Early clopidogrel versus prasugrel use among contemporary STEMI and NSTEMI patients in the US: insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.

BACKGROUND: P2Y12 antagonist therapy improves outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (MI) patients. Novel agents in this class are now available in the US. We studied the introduction of prasugrel into contemporary MI practice to understand the appropriateness of its use and assess for changes in antiplatelet management practices. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using ACTION Registry-GWTG (Get-with-the-Guidelines), we evaluated patterns of P2Y12 antagonist use within 24 hours of admission in 100 228 ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 158 492 Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients at 548 hospitals between October 2009 and September 2012. Rates of early P2Y12 antagonist use were approximately 90% among STEMI and 57% among NSTEMI patients. From 2009 to 2012, prasugrel use increased significantly from 3% to 18% (5% to 30% in STEMI; 2% to 10% in NSTEMI; P for trend <0.001 for all). During the same period, we observed a decrease in use of early but not discharge P2Y12 antagonist among NSTEMI patients. Although contraindicated, 3.0% of patients with prior stroke received prasugrel. Prasugrel was used in 1.9% of patients ≥75 years and 4.5% of patients with weight <60 kg. In both STEMI and NSTEMI, prasugrel was most frequently used in patients at the lowest predicted risk for bleeding and mortality. Despite lack of supporting evidence, prasugrel was initiated before cardiac catheterization in 18% of NSTEMI patients. CONCLUSIONS: With prasugrel as an antiplatelet treatment option, contemporary practice shows low uptake of prasugrel and delays in P2Y12 antagonist initiation among NSTEMI patients. We also note concerning evidence of inappropriate use of prasugrel, and inadequate targeting of this more potent therapy to maximize the benefit/risk ratio.

Prasugrel versus Clopidogrel for Acute Coronary Syndromes without Revascularization

Background The effect of intensified platelet inhibition for patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation who do not undergo revascularization has not been delineated. Methods In this double-blind, randomized trial, in a primary analysis involving 7243 patients under the age of 75 years receiving aspirin, we evaluated up to 30 months of treatment with prasugrel (10 mg daily) versus clopidogrel (75 mg daily). In a secondary analysis involving 2083 patients 75 years of age or older, we evaluated 5 mg of prasugrel versus 75 mg of clopidogrel. Results At a median follow-up of 17 months, the primary end point of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke among patients under the age of 75 years occurred in 13.9% of the prasugrel group and 16.0% of the clopidogrel group (hazard ratio in the prasugrel group, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.05; P = 0.21). Similar results were observed in the overall population. The prespecified analysis of multiple recurrent ischemic events (all components of the primary end point) suggested a lower risk for prasugrel among patients under the age of 75 years (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.00; P = 0.04). Rates of severe and intracranial bleeding were similar in the two groups in all age groups. There was no significant between-group difference in the frequency of nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events, except for a higher frequency of heart failure in the clopidogrel group. Conclusions Among patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST- segment elevation, prasugrel did not significantly reduce the frequency of the primary end point, as compared with clopidogrel, and similar risks of bleeding were observed. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo; TRILOGY ACS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699998.)

Safety profile of prasugrel and clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes in Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE To assess safety up to 1 year of follow-up associated with prasugrel and clopidogrel use in a prospective cohort of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). METHODS Between 2009 and 2012, 2286 patients invasively managed for ACS were enrolled in the multicentre Swiss ACS Bleeding Cohort, among whom 2148 patients received either prasugrel or clopidogrel according to current guidelines. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) preferentially received prasugrel, while those with non-STEMI, a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, age ≥75 years, or weight <60 kg received clopidogrel or reduced dose of prasugrel to comply with the prasugrel label. RESULTS After adjustment using propensity scores, the primary end point of clinically relevant bleeding events (defined as the composite of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium, BARC, type 3, 4 or 5 bleeding) at 1 year, occurred at a similar rate in both patient groups (prasugrel/clopidogrel: 3.8%/5.5%). Stratified analyses in subgroups including patients with STEMI yielded a similar safety profile. After adjusting for baseline variables, no relevant differences in major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were observed at 1 year (prasugrel/clopidogrel: cardiac death 2.6%/4.2%, myocardial infarction 2.7%/3.8%, revascularisation 5.9%/6.7%, stroke 1.0%/1.6%). Of note, this study was not designed to compare efficacy between prasugrel and clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS In this large prospective ACS cohort, patients treated with prasugrel according to current guidelines (ie, in patients without cerebrovascular disease, old age or underweight) had a similar safety profile compared with patients treated with clopidogrel. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER SPUM-ACS: NCT01000701; COMFORTABLE AMI: NCT00962416.

Safety of Prasugrel Loading Doses in Patients Pre-Loaded With Clopidogrel in the Setting of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results of a Nonrandomized Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the safety of the concurrent administration of a clopidogrel and prasugrel loading dose in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND Prasugrel is one of the preferred P2Y12 platelet receptor antagonists for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients. The use of prasugrel was evaluated clinically in clopidogrel-naive patients. METHODS Between September 2009 and October 2012, a total of 2,023 STEMI patients were enrolled in the COMFORTABLE (Comparison of Biomatrix Versus Gazelle in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction [STEMI]) and the SPUM-ACS (Inflammation and Acute Coronary Syndromes) studies. Patients receiving a prasugrel loading dose were divided into 2 groups: 1) clopidogrel and a subsequent prasugrel loading dose; and 2) a prasugrel loading dose. The primary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding in hospital at 30 days. RESULTS Of 2,023 patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, 427 (21.1%) received clopidogrel and a subsequent prasugrel loading dose, 447 (22.1%) received a prasugrel loading dose alone, and the remaining received clopidogrel only. At 30 days, the primary safety endpoint was observed in 1.9% of those receiving clopidogrel and a subsequent prasugrel loading dose and 3.4% of those receiving a prasugrel loading dose alone (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25 to 1.30, p = 0.18). The HAS-BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly) bleeding score tended to be higher in prasugrel-treated patients (p = 0.076). The primary safety endpoint results, however, remained unchanged after adjustment for these differences (clopidogrel and a subsequent prasugrel loading dose vs. prasugrel only; HR: 0.54 [95% CI: 0.23 to 1.27], p = 0.16). No differences in the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke were observed at 30 days (adjusted HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.62, p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS This observational, nonrandomized study of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients suggests that the administration of a loading dose of prasugrel in patients pre-treated with a loading dose of clopidogrel is not associated with an excess of major bleeding events. (Comparison of Biomatrix Versus Gazelle in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction [STEMI] [COMFORTABLE]; NCT00962416; and Inflammation and Acute Coronary Syndromes [SPUM-ACS]; NCT01000701).

Comparison of prasugrel and clopidogrel-treated patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A propensity score-matched analysis of the Acute Myocardial Infarction in Switzerland (AMIS)-Plus Registry

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes of patients treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a nationwide acute coronary syndrome (ACS) registry. BACKGROUND Prasugrel was found to be superior to clopidogrel in a randomized trial of ACS patients undergoing PCI. However, little is known about its efficacy in everyday practice. METHODS All ACS patients enrolled in the Acute Myocardial Infarction in Switzerland (AMIS)-Plus registry undergoing PCI and being treated with a thienopyridine P2Y12 inhibitor between January 2010-December 2013 were included in this analysis. Patients were stratified according to treatment with prasugrel or clopidogrel and outcomes were compared using propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, recurrent infarction and stroke at hospital discharge. RESULTS Out of 7621 patients, 2891 received prasugrel (38%) and 4730 received clopidogrel (62%). Independent predictors of in-hospital mortality were age, Killip class >2, STEMI, Charlson comorbidity index >1, and resuscitation prior to admission. After propensity score matching (2301 patients per group), the primary endpoint was significantly lower in prasugrel-treated patients (3.0% vs 4.3%; p=0.022) while bleeding events were more frequent (4.1% vs 3.0%; p=0.048). In-hospital mortality was significantly reduced (1.8% vs 3.1%; p=0.004), but no significant differences were observed in rates of recurrent infarction (0.8% vs 0.7%; p=1.00) or stroke (0.5% vs 0.6%; p=0.85). In a predefined subset of matched patients with one-year follow-up (n=1226), mortality between discharge and one year was not significantly reduced in prasugrel-treated patients (1.3% vs 1.9%, p=0.38). CONCLUSIONS In everyday practice in Switzerland, prasugrel is predominantly used in younger patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. A propensity score-matched analysis suggests a mortality benefit from prasugrel compared with clopidogrel in these patients.

Upstream clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor for patients treated with primary angioplasty: Results of an angiographic randomized pilot study.

OBJETIVES The main objective of the present randomized pilot study was to explore the effects of upstream prasugrel or ticagrelor or clopidogrel for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND Administration of clopidogrel "as soon as possible" has been advocated for STEMI. Pretreatment with prasugrel and ticagrelor may improve reperfusion. Currently, the angiographic effects of upstream administration of these agents are poorly understood. METHODS A total of 132 patients with STEMI within the first 12 hr of chest pain referred to primary angioplasty were randomized to upstream clopidogrel (600 mg), prasugrel (60 mg), or ticagrelor (180 mg) while still in the emergency room. All patients underwent protocol-mandated thrombus aspiration. RESULTS Macroscopic thrombus material was retrieved in 79.5% of the clopidogrel group, 65.9% of the prasugrel group, and 54.3% of the ticagrelor group (P = 0.041). At baseline angiography, large thrombus burden was 97.7% vs. 87.8% vs. 80.4% in the clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor groups, respectively (P = 0.036). Also, at baseline, 97.7% presented with an occluded target vessel in the clopidogrel group, 87.8% in the prasugrel group and 78.3% in the ticagrelor group (P = 0.019). At the end of the procedure, the percentages of patients with combined TIMI grade III flow and myocardial blush grade III were 52.3% for clopidogrel, 80.5% for prasugrel, and 67.4% for ticagrelor (P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS In patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI within 12 hr, upstream clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor have varying angiographic findings, with a trend toward better results for the latter two agents. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Prasugrel and Acquired Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura Associated with ADAMTS13 Activity Deficiency

We report a case of a 64-year-old male who, 44 days after starting treatment with prasugrel, presented with severe thrombocytopenia, anemia, renal failure, and severe ADAMTS13 activity deficiency, along with a high titer of autoantibodies to this protease.

Clopidogrel use and cancer-specific mortality: a population-based cohort study of colorectal, breast and prostate cancer patients

PURPOSE: Concerns were raised about the safety of antiplatelet thienopyridine derivatives after a randomized control trial reported increased risks of cancer and cancer deaths in prasugrel users. We investigate whether clopidogrel, a widely used thienopyridine derivative, was associated with increased risk of cancer-specific or all-cause mortality in cancer patients.

METHODS: Colorectal, breast and prostate cancer patients, newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009, were identified from the National Cancer Data Repository. Cohorts were linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, providing prescription records, and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (up to 2012). Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for cancer-specific and all-cause mortality in post-diagnostic clopidogrel users were calculated using time-dependent Cox regression models.

RESULTS: The analysis included 10 359 colorectal, 17 889 breast and 13 155 prostate cancer patients. There was no evidence of an increase in cancer-specific mortality in clopidogrel users with colorectal (HR = 0.98 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77, 1.24) or prostate cancer (HR = 1.03 95%CI 0.82, 1.28). There was limited evidence of an increase in breast cancer patients (HR = 1.22 95%CI 0.90, 1.65); however, this was attenuated when removing prescriptions in the year prior to death.

CONCLUSIONS: This novel study of large population-based cohorts of colorectal, breast and prostate cancer patients found no evidence of an increased risk of cancer-specific mortality among colorectal, breast and prostate cancer patients using clopidogrel.

Highlights from the I international symposium of thrombosis and anticoagulation in internal medicine, October 23-25, 2008, Sao Paulo, Brazil

The importance of thrombosis and anticoagulation in clinical practice is rooted firmly in several fundamental constructs that can be applied both broadly and globally. Awareness and the appropriate use of anticoagulant therapy remain the keys to prevention and treatment. However, to assure maximal efficacy and safety, the clinician must, according to the available evidence, choose the right drug, at the right dose, for the right patient, under the right indication, and for the right duration of time. The first International Symposium of Thrombosis and Anticoagulation in Internal Medicine was a scientific program developed by clinicians for clinicians. The primary objective of the meeting was to educate, motivate and inspire internists, cardiologists and hematologists by convening national and international visionaries, thought-leaders and dedicated clinician-scientists in Sao Paulo, Brazil. This article is a focused summary of the symposium proceedings. © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009.

Toxicity of thienopyridines on human neutrophil granulocytes and lymphocytes

Thienopyridines can cause neutropenia and agranulocytosis. The aim of the current investigations was to compare cytotoxicity of ticlopidine, clopidogrel, clopidogrel carboxylate and prasugrel for human neutrophil granulocytes with the toxicity for lymphocytes and to investigate underlying mechanisms. For granulocytes, clopidogrel, ticlopidine, clopidogrel carboxylate and prasugrel were concentration-dependently toxic starting at 10μM. Cytotoxicity could be prevented by the myeloperoxidase inhibitor rutin, but not by the cytochrome P450 inhibitor ketoconazole. All compounds were also toxic for lymphocytes, but cytotoxicity started at 100μM and could not be prevented by rutin or ketoconazole. Granulocytes metabolized ticlopidine, clopidogrel, clopidogrel carboxylate and prasugrel, and metabolization was inhibited by rutin, but not by ketoconazole. Metabolism of these compounds by lymphocytes was much slower and could not be inhibited by ketoconazole or rutin. In neutrophils, all compounds investigated decreased the electrical potential across the inner mitochondrial membrane, were associated with cellular accumulation of ROS, mitochondrial loss of cytochrome c and induction of apoptosis starting at 10μM. All of these effects could be inhibited by rutin, but not by ketoconazole. Similar findings were obtained in lymphocytes; but compared to neutrophils, the effects were detectable only at higher concentrations and were not inhibited by rutin. In conclusion, ticlopidine, clopidogrel, clopidogrel carboxylate and prasugrel are toxic for both granulocytes and lymphocytes. In granulocytes, cytotoxicity is more accentuated than in lymphocytes and depends on metabolization by myeloperoxidase. These findings suggest a mitochondrial mechanism for cytotoxicity for both myeloperoxidase-associated metabolites and, at higher concentrations, also for the parent compounds.

Diabetes and acute coronary syndromes

Diabetic patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) are at a high risk for subsequent cardiovascular events but derive, at the same time, greater benefit from evidence-based therapy than non-diabetic individuals. State-of-the-art anti-thrombotic therapy includes a triple anti-platelet combination - aspirin, clopidogrel and glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors - and unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin. For low- or medium-risk individuals, a treatment based on aspirin, clopidogrel and bivalirudin is a valuable alternative. Prasugrel, a new and more potent inhibitor of the platelet P2Y(12) receptor, has to be regarded as the most promising anti-thrombotic agent for diabetic patients with ACS. This agent may replace clopidogrel - and possibly GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors - in the future. In addition to aggressive anti-thrombotic therapy, diabetic patients should undergo systematic early invasive angiography if presenting with non-ST-segment elevation ACS, and immediate percutaneous coronary intervention if presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Indeed, the benefit derived from these strategies appears to be more pronounced in the diabetic population than in non-diabetic individuals. Despite the benefit, multiple surveys have demonstrated that, in the setting of ACS, diabetic patients receive evidence-based therapy less frequently than non-diabetic counterparts.

Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stents.

BACKGROUND Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended after coronary stenting to prevent thrombotic complications, yet the benefits and risks of treatment beyond 1 year are uncertain. METHODS Patients were enrolled after they had undergone a coronary stent procedure in which a drug-eluting stent was placed. After 12 months of treatment with a thienopyridine drug (clopidogrel or prasugrel) and aspirin, patients were randomly assigned to continue receiving thienopyridine treatment or to receive placebo for another 18 months; all patients continued receiving aspirin. The coprimary efficacy end points were stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) during the period from 12 to 30 months. The primary safety end point was moderate or severe bleeding. RESULTS A total of 9961 patients were randomly assigned to continue thienopyridine treatment or to receive placebo. Continued treatment with thienopyridine, as compared with placebo, reduced the rates of stent thrombosis (0.4% vs. 1.4%; hazard ratio, 0.29 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.17 to 0.48]; P<0.001) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (4.3% vs. 5.9%; hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85]; P<0.001). The rate of myocardial infarction was lower with thienopyridine treatment than with placebo (2.1% vs. 4.1%; hazard ratio, 0.47; P<0.001). The rate of death from any cause was 2.0% in the group that continued thienopyridine therapy and 1.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.85]; P=0.05). The rate of moderate or severe bleeding was increased with continued thienopyridine treatment (2.5% vs. 1.6%, P=0.001). An elevated risk of stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction was observed in both groups during the 3 months after discontinuation of thienopyridine treatment. CONCLUSIONS Dual antiplatelet therapy beyond 1 year after placement of a drug-eluting stent, as compared with aspirin therapy alone, significantly reduced the risks of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events but was associated with an increased risk of bleeding. (Funded by a consortium of eight device and drug manufacturers and others; DAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00977938.).