RESUMO
AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between sex and clinical outcomes and treatment-related complications in patients with ST-elevation or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS) randomized to treatment with ticagrelor or clopidogrel in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. METHODS: The associations between sex subgroup and the primary composite outcomes, secondary outcomes, and major bleeding endpoints as well as interaction of sex subgroup with treatment effects were analysed using Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: Sex was not significantly associated with the probability of the primary composite endpoint [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.02 (0.91-1.16)], or other adverse cardiovascular endpoints. Ticagrelor was similarly more effective than clopidogrel in reducing rates of the primary endpoint in women 11.2 vs. 13.2% [adjusted HR: 0.88 (0.74-1.06)] and men 9.4 vs. 11.1% [adjusted HR: 0.86 (0.76-0.97)] (interaction P-value 0.78), all-cause death in women 5.8 vs. 6.8% [adjusted HR: 0.90 (0.69-1.16)] and men 4.0 vs. 5.7% [adjusted HR: 0.80 (0.67-0.96)] (interaction P-value 0.49), and definite stent thrombosis in women 1.2 vs. 1.4% [adjusted HR: 0.71 (0.36-1.38)] and men 1.4 vs. 2.1% [adjusted HR: 0.63 (0.45-0.89)] (interaction P-value 0.78). The treatments did not differ for PLATO-defined overall major bleeding complications in women [adjusted HR: 1.01 (0.83-1.23)] or men [adjusted HR: 1.10 (0.98-1.24)]. Sex had no significant association with these outcomes (interactions P = 0.43-0.88). CONCLUSION: Female sex is not an independent risk factor for adverse clinical outcomes in moderate-to-high risk ACS patients. Ticagrelor has a similar efficacy and safety profile in men and women.
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Adenosina/análogos & derivados , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/administração & dosagem , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/administração & dosagem , Ticlopidina/análogos & derivados , Adenosina/administração & dosagem , Adenosina/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Clopidogrel , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Oclusão de Enxerto Vascular/prevenção & controle , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Infarto do Miocárdio/etiologia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/efeitos adversos , Recidiva , Fatores Sexuais , Stents , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Ticagrelor , Ticlopidina/administração & dosagem , Ticlopidina/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Inhibitor development represents the most serious side effect of haemophilia treatment. Any difference in risk of inhibitor formation depending on the product used might be of clinical relevance. It was this study's objective to assess inhibitor development according to clotting factor concentrate in severe haemophilia A and B. The European Haemophilia Safety Surveillance (EUHASS) was set up as a study monitoring adverse events overall and according to concentrate. Since October 2008, inhibitors were reported at least quarterly. Number of treated patients was reported annually, specifying the number of patients completing 50 exposure days (Previously Untreated Patients, PUPs) without inhibitor development. Cumulative incidence, incidence rates and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Data from October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2012 were analysed for 68 centres that validated their data. Inhibitors developed in 108/417 (26 %; CI 22-30 %) PUPs with severe haemophilia A and 5/72 (7 %; CI 2-16%) PUPs with severe haemophilia B. For Previously Treated Patients (PTPs), 26 inhibitors developed in 17,667 treatment years [0.15/100 treatment years; CI 0.10-0.22) for severe haemophilia A and 1/2836 (0.04/100; (CI 0.00-0.20) for severe haemophilia B. Differences between plasma-derived and recombinant concentrates, or among the different recombinant FVIII concentrates were investigated. In conclusion, while confirming the expected rates of inhibitors in PUPs and PTPs, no class or brand related differences were observed.