Efficacy and Safety of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Smoking and outcomes following personalized antiplatelet therapy in chronic coronary syndrome patients: A substudy from the randomized PATH-PCI trial

BACKGROUND

This is a sub-analysis of the Personalized Antithrombotic Therapy for Coronary Heart Disease after PCI (PATH-PCI) trial in China to explore the relationship between smoking and outcomes following personalized antiplatelet therapy (PAT) in chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

As a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled and open-label trial, the PATH-PCI trial randomized CCS patients undergoing PCI into standard group or personalized group guided by a novel platelet function test (PFT), from December 2016 to February 2018. All patients were divided into smokers and nonsmokers according to their smoking status. Subsequently, we underwent a 180-day follow-up evaluation. The primary endpoint was the net adverse clinical events (NACE).

RESULTS

Regardless of smoking status, in the incidence of NACE, there was a reduction with PAT but that the reductions are not statistically significant. In the incidence of bleeding events, we found no statistically significant difference between two groups (smokers: 2.0% vs. 1.4%, HR = 1.455, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.595-3.559, p = .412; nonsmokers: 2.2% vs. 1.8%, HR = 1.228, 95% CI: 0.530-2.842, p = .632). In smokers, PAT reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) by 48.7% (3.0% vs. 5.9%, HR = 0.513, 95% CI: 0.290-0.908, p = .022), compared with standard antiplatelet therapy (SAT). PAT also reduced the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) but there was no statistically difference in the reductions (p > .05). In nonsmokers, PAT reduced MACCE and MACE by 51.5% (3.3% vs. 6.7%, HR = 0.485, 95% CI: 0.277-0.849, p = .011) and 63.5% (1.8% vs. 4.9%, HR = 0.365, 95% CI: 0.178-0.752, p = .006), respectively. When testing p-values for interaction, we found there was no significant interaction of smoking status with treatment effects of PAT (pint-NACE  = .184, pint-bleeding  = .660).

CONCLUSION

Regardless of smoking, PAT reduced the MACE and MACCE, with no significant difference in bleeding. This suggests that PAT was an recommendable regimen to CCS patients after PCI, taking into consideration both ischemic and bleeding risk.

Comparison of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Elective Coronary Stenting: A Double Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Dual antiplatelet therapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor (e.g., clopidogrel and ticagrelor) and aspirin is recommended for at least one year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to prevent further myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis as the major adverse effects of PCI.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial was conducted from October 2022 to March 2023. Patients who had undergone elective PCI were included in the study. Patients were randomized into two different groups. One group took ASA 80 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg once daily, while the other took ASA 80 mg once daily and ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily. After six months of close follow-up, patients were asked to score their dyspnea on a 10-point Likert scale. They were also asked about dyspnea on exertion, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea (PND), bleeding, and the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs).

Results

223 patients were allocated to the clopidogrel group and 214 to the ticagrelor group. In the ticagrelor group, 95 patients (44.3%) reported dyspnea at rest, compared with only 44 patients (19.7%) in the clopidogrel group (P < 0.001). MACEs occurred in 7 patients (2.8%) in the ticagrelor group, compared with 16 (7.6%) in the clopidogrel group (P = 0.031). Eight patients (3.8%) reported bleeding with ticagrelor, as did seven (3.2%) with clopidogrel (P = 0.799).

Conclusions

New-onset dyspnea was recorded more frequently with ticagrelor than clopidogrel, yet fewer MACEs occurred with ticagrelor (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT05858918).

Real-World Data on Potent P2Y12 Inhibition in Patients with Suspected Chronic Coronary Syndrome, Referred for Coronary Angiography

INTRODUCTION

Potential benefit with potent platelet inhibition in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been discussed. The aim of this study was to compare a potent P2Y12 inhibition strategy using ticagrelor with clopidogrel in CCS patients referred for coronary angiography (CA) and PCI if feasible.

METHODS

In this retrospective real-world study, patients referred for outpatient CA due to suspected CCS were included. To adjust for group differences, a propensity score reflecting the probability of being treated with ticagrelor was calculated and added to the logistic regression outcome model.

RESULTS

In total, 1,003 patients were included in the primary analysis (577 treated with clopidogrel and 426 with ticagrelor). Among clopidogrel-treated patients, 132 (22.9%) experienced a bleeding complication compared with 93 (21.8%) among ticagrelor-treated patients, with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.70). There was no difference in bleeding severity. Furthermore, we observed no statistically significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE [death, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, or stroke]) (1.2% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.17). A subgroup analysis restricted to patients undergoing PCI ad hoc displayed a similar pattern. Also, patients undergoing CA without PCI ad hoc frequently experienced a bleeding complication, with no difference between the two treatments (21.0% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.27). Propensity score adjusted analyses confirmed the results.

DISCUSSION

In patients with CCS referred for CA and PCI if feasible, a more potent P2Y12 inhibition strategy with ticagrelor was not associated with bleeding complications or MACE compared with clopidogrel.

Comparative efficacy and safety of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in patients with chronic coronary syndromes after percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aimed to evaluate and compare the interactive effects of different antiplatelet or anticoagulation strategies in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Randomized controlled trials comparing different antiplatelet or anticoagulant strategies in patients with CCS after PCI were included. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), mortality, ischemic and bleeding events. Compared to aspirin alone, addition of prasugrel or ticagrelor to aspirin resulted in lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) [odds ratio (OR): 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.38-0.62); 0.810-0.84 (0.69-0.98)] and any stroke [0.56 (0.42-0.75)] at the expense of increased risk of major bleeding [1.79 (1.34-2.39); 2.08-2.38 (1.56-3.28)], whereas, clopidogrel monotherapy reduced the risk of any stroke, major bleeding, and intracranial bleeding. On subgroup analysis, compared with aspirin alone, addition of prasugrel resulted in lower MACE [0.72 (0.60-0.86)], MI [0.48 (0.38-0.62)], and stent thrombosis [0.29 (0.09-0.91)], whereas, addition of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg resulted in lower risk of MACE [0.72 (0.60-0.87)], cardiac death [0.71 (0.52-0.98)] and any stroke [0.65 (0.45-0.95)], but not reduced MI. Both prasugrel and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg increased major bleeding [1.79 (1.34-2.39); 1.72 (1.33-2.22)]. Clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with lower MACE [0.72 (0.58-0.90)], any stroke [0.42 (0.24-0.73)], and major bleeding [0.62 (0.40-0.96)]. Adding prasugrel or ticagrelor led to a reduced incidence of MI and prasugrel was also found to reduce the risk of MACE and stent thrombosis in CCS patients with low risk of bleeding after PCI. Clopidogrel monotherapy has advantage in reducing MACE, stroke, and major bleeding events in CCS patients at high risk of bleeding after PCI. Systematic Review Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, PROSPERO Identifier: CRD 42021291050.

Ticagrelor is more effective than clopidogrel in carrier of nonfunctional CYP2C19 allele who has diabetes and acute coronary syndrome - case report and literature review

Clopidogrel is a purinergic receptor P2Y12 (P2RY12)-blocking pro-drug used to inhibit platelet aggregation in patients at risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), such as coronary artery disease and stroke. Despite clopidogrel therapy, some patients may still present with recurrent cardiovascular events. One possible cause of recurrence are variants in the cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) gene. CYP2C19 is responsible for the metabolism of many drugs including clopidogrel. Recent studies have associated pharmacogenetics testing of CYP2C19 variants to guide clopidogrel therapy with a decreased risk of certain recurrent MACEs. Through a different mechanism, diabetes mellitus (DM) and obesity are also associated with clopidogrel treatment failure. We describe the case of a 64-year-old Caucasian woman with a history of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and DM/obesity, who presented to University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) in 2019 with a transient ischemic attack (TIA) while on clopidogrel/aspirin dual anti-platelet therapy. After CYP2C19 genetic testing revealed that she was an intermediate metabolizer with a heterozygous *2 genotype, ticagrelor replaced the clopidogrel treatment regimen. No future MACEs were documented in the two-year patient follow-up. Thus, ACS patients with DM/obesity who have undergone PCI and are intermediate CYP2C19 metabolizers may yield better treatment outcomes if prescribed ticagrelor instead of clopidogrel. Whether this improvement was due to genotype-guided therapy or the differing interactions of clopidogrel/ticagrelor in DM/obese patients is unknown based on available data. Regardless, CYP2C19 genotype-guided treatment of ACS/PCI patients, with consideration of DM/obesity status, may provide effective individualized therapy compared to standard treatment. The inclusion of DM/obesity in this study is clinically relevant because DM/obesity has become a major health issue in the United States and worldwide.

Ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel After Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Background: Patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Whether potent antiplatelet therapy after complex PCI improves outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) remains unclear. Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with SCAD undergoing complex PCI. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of SCAD and undergoing PCI during January 2016 to December 2018 were selected from an institutional registry. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 12 months after PCI. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Results: Among 15,459 patients with SCAD included in this analysis, complex PCI was performed in 6,335 (41.0%) patients. Of patients undergoing complex PCI, 1,123 patients (17.7%) were treated with ticagrelor. The primary efficacy outcome after complex PCI occurred in 8.6% of patients in the ticagrelor group and 11.2% in the clopidogrel group. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor decreased the risk of MACE in patients undergoing complex PCI [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.764; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.615 to 0.949; p = 0.015], but not in non-complex PCI (p for interaction = 0.001). There was no significant difference in incidence of major bleeding between patients treated with ticagrelor and clopidogrel (p = 0.221), while ticagrelor was associated with an increased risk of minor bleeding (adjusted HR: 3.099; 95% CI: 2.049 to 4.687; p < 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with SCAD and undergoing complex PCI, ticagrelor could substantially reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes without increasing the risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel.