Total events and net clinical benefit of rivaroxaban and aspirin in patients with chronic coronary or peripheral artery disease: the COMPASS trial

BACKGROUND: Low dose rivaroxaban with aspirin reduced major cardiovascular events (MACE) compared to aspirin alone in patients with cardiovascular disease although effects on total events are unknown. METHODS: The COMPASS clinical trial randomized 27,395 participants with chronic coronary and/or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg daily. We analyzed total (first and recurrent) MACE outcomes of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome of major bleeding. Exploratory analyses included on-treatment and net clinical benefit. Total MACE and safety events were modeled for each treatment. RESULTS: MACE events were lowest in rivaroxaban with aspirin (379 first MACE, 432 total MACE) compared with rivaroxaban (448 first, 508 total) or aspirin alone (496 first, 574 total). Rivaroxaban and aspirin reduced total MACE events compared with aspirin alone [HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.85, P < .0001, number needed to treat for 2 years (NNT2y) of 63]. Total major bleeding was higher for rivaroxaban with aspirin compared to aspirin, but severe bleeding was not increased. The net clinical benefit of rivaroxaban plus aspirin was 20% higher compared with aspirin alone [HR 0.80 (95% CI 16.3%-31.6%)]. Rivaroxaban alone had no benefit on MACE outcomes compared with aspirin alone. MACE outcomes were similar for those on and off randomized treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Low dose rivaroxaban with aspirin significantly reduces first and total cardiovascular events compared with aspirin alone with a NNT2y of 63 and a 20% net clinical benefit.

Dual antiplatelet therapy duration after percutaneous coronary intervention in high bleeding risk: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIMS: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) is still debated. The current study, using the totality of existing evidence, evaluated the impact of an abbreviated DAPT regimen in HBR patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to search randomized clinical trials comparing abbreviated [i.e. very-short (1 month) or short (3 months)] with standard (≥6 months) DAPT in HBR patients without indication for oral anticoagulation. A total of 11 trials, including 9006 HBR patients, were included. Abbreviated DAPT reduced major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding [risk ratio (RR): 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.94; I2 = 28%], major bleeding (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.64-0.99, I2 = 0%), and cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.65-0.95, I2 = 0%) compared with standard DAPT. No difference in all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis was observed. Results were consistent, irrespective of HBR definition and clinical presentation. CONCLUSION: In HBR patients undergoing PCI, a 1- or 3-month abbreviated DAPT regimen was associated with lower bleeding and cardiovascular mortality, without increasing ischaemic events, compared with a ≥6-month DAPT regimen.

Case-fatality rate of major bleeding events in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the case-fatality rate (CFR) of major bleeding on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) may improve balancing risks and benefits of different durations of DAPT following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVES: To determine the CFR of major bleeding in patients on DAPT after PCI and to compare rates among different durations of DAPT. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to August 2021 for randomized trials that reported fatal bleeding among patients who were randomized to ≥1 month of DAPT following PCI. Summary estimates for CFRs of major bleeding were calculated using the random-effects inverse-variance method. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Of 2777 citations obtained by the search, 15 (48%) of 31 potentially eligible studies were excluded because fatal bleeding was not reported, leaving 16 studies that were included in the analysis. Overall, there were 823 major bleeding events including 91 fatal events in 48,884 patients who were assigned to receive DAPT during study follow-up. The CFR of major bleeding was 10.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1­ 16.2; I2= 50%) in the entire study population, and 13.8% (95% CI, 6.5­27.1; I2= 28%), 11.2% (95% CI, 6.7­ 18.0; I2= 0%), and 5.8% (95% CI, 3.0­11.1; I2= 0%) in those on short-term (≤6 months; n= 16,553), standard-term (12 months; n= 19,453), and long-term DAPT (>12 months; n= 10,238), respectively. CONCLUSION: Fatal bleeding is not reported in many studies evaluating DAPT after PCI. The CFR of major bleeding on DAPT is substantial and may be higher in the first 12 months of DAPT than during long-term DAPT.

Three-Year Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery in Patients With Obesity and Hypertension: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Hypertension is a leading cause of cardiovascular mortality (1). Its unfavorable impact is potentially explained by several factors, including the asymptomatic nature of this condition, poor medication adherence, and high burden of comorbid conditions, including obesity (1, 2). Hypertension occurs mostly in persons with excess weight and is often poorly controlled in patients with obesity (3, 4), and pharmacologic treatment of obesity has modest impact on blood pressure (BP) reduction (5). Bariatric surgery is the most effective method to treat obesity (6 ­ 8). Although recent research efforts have focused on metabolic improvement and diabetes resolution (9 ­12), growing interest has been devoted to evaluating the effects of this surgery on hypertension (13­15). The GATEWAY (Gastric Bypass to Treat Obese Patients With Steady Hypertension) trial focused on hypertension and included patients with mild obesity (body mass index [BMI], 30 to 34.9 kg/m2 ) and those with a BMI greater than 35 kg/m2 per current guidelines. The 1-year results showed that patients with coexisting obesity and hypertension were able to reduce or completely discontinue their antihypertensive medications after surgery, while maintaining a controlled BP and a similar 24-hour BP profile (16, 17). However, midterm effects of bariatric surgery on office and 24-hour BP measurements in a broad population of patients with obesity and hypertension remain uncertain. Here, we present the 3-year results from the GATEWAY trial. METHODS The GATEWAY trial is a randomized, nonblinded, single-center, investigator-initiated clinical trial performed at Heart Hospital in Sa˜ o Paulo, Brazil. Study design (18) and 1-year results (16) were previously pub lished; the full protocol, approved by the Research Ethics Board at the Heart Hospital (HCor), and the statistical analysis plan are available in Supplements 1 and 2 (available at Annals.org). The follow-up period for the primary end point was 12 months, but we prespecified that all patients would be scheduled for a 3-year and 5-year extension study. Here, we present the 3-year outcomes.

Risk factors and clinical outcomes in chronic coronary and peripheral artery disease: an analysis of the randomized, double-blind COMPASS trial

Abstract Aims: Secondary prevention in patients with coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease involves antithrombotic therapy and optimal control of cardiovascular risk factors. In the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) study, adding low-dose rivaroxaban on top of aspirin lowered cardiovascular events, but there is limited data about risk factor control in secondary prevention. We studied the association between risk factor status and outcomes, and the impact of risk factor status on the treatment effect of rivaroxaban, in a large contemporary population of patients with coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease. Methods and results: We reported ischemic events (cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction) in participants from the randomized, double-blind COMPASS study by individual risk factor (blood pressure, smoking status, cholesterol level, presence of diabetes, body mass index, and level of physical activity), and by number of risk factors. We compared rates and hazard ratios of patients treated with rivaroxaban plus aspirin vs aspirin alone within each risk factor category and tested for interaction between risk factor status and antithrombotic regimen. Complete baseline risk factor status was available in 27,117 (99%) patients. Status and number of risk factors were both associated with increased risk of ischemic events. Rates of ischemic events (hazard ratio 2.2; 95% confidence interval 1.8­2.6) and cardiovascular death (hazard ratio 2.0; 1.5­2.7) were more than twofold higher in patients with 4­6 compared with 0­1 risk factors (p<0.0001 for both). Rivaroxaban reduced event rates independently of the number of risk factors (p interaction 0.93), with the largest absolute benefit in patients with the highest number of risk factors. Conclusion: More favorable risk factor status and low-dose rivaroxaban were independently associated with lower risk of cardiovascular events. (AU)

Pantoprazole to prevent gastroduodenal events in patients receiving rivaroxaban and/or aspirin in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Antiplatelets and anticoagulants are associated with increased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We evaluated whether proton pump inhibitor therapy could reduce this risk. METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease. Participants were randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole 40 mg daily or placebo, as well as rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily with aspirin 100 mg once daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily, or aspirin 100 mg alone. The primary outcome was time to first upper gastrointestinal event, defined as a composite of overt bleeding, upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a gastroduodenal lesion or of unknown origin, occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcer or ≥5 erosions, upper gastrointestinal obstruction, or perforation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal events between the pantoprazole group (102 of 8791 events) and the placebo group (116 of 8807 events) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.15). Pantoprazole significantly reduced bleeding of gastroduodenal lesions (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.94; P = .03); this reduction was greater when we used a post-hoc definition of bleeding gastroduodenal lesion (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.74), although the number needed to treat still was high (n = 982; 95% confidence interval, 609-2528).CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized placebo-controlled trial, we found that routine use of proton pump inhibitors in patients receiving low-dose anticoagulation and/or aspirin for stable cardiovascular disease does not reduce upper gastrointestinal events, but may reduce bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions. ClinicalTrials. (AU)

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with heart failure and chronic coronary or peripheral artery disease

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and history of heart failure (HF) are at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. We explored the effects of rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in these patients. METHODS: The COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized 27 395 participants with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg alone. Patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV HF or left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) <30% were excluded. The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome comprised cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding using modified International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. Investigators recorded a history of HF and EF at baseline, if available. We examined the effects of rivaroxaban on major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding in patients with or without a history of HF and an EF <40% or >/=40% at baseline. RESULTS: Of the 5902 participants (22%) with a history of HF, 4971 (84%) had EF recorded at baseline, and 12% had EF <40%. Rivaroxaban and aspirin had similar relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events compared with aspirin in participants with HF (5.5% versus 7.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86) and those without HF (3.8% versus 4.7%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93; P for interaction 0.28) but larger absolute risk reduction in those with HF (HF absolute risk reduction 2.4%, number needed to treat=42; no HF absolute risk reduction 1.0%, number needed to treat=103). The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome was not statistically different between those with EF <40% (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55-1.42) and >/=40% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; P for interaction 0.36). The excesso hazard for major bleeding was not different in participants with HF (2.5% versus 1.8%; HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.88-2.09) than in those without HF (3.3% versus 1.9%; HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45-2.21; P for interaction 0.26). There were no significant differences in the primary outcomes with rivaroxaban alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and a history of mild or moderate HF, combination rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone produces similar relative but larger absolute benefits than in those without HF.(AU)

Safety of proton pump inhibitors based on a large, multi-year, randomized trial of patients receiving rivaroxaban or aspirin

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial. METHODS: We performed a 3 x 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 (5mg 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. (AU)

Rivaroxaban plus aspirin versus aspirin in Rrelation to vascular risk in the COMPASS Trial

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that the combination of low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin reduced major vascular events in patients with stable vascular disease. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify subsets of patients at higher risk of recurrent vascular events, which may help focus the use of rivaroxaban and aspirin therapy. METHODS: COMPASS patients with vascular disease were risk stratified using 2 methods: the REACH (reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) atherothrombosis risk score and CART (Classification and Regression Tree) analysis. The absolute risk differences for rivaroxaban with aspirin were compared to aspirin alone over 30 months for the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, or vascular amputation; for severe bleeding; and for the net clinical benefit. RESULTS: High-risk patients using the REACH score were those with 2 or more vascular beds affected, history of heart failure (HF), or renal insufficiency, and by CART analysis were those with ≥2 vascular beds affected, history of HF, or diabetes. Rivaroxaban and aspirin combination reduced the serious vascular event incidence by 25% (4.48% vs. 5.95%, hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.85), equivalent to 23 events prevented per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months, at the cost of a nonsignificant 34% increase in severe bleeding (1.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.95 to 1.88), or 2 events caused per 1,000 patients treated. Among patients with ≥1 high-risk feature identified from the CART analysis, rivaroxaban and aspirin prevented 33 serious vascular events, whereas in lower-risk patients, rivaroxaban and aspirin treatment led to the avoidance of 10 events per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with vascular disease, further risk stratification can identify higher-risk patients (≥2 vascular beds affected, HF, renal insufficiency, or diabetes). The net clinical benefit remains favorable for most patients treated with rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin. (AU)

Standardized classification and framework for reporting, interpreting, and analysing medication non-adherence in cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium (NARC)

Non-adherence has been well recognized for years to be a common issue that significantly impacts clinical outcomes and health care costs. Medication adherence is remarkably low even in the controlled environment of clinical trials where it has potentially complex major implications. Collection of non-adherence data diverge markedly among cardiovascular randomized trials and, even where collected, is rarely incorporated in the statistical analysis to test the consistency of the primary endpoint(s). The imprecision introduced by the inconsistent assessment of non-adherence in clinical trials might confound the estimate of the calculated efficacy of the study drug. Hence, clinical trials may not accurately answer the scientific question posed by regulators, who seek an accurate estimate of the true efficacy and safety of treatment, or the question posed by payers, who want a reliable estimate of the effectiveness of treatment in the marketplace after approval. The Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium is a collaboration among leading academic research organizations, representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and physician-scientists from the USA and Europe. One in-person meeting was held in Madrid, Spain, culminating in a document describing consensus recommendations for reporting, collecting, and analysing adherence endpoints across clinical trials. The adoption of these recommendations will afford robustness and consistency in the comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation of investigational drugs from early development to post-marketing approval studies. These principles may be useful for regulatory assessment, as well as for monitoring local and regional outcomes to guide quality improvement initiatives.(AU)

Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with CKD and drug-eluting stents: a meta analysis

Background and objectives Whether prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is more protective in patients with CKD and drug elutings tents compared with shorter DAPT isuncertain.The purposeofthismeta-analysis was to examine whether shorter DAPT in patients with drug-eluting stents and CKD is associated with lower mortality or major adverse cardiovascular event rates compared with longer DAPT. Design, setting, participants, & measurements A Medline literature research was conducted to identify randomized trials in patients with drug-eluting stents comparing different DAPT duration strategies.Inclusionof patients with CKD was alsorequired. The primary outcome was acomposite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction,stroke,orstent thrombosis (definiteorprobable).Major bleeding was the secondary outcome.Therisk ratio (RR) was estimated using a random-effects model. Results Five randomized trials were included (1902 patient swith CKD).Short DAPT (#6months) was associated with a similar incidence of the primary outcome, compared with 12-month DAPT among patients with CKD (48 versus 50 events; RR, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.64 to 1.36; P=0.72). Twelve-month DAPT was also associated with a similar incidence of the primary outcome compared with extended DAPT ($30 months) in the CKD subgroup (35 versus 35 events; RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.62; P=0.87). Numerically lower major bleeding eventrates were detected with shorter versus 12-monthDAPT(9versus13events;RR,0.69;95%CI,0.30 to1.60;P=0.39)and12-month versus extended DAPT( 9 versus 12 events;RR,0.83;95%CI,0.35to1.93;P=0.66)in patients with CKD.Conclusions Short DAPT does not appear to be inferior to longer DAPT in patients with CKD and drug-eluting stents.Because of imprecisioninestimates (feweventsandwide confidence intervals),nodefinite conclusion scan be drawn with respect to stent thrombosis. (AU)

Dual antiplatelet therapy duration based on ischemic and bleeding risks after coronary stenting

Background Complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with higher ischemic risk, which can be mitigated by long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, concomitant high bleeding risk (HBR) may be present, making it unclear whether short- or long-term DAPT should be prioritized. Objectives This study investigated the effects of ischemic (by PCI complexity) and bleeding (by PRECISE-DAPT [PRE dicting bleeding Complications in patients undergoing stent Implantation and Sub sequent Dual Anti Platelet Therapy] score) risks on clinical outcomes and on the impact of DAPT duration after coronary stenting. Methods Complex PCI was defined as ≥3 stents implanted and/or ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation stenting and/or stent length >60 mm, and/or chronic total occlusion revascularization. Ischemic and bleeding outcomes in high (≥25) or non-high (<25) PRECISE-DAPT strata were evaluated based on randomly allocated duration of DAPT. Results Among 14,963 patients from 8 randomized trials, 3,118 underwent complex PCI and experienced a higher rate of ischemic, but not bleeding, events. Long-term DAPT in non-HBR patients reduced ischemic events in both complex (absolute risk difference: −3.86%; 95% confidence interval: −7.71 to +0.06) and noncomplex PCI strata (absolute risk difference: −1.14%; 95% confidence interval: −2.26 to −0.02), but not among HBR patients, regardless of complex PCI features. The bleeding risk according to the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction scale was increased by long-term DAPT only in HBR patients, regardless of PCI complexity. Conclusions Patients who underwent complex PCI had a higher risk of ischemic events, but benefitted from long-term DAPT only if HBR features were not present. These data suggested that when concordant, bleeding, more than ischemic risk, should inform decision-making on the duration of DAPT. (AU)

Racial Differences in Ischaemia/Bleeding Risk Trade-Off during Anti-Platelet Therapy: Individual Patient Level Landmark Meta-Analysis from Seven RCTs

BACKGROUND: Prolonged dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) is intended to reduce ischemic events, at the cost of an increased bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this study, we evaluated whether race influences the ischemia/bleeding risk trade-off. METHODS: We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT duration after PCI. To compare the benefit or harm between DAPT duration by race, individual patient-level landmark meta-analysis was performed after discontinuation of the shorter duration DAPT group in each RCT. The primary ischemic endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and the primary bleeding endpoint was major bleeding events (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03338335). RESULTS: Seven RCTs including 16,518 patients (8,605 East Asians, 7,913 non-East Asians) were pooled. MACE occurred more frequently in non-East Asians (0.8% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001), while major bleeding events occurred more frequently in East Asians (0.6% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.001). In Cox proportional hazards model, prolonged DAPT significantly increased the risk of major bleeding in East Asians (hazard ratio [HR], 2.843, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.474-5.152, p = 0.002), but not in non-East Asians (HR, 1.375, 95% CI, 0.523-3.616, p = 0.523). East Asians had a higher median probability risk ratio of bleeding to ischemia (0.66 vs. 0.15), and the proportion of patients with higher probability of bleeding than ischemia was significantly higher in East Asians (32.3% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We suggest that the ischemia/bleeding trade-off may be different between East Asians and non-East Asians. In East Asians, prolonged DAPT may have no effect in reducing the ischemic risk, while significantly increases the bleeding risk. (AU)

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable coronary artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and is a consequence of acute thrombotic events involving activation of platelets and coagulation proteins. Factor Xa inhibitors and aspirin each reduce thrombotic events but have not yet been tested in combination or against each other in patients with stable coronary artery disease. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, outpatient trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community centres in 33 countries. This paper reports on patients with coronary artery disease. Eligible patients with coronary artery disease had to have had a myocardial infarction in the past 20 years, multi-vessel coronary artery disease, history of stable or unstable angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery. After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive rivaroxaban (2·5 mg orally twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg orally twice a day), or aspirin alone (100 mg orally once a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patients, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the COMPASS trial was the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants...

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable peripheral or carotid artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

SUMMARY BACKGROUND Patients with peripheral artery disease have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Antiplatelet agents are widely used to reduce these complications. METHODS This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, intermittent claudication with objective evidence of peripheral artery disease), of the carotid arteries (previous carotid artery revascularisation or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%), or coronary artery disease with an ankle­brachial index of less than 0·90. After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral rivaroxaban (2·5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban twice a day (5 mg with aspirin placebo once a day), or to aspirin once a day (100 mg and rivaroxaban placebo twice a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patient, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; the primary peripheral artery disease outcome was major adverse limb events including major amputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, we enrolled 7470 patients with peripheral artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (126 [5%] of 2492 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·57­0·90, p=0·0047), and major adverse limb events including major amputation (32 [1%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·54 95% CI 0·35­0·82, p=0·0037). Rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day compared with aspirin alone did not significantly reduce the composite endpoint (149 [6%] of 2474 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·69­1·08, p=0·19), but reduced major adverse limb events including major amputation (40 [2%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·45­1·00, p=0·05). The median duration of treatment was 21 months. The use of the rivaroxaban plus aspirin combination increased major bleeding compared with the aspirin alone group (77 [3%] of 2492 vs 48 [2%] of 2504; HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·12­2·31, p=0·0089), which was mainly gastrointestinal. Similarly, major bleeding occurred in 79 (3%) of 2474 patients with rivaroxaban 5 mg, and in 48 (2%) of 2504 in the aspirin alone group (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·17­2·40; p=0·0043). INTERPRETATION Low-dose rivaroxaban taken twice a day plus aspirin once a day reduced major adverse cardiovascular and limb events when compared with aspirin alone. Although major bleeding was increased, fatal or critical organ bleeding was not. This combination therapy represents an important advance in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Rivaroxaban alone did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with asprin alone, but reduced major adverse limb events and increased major bleeding.

Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of participants in the cardiovascular outcomes for people using anticoagulation strategies (COMPASS) trial

BACKGROUND: Long-term aspirin prevents vascular events but is only modestly effective. Rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin might be more effective than aspirin alone for vascular prevention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD). Rivaroxaban as well as aspirin increase upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and this might be prevented by proton pump inhibitor therapy. METHODS: Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) is a double-blind superiority trial comparing rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily combined with aspirin 100 mg once daily or rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily vs aspirin 100 mg once daily for prevention of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death in patients with stable CAD or PAD. Patients not taking a proton pump inhibitor were also randomized, using a partial factorial design, to pantoprazole 40 mg once daily or placebo. The trial was designed to have at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in each of the rivaroxaban treatment arms compared with aspirin and to detect a 50% reduction in upper GI complications with pantoprazole compared with placebo...

Derivation and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) score: a pooled analysis of individual-patient datasets from clinical trials

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor prevents ischaemic events after coronary stenting, but increases bleeding. Guidelines support weighting bleeding risk before the selection of treatment duration, but no standardised tool exists for this purpose. Methods: A total of 14 963 patients treated with DAPT after coronary stenting—largely consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel and without indication to oral anticoagulation—were pooled at a single-patient level from eight multicentre randomised clinical trials with independent adjudication of events. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we identified predictors of out-of-hospital Thrombosis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding stratified by trial, and developed a numerical bleeding risk score. The predictive performance of the novel score was assessed in the derivation cohort and validated in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial (n=8595) and BernPCI registry (n=6172). The novel score was assessed within patients randomised to different DAPT durations (n=10 081) to identify the effect on bleeding and ischaemia of a long (12–24 months) or short (3–6 months) treatment in relation to baseline bleeding risk...

Three, six, or twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after DES Implantation in patients with or without acute coronary syndromes: anindividual patient data pairwise and network meta-analysis of six randomized trials and 11 473 patients

AIM: We sought to determine whether the optimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration after drug-eluting stent (DES) placement varies according to clinical presentation.METHODS AND RESULTS:We performed an individual patient data pairwise and network meta-analysis comparing short-term (≤6-months) versus long-term (1-year) DAPT as well as 3-month vs. 6-month vs 1-year DAPT. The primary study outcome was the 1-year composite risk of myocardial infarction (MI) or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). Six trials were included in which DAPT after DES consisted of aspirin and clopidogrel. Among 11 473 randomized patients 6714 (58.5%) had stable CAD and 4758 (41.5%) presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the majority of whom (67.0%) had unstable angina. In ACS patients, ≤6-month DAPT was associated with non-significantly higher 1-year rates of MI or ST compared with 1-year DAPT (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.48, 95% Confidence interval (CI) 0.98-2.22; P = 0.059), whereas in stable patients rates of MI and ST were similar between the two DAPT strategies (HR 0.93, 95%CI 0.65-1.35; P = 0.71; Pinteraction = 0.09). By network meta-analysis, 3-month DAPT, but not 6-month DAPT, was associated with higher rates of MI or ST in ACS, whereas no significant differences were apparent in stable patients. Short DAPT was associated with lower rates of major bleeding compared with 1-year DAPT, irrespective of clinical presentation. All-cause mortality was not significantly different with short vs. long DAPT in both patients with stable CAD and ACS.

Bleeding-Related Deaths in Relation to the Duration of Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Stenting

BACKGROUND:Although some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses have suggested that prolonged dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) may be associated with increased mortality, the mechanistic underpinnings of this association remain unclear.OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study was to analyze the associations among bleeding, mortality, and DAPT duration after drug-eluting stent implantation in a meta-analysis of RCTs.METHODS:RCTs comparing different DAPT durations after drug-eluting stent placement were sought through the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases and the proceedings of international meetings. Deaths were considered possibly bleeding related if occurring within 1 year of the episodes of bleeding. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat. Secondary analysis was performed in a modified intention-to-treat population in which events occurring when all patients were on DAPT were excluded.

Risk of Early Adverse Events After Clopidogrel Discontinuation in Patients Undergoing Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: An Individual Participant Data Analysis

OBJECTIVES: The study sought to evaluate the presence of a clinically relevant rebound phenomenon after dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) discontinuation in randomized trials. BACKGROUND: It is currently unknown whether clopidogrel discontinuation after short-term DAPT is associated with an early hazard of ischemic events. METHODS: The authors performed an individual participant data analysis and aggregate meta-analysis. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. RESULTS: The study included 11,473 PCI patients with individual participant data from 6 randomized trials comparing short-term DAPT (3 or 6 months) versus long-term DAPT (12 months or more). During the first 90 days following clopidogrel discontinuation, there was no significant increase in the risk of MACCE between patients randomized to short-term DAPT compared with long-term DAPT (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71 to 1.98; p»0.52; absolute risk difference 0.10%; 95% CI: 0.16% to 0.36%). The risk of MI or stent thrombosis was similar among patients randomized to short-term DAPT versus long-term DAPT (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.90; p»0.85). In the aggregate data meta-analysis of 11 trials including 38,919 patients, a higher risk of early MACCE was observed after long-term ($12 months) DAPT duration (HR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.69 to 3.09; p<0.001) but not short-term (<12 months) DAPT duration (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.74; p for interaction»0.036).CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing PCI with predominantly new-generation DES, discontinuation of clopidogrel after 3 or 6 months DAPT duration was not associated with an early increase in adverse clinical events. An early increase in MACCE was observed after long-term ($12 months) DAPT exposure.