Rationale and Design of the Effectiveness of LowEr maintenanCe dose of TicagRelor early After myocardial infarction (ELECTRA) pilot study

An alternative reduced dose regimen of ticagrelor for neuroendovascular patients

OBJECTIVE

There is a growing use of ticagrelor in patients undergoing neuroendovascular procedures, especially those who demonstrate clopidogrel resistance. While multiple dosages are studied in the cardiology literature, the optimal dose for patients with neurological pathology has yet to be established. Here, we describe a single center experience involving 39 patients who underwent neuroendovascular procedures that then received an adjusted lower dose of ticagrelor.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed between 2013 and 2017 for patients on dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) for either cervical or intracranial vascular pathologies, as well as stenting of the neurovasculature, including carotid arteries. Patients were placed on ticagrelor if their measured P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) responses to clopidogrel were outside the expected range in our center using the VerifyNow™ P2Y12 test. All patients were maintained on a dose of 45 mg twice daily except for one patient who received 22.5 mg twice daily. Responsiveness to ticagrelor were measured utilizing the VerifyNow™ P2Y12 test.

RESULTS

The mean number of days for follow-up post treatment initiation was 532 days. A total of 39 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 8 patients (21%) received implantation of intracranial stents (5 patients received pipeline embolization devices, 1 patient received stent-assisted coiling, and 2 patients received intracranial stents for atherosclerotic disease). Fourteen patients (35%) received carotid angioplasty and stenting. Seventeen patients (44%) did not receive permanent implantation of a stent. All patients on the lower dose ticagrelor of 45 mg twice daily achieved responsiveness (i.e., PRU < 194). Hemorrhagic transformation of ischemic stroke occurred in one patient (2.5%). No other hemorrhagic complications were encountered. No thromboembolic events were recorded aside from one patient (2.5%) with intracranial atherosclerotic disease who had an ischemic event.

CONCLUSIONS

A lower dose of ticagrelor (45 mg twice daily) appears to be safe and effective in this small cohort of patients who are resistant to clopidogrel per P2Y12 testing and who have increased risk of ischemic or hemorrhagic strokes due to neurovascular pathologies and implants. Further randomized studies are required to confirm these findings.

A new approach to ticagrelor-based de-escalation of antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndrome. A rationale for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated, multicenter clinical study

The risk of ischemic events gradually decreases after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), reaching a stable level after 1 month, while the risk of bleeding remains steady during the whole period of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT). Several de-escalation strategies of antiplatelet treatment aiming to enhance safety of DAPT without depriving it of its efficacy have been evaluated so far. We hypothesized that reduction of the ticagrelor maintenance dose 1 month after ACS and its continuation until 12 months after ACS may improve adherence to antiplatelet treatment due to better tolerability compared with the standard dose of ticagrelor. Moreover, improved safety of treatment and preserved anti-ischemic benefit may also be expected with additional acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) withdrawal. To evaluate these hypotheses, we designed the Evaluating Safety and Efficacy of Two Ticagrelor-based De-escalation Antiplatelet Strategies in Acute Coronary Syndrome - a randomized clinical trial (ELECTRA-SIRIO 2), to assess the influence of ticagrelor dose reduction with or without continuation of ASA versus DAPT with standard dose ticagrelor in reducing clinically relevant bleeding and maintaining anti-ischemic efficacy in ACS patients. The study was designed as a phase III, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, investigator-initiated clinical study with a 12-month follow-up (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04718025; EudraCT number: 2020-005130-15).

Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy in patients following percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety ticagrelor monotherapy following percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

Online databases were searched for relevant studies (published between the years 2015 and 2020) comparing 1-month Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy with 12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy following percutaneous coronary intervention. Primary outcomes assessed efficacy whereas secondary outcomes assessed safety. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on a random effect model were calculated and the analysis was carried out by the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Only 6 studies were selected for this meta-analytical research. The meta-analysis results: MI(OR:0.96, 95% CI:0.86-1.06, P = .40), stroke (OR:1.04, 95% CI: 0.87-1.25, P = .68), stent thrombosis (OR: 0.91,95% CI:0.76-1.10,P = .32),New-Q Wave (OR:0.85,95% CI: 0.72-1.00, P = .05), all cause death (OR:0.91, 95% CI: 0.87-0.96, P < .0001), death from cardiovascular (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58-0.99, P = .04), revascularization (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99, P = .03). Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a significantly lower rate of myocardial Infarction (MI), stroke, stent thrombosis, all cause death, death from cardiovascular and revascularization (OR:0.91,95% CI:0.87-0.96, P < .0001) when compared to DAPT. Besides, DAPT was associated with a significantly higher rate of BARC3 or 5 bleeding (OR:0.85, 95% CI: 0.68-1.06; P = .16) when compared to ticagrelor. When bleeding was further subdivided, minor or major bleeding was also significantly higher with DAPT (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.41-1.27; P = .26). GUSTO moderate or severe bleeding was also significantly higher with DAPT (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.39-1.52; P = .45).

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) can optimize ischemic and bleeding risks. And, it can reduce the occurrence of events outcome (MI, revascularization, stroke, stent thrombosis).

Pharmacodynamic and clinical efficacy of reduced ticagrelor maintenance doses in patients with coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

An increasing body of data indicates that a reduction of ticagrelor maintenance dose (MD) in stabilized patients might improve ticagrelor's safety profile and adherence to the treatment. The aim of this review was to discuss the rationale and summarize the current pharmacodynamic and clinical outcomes-based evidence from reduced MD of ticagrelor in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

A narrative systematic review based on a literature search using the PubMed database from its inception through to June 2020. A search strategy included a combination of relevant search terms regarding ticagrelor reduced MD. The pre-determined inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized or observational trials; (2) presentation of clinical or pharmacodynamic results; (3) evaluation of any ticagrelor MD below 90 mg BID in patients with CAD.

RESULTS

Studies evaluating the following ticagrelor reduced MD have been identified: 90 mg QD, 60 mg BID, 60 mg QD, 45 mg BID, 22.5 mg BID. Majority of trials assessing doses <60 mg BID were performed in Asian patients only. Antiplatelet effect of ticagrelor in CAD decreases with the dose, however even reduced MDs provide sufficient platelet inhibition, which is greater than in clopidogrel-treated patients. De-escalation of ticagrelor dose shows a propensity towards a reduced rate of bleeding and non-bleeding adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Ticagrelor doses below 90 mg BID generally show an acceptable profile of platelet inhibition. The number of studies reporting clinical outcomes in CAD patients receiving reduced MD of ticagrelor are limited, however available results indicate that in a stable setting this strategy offers improved safety with preserved efficacy in the prevention of thrombotic events.

Prolonged antithrombotic therapy in patients after acute coronary syndrome: A critical appraisal of current European Society of Cardiology guidelines

The increased risk of non-cardiovascular death in patients receiving clopidogrel or prasugrel in comparison with the placebo group in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) trial in contrast to the decreased risk of cardiovascular death and all-cause death seen in patients treated with low-dose ticagrelor in the EU label population of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial, resulted in inclusion in the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines the recommendation for use of clopidogrel or prasugrel only if the patient is not eligible for treatment with ticagrelor. The prevalence of the primary outcome composed of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction was lower in the low-dose rivaroxaban and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) group than in the ASA-alone group in the COMPASS trial. Moreover, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality rates were lower in the rivaroxaban-plus-ASA group. Comparison of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 and COMPASS trial patient characteristics clearly shows that each of these treatment strategies should be addressed at different groups of patients. A greater benefit in post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with a high risk of ischemic events and without high bleeding risk may be expected with ASA and ticagrelor 60 mg b.i.d. when the therapy is continued without interruption or with short interruption only after ACS. On the other hand, ASA and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. seems to be a better option when indications for dual antithrombotic therapy (DATT) appear after a longer time from ACS (more than 2 years) and/or from cessation of DAPT (more than 1 year) and in patients with multiple vascular bed atherosclerosis. Thus, both options of DATTs complement each other rather than compete, as can be presumed from the recommendations. However, a direct comparison between these strategies should be tested in future clinical trials.

Platelet inhibition with standard vs. lower maintenance dose of ticagrelor early after myocardial infarction (ELECTRA): a randomized, open-label, active-controlled pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic study

AIMS

Currently available data indicate that reduction of ticagrelor maintenance dose (MD) 1-3 years after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) not only provides sufficient platelet inhibition but also can improve ticagrelor's safety profile. The aim of this study was to compare the antiplatelet effect of reduced and standard ticagrelor MD in stable patients beginning 1 month after AMI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a single-centre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial, on Day 30 following AMI, 52 patients (26 in each study arm) were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either reduced (60 mg b.i.d) or standard (90 mg b.i.d) ticagrelor MD for the following 2 weeks. On Day 45 after AMI the antiplatelet effect of ticagrelor was evaluated with the VASP assay and Multiplate, and there were no significant differences in platelet inhibition between patients on reduced vs. standard MD [VASP: 10.4 (5.6-22.2) vs. 14.1 (9.4-22.1) platelet reactivity index; P = 0.30; Multiplate: 30.0 (24.0-39.0) vs. 26.5 (22.0-35.0) U; P = 0.26]. Likewise, no differences were found regarding the prevalence of on-ticagrelor high platelet reactivity between patients on ticagrelor 60 mg b.i.d vs. 90 mg b.i.d (VASP: 4% vs. 8%; P = 0.67; Multiplate: 15% vs. 8%; P = 0.54). Administration of reduced MD resulted in proportionally lower plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and its active metabolite on Day 45 after AMI.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that lowering ticagrelor MD 1 month after AMI confers an adequate antiplatelet effect that is comparable to the standard dose. The tested strategy warrants further research to assess its clinical efficacy and safety.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03251859.

Who approves/pays for additional monitoring?

Major considerations in the provision of healthcare are availability, affordability, accessibility, and appropriateness, especially in the setting of heart failure where disease burden is growing, developments have been rapid and newer biomarkers, diagnostic and imaging techniques, monitoring systems, devices, procedures, and drugs have all been developed in a relatively short period of time. Many monitoring and diagnostic systems have been developed but the disproportionate cost of conducting trials of their effectiveness has limited their uptake. There are added complexities, in that the utilization of doctors for the supervision of the monitoring results may be optimal in one setting and not in another because of differences in the characteristics of organization of healthcare provision, making even interpretation of the trials we have had, still difficult to interpret. New technologies are continuously changing the approach to healthcare and will reshape the structure of the healthcare systems in the future. Mobile technologies can empower patients and carers by giving them more control over their health and social care needs and reducing their dependence on healthcare professionals for monitoring their health, but a significant problem is the integration of the multitude of monitored parameters with clinical data and the recognition of intervention thresholds. Digital technology can help, but we need to prove its cost/efficacy and how it will be paid for. Governments in many European countries and worldwide are trying to establish frameworks that promote the convergence of standards and regulations for telemedicine solutions and yet simultaneously health authorities are closely scrutinizing healthcare spending, with the objective of reducing and optimizing expenditure in the provision of health services. There are multiple factors to be considered for the reimbursement models associated with the implementation of physiological monitoring yet it remains a challenge in cash-strapped health systems.

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

Objective:

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

Data sources:

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

Study selection:

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

Results:

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

Conclusions:

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

Assessment of adherence to medication in patients after myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Is there a place for newself-reported questionnaires?

INTRODUCTION

Non-adherence to medication regimen after myocardial infarction (MI) leads to increased morbidity and mortality and generates additional cost to the healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to critically discuss assessment methods of adherence to medication in patients after myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and the possible application of a new self-reported questionnaire.

METHODS

A systematic investigation of all published literature was conducted to minimize the risk of bias. A database search (PubMed, CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases) from January 1998 through December 2017.

RESULTS

Adequate assessment of patient adherence to treatment is necessary to understand the potential for adverse outcomes. Methods developed for adherence evaluation are classified as subjective and objective or as direct and indirect. Direct, objective measures reflect pharmacokinetics and include measurement of the drug or its metabolite concentration, evaluation of the presence of biological markers given with the drug and direct observation of patients' medication-taking behavior. Several indirect, objective methods are based on evaluation of the availability of prescribed medications assuming that medication is taken exactly as prescribed. Assessment of the effectiveness of treatment, both at the pharmacodynamic and clinical level, indirectly but objectively reflects adherence to treatment. Subjective methods, including patient-kept diaries, patient interviews and self-reported questionnaires, due to their simplicity, real-time feedback and low cost, are often used for adherence evaluation in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the availability, convenience and variety of methods, measuring adherence still remains a real challenge. Using a well designed questionnaire provides an opportunity to identify patients at increased risk of non-adherence and the obstacles impeding implementation of the treatment plan, allowing implementation of tailored interventions in order to improve patient medication-taking behavior.

Evaluating current and emerging antithrombotic therapy currently available for the treatment of acute coronary syndrome in geriatric populations

INTRODUCTION

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) represent one of the most perilous presentations of ischemic heart disease. Temporal trends clearly demonstrate that ACS occur later and later in life. Elderly patients with ACS comprise a populous and growing group, with more than half of individuals presenting with myocardial infarction being 75 years or older. Nevertheless, geriatric patients are greatly underrepresented in the landmark ACS trials evaluating innovative pharmacological strategies.

AREAS COVERED

The authors critically summarize recently published research on contemporary and emerging antithrombotic therapy for the treatment of ACS in geriatric patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Elderly ACS patients are characterized by simultaneously increased risk of cardiovascular events and bleeding. Very few studies assessing the efficacy and safety of novel ACS pharmacotherapy in geriatric patients are currently available. Guidelines on the treatment of ACS are based on the overall results of major randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and data supporting the recommended therapy in elderly mainly derive from subanalyses of these RCTs. Properly designed and powered RCTs are necessary to properly evaluate the net effect of current and emerging pharmacotherapy in geriatric patients. Until such data are available, elderly ACS patients should receive treatment according to the general recommendations.

Adherence to treatment assessed with the Adherence in Chronic Diseases Scale in patients after myocardial infarction

INTRODUCTION

A substantial subset of patients after myocardial infarction (MI) discontinue pivotal medication early after discharge. In particular, cessation of antiplatelet treatment may lead to catastrophic ischemic events. Thus, adherence to prescribed medication in patients after MI is an issue of medical and social concern.

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the level of adherence to treatment using a newly developed scale in patients after MI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single-center, prospective, observational cohort clinical study with a 6-month follow-up was performed. Patients with physical or cognitive impairment, prisoners, soldiers, and family members and coworkers of the researchers were excluded from the study. The impact of selected sociodemographic and clinical factors on adherence was evaluated in 221 patients (63 women and 158 men) aged 30 to 91 years.

RESULTS

The results obtained with the Adherence in Chronic Diseases Scale (ACDS) ranged from 7 to 28 points; with the average and median scored being 23.35 and 24, respectively. The ACDS score reflects the level of adherence to prescribed medication. The high ACDS scores (>26 points) were obtained in 59 (26.7%) patients, intermediate scores (21-26 points) in 110 (49.8%) and low scores (<21 points) in 52 subjects (23.5%). Acute coronary syndrome (re-ACS) occurred in 18 (8.1%) patients during the follow-up period. The high-level adherence (ACDS score >26 points) was found in 11.1% of patients with re-ACS vs 28.4% of the remaining ones (P=0.1). Lower scores (mean ± standard deviation) in re-ACS patients were found for items 2 and 3 of the ACDS: 3.11±0.68 vs 3.45±0.73 (P=0.02) and 3.28±0.89 vs 3.64±0.64 (P=0.04), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Age and previous MI were found to be independent factors influencing adherence assessed with the ACDS.