Advances in antiplatelet treatment for acute coronary syndromes

An "occlusive thrombosis-on-a-chip" microfluidic device for investigating the effect of anti-thrombotic drugs

Cardiovascular disease remains one of the world's leading causes of death. Myocardial infarction (heart attack) is triggered by occlusion of coronary arteries by platelet-rich thrombi (clots). The development of new anti-platelet drugs to prevent myocardial infarction continues to be an active area of research and is dependent on accurately modelling the process of clot formation. Occlusive thrombi can be generated in vivo in a range of species, but these models are limited by variability and lack of relevance to human disease. Although in vitro models using human blood can overcome species-specific differences and improve translatability, many models do not generate occlusive thrombi. In those models that do achieve occlusion, time to occlusion is difficult to measure in an unbiased and objective manner. In this study we developed a simple and robust approach to determine occlusion time of a novel in vitro microfluidic assay. This highlighted the potential for occlusion to occur in thrombosis microfluidic devices through off-site coagulation, obscuring the effect of anti-platelet drugs. We therefore designed a novel occlusive thrombosis-on-a-chip microfluidic device that reliably generates occlusive thrombi at arterial shear rates by quenching downstream coagulation. We further validated our device and methods by using the approved anti-platelet drug, eptifibatide, recording a significant difference in the "time to occlude" in treated devices compared to control conditions. These results demonstrate that this device can be used to monitor the effect of antithrombotic drugs on time to occlude, and, for the first time, delivers this essential data in an unbiased and objective manner.

Using nationwide ‘big data’ from linked electronic health records to help improve outcomes in cardiovascular diseases: 33 studies using methods from epidemiology, informatics, economics and social science in the ClinicAl disease research using LInked Bespoke studies and Electronic health Records (CALIBER) programme

Background

Electronic health records (EHRs), when linked across primary and secondary care and curated for research use, have the potential to improve our understanding of care quality and outcomes.

Objective

To evaluate new opportunities arising from linked EHRs for improving quality of care and outcomes for patients at risk of or with coronary disease across the patient journey.

Design

Epidemiological cohort, health informatics, health economics and ethnographic approaches were used.

Setting

230 NHS hospitals and 226 general practices in England and Wales.

Participants

Up to 2 million initially healthy adults, 100,000 people with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) and up to 300,000 patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Main outcome measures

Quality of care, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) events.

Data platform and methods

We created a novel research platform [ClinicAl disease research using LInked Bespoke studies and Electronic health Records (CALIBER)] based on linkage of four major sources of EHR data in primary care and national registries. We carried out 33 complementary studies within the CALIBER framework. We developed a web-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) in hospital chest pain clinics. We established a novel consented prognostic clinical cohort of SCAD patients.

Results

CALIBER was successfully established as a valid research platform based on linked EHR data in nearly 2 million adults with > 600 EHR phenotypes implemented on the web portal (seehttps://caliberresearch.org/portal). Despite national guidance, key opportunities for investigation and treatment were missed across the patient journey, resulting in a worse prognosis for patients in the UK compared with patients in health systems in other countries. Our novel, contemporary, high-resolution studies showed heterogeneous associations for CVD risk factors across CVDs. The CDSS did not alter the decision-making behaviour of clinicians in chest pain clinics. Prognostic models using real-world data validly discriminated risk of death and events, and were used in cost-effectiveness decision models.

Conclusions

Emerging ‘big data’ opportunities arising from the linkage of records at different stages of a patient’s journey are vital to the generation of actionable insights into the diagnosis, risk stratification and cost-effective treatment of people at risk of, or with, CVD.

Future work

The vast majority of NHS data remain inaccessible to research and this hampers efforts to improve efficiency and quality of care and to drive innovation. We propose three priority directions for further research. First, there is an urgent need to ‘unlock’ more detailed data within hospitals for the scale of the UK’s 65 million population. Second, there is a need for scaled approaches to using EHRs to design and carry out trials, and interpret the implementation of trial results. Third, large-scale, disease agnostic genetic and biological collections linked to such EHRs are required in order to deliver precision medicine and to innovate discovery.

Study registration

CALIBER studies are registered as follows: study 2 – NCT01569139, study 4 – NCT02176174 and NCT01164371, study 5 – NCT01163513, studies 6 and 7 – NCT01804439, study 8 – NCT02285322, and studies 26–29 – NCT01162187. Optimising the Management of Angina is registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN54381840.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme (RP-PG-0407-10314) (all 33 studies) and additional funding from the Wellcome Trust (study 1), Medical Research Council Partnership grant (study 3), Servier (study 16), NIHR Research Methods Fellowship funding (study 19) and NIHR Research for Patient Benefit (study 33).

The safety and efficacy of intracoronary nitrite infusion during acute myocardial infarction (NITRITE-AMI): study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a major cause of death and disability in the UK and worldwide. Presently, timely and effective reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) remains the most effective treatment strategy for limiting infarct size, preserving left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and improving clinical outcomes. However, the process of reperfusion can itself induce cardiomyocyte death, known as myocardial reperfusion injury, for which there is currently no effective therapy. Extensive preclinical evidence exists to suggest that sodium nitrite (as a source of endogenous nitric oxide) is an effective therapeutic strategy for preventing myocardial reperfusion injury. The purpose of NITRITE-AMI is to test whether sodium nitrite reduces reperfusion injury and subsequent infarct size in patients undergoing PPCI for MI.

METHODS AND DESIGN

NITRITE-AMI is a double-blind, randomised, single-centre, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether intracoronary nitrite injection reduces infarct size in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty. The study will enrol 80 patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Patients will be randomised to receive either a bolus of intracoronary sodium nitrite or placebo (sodium chloride) at the time of PPCI. The primary outcome is infarct size assessed by creatine kinase area under the curve (AUC) over 48 h. Secondary endpoints include troponin T AUC and infarct size, LV dimensions and myocardial salvage index assessed by cardiac MR (CMR), markers of platelet reactivity and inflammation, the safety and tolerability of intracoronary nitrite, and 1 year major adverse cardiac events.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the local ethics committee (NRES Committee London West London: 11/LO/1500) and by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) (EudraCT nr. 2010-022460-12). The results of the trial will be published according to the CONSORT statement and will be presented at conferences and reported in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

United Kingdom Clinical Research Network (Study ID 12117), http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01584453) and Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN:38736987).

Current antiplatelet options for NSTE-ACS patients

Non-ST elevation (NSTE) myocardial infarction and unstable angina are the most common clinical presentations of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Platelet activation is central to the pathogenesis of NSTE-ACS and consensus guidelines that advocate early revascularization supported by intensive antiplatelet therapy. This review examines the drugs used concurrently with aspirin as dual antiplatelet therapy in the NSTE-ACS setting. Clopidogrel represented an important therapeutic advance. However, variations in platelet response and a relatively slow onset of action compromise outcomes with clopidogrel. Evidence reviewed in this article shows that in NSTE-ACS patients, ticagrelor and prasugrel are more effective than clopidogrel and are relatively well tolerated, with an acceptable and manageable bleeding risk. The literature suggests several differences between ticagrelor and prasugrel that should allow clinicians to better tailor treatment to the patient. Head-to-head comparisons are now needed to compare directly the risks and benefits of ticagrelor and prasugrel in NSTE-ACS. Further studies also need to address other outstanding issues such as the benefits and risks of prasugrel pre-treatment and to stratify efficacy and tolerability according to diabetes mellitus (DM) and other co-morbidities. In the meantime, the issues discussed in this review should enhance clinicians' ability to optimize and individualize NSTE-ACS treatment, thereby further reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with this common cardiovascular condition.

Anticoagulants: newer ones, mechanisms, and perioperative updates

With a growing number of new anticoagulant/antiplatelet agents being developed, it is likely that an increasing number of patients taking these drugs will present for surgery and other procedures. A familiarity with mechanisms of action and drug interactions helps to maintain optimal patient safety in the perioperative period. Furthermore, it is crucial for anesthesiologists to remain current on recommendations regarding discontinuation or need to continue the newer anticoagulants/antiplatelet drugs in patients presenting for surgery and/or regional anesthesia. Further studies are needed for monitoring of many of these newer agents and to identify antidotes.

Adjusted indirect comparison meta-analysis of prasugrel versus ticagrelor for patients with acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Clopidogrel is beneficial after ACS. Recent data suggest the superiority of prasugrel or ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel. However, there is no comparison of prasugrel vs. ticagrelor. We performed an adjusted indirect meta-analysis comparing prasugrel vs. ticagrelor for acute coronary syndromes (ACSs).

METHODS

Randomized trials were searched in PubMed. The primary end-point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. Odds ratios (OR) were computed (95% confidence intervals).

RESULTS

Three trial (32,893) patients were included. Overall, either prasugrel or ticagrelor appeared significantly superior to clopidogrel for the 12-month risk of death, MI or stroke (OR=0.83 [0.77-0.89], p<0.001), death (OR=0.83 [0.74-0.93], p=0.001), MI (OR=0.79 [0.73-0.86], p<0.001), and stent thrombosis (OR=0.61 [0.51-0.74], p<0.001), without any significant difference in stroke or major bleeding (both p>0.05), despite more frequent drug discontinuation (OR=1.12 [1.05-1.19], p<0.001). Head-to-head comparison of prasugrel vs. ticagrelor showed no significant differences in overall death, MI, stroke, or their composite (all p>0.05). Prasugrel was associated with a significantly lower risk of stent thrombosis (OR=0.64 [0.43-0.93], p=0.020). Ticagrelor was associated with a significantly lower risk of any major bleeding (OR=1.43 [1.10-1.85], p=0.007), and major bleeding associated with bypass grafting (OR=4.30 [1.73-10.6], p=0.002). However, the more clinically relevant risk of major bleeding not related to bypass surgery was similar with either prasugrel or ticagrelor (OR=1.06 [0.77-1.45], p=0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Prasugrel and ticagrelor are superior to clopidogrel for ACS. Head-to-head comparison suggests similar efficacy and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor, but prasugrel appears more protective from stent thrombosis, while causing more bleedings.