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.

Association of pulse pressure with clinical outcomes in patients under different antiplatelet strategies after percutaneous coronary intervention: analysis of GLOBAL LEADERS

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the association of pulse pressure (PP) and different antiplatelet regimes with clinical and safety outcomes in an all-comers percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) population. METHODS: In this analysis of GLOBAL LEADERS (n = 15,936) we compared the experimental therapy of 23 months of ticagrelor after 1 month of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) vs standard DAPT for 12 months followed by aspirin monotherapy in subjects who underwent PCI and were divided into 2 groups according to the median PP (60 mm Hg). The primary end point (all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction) and the composite end points: patient-oriented composite end points (POCE), Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5, and net adverse clinical events (NACE) were evaluated. RESULTS: At 2 years, subjects in the high-PP group (n = 7971) had similar rates of the primary end point (4.3% vs 3.9%; P = 0.058), POCE (14.9% vs 12.7%; P = 0.051), and BARC 3 or 5 (2.5% vs 1.7%; P = 0.355) and higher rates of NACE (16.4% vs 13.7%; P = 0.037) compared with the low-PP group (n = 7965). Among patients with PP < 60 mm Hg, the primary end point (3.4% vs 4.4%, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.96), POCE (11.8% vs 13.5%, aHR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76-0.98), NACE (12.8% vs 14.7%, aHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.96), and BARC 3 or 5 (1.4% vs 2.1%, aHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.97) were lower with ticagrelor monotherapy compared with DAPT. The only significant interaction was for BARC 3 or 5 (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: After contemporary PCI, subjects with high PP levels experienced high rates of NACE at 2 years. In those with low PP, ticagrelor monotherapy led to a lower risk of bleeding events compared with standard DAPT.

Ascertainment of silent myocardial infarction in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (from the GLOBAL LEADERS Trial)

Abstract: Q-wave myocardial infarction (QWMI) comprises 2 entities. First, a clinically evident MI, which can occur spontaneously or be related to a coronary procedure. Second, silent MI which is incidentally detected on serial electrocardiographic (ECG) assessment. The prevalence of silent MI after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the drug-eluting stent era has not been fully investigated. The GLOBAL LEADERS is an all-comers multicenter trial which randomized 15,991 patients who underwent PCI to 2 antiplatelet treatment strategies. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death or nonfatal new QWMI at 2-years follow-up. ECGs were collected at discharge, 3-month and 2-year visits, and analyzed by an independent ECG core laboratory following the Minnesota code. All new QWMI were further reviewed by a blinded independent cardiologist to identify a potential clinical correlate by reviewing clinical information. Of 15,968 participants, ECG information was complete in 14,829 (92.9%) at 2 years. A new QWMI was confirmed in 186 (1.16%) patients. Transient new Q-waves were observed in 28.5% (53 of 186) of them during the follow-up. The majority of new QWMI (78%, 146 of 186) were classified as silent MI due to the absence of a clinical correlate. Silent MI accounted for 22.1% (146 of 660) of all MI events. The prevalence of silent MI did not differ significantly between treatment strategies (experimental vs reference: 0.88% vs 0.98%, p = 0.5027). In conclusion, we document the prevalence of silent MI in an all-comers population undergoing PCI in this large-scale randomized trial. (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)