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.)

Optimized Duration of Clopidogrel Therapy Following Treatment with the Endeavor Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent in Real-World Clinical Practice (OPTIMIZE) Trial: Rationale and design of a large-scale, randomized, multicenter study

Background Current recommendations for antithrombotic therapy after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation include prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel >= 12 months. However, the impact of such a regimen for all patients receiving any DES system remains unclear based on scientific evidence available to date. Also, several other shortcomings have been identified with prolonged DAPT, including bleeding complications, compliance, and cost. The second-generation Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) has demonstrated efficacy and safety, despite short duration DAPT (3 months) in the majority of studies. Still, the safety and clinical impact of short-term DAPT with E-ZES in the real world is yet to be determined. Methods The OPTIMIZE trial is a large, prospective, multicenter, randomized (1: 1) non-inferiority clinical evaluation of short-term (3 months) vs long-term (12-months) DAPT in patients undergoing E-ZES implantation in daily clinical practice. Overall, 3,120 patients were enrolled at 33 clinical sites in Brazil. The primary composite endpoint is death (any cause), myocardial infarction, cerebral vascular accident, and major bleeding at 12-month clinical follow-up post-index procedure. Conclusions The OPTIMIZE clinical trial will determine the clinical implications of DAPT duration with the second generation E-ZES in real-world patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. (Am Heart J 2012;164:810-816.e3.)

Increased clopidogrel response is associated with ABCC3 expression: A pilot study

Background: The aim of this study was investigate the relationship between ABCB1 and ABCC3 gene expressions in peripheral blood cells (PBC) and the response to clopidogrel in patients with coronary arterial disease (CAD). Methods: Twenty-six male CAD patients (50-70 years) under treatment with clopidogrel (75 mg/day) for at least 5 days were selected. Blood samples were obtained to evaluate platelet reactivity and ABCB1 and ABCC3 mRNA expression. Platelet reactivity was measured in P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) using VerifyNow. RNA was extracted from PBC and mRNA levels were measured by qPCR, using GAPD as a reference gene. Results: Platelet response to clopidogrel was categorized in to PRU quartiles. Individuals with PRU values within the first quartile (Q1, <151 units) were considered good responders, while those who had PRU within the fourth quartile (Q4. PRU>260) were considered non-responders. ABCC3 was 1.7 times more expressed in Q4 than in Q1 PRU group (p=0.048). Moreover, CAD patients with low ABCC3 expression (Qe1, <2.5x10(-3)) had higher probability to have a good response to clopidogrel (OR: 18.00, 95%CI: 1.90-169.99, p=0.001). Univariate linear regression analysis demonstrated that low ABCC3 mRNA expression contributed with a reduction of 73 PRU in relation to the patients with expression value higher than 2.5x10(-3) (p=0.027). Neither ABCB1 mRNA levels nor clinical variables studied influenced PRU values. Conclusions: Low ABCC3 mRNA expression in peripheral blood cells is associated with increased clopidogrel response, but further studies are needed to describe the functional relationship of clopidogrel with the ABCC3. Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes and a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack

Background-Patients with acute coronary syndromes and history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) have an increased rate of recurrent cardiac events and intracranial hemorrhages. Methods and Results-We evaluated treatment effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome with and without a history of prior stroke or TIA in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Of the 18 624 randomized patients, 1152 (6.2%) had a history of stroke or TIA. Such patients had higher rates of myocardial infarction (11.5% versus 6.0%), death (10.5% versus 4.9%), stroke (3.4% versus 1.2%), and intracranial bleeding (0.8% versus 0.2%) than patients without prior stroke or TIA. Among patients with a history of stroke or TIA, the reduction of the primary composite outcome and total mortality at 1 year with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel was consistent with the overall trial results: 19.0% versus 20.8% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.13; interaction P=0.84) and 7.9% versus 13.0% (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.91). The overall PLATO-defined bleeding rates were similar: 14.6% versus 14.9% (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.37), and intracranial bleeding occurred infrequently (4 versus 4 cases, respectively). Conclusions-Patients with acute coronary syndrome with a prior history of ischemic stroke or TIA had higher rates of clinical outcomes than patients without prior stroke or TIA. However, the efficacy and bleeding results of ticagrelor in these high-risk patients were consistent with the overall trial population, with a favorable clinical net benefit and associated impact on mortality.

Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Use on Cardiovascular Outcomes With Clopidogrel and Ticagrelor Insights From the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes Trial

Background-The clinical significance of the interaction between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remains unclear. Methods and Results-We examined the relationship between PPI use and 1-year cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) in patients with acute coronary syndrome randomized to clopidogrel or ticagrelor in a prespecified, nonrandomized subgroup analysis of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. The primary end point rates were higher for individuals on a PPI (n = 6539) compared with those not on a PPI (n = 12 060) at randomization in both the clopidogrel (13.0% versus 10.9%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 -1.38) and ticagrelor (11.0% versus 9.2%; HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.45) groups. Patients on non-PPI gastrointestinal drugs had similar primary end point rates compared with those on a PPI (PPI versus non-PPI gastrointestinal treatment: clopidogrel, HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.23; ticagrelor, HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.10). In contrast, patients on no gastric therapy had a significantly lower primary end point rate (PPI versus no gastrointestinal treatment: clopidogrel, HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12-1.49; ticagrelor, HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.14-1.49). Conclusions-The use of a PPI was independently associated with a higher rate of cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving clopidogrel. However, a similar association was observed between cardiovascular events and PPI use during ticagrelor treatment and with other non-PPI gastrointestinal treatment. Therefore, in the PLATO trial, the association between PPI use and adverse events may be due to confounding, with PPI use more of a marker for, than a cause of, higher rates of cardiovascular events.