Walking the Line with Ticagrelor: Meta-Analysis Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Monotherapy after a Short Course of Ticagrelor-Based Dual Antiplatelet Therapy versus Standard Therapy in Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Abbreviated ticagrelor based dual antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Few randomized clinical trials have evaluated the safety and efficacy of abbreviated ticagrelor based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS); however, these trials were underpowered to detect differences in hard clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Scopus databases was performed through June 2024, for trials that compared abbreviated (≤3-months) versus standard 12-months ticagrelor based DAPT in ACS. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding. Endpoints were measured at 12-months after DAPT initiation. Data were pooled using random-effects model. Effect measure utilized was risk ratio (RR). Heterogeneity was assessed via Chi-squared and Higgin's I2 test. RevMan 5.0 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom) was utilized to perform statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Five trials were included in this analysis with 21,407 patients assessed. ULTIMATE-DAPT, T-PASS, and GLOBAL LEADERS-ACS assessed 1-month DAPT duration while TICO and TWILIGHT-ACS assessed 3-months DAPT duration. The average age was 62.7 years and 22.7 % were women. ACS presentations included non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (40.1 %), unstable angina (35.2 %), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (31.5 %). Abbreviated ticagrelor based DAPT was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.78; 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) 0.62-0.98, I2 = 0 %) compared with standard duration DAPT. There was no difference between groups in cardiovascular death (RR 0.65; 95 % CI 0.41-1.03, I2 = 0 %), myocardial infarction (RR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.85-1.27, I2 = 0 %), stent thrombosis (RR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.64-1.45, I2 = 0 %), or ischemic stroke (RR 0.90; 95 % CI 0.62-1.30, I2 = 0 %). Abbreviated DAPT was associated with lower risk of major bleeding (RR 0.50; 95 % CI 0.38-0.66, I2 = 46 %).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis includes the totality of randomized data evaluating the merits of abbreviated ticagrelor based DAPT after ACS. The salient study finding was the observed reduced risk of all-cause mortality and major bleeding with abbreviated DAPT approach.

Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy following a brief DAPT vs. prolonged 12-month DAPT in ACS patients post-PCI: a meta-analysis of RCTs

BACKGROUND

As per current guidelines, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should be started on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for a period of 12 months.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of brief DAPT (up to 3 months) succeeded by ticagrelor monotherapy compared with a 12-month DAPT in ACS patients following PCI.

METHODS

We systematically searched Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed to find relevant randomized clinical trials. Examined outcomes included the incidence of major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events (MACCE), bleeding events, and the composite incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE).

RESULTS

Our primary analysis included 21,927 ACS patients from six RCTs. Our pooled results indicate that following PCI in individuals with ACS, brief DAPT followed by ticagrelor did not increase the risk of MACCE (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.07) but significantly reduced the risk of minor or major bleeding (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.44-0.62) and NACE (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86) compared with a long-term DAPT within a follow-up of 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Brief DAPT followed by ticagrelor monotherapy is superior to a 12-month DAPT in offering a net clinical advantage in ACS patients following PCI.

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 and Efficacy of CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Escalation of P2Y12 Inhibitor Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chronic Kidney Disease: a Post Hoc Analysis of the TAILOR-PCI Study

PURPOSE

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a risk factor for ischemic and bleeding events with dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether the presence of CYP2C19 loss of function (LOF) alleles modifies this risk, and whether a genotype-guided (GG) escalation of P2Y12 inhibitor therapy post PCI is safe in this population is unclear.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of randomized patients in TAILOR PCI. Patients were divided into two groups based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) threshold of < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 for CKD (n = 539) and non-CKD (n = 4276). The aggregate of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and severe recurrent coronary ischemia at 12-months post-PCI was assessed as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoint was major or minor bleeding.

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation) eGFR among patients with CKD was 49.5 (8.4) ml/min/1.72 m2. Among all patients, there was no significant interaction between randomized strategy and CKD status for any endpoint. Among LOF carriers, the interaction between randomized strategy and CKD status on composite ischemic outcome was not significant (p = 0.2). GG strategy was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding in either CKD group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this exploratory analysis, escalation of P2Y12 inhibitor therapy following a GG strategy did not reduce the primary outcome in CKD. However, P2Y12 inhibitor escalation following a GG strategy was not associated with increased bleeding risk in CKD. Larger studies in CKD are needed.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01742117?term=TAILOR-PCI&draw=2&rank=1 . NCT01742117.

Definitions and Standardized Endpoints for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcations

The Bifurcation Academic Research Consortium (Bif-ARC) project originated from the need to overcome the paucity of standardization and comparability between studies involving bifurcation coronary lesions. This document is the result of a collaborative effort between academic research organizations and the most renowned interventional cardiology societies focused on bifurcation lesions in Europe, the United States, and Asia. This consensus provides standardized definitions for bifurcation lesions; the criteria to judge the side branch relevance; the procedural, mechanistic, and clinical endpoints for every type of bifurcation study; and the follow-up methods. Considering the complexity of bifurcation lesions and their evaluation, detailed instructions and technical aspects for site and core laboratory analysis of bifurcation lesions are also reported. The recommendations included within this consensus will facilitate pooled analyses and the effective comparison of data in the future, improving the clinical relevance of trials in bifurcation lesions, and the quality of care in this subset of patients.

Stent Thrombosis and Restenosis with Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents: Predictors and Current Evidence

Iterations in stent technologies, advances in pharmacotherapy, and awareness of the implications of implantation techniques have markedly reduced the risk of stent failure, both in the form of stent thrombosis (ST) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, given the number of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) performed worldwide every year, ST and ISR, albeit occurring at a fairly low rate, represent a public health problem even with contemporary DES platforms. The understanding of mechanisms and risk factors for these two PCI complications has been of fundamental importance for the parallel evolution of stent technologies. Risk factors associated with ST and ISR are usually divided into patient-, lesion-, device- and procedure-related. A number of studies have shown how certain risk factors are related to early (1 month) versus late/very late ST (between 1 month and 1 year and >1 year, respectively). However, more research is required to conclusively show the role of time-dependence of risk factors also in the incidence of ISR (early [1 year] or late [>1 year]). A thorough risk assessment is required due to the complex etiology of ST and ISR. The most effective strategy to treat ST and ISR is still to prevent them; hence, it is crucial to identify patient-, lesion-, device- and procedure-related predictors.