Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor as Part of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

A Comprehensive Review of the Pleiotropic Effects of Ticagrelor

AIMS

This review summarizes the findings of preclinical studies evaluating the pleiotropic effects of ticagrelor. These include attenuation of ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI), inflammation, adverse cardiac remodeling, and atherosclerosis. In doing so, it aims to provide novel insights into ticagrelor's mechanisms and benefits over other P2Y12 inhibitors. It also generates viable hypotheses for the results of seminal clinical trials assessing ticagrelor use in acute and chronic coronary syndromes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A comprehensive review of the preclinical literature demonstrates that ticagrelor protects against IRI in the setting of both an acute myocardial infarction (MI), and when MI occurs while on chronic treatment. Maintenance therapy with ticagrelor also likely mitigates adverse inflammation, cardiac remodeling, and atherosclerosis, while improving stem cell recruitment. These effects are probably mediated by ticagrelor's ability to increase local interstitial adenosine levels which activate downstream cardio-protective molecules. Attenuation and augmentation of these pleiotropic effects by high-dose aspirin and caffeine, and statins respectively may help explain variable outcomes in PLATO and subsequent randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

CONCLUSION

Most RCTs and meta-analyses have not evaluated the pleiotropic effects of ticagrelor. We need further studies comparing cardiovascular outcomes in patients treated with ticagrelor versus other P2Y12 inhibitors that are mindful of the unique pleiotropic advantages afforded by ticagrelor, as well as possible interactions with other therapies (e.g., aspirin, statins, caffeine).

Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Regimens for High-Bleeding Risk Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Adverse Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Patients of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) at a high-bleeding risk (HBR) often require dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. Clopidogrel and ticagrelor are the most commonly used antiplatelet agents in DAPT regimens. However, the safety profiles of these drugs in ACS patients at HBR remain a subject of ongoing debate.

AIM

To investigate any difference between the safety of clopidogrel and ticagrelor used as a part of DAPT regimen in ACS patients at HBR.

METHODS

A systematic search on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify experimental and observational studies published up to the knowledge cutoff date in September 2023. Studies comparing the safety of clopidogrel and ticagrelor in ACS patients at HBR were included for analysis. The primary outcomes assessed were major bleeding events, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI), while secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and net adverse clinical and cerebral events (NACCE).

RESULTS

We included a total of 8 observational studies in our meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in the risk of MI (pooled RR = 1.43; 95% CI 1.12-1.83; P = 0.005) in the patients using clopidogrel. There were no statistically significant differences in major bleeding events (pooled RR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.82-1.09; P = 0.44), stroke (pooled RR = 1.36; 95% CI 0.86-2.14; P = 0.18), all-cause mortality (pooled RR = 1.17; 95% CI 0.97-1.41; P = 0.10), MACCE (pooled RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.76-1.50; P = 0.69) and NACCE (pooled RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.66-1.37; P = 0.78) between the two groups. Subgroup analyses based on region were performed.

CONCLUSION

Both drugs are generally safe for treating ACS patients with HBR at baseline, although a higher risk of MI was observed with the use of clopidogrel. Nevertheless, drug choice should factor in regional variations, patient-specific characteristics, cost, accessibility, and potential drug interactions.

Refractory drug-induced systemic small-vessel vasculitis with two varied extracutaneous manifestations: a case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Clopidogrel and ticagrelor are rarely reported to cause vasculitis via drug hypersensitivity reaction, largely mediated by T cells and immunoglobulin E (IgE). Despite therapeutic advances, the etiology of refractory vasculitides remains incompletely understood. Recently, (non)immunological mechanisms bypassing T cells and IgE have been proposed to explain resistance to standard immunosuppressants. Herein, we report a case of refractory drug-induced systemic small-vessel vasculitis with varied extracutaneous manifestations and incorporate multiple sources of data to provide detailed accounts of complex (non)immunological phenomena involved in this case. Study objectives are to provide an insight about rare presentations of commonly used drugs, upgrade the pathophysiological concepts of drug-induced vasculitis, raise need for further investigation to define causes and risk factors for refractory vasculitis, and discuss most of the current knowledge suggesting novel therapeutic approaches to treat this vasculitis. To our knowledge, this is the first case of the two flares of systemic small-vessel vasculitis in a single patient in response to clopidogrel and ticagrelor exposure, respectively. However, this report is limited by attribution/observer bias.

CASE PRESENTATION

We herein report a 24-year-old Caucasian male student with a medical history of mild seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, tension-type headaches, posttraumatic arterial stenosis, and previous exposure to ibuprofen, acetylsalicylic acid, and mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine who suffered largely from acute urticaria and dyspnea after 20 days of acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel introduction. A skin punch biopsy confirmed leukocytoclastic vasculitis. Serologic antibody testing, complement analysis, microbiologic testing, and cancer biomarkers revealed no abnormalities. Regarding the patient's medical history, both acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel were exchanged for ticagrelor. Furthermore, the addition of naproxen, cyclosporine, bilastine, prednisolone, and montelukast resulted in complete recovery. After 7 days, diarrhea and hematuria occurred. Urinalysis and computed tomography showed reversible proteinuria with gross hematuria and hypodense changes in kidney medulla, respectively, associated with discontinuation of ticagrelor and naproxen. In addition, the patient recovered completely without any immunosuppression up-titration.

CONCLUSIONS

This case highlights the role of clopidogrel and ticagrelor as possible triggering agents for systemic small-vessel vasculitis and offers an insight into novel therapeutic strategies for refractory vasculitides. Further research is needed to build on the findings of a current report.