METHODS: The REDUCE trial is a prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated study that randomized ACS patients undergoing PCI with the COMBO drug eluting stent to either 3 or 12 months of DAPT. The study population was divided according to age (
METHODS: We did a retrospective observational cohort study. We included consecutive people with ACS who were discharged from Scottish hospitals between January 2008 and December 2013 and who received DAPT after discharge followed by antiplatelet monotherapy. The rates of cardiovascular events were assessed during each 90-day period of DAPT treatment and 90-day period after stopping DAPT. Cardiovascular events were defined as a composite of death, ACS, transient ischaemic attack or stroke. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of cardiovascular events following DAPT cessation.
RESULTS: 1340 patients were included (62% male, mean age 64.9 (13.0) years). Cardiovascular events occurred in 15.7% (n=211) during the DAPT period (mean DAPT duration 175.1 (155.3) days) and in 16.7% (n=188) following DAPT cessation (mean of 2.7 years follow-up). Independent predictors for a cardiovascular event following DAPT cessation were age (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.08; p<0.001), DAPT duration (HR 0.997; 95% CI 0.995 to 0.998; p<0.001) and having revascularisation therapy during the index admission (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.85; p=0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of cardiovascular events was not significantly increased in the early period post-DAPT cessation compared with later periods in this ACS population. Increasing age, DAPT duration and lack of revascularisation therapy were associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up after DAPT cessation.
METHODS: We used a matched case-control design using the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA). Cases were patients who had an acute coronary syndrome, recurrent stroke or transient ischaemic attack within 90 days post-stroke and were matched for age ± 10 years and sex with up to four controls. Antiplatelet use was categorized as persistent (used for >3 days and continued up to day 90), early cessation (used antiplatelet <3 days) or stopped/interrupted users (used for >3 days but stopped prior to day 90). These categories were compared in cases and controls using a conditional logistic regression model that adjusted for potential confounders.
RESULTS: A total of 970 patients were included, of whom 194 were cases and 776 were matched controls. At 90 days, 10 cases (5.2%) and 58 controls (7.5%) stopped/interrupted their antiplatelet. The risk of cardiovascular event was not different in stopped/interrupted users (adjusted odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.33, 1.48; P = 0.352) and early cessations (adjusted odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.62, 1.74; P = 0.876) when compared to persistent users.
CONCLUSION: We found no increased risk in patients who stopped and interrupted antiplatelets early after stroke but the study was limited by a small sample size and further research is needed.
METHODS: A 44-year-old male, who had staged PCI to left anterior descending (LAD) 2 weeks after an anterior MI, with a drug-coated stent was readmitted with new anterior STEMI 35 days later. Coronary angiogram revealed mid-stent thrombus in situ. He had further uncomplicated PCI. Platelet function testing and genotyping showed clopidogrel high on-treatment platelet reactivity and CYP2C19*3/*17 genotype. Ticagrelor was commenced.
RESULTS & CONCLUSION: This case study is the first reported in Malaysia to document a patient with a CYP2C19*3/*17 genotype presenting with a stent thrombosis after an uncomplicated index PCI procedure.
AREAS COVERED: Literature was searched in different resources for eligible studies. The pooled risk ratio was measured using RevMan software, with p<0.05 (two-sided) set as statistically significant.
EXPERT OPINION: The ABCB1 C3435T homozygous mutant (TT) was associated with significantly increased risk of MACE compared to either wild type genotype (CC) or the combination of wild type and heterozygous genotypes (TT vs. CC: RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.06-1.68; p=0.02; TT vs. CC+CT: RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.10-1.60; p=0.004). Safety outcomes, i.e. bleeding events were not significantly different between the genetic models investigated (TT vs. CC: RR 1.93; 95% CI 0.86-4.35; p=0.11; TT vs. CC+CT: RR 1.36; 95% CI 0.89-2.09; p=0.16; CT+TT vs. CC: RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.59-2.44; p=0.61). It is suggested that ABCB1 C3435T genotype should be tested for ACS/CAD patients undergoing PCI to ensure optimum therapy of clopidogrel.
STUDY QUESTION: Whether FDA death data in the PLATO trial matched the local site records.
STUDY DESIGN: The NDA spreadsheet contains 938 precisely detailed PLATO deaths. We obtained and validated local evidence for 52 deaths among 861 PLATO patients from 14 enrolling sites in 8 countries and matched those with the official NDA dataset submitted to the FDA.
MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: Existence, precise time, and primary cause of deaths in PLATO.
RESULTS: Discrepant to the NDA document, sites confirmed 2 extra unreported deaths (Poland and Korea) and failed to confirm 4 deaths (Malaysia). Of the remaining 46 deaths, dates were reported correctly for 42 patients, earlier (2 clopidogrel), or later (2 ticagrelor) than the actual occurrence of death. In 12 clopidogrel patients, cause of death was changed to "vascular," whereas 6 NDA ticagrelor "nonvascular" or "unknown" deaths were site-reported as of "vascular" origin. Sudden death was incorrectly reported in 4 clopidogrel patients, but omitted in 4 ticagrelor patients directly affecting the primary efficacy PLATO endpoint.
CONCLUSIONS: Many deaths were inaccurately reported in PLATO favoring ticagrelor. The full extent of mortality misreporting is currently unclear, while especially worrisome is a mismatch in identifying primary death cause. Because all PLATO events are kept in the cloud electronic Medidata Rave capture system, securing the database content, examining the dataset changes or/and repeated entries, identifying potential interference origin, and assessing full magnitude of the problem are warranted.
AIM OF THE STUDY: To establish the relationship between CYP2C19 genotype, clopidogrel responsiveness and 1-year MACE.
MATERIALS & METHODS: Aspirin/clopidogrel responses were assessed with Multiplate Analyzer and CYP2C19*2 allele by SpartanRx.
RESULTS: A total of 42.0% carried ≥1 CYP2C19*2 allele. Prevalences of aspirin and clopidogrel high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR; local cutoffs: 300 AU*min for aspirin and 600 AU*min for clopidogrel) were 11.5% and 19.8% respectively. In multivariate ana-lysis, clopidogrel HPR was found to be an independent predictor for 1-year MACE (adj HR: 3.48, p = 0.022 ).
CONCLUSION: Having clopidogrel HPR could be a potentially modifiable risk factor guided by phenotyping.
METHODS: In an international, randomized, single-blind trial, we compared polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents with polymer-free umirolimus-coated stents in patients at high bleeding risk. After PCI, patients were treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy, followed by single antiplatelet therapy. The primary outcome was a safety composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1 year. The principal secondary outcome was target-lesion failure, an effectiveness composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. Both outcomes were powered for noninferiority.
RESULTS: A total of 1996 patients at high bleeding risk were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents (1003 patients) or polymer-free drug-coated stents (993 patients). At 1 year, the primary outcome was observed in 169 of 988 patients (17.1%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 164 of 969 (16.9%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.1; P = 0.01 for noninferiority). The principal secondary outcome was observed in 174 patients (17.6%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 169 (17.4%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.4; P = 0.007 for noninferiority).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high bleeding risk who received 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI, use of polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents was noninferior to use of polymer-free drug-coated stents with regard to safety and effectiveness composite outcomes. (Funded by Medtronic; ONYX ONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03344653.).
METHODS: POISE-2 was a blinded, randomized trial of patients having non-cardiac surgery. Patients were assigned to perioperative aspirin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included: vascular occlusive complications (a composite of amputation and peripheral arterial thrombosis) and major or life-threatening bleeding.
RESULTS: Of 10 010 patients in POISE-2, 603 underwent vascular surgery, 319 in the continuation and 284 in the initiation stratum. Some 272 patients had vascular surgery for occlusive disease and 265 had aneurysm surgery. The primary outcome occurred in 13·7 per cent of patients having aneurysm repair allocated to aspirin and 9·0 per cent who had placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 1·48, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 3·09). Among patients who had surgery for occlusive vascular disease, 15·8 per cent allocated to aspirin and 13·6 per cent on placebo had the primary outcome (HR 1·16, 0·62 to 2·17). There was no interaction with the primary outcome for type of surgery (P = 0·294) or aspirin stratum (P = 0·623). There was no interaction for vascular occlusive complications (P = 0·413) or bleeding (P = 0·900) for vascular compared with non-vascular surgery.
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the overall POISE-2 results apply to vascular surgery. Perioperative withdrawal of chronic aspirin therapy did not increase cardiovascular or vascular occlusive complications. Registration number: NCT01082874 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.
METHODS: Patient-level data from two all-comers observational studies (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02629575 and NCT02905214) were pooled and analyzed in terms of their primary endpoint. During the data verification process, we observed substantial deviations from DAPT guideline recommendations. To illuminate this gap between clinical practice and guideline recommendations, we conducted a post hoc analysis of DAPT regimens and clinical event rates for which we defined the net adverse event rate (NACE) consisting of target lesion revascularization (TLR, primary endpoint of all-comers observational studies) all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), and bleeding events. A logistic regression was utilized to determine predictors why ticagrelor was used in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients instead of the guideline-recommended clopidogrel.
RESULTS: For stable CAD, the composite endpoint of clinical, bleeding, and stent thrombosis, i.e., NACE, between the clopidogrel and ticagrelor treatment groups was not different (5.4% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.745). Likewise, in the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cohort, the NACE rates were not different between both DAPT strategies (9.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.927). There were also no differences in the accumulated rates for TLR, myocardial infarction ([MI], mortality, bleeding events, and stent thrombosis in elective and ACS patients. The main predictors for ticagrelor use in stable CAD patients were age
METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months.
RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=-4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events. (Funded by Bayer; COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01776424 .).
HYPOTHESIS: There is wide variability in AMP use for ACS management in Asia.
METHODS: EPICOR Asia (NCT01361386) is a prospective observational study of patients discharged after hospitalization for an ACS in eight countries/regions in Asia, followed up for 2 years. Here, we describe AMPs used and present an exploratory analysis of characteristics and outcomes in patients who received DAPT for ≤12 months post discharge compared with >12 months.
RESULTS: Data were available for 12 922 patients; of 11 639 patients discharged on DAPT, 2364 (20.3%) received DAPT for ≤12 months and 9275 (79.7%) for >12 months, with approximately 60% still on DAPT at 2 years. Patients who received DAPT for >12 months were more likely to be younger, obese, lower Killip class, resident in India (vs China), and to have received invasive reperfusion. Clinical event rates during year 2 of follow-up were lower in patients with DAPT >12 vs ≤12 months, but no causal association can be implied in this non-randomized study.
CONCLUSIONS: Most ACS patients remained on DAPT up to 1 year, in accordance with current guidelines, and over half remained on DAPT at 2 years post discharge. Patients not on DAPT at 12 months are a higher risk group requiring careful monitoring.