Efficacy of combination antiplatelet therapy and nicardipine for chronic cerebral infarction

Thienopyridine derivatives versus aspirin for preventing stroke and other serious vascular events in high vascular risk patients

BACKGROUND

Aspirin is the most widely studied and prescribed antiplatelet agent for preventing serious vascular events, reducing the odds of such events among high vascular risk patients by about a quarter. Thienopyridine derivatives inhibit platelet activation by a different mechanism and so may be more effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of thienopyridine derivatives (ticlopidine and clopidogrel) versus aspirin for preventing serious vascular events (stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or vascular death) in patients at high risk, and specifically in patients with a previous TIA or ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the trials registers of the Stroke, Heart and Peripheral Vascular Diseases Cochrane Review Groups (last searched July 2008), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2008) and EMBASE (1980 to August 2008). We also searched reference lists of relevant papers, and contacted other researchers and the pharmaceutical company Sanofi-BMS (December 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All unconfounded, double blind, randomised trials directly comparing a thienopyridine derivative with aspirin in high vascular risk patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We sought additional data from the principal investigators of the largest trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials involving 26,865 high vascular risk patients. The trials were generally of high quality. Aspirin was compared with ticlopidine in nine trials (7633 patients) and with clopidogrel in one trial (19,185 patients). Compared with aspirin, allocation to a thienopyridine produced a modest, just statistically significant, reduction in the odds of a serious vascular event (11.6% versus 12.5%; odds ratio (OR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 0.99), corresponding to the avoidance of 10 (95% CI 0 to 20) serious vascular events per 1000 patients treated for about two years. However, the wide confidence interval includes the possibility of negligible additional benefit. Compared with aspirin, thienopyridines significantly reduced gastrointestinal adverse effects. However, thienopyridines increased the odds of skin rash and diarrhoea, ticlopidine more than clopidogrel. Allocation to ticlopidine, but not clopidogrel, significantly increased the odds of neutropenia. In patients with TIA/ischaemic stroke, the results were similar to those for all patients combined.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The thienopyridine derivatives are at least as effective as aspirin in preventing serious vascular events in patients at high risk, and possibly somewhat more so. However, the size of any additional benefit is uncertain and could be negligible. Clopidogrel has a more favourable adverse effects profile than ticlopidine and so is the thienopyridine of choice. It should be used as an alternative to aspirin in patients genuinely intolerant of or allergic to aspirin.

Thienopyridine derivatives (ticlopidine, clopidogrel) versus aspirin for preventing stroke and other serious vascular events in high vascular risk patients

BACKGROUND

The most widely studied and prescribed antiplatelet agent for the prevention of stroke and other serious vascular events among high vascular risk patients is aspirin. Aspirin inhibits platelet activation by inhibiting platelet cyclooxygenase and thromboxane production, and reduces the odds of a serious vascular event by about a quarter. The thienopyridines (ticlopidine and clopidogrel) inhibit platelet activation by a different mechanism to aspirin (blocking the ADP receptor on platelets), and so may be more effective than aspirin.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness and safety of thienopyridine derivatives (ticlopidine and clopidogrel) versus aspirin for the prevention of serious vascular events (stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or vascular death) in patients at high risk of such events, and specifically in patients with a previous TIA or ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (most recent search: March 1999) and the Antithrombotic Trialists' database, and also contacted Sanofi pharmaceutical company.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All unconfounded, double blind, randomised trials directly comparing ticlopidine or clopidogrel with aspirin in high vascular risk patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Additional data were sought from the principal investigators of the largest trial.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials involving a total of 22,656 high vascular risk patients were included. The trials were of high quality and comparable. Aspirin was compared with ticlopidine in three trials (3471 patients) and with clopidogrel in one trial (19,185 patients). Allocation to a thienopyridine was associated with a modest, yet statistically significant, reduction in the odds of a serious vascular event (12. 0% vs 13.0%; OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.84 to 0.98; 2p = 0.01), corresponding to the avoidance of 11 (95% CI: 2 to 19) serious vascular events per 1000 patients treated for about two years. There was also a reduction in stroke (5.7% vs 6.4%; OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.98; 7 [95% CI: 1 to 13] strokes avoided per 1000 patients treated for two years). Compared with aspirin, thienopyridines produced a significant reduction in the odds of gastrointestinal haemorrhage and other upper gastrointestinal upset, but a significant increase in the odds of skin rash and of diarrhoea. However, the increased odds of skin rash and diarrhoea were greater for ticlopidine than for clopidogrel. Allocation to ticlopidine, but not clopidogrel, was associated with a significant increase in the odds of neutropenia (2.3% vs 0.8%; OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.5 to 4.8). In the subset of patients with TIA/ischaemic stroke, the results were similar to those for all patients combined. However, since these patients are at particularly high risk of stroke, allocation to a thienopyridine was associated with a larger absolute reduction in stroke (10.4% vs 12.0%; OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.97; 16 [95% CI: 3 to 28] strokes avoided per 1000 patients treated for two years).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The available randomised evidence shows that the thienopyridine derivatives are modestly but significantly more effective than aspirin in preventing serious vascular events in patients at high risk (and specifically in TIA/ischaemic stroke patients), but there is uncertainty about the size of the additional benefit. The thienopyridines are also associated with less gastrointestinal haemorrhage and other upper gastrointestinal upset than aspirin, but an excess of skin rash and diarrhoea. The risk of skin rash and diarrhoea is greater with ticlopidine than with clopidogrel. Ticlopidine, but not clopidogrel, is associated with an excess of neutropenia and of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura.