escalation group compared with the conventional group (0·76 [0·40-1·45]; p=0·40), and the risk of bleeding events was significantly decreased (0·48 [0·32-0·73]; p=0·0007).

INTERPRETATION

In east Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome patients receiving PCI, a prasugrel-based dose de-escalation strategy from 1 month after PCI reduced the risk of net clinical outcomes up to 1 year, mainly driven by a reduction in bleeding without an increase in ischaemia.

FUNDING

Daiichi Sankyo, Boston Scientific, Terumo, Biotronik, Qualitech Korea, and Dio.

Clopidogrel versus ticagrelor or prasugrel in patients aged 70 years or older with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (POPular AGE): the randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend potent platelet inhibition with ticagrelor or prasugrel in patients after an acute coronary syndrome. However, data about optimal platelet inhibition in older patients are scarce. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of clopidogrel compared with ticagrelor or prasugrel in older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).

METHODS

We did the open-label, randomised controlled POPular AGE trial in 12 sites (ten hospitals and two university hospitals) in the Netherlands. Patients aged 70 years or older with NSTE-ACS were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio using an internet-based randomisation procedure with block sizes of six to receive a loading dose of clopidogrel 300 mg or 600 mg, or ticagrelor 180 mg or prasugrel 60 mg, and then a maintenance dose for the duration of 12 months (clopidogrel 75 mg once daily, ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily, or prasugrel 10 mg once daily) on top of standard care. Patient and treating physicians were aware of the allocated treatment strategy, but the outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. Primary bleeding outcome consisted of PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO; major or minor bleeding [superiority hypothesis]). Co-primary net clinical benefit outcome consisted of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, PLATO major and minor bleeding (non-inferiority hypothesis, margin of 2%). Follow-up duration was 12 months. Analyses were done on intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NL3804), ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02317198), and EudraCT (2013-001403-37).

FINDINGS

Between June 10, 2013, and Oct 17, 2018, 1002 patients were randomly assigned to clopidogrel (n=500) or ticagrelor or prasugrel (n=502). Because 475 (95%) patients received ticagrelor in the ticagrelor or prasugrel group, we will refer to this group as the ticagrelor group. Premature discontinuation of the study drug occurred in 238 (47%) of 502 ticagrelor group patients randomly assigned to ticagrelor, and in 112 (22%) of 500 patients randomly assigned to clopidogrel. Primary bleeding outcome was significantly lower in the clopidogrel group (88 [18%] of 500 patients) than in the ticagrelor group (118 [24%] of 502; hazard ratio 0·71, 95% CI 0·54 to 0·94; p=0·02 for superiority). Co-primary net clinical benefit outcome was non-inferior for the use of clopidogrel (139 [28%]) versus ticagrelor (161 [32%]; absolute risk difference -4%, 95% CI -10·0 to 1·4; p=0·03 for non-inferiority). The most important reasons for discontinuation were occurrence of bleeding (n=38), dyspnoea (n=40), and the need for treatment with oral anticoagulation (n=35).

INTERPRETATION

In patients aged 70 years or older presenting with NSTE-ACS, clopidogrel is a favourable alternative to ticagrelor, because it leads to fewer bleeding events without an increase in the combined endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and bleeding. Clopidogrel could be an alternative P2Y12 inhibitor especially for elderly patients with a higher bleeding risk.

FUNDING

ZonMw.

Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I2 = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I2 = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I2 = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

Long-term ticagrelor for secondary prevention in patients with prior myocardial infarction and no history of coronary stenting: insights from PEGASUS-TIMI 54

Aims

PEGASUS-TIMI 54 demonstrated that long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with an acceptable increase in bleeding, in patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI). While much of the discussion around prolonged DAPT has been focused on stented patients, patients with prior MI without prior coronary stenting comprise a clinically important subgroup.

Methods and results

This was a pre-specified analysis from PEGASUS-TIMI 54, which randomized 21 162 patients with prior MI (1–3 years) and additional high-risk features to ticagrelor 60 mg, 90 mg, or placebo twice daily in addition to aspirin. A total of 4199 patients had no history of coronary stenting at baseline. The primary efficacy outcome (MACE) was the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke. Patients without history of coronary stenting had higher baseline risk of MACE [13.2% vs. 8.0%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15–1.73, in the placebo arm]. The relative risk reduction in MACE with ticagrelor (pooled doses) was similar in patients without (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.99) and with prior stenting (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75–0.96; P for interaction = 0.76).

Conclusion

Long-term ticagrelor reduces thrombotic events in patients with prior MI regardless of whether they had prior coronary stenting. These data highlight the benefits of DAPT in prevention of spontaneous atherothrombotic events and indicate that long-term ticagrelor may be considered in high-risk patients with prior MI even if they have not been treated with stenting.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

NCT01225562.

Ticagrelor in Patients with Stable Coronary Disease and Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus who have not had a myocardial infarction or stroke are at high risk for cardiovascular events. Whether adding ticagrelor to aspirin improves outcomes in this population is unclear.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned patients who were 50 years of age or older and who had stable coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus to receive either ticagrelor plus aspirin or placebo plus aspirin. Patients with previous myocardial infarction or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding as defined by the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 19,220 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 39.9 months. Permanent treatment discontinuation was more frequent with ticagrelor than placebo (34.5% vs. 25.4%). The incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events (the primary efficacy outcome) was lower in the ticagrelor group than in the placebo group (7.7% vs. 8.5%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.99; P = 0.04), whereas the incidence of TIMI major bleeding was higher (2.2% vs. 1.0%; hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.94; P<0.001), as was the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (0.7% vs. 0.5%; hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.48; P = 0.005). There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.1%; hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.87 to 4.15; P = 0.11). The incidence of an exploratory composite outcome of irreversible harm (death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, fatal bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage) was similar in the ticagrelor group and the placebo group (10.1% vs. 10.8%; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, those who received ticagrelor plus aspirin had a lower incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events but a higher incidence of major bleeding than those who received placebo plus aspirin. (Funded by AstraZeneca; THEMIS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01991795.).

Ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (THEMIS-PCI): a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor.

METHODS

The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population).

FINDINGS

Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8-3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74-0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, p_interaction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78-1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75-1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48-2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36-3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74-1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75-0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, p_interaction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers

BACKGROUND

Ticagrelor is an oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitor that is used with aspirin to reduce the risk of ischemic events among patients with acute coronary syndromes or previous myocardial infarction. Spontaneous major bleeding and bleeding associated with urgent invasive procedures are concerns with ticagrelor, as with other antiplatelet drugs. The antiplatelet effects of ticagrelor cannot be reversed with platelet transfusion. A rapid-acting reversal agent would be useful.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial, we evaluated intravenous PB2452, a monoclonal antibody fragment that binds ticagrelor with high affinity, as a ticagrelor reversal agent. We assessed platelet function in healthy volunteers before and after 48 hours of ticagrelor pretreatment and again after the administration of PB2452 or placebo. Platelet function was assessed with the use of light transmission aggregometry, a point-of-care P2Y₁₂ platelet-reactivity test, and a vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay.

RESULTS

Of the 64 volunteers who underwent randomization, 48 were assigned to receive PB2452 and 16 to receive placebo. After 48 hours of ticagrelor pretreatment, platelet aggregation was suppressed by approximately 80%. PB2452 administered as an initial intravenous bolus followed by a prolonged infusion (8, 12, or 16 hours) was associated with a significantly greater increase in platelet function than placebo, as measured by multiple assays. Ticagrelor reversal occurred within 5 minutes after the initiation of PB2452 and was sustained for more than 20 hours (P<0.001 after Bonferroni adjustment across all time points for all assays). There was no evidence of a rebound in platelet activity after drug cessation. Adverse events related to the trial drug were limited mainly to issues involving the infusion site.

CONCLUSIONS

In healthy volunteers, the administration of PB2452, a specific reversal agent for ticagrelor, provided immediate and sustained reversal of the antiplatelet effects of ticagrelor, as measured by multiple assays. (Funded by PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03492385.).

Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the effect of ticagrelor on health outcomes in diabetes mellitus patients Intervention study

In the setting of prior myocardial infarction, the oral antiplatelet ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced the risk of recurrent ischemic events, especially, in those with diabetes mellitus. Patients with stable coronary disease and diabetes are also at elevated risk and might benefit from dual antiplatelet therapy. The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS, NCT01991795) is a Phase 3b randomized, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled trial of ticagrelor vs placebo, on top of low dose aspirin. Patients ≥50 years with type 2 diabetes receiving anti‐diabetic medications for at least 6 months with stable coronary artery disease as determined by a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention, bypass grafting, or angiographic stenosis of ≥50% of at least one coronary artery were enrolled. Patients with known prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety endpoint is Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding. A total of 19 220 patients worldwide have been randomized and at least 1385 adjudicated primary efficacy endpoint events are expected to be available for analysis, with an expected average follow‐up of 40 months (maximum 58 months). Most of the exposure is on a 60 mg twice daily dose, as the dose was lowered from 90 mg twice daily partway into the study. The results may revise the boundaries of efficacy for dual antiplatelet therapy and whether it has a role outside acute coronary syndromes, prior myocardial infarction, or percutaneous coronary intervention.

Novel Antiplatelet Therapies for Atherothrombotic Diseases

Antiplatelet therapies are an essential tool to reduce the risk of developing clinically apparent atherothrombotic disease and are a mainstay in the therapy of patients who have established cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and peripheral artery disease. Strategies to intensify antiplatelet regimens are limited by concomitant increases in clinically significant bleeding. The development of novel antiplatelet therapies targeting additional receptor and signaling pathways, with a focus on maintaining antiplatelet efficacy while preserving hemostasis, holds tremendous potential to improve outcomes among patients with atherothrombotic diseases.

Outcomes of Patients Receiving Downstream Revascularization After Initial Medical Management for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes (From the TRILOGY ACS Trial)

Patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS) are sometimes treated with medical management alone rather than an invasive strategy. Among those medically managed without revascularization and discharged, a proportion will require revascularization later on, but little is known about this population. In TRILOGY ACS, 9,326 patients with NSTE ACS who were selected for medical management alone were randomized to treatment with prasugrel or clopidogrel and discharged without revascularization. Patient characteristics and ischemic and bleeding outcomes through 30 months were compared between patients who underwent downstream revascularization after the index hospitalization and those who did not. A total of 662 patients (7.1%) underwent later revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (73.1%), coronary artery bypass graft surgery (26.4%), or the two (0.5%). Median time to revascularization was 121 days (twenty-fifth, seventy-fifth percentiles: 41, 326). Revascularized patients were younger, more likely to be male, and had higher rates of hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, prior myocardial infarction, and prior revascularization compared with those not revascularized. Europe and North America had the highest rates of revascularization. During the follow-up period, those who underwent revascularization had a higher rate of the composite outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurring after revascularization compared with those not revascularized (hazard ratio [HR] 2.73 [95% confidence interval {CI} 2.21 to 3.38], p < 0.001) as well as a higher rate of each of the individual outcomes. Major bleeding was also higher in those who underwent revascularization (GUSTO severe or life-threatening: HR 2.61 [95% CI 1.02 to 6.67], p = 0.045; TIMI major: HR 2.24 [95% CI 1.12 to 4.48], p = 0.022). There was no evidence that bleeding and ischemic outcomes varied by treatment with clopidogrel versus prasugrel. In conclusion, among patients initially medically managed after NSTE ACS, a small proportion later require revascularization and have a high rate of ischemic and major bleeding outcomes compared with those not requiring downstream revascularization.

Selection of P2Y12 Inhibitor in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and/or Acute Coronary Syndrome

The P2Y₁₂ receptor plays a critical role in the amplification of platelet aggregation in response to various agonists and stable thrombus generation at the site of vascular injury leading to deleterious ischemic complications. Therefore, treatment with a P2Y₁₂ receptor blocker is a major effective strategy to prevent ischemic complications in high-risk patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The determination of optimal platelet inhibition is based on maximizing antithrombotic properties while minimizing bleeding risk and is critically dependent on individual patient's propensity for thrombotic and bleeding risks. Immediately after ACS and during PCI, where highly elevated thrombotic activity is present, a loading dose administration with a potent P2Y₁₂ receptor blocker such as ticagrelor or prasugrel is preferred. In stable coronary artery disease patients undergoing PCI, clopidogrel is widely used. In addition, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infraction who cannot take oral medications, a fast acting intravenous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor or P2Y₁₂ receptor blocker, cangrelor, may add clinical benefits. During long term therapy, a strategy that prevents ischemic risk while avoiding excessive bleeding risk is similarly desired. Although up to one year dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended in patients undergoing elective stenting, the available data support the anti-ischemic benefit of prolonged DAPT (more than1 year) in patients with prior MI. In addition to the DAPT risk calculator tool, future risk assessment methods that analyze intrinsic thrombogenicity and atherosclerotic coronary burden may further identify the optimal candidate for prolonged DAPT to improve net clinical outcomes.

Subgroup analyses with special reference to the effect of antiplatelet agents in acute coronary syndromes

Controlled trials estimate treatment effects averaged over the reference population of subjects. However, physicians are interested in whether the treatment effect varies across subgroups (effect heterogeneity) in order to target specific subgroups to maximise the benefit of treatment and minimise harm. Therefore, large clinical trials of antiplatelet agents include subgroup analyses that examine whether treatment effects differ between subgroups of subjects identified by baseline characteristics. Reporting subgroup is pervasive and often accompanied by claims of difference of treatment effects between subgroups with potential important implications for clinical practice. However, subgroup-specific analyses of clinical trial data have inherent limitations that reduce their reliability. These include reduced statistical power, failure to specify the subgroups of interest a priori, failure to account for examining large numbers of subgroups, lack of strong rationale for biological response modification, and performing analyses based on variables measured post randomisation or in trials showing no overall difference between treatments. Rules for interpretation of subgroup findings in subgroups have been suggested but are frequently not applied. In this article we draw attention to the pitfalls of subgroup analyses in the context of recent trials of antiplatelet agents.

Patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed without coronary revascularization: A population needing treatment improvement

NSTE-ACS patients are a heterogeneous population, with different clinical features and prognosis. A large proportion of them is medically managed, without any revascularization. In the EYSHOT and FAST-MI registries such patients were 40% and 35%, respectively. These patients are at higher risk of adverse cardiovascular events and have a worse prognosis compared with those receiving revascularization. Medically managed NSTE-ACS patients consist of different subgroups: those not undergoing coronary angiography, those without significant coronary artery disease, and those with coronary stenoses not referred to revascularization. Patients with NSTE-ACS for whom a conservative strategy without coronary angiogram is planned must be very carefully selected. In patients with comorbidities, frailty, or advanced age, a careful balance between benefits and risks is needed to choice the management strategy (perform or not coronary angiography and/or revascularization), as evidence-based medicine data are lacking in the setting of frailty and comorbidities. In this decisional process, it should be also taken into consideration the role of coronary anatomy in risk stratification and treatment guidance. NSTE-ACS patients managed without revascularization less frequently receive guideline-recommended pharmacological treatment. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended for 12months also in medically managed patients, after careful balancing of ischemic and bleeding risk. In these patients it is mandatory to optimize pharmacological treatment, including antiplatelet therapy, to improve outcome. In NSTE-ACS medically managed, the proportion of patients discharged with DAPT should be increased in comparison with current practice, and the use of ticagrelor in place of clopidogrel should be considered in selected patients.

Cangrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients with prior myocardial infarction - Insights from the CHAMPION trials

BACKGROUND

Patients who have had a prior myocardial infarction (MI) are at increased risk for adverse outcomes after subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to examine the efficacy and safety of cangrelor, a potent intravenous P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, in patients with prior MI.

METHODS

Pooled data from the CHAMPION trials were examined. Prior MI was defined as a history of MI, excluding MI events at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, MI, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48-h post-randomization. The primary safety endpoint was GUSTO-defined severe bleeding at 48h.

RESULTS

Out of 24,691 patients, 5699 (23%) had a prior MI. The primary endpoint was higher in patients with vs. without prior MI (4.9% vs. 4.0%, p=0.002). The primary endpoint was 4.2% with cangrelor vs. 5.7% with clopidogrel (absolute risk reduction=1.5%; OR 0.72 [95%CI 0.57-0.92]) in patients with prior MI and 3.7% with cangrelor vs. 4.3% with clopidogrel (absolute risk reduction=0.6%; OR 0.85 [95%CI 0.74-0.99]) in patients without prior MI (P-interaction=0.25). The rate of GUSTO-defined severe bleeding was 0.1% with cangrelor vs. 0.1% with clopidogrel (OR 1.39 [95%CI 0.31-6.24]) in patients with prior MI, and 0.2% with cangrelor vs. 0.2% with clopidogrel (OR 1.18 [95%CI 0.65-2.14]) in patients without prior MI (P-interaction=0.84).

CONCLUSION

In the CHAMPION trials, patients with prior MI had higher rates of ischemic outcomes within 48h after PCI. Cangrelor reduced ischemic events with no significant increase in GUSTO-defined severe bleeding in patients with or without prior MI.

How I use laboratory monitoring of antiplatelet therapy

Antiplatelet therapy is of proven benefit in coronary artery disease and a number of other clinical settings. This article reviews platelet function, molecular targets of antiplatelet agents, and clinical indications for antiplatelet therapy before focusing on a frequent question to hematologists about the 2 most commonly used antiplatelet therapies: Could the patient be aspirin “resistant” or clopidogrel “resistant”? If so, should results of a platelet function test be used to guide the dose or type of antiplatelet therapy? Whether such guided therapy is of clinical benefit to patients has been a source of controversy. The present article reviews this subject in the context of 2 prototypical clinical cases. Available evidence does not support the use of laboratory tests to guide the dose of aspirin or clopidogrel in patients with so-called aspirin or clopidogrel “resistance.”

Temporal Biomarker Profiling Reveals Longitudinal Changes in Risk of Death or Myocardial Infarction in Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting data on whether changes in N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) concentrations between time points (delta NT-proBNP and hs-CRP) are associated with a change in prognosis.

METHODS

We measured NT-proBNP and hs-CRP at 3 time points in 1665 patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). Cox proportional hazards was applied to the delta between temporal measurements to determine the continuous association with cardiovascular events. Effect estimates for delta NT-proBNP and hs-CRP are presented per 40% increase as the basic unit of temporal change.

RESULTS

Median NT-proBNP was 370.0 (25th, 75th percentiles, 130.0, 996.0), 340.0 (135.0, 875.0), and 267.0 (111.0, 684.0) ng/L; and median hs-CRP was 4.6 (1.7, 13.1), 1.9 (0.8, 4.5), and 1.8 (0.8, 4.4) mg/L at baseline, 30 days, and 6 months, respectively. The deltas between baseline and 6 months were the most prognostically informative. Every +40% increase of delta NT-proBNP (baseline to 6 months) was associated with a 14% greater risk of cardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.14, 95% CI, 1.03–1.27) and with a 14% greater risk of all-cause death (adjusted HR 1.14, 95% CI, 1.04–1.26), while every +40% increase of delta hs-CRP (baseline to 6 months) was associated with a 9% greater risk of the composite end point (adjusted HR 1.09, 95% CI, 1.02–1.17) and a 10% greater risk of myocardial infarction (adjusted HR 1.10, 95%, CI 1.00–1.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Temporal changes in NT-proBNP and hs-CRP are quantitatively associated with future cardiovascular events, supporting their role in dynamic risk stratification of NSTEACS.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00699998

Dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndromes managed without revascularization

OBJECTIVE

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) derived enhanced benefit with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with prasugrel vs. clopidogrel. The risk profile and treatment response to DAPT for medically managed ACS patients with DM remains uncertain.

METHODS

The TRILOGY ACS trial compared aspirin + prasugrel vs. aspirin + clopidogrel for up to 30months in non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE) ACS patients managed medically without revascularization. We compared treatment-related outcomes among 3539 patients with DM vs. 5767 patients without DM. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.

RESULTS

Patients with vs. without DM were younger, more commonly female, heavier, and more often had revascularization prior to the index ACS event. The frequency of the primary endpoint through 30months was higher among patients with vs. without DM (24.8% vs. 16.3%), with a higher risk for those patients with DM treated with insulin vs. those treated without insulin (35.3% vs. 19.9%). There was no significant difference in the frequency of the primary endpoint by treatment with prasugrel vs. clopiodgrel in those with or without DM (P_int=0.82) and with or without insulin treatment among those with DM (P_int=0.304).

CONCLUSIONS

Among NSTE ACS patients managed medically without revascularization, patients with DM had a higher risk of ischemic events that was amplified among those treated with insulin. There was no differential treatment effect with a more potent DAPT regimen of aspirin + prasugrel vs. aspirin + clopidogrel.

Predicting the risk of bleeding during dual antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndromes

OBJECTIVES

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin + a P2Y12 inhibitor is recommended for at least 12 months for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), with shorter durations considered for patients with increased bleeding risk. However, there are no decision support tools available to predict an individual patient's bleeding risk during DAPT treatment in the post-ACS setting.

METHODS

To develop a longitudinal bleeding risk prediction model, we analy sed 9240 patients with unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial, who were managed without revasculari sation and treated with DAPT for a median of 14.8 months.

RESULTS

We identified 10 significant baseline predictors of non-coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)-related Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries (GUSTO) severe/life-threatening/moderate bleeding: age, sex, weight, NSTEMI (vs unstable angina), angiography performed before randomi sation, prior peptic ulcer disease, creatinine, systolic blood pressure, haemoglobin and treatment with beta-blocker. The five significant baseline predictors of Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding included age, sex, angiography performed before randomi sation, creatinine and haemoglobin. The models showed good predictive accuracy with Therneau's C-indices: 0.78 (SE = 0.024) for the GUSTO model and 0.67 (SE = 0.023) for the TIMI model. Internal validation with bootstrapping gave similar C-indices of 0.77 and 0.65, respectively. External validation demonstrated an attenuated C-index for the GUSTO model (0.69) but not the TIMI model (0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

Longitudinal bleeding risks during treatment with DAPT in patients with ACS can be reliably predicted using selected baseline characteristics. The TRILOGY ACS bleeding models can inform risk -benefit considerations regarding the duration of DAPT following ACS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00699998.

Dual pathway therapy in acute coronary syndrome

In 10 % of patients, who suffer an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), a major cardiovascular event occurs despite optimal therapy. The occlusion of the vessel is driven by atherothrombosis, which arises from platelet activation and activation of the coagulation cascade. In the last decade the secondary prevention continuously improved by development of dual anti-platelet therapy with new P2Y12-inhibitors such as clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor. Until recently, the coagulation cascade was not targeted in secondary prevention. The coagulation factor Xa plays a crucial role in thrombosis and is elevated in patients after acute coronary syndrome, therefore representing an attractive target for novel therapies in ACS. Former studies with vitamin K antagonists showed reduction of cardiovascular events but increased major bleedings. Two phase-3 trials investigated the role of novel oral anticoagulant agents on top of aspirin and clopidogrel in patients with ACS. The APPRAISE-2 study, which tested the oral factor Xa inhibitor apixaban was prematurely terminated because of an increase of major bleedings in the absence of an effect on cardiovascular events. In contrast, the ATLAS ACS2 TIMI-51 trial interrogating the oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban in a low dose regimen showed significant reduction of cardiovascular events as well as total mortality. Thus, add-on treatment with low dose rivaroxaban emerged as a new option for patients with ACS. This review illustrates recent advances in the development of antithrombotic therapy in acute coronary syndromes, provides guidance on which patients should receive which therapy for secondary prevention of events, and points out potentially fruitful new strategies for the future of antithrombotic treatment in ACS.

Association Between Clinical Pathways Leading to Medical Management and Prognosis in Patients With NSTEACS

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

A large proportion of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) are initially selected for medical management (MM) and do not undergo coronary revascularization during or immediately after the index event. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical pathways leading to MM in NSTEACS patients and their influence on prognosis.

METHODS

Patient characteristics, pathways leading to MM, and 2-year outcomes were recorded in a prospective cohort of 5591 NSTEACS patients enrolled in 555 hospitals in 20 countries across Europe and Latin America. Cox models were used to assess the impact of hospital management on postdischarge mortality.

RESULTS

Medical management was the selected strategy in 2306 (41.2%) patients, of whom 669 (29%) had significant coronary artery disease (CAD), 451 (19.6%) had nonsignificant disease, and 1186 (51.4%) did not undergo coronary angiography. Medically managed patients were older and had higher risk features than revascularized patients. Two-year mortality was higher in medically managed patients than in revascularized patients (11.0% vs 4.4%; P < .001), with higher mortality rates in patients who did not undergo angiography (14.6%) and in those with significant CAD (9.3%). Risk-adjusted mortality was highest for patients who did not undergo angiography (HR = 1.81; 95%CI, 1.23-2.65), or were not revascularized in the presence of significant CAD (HR = 1.90; 95%CI, 1.23-2.95) compared with revascularized patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Medically managed NSTEACS patients represent a heterogeneous population with distinct risk profiles and outcomes. These differences should be considered when designing future studies in this population.

Case Study: Ticagrelor in PLATO and Prasugrel in TRITON-TIMI 38 and TRILOGY-ACS Trials in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes

Cross-trial comparisons are typically inappropriate as there are often numerous differences in study designs, populations, end points, and loading doses of the study drugs. These differences are clearly reflected in the most recent updates to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) guidelines, which include recommendations for the use of the antiplatelet agents ticagrelor, prasugrel, and clopidogrel, based in part on results from the TRial to assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by optimizing platelet inhibitioN with prasugrel-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TRITON-TIMI) 38, TaRgeted platelet Inhibition to cLarify the Optimal strateGy to medicallY manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY-ACS) and PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trials. Here, we describe each of these trials in detail and explain the differences between them that make direct comparisons difficult. In conclusion, this information, along with the current guidelines and recommendations, will assist clinicians in deciding the most appropriate treatment pathway for their patients with NSTE-ACS and STEMI.

Antiplatelet Therapy for Secondary Prevention After Acute Myocardial Infarction

Patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) are at long-term heightened risk for recurrent ischemic events. Several large randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefit of more intensive antiplatelet strategies for long-term secondary prevention of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, and stroke in patients with a history of MI at a cost of increased bleeding. The bleeding risk associated with long-term intensive antiplatelet strategies requires careful patient selection and involvement of patients in shared decision making regarding risks and benefits of therapy. Clinical characteristics, adherence to therapy, and integrated risk scores may aid clinicians in translating clinical trials into individualized therapy.

Relationship of Platelet Reactivity With Bleeding Outcomes During Long-Term Treatment With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Medically Managed Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes

BACKGROUND

The relationship between "on-treatment" low platelet reactivity and longitudinal risks of major bleeding dual antiplatelet therapy following acute coronary syndromes remains uncertain, especially for patients who do not undergo percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analyzed 2428 medically managed acute coronary syndromes patients from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial who had serial platelet reactivity measurements (P2Y12 reaction units; PRUs) and were randomized to aspirin+prasugrel versus aspirin+clopidogrel for up to 30 months. Contal's method was used to determine whether a cut point for steady-state PRU values could distinguish high versus low bleeding risk using 2-level composites: Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) severe/life-threatening or moderate bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and non-CABG Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding. Exploratory analyses used 3-level composites that incorporated mild and minimal GUSTO and TIMI events. Continuous measures of PRUs (per 10-unit decrease) were not independently associated with the 2-level GUSTO (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.06) or TIMI composites (1.02; 0.98-1.07). Furthermore, no PRU cut point could significantly distinguish bleeding risk using the 2-level composites. However, the PRU cut point of 75 differentiated bleeding risk with the 3-level composites of GUSTO (26.5% vs 12.6%; adjusted HR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.77-2.94; P<0.001) and TIMI bleeding events (25.9% vs 12.2%; adjusted HR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.78-2.97; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among medically managed non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes patients receiving prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, PRU values were not significantly associated with the long-term risk of major bleeding events, suggesting that low on-treatment platelet reactivity does not independently predict serious bleeding risk.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00699998.

Antithrombotic Approaches in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Optimizing Benefit vs Bleeding Risks

It is estimated that in the United States, each year, approximately 620,000 persons will experience an acute coronary syndrome and approximately 70% of these will have non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Cardiovascular disease still accounts for 1 of every 3 deaths in the United States, and there is an urgent need to improve the prognosis of patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome. Cardiovascular mortality and ischemic complications are common after acute coronary syndrome, and the advent of newer antithrombotic therapies has reduced ischemic complications, but at the expense of greater bleeding. The new antithrombotic agents also raise the challenge of choosing between multiple potential therapeutic combinations to minimize recurrent ischemia without a concomitant increase in bleeding, a decision that often varies according to an individual patient's relative propensity for ischemia versus hemorrhage. In this review, we will synthesize the available information to arm health care providers with the contemporary knowledge on antithrombotic therapy and individualize treatment decisions.

Prevention of post-operative bleeding in hemostatic compromised patients using native porcine collagen fleeces-retrospective study of a consecutive case series

INTRODUCTION

Various anticoagulant therapy regimes bear the risk of postsurgical bleeding events after dental extractions. Local hemostyptic measures, e.g., collagen fleeces, are applied by surgeons to prevent such bleedings. No standard protocol in prevention of bleeding events has met general acceptance among surgeons yet.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine if post-operative bleeding can be prevented by suturing native collagen fleeces into extraction wounds immediately after teeth removal, regardless what anticoagulant regime is performed.

METHODS

A total of 741 extraction units were removed from 200 consecutive in-ward patients with or without alternation of different anticoagulant therapy regimes. Anti-vitamin K agents were the most prescribed drugs (n = 104, 52 %), followed by Acetylsalicylate (ASS) (n = 78, 39 %). Nineteen (9.5 %) patients received a dual anti-platelet therapy. Out of 104 patients receiving an anti-vitamin K agent (phenprocoumon), 84 patients were bridged, 20 patients continued to their anticoagulant therapy without alterations. Following careful tooth extraction, extraction sockets were filled using a native type I and III porcine collagen sponge (Collacone, Botiss Biomaterials, Berlin), supported by single and mattress sutures for local hemostasis. Post-operative bleeding events were rated according to their clinical relevance.

RESULTS

In the post-operative phase, 8 out of 200 consecutively treated patients experienced a post-operative bleeding event. All of them had been designated for a long-term anti-vitamin K therapy (p ≤ 0.05), and extractions were performed under a heparin bridging regime (n = 6) or an uninterrupted anti-vitamin K agent therapy (n = 2). No bleeding events occurred in patients with ASS 100 therapy or low-dose LMWH therapy (p ≤ 0.05), or in patients with dual anti-platelet therapy (0 out of 24). None of the bleeding events put patients' health at risk or required systemic intervention.

CONCLUSION

Sufficiently performed local hemostyptic measures, like the application of collagen fleeces in combination with atraumatic surgery, bears a great potential for preventing heavy bleeding events in hemostatic compromised patients, regardless of their anticoagulant therapy.

Effect of prior clopidogrel use on outcomes in medically managed acute coronary syndrome patients

OBJECTIVE

We investigated whether prior clopidogrel influenced long-term ischaemic and bleeding risks and modified the randomised treatment effect of clopidogrel versus prasugrel among medically managed patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) treated with dual antiplatelet therapy.

METHODS

Medically managed patients with ACS in the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial were randomised to clopidogrel versus prasugrel (plus aspirin), stratified by prior clopidogrel use. From the analysis population (n=8927), we compared two groups: 'clopidogrel in-hospital (n=6513)' (clopidogrel started ≤72 h of presentation for index ACS event) and 'prior-clopidogrel (n=2414)' (on clopidogrel ≥5 days before index hospitalisation). Treatment-related differences in ischaemic (all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and the composite of CV death/MI/stroke) and bleeding outcomes (severe/life-threatening or moderate bleeding events based on Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) criteria) through 30 months were analysed between patients in the two groups.

RESULTS

Compared with 'clopidogrel in-hospital,' 'prior clopidogrel' patients were younger (median 64 years vs 66 years, p<0.001), more likely to have prior CV events/revascularisation, and had a higher frequency of CV death, MI or stroke through 30 months (20.8% vs 18.2%, p=0.002), with no difference in bleeding events (2.3% vs 3.4%, p=0.50). Randomised treatment effect (prasugrel vs clopidogrel) was similar for ischaemic and bleeding outcomes in both groups (all pinteraction>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving clopidogrel before admission for ACS and subsequently treated only medically are at higher risk for CV events versus those not previously receiving clopidogrel. More potent antiplatelet inhibition with prasugrel versus clopidogrel did not significantly reduce this risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00699998.