Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated Medically or With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the AUGUSTUS Trial.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens may differ between patients with atrial fibrillation who have acute coronary syndromes (ACS), treated medically or with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and those undergoing elective PCI. METHODS: Using a 2×2 factorial design, we compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonists and aspirin with placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation who had ACS or were undergoing PCI and were receiving a P2Y12 inhibitor. We explored bleeding, death and hospitalization, as well as death and ischemic events, by antithrombotic strategy in 3 prespecified subgroups: patients with ACS treated medically, patients with ACS treated with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI. RESULTS: Of 4614 patients enrolled, 1097 (23.9%) had ACS treated medically, 1714 (37.3%) had ACS treated with PCI, and 1784 (38.8%) had elective PCI. Apixaban compared with vitamin K antagonist reduced International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients with ACS treated medically (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.28-0.68]), patients with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-0.89]), and patients undergoing elective PCI (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.64-1.04]; Pinteraction=0.052) and reduced death or hospitalization in the ACS treated medically (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.54-0.92]), ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.74-1.06]), and elective PCI (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.72-1.04]; Pinteraction=0.345) groups. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events in the ACS treated medically, ACS treated with PCI, and elective PCI groups (Pinteraction=0.356). Aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding than did placebo in patients with ACS treated medically (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 0.98-2.26]), those with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.53-2.67]), and those undergoing elective PCI (HR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.48-2.47]; Pinteraction=0.479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the 3 groups for the composite of death or hospitalization (Pinteraction=0.787) and death and ischemic events (Pinteraction=0.710). CONCLUSIONS: An antithrombotic regimen consisting of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have ACS, whether managed medically or with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02415400.

Antithrombotic Therapy after Acute Coronary Syndrome or PCI in Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate antithrombotic regimens for patients with atrial fibrillation who have an acute coronary syndrome or have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are unclear. METHODS: In an international trial with a two-by-two factorial design, we randomly assigned patients with atrial fibrillation who had an acute coronary syndrome or had undergone PCI and were planning to take a P2Y12 inhibitor to receive apixaban or a vitamin K antagonist and to receive aspirin or matching placebo for 6 months. The primary outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included death or hospitalization and a composite of ischemic events. RESULTS: Enrollment included 4614 patients from 33 countries. There were no significant interactions between the two randomization factors on the primary or secondary outcomes. Major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was noted in 10.5% of the patients receiving apixaban, as compared with 14.7% of those receiving a vitamin K antagonist (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.81; P<0.001 for both noninferiority and superiority), and in 16.1% of the patients receiving aspirin, as compared with 9.0% of those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.59 to 2.24; P<0.001). Patients in the apixaban group had a lower incidence of death or hospitalization than those in the vitamin K antagonist group (23.5% vs. 27.4%; hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.93; P = 0.002) and a similar incidence of ischemic events. Patients in the aspirin group had an incidence of death or hospitalization and of ischemic events that was similar to that in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atrial fibrillation and a recent acute coronary syndrome or PCI treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor, an antithrombotic regimen that included apixaban, without aspirin, resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations without significant differences in the incidence of ischemic events than regimens that included a vitamin K antagonist, aspirin, or both. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; AUGUSTUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02415400.).

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease and prior coronary artery disease: Insights from the EUCLID trial.

Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at heightened risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We sought to evaluate the risk of concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with symptomatic PAD versus PAD without diagnosed CAD, and whether ticagrelor was superior to clopidogrel in reducing that risk. The EUCLID trial randomized 13,885 patients with PAD to antithrombotic monotherapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. CAD was defined as prior myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Median follow-up was 30 months. Among 4032 (29%) patients with PAD and CAD, 63% had prior MI, 54% prior PCI, and 38% prior CABG. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, patients with PAD and CAD had significantly higher rates of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death/MI/stroke, 15.3% vs 8.9%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% CI: 1.13-1.99; p=0.005), but no statistically significant increase in acute limb ischemia (HR 1.28, 95% CI: 0.57-2.85; p=0.55) or major bleeding (HR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.49-2.48; p=0.81) versus PAD without CAD. Among patients with PAD and CAD, there was no differential treatment effect between ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for the primary efficacy endpoint (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87-1.19; p=0.84), acute limb ischemia (HR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.63-1.69; p=0.89), or major bleeding (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.66-1.69; p=0.81). There was a statistically significant interaction between prior coronary stent placement and study treatment ( p=0.03) with a numerical reduction in the primary efficacy endpoint with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel (13.8% vs 16.8%, HR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.65-1.03; p=0.09). Patients with PAD and prior CAD had higher composite rates of cardiovascular death, MI, and ischemic stroke versus PAD without diagnosed CAD. There were no significant differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in cardiovascular events or major bleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01732822.

Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease is considered to be a manifestation of systemic atherosclerosis with associated adverse cardiovascular and limb events. Data from previous trials have suggested that patients receiving clopidogrel monotherapy had a lower risk of cardiovascular events than those receiving aspirin. We wanted to compare clopidogrel with ticagrelor, a potent antiplatelet agent, in patients with peripheral artery disease. METHODS: In this double-blind, event-driven trial, we randomly assigned 13,885 patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease to receive monotherapy with ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) or clopidogrel (75 mg once daily). Patients were eligible if they had an ankle-brachial index (ABI) of 0.80 or less or had undergone previous revascularization of the lower limbs. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of adjudicated cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. The primary safety end point was major bleeding. The median follow-up was 30 months. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 66 years, and 72% were men; 43% were enrolled on the basis of the ABI and 57% on the basis of previous revascularization. The mean baseline ABI in all patients was 0.71, 76.6% of the patients had claudication, and 4.6% had critical limb ischemia. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 751 of 6930 patients (10.8%) receiving ticagrelor and in 740 of 6955 (10.6%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.13; P=0.65). In each group, acute limb ischemia occurred in 1.7% of the patients (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.33; P=0.85) and major bleeding in 1.6% (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.43; P=0.49). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease, ticagrelor was not shown to be superior to clopidogrel for the reduction of cardiovascular events. Major bleeding occurred at similar rates among the patients in the two trial groups. (Funded by AstraZeneca; EUCLID ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01732822 .).

Ticagrelor Compared With Clopidogrel in Patients With Prior Lower Extremity Revascularization for Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease with a history of limb revascularization, the optimal antithrombotic regimen for long-term management is unknown. METHODS: The EUCLID trial (Examining Use of Ticagrelor In PAD) randomized 13 885 patients with peripheral artery disease to treatment with ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily or clopidogrel 75 mg daily. Patients were enrolled based on an abnormal ankle-brachial index ≤0.80 or a previous lower extremity revascularization. This analysis focuses on the 7875 (57%) patients enrolled based on the previous lower extremity revascularization criterion. Patients could not be enrolled within 30 days of most recent revascularization, and patients with an indication for dual antiplatelet therapy were excluded. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. The primary safety end point was major bleeding. RESULTS: Patients with a previous revascularization had a mean age of 66 years, 73% were male, and the median baseline ankle-brachial index was 0.78. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, patients enrolled based on previous revascularization had similar rates of the primary composite end point (hazard ratio [HR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.23, P=0.12) and statistically significantly higher rates of myocardial infarction (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08-1.55, P=0.005) and acute limb ischemia (HR 4.23, 95% CI 2.86-6.25, P<0.001) when compared with patients enrolled based on ankle-brachial index criteria. No differences in ticagrelor- versus clopidogrel-treated patients were found for the primary efficacy end point (11.4% vs 11.3%; HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.88-1.15; P=0.90), all-cause mortality (9.2% vs 9.2%; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86-1.15; P=0.93), acute limb ischemia (2.5% vs 2.5%; HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78-1.36; P=0.84), or major bleeding (1.9% vs 1.8%; HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83-1.59; P=0.41). The median duration of follow-up was ≈30 months. CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for baseline characteristics, patients enrolled based on previous revascularization for peripheral artery disease had higher rates of myocardial infarction and acute limb ischemia, with similar composite rates of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke when compared with patients enrolled based on the ankle-brachial index criterion. No significant differences were found between ticagrelor and clopidogrel for reduction of cardiovascular or acute limb events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01732822.

Design and rationale for the Effects of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease (EUCLID) trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite overwhelming data demonstrating the efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in heart disease and stroke, data in peripheral artery disease (PAD) are less compelling. Aspirin has modest evidence supporting a reduction in cardiovascular events in patients with PAD, whereas clopidogrel monotherapy may be more effective in PAD. Ticagrelor, a potent, reversibly binding P2Y12 receptor antagonist, is beneficial in patients with acute coronary syndrome and prior myocardial infarction. The EUCLID trial is designed to address the need for effective antiplatelet therapy in PAD to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events. STUDY DESIGN: EUCLID is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multinational clinical trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel for the prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events in subjects with symptomatic PAD. Subjects with established PAD will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily or clopidogrel 75 mg daily. The primary end point is a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. Other end points address limb events including acute leg ischemia, need for revascularization, disease progression by ankle-brachial index, and quality of life. The primary safety objective is Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction-defined major bleeding. Recruitment began in December 2012 and was completed in March 2014; 13,887 patients were randomized. The trial will continue until at least 1,364 adjudicated primary end points occur. CONCLUSIONS: The EUCLID study is investigating whether treatment with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, given as antiplatelet monotherapy, will reduce the incidence of cardiovascular and limb-specific events in patients with symptomatic PAD.