Cost Utility of Prasugrel in Postangioplasty Diabetic Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To prevent thrombotic events after angioplasty, current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and thienopyridine. Clopidogrel is the only thienopyridine currently available in the Brazilian National Health System. The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of prasugrel, an alternative thienopyridine, compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome and diabetes mellitus who underwent angioplasty. METHODS: A state-transition Markov model was created to simulate the progression of diabetic patients after angioplasty. The model had a lifetime horizon and discounted outcomes at a 5% annual rate. The risks of myocardial infarction and death were calculated using data from the diabetes subgroup, and the risks of bleeding were calculated using data from the overall group from the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38 trial. Direct costs were estimated using official Brazilian open data. Quality of life values were obtained through literature search. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Prasugrel was associated with more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (5.03 vs 4.94) and higher costs (US$975.11 vs US$575.97), resulting in an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of US$4303.86/QALY. In one-way sensitivity analysis, the costs of prasugrel had the greatest impact on ICUR, followed by the initial age entering the cohort. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, all ICUR values simulations were less than one Brazilian gross domestic product per capita/QALY (US $5802.86). CONCLUSIONS: Given the appealing economic profile, the clinical debate between reducing the risk of myocardial infarction and increasing the risk of bleeding may overcome economic concerns in the Brazilian National Health System.

Assessment of Risk Factors for Drug Resistance of Dual Anti Platelet Therapy After PCI.

Since aspirin and clopidogrel are the widely and conventionally used drugs to treat acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it is important to explore potential risk factors of their resistance. The platelet aggregation rate with arachidonic acid (AA, PAg-AA%) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP, PAg-ADP%) of 219 PCI patients were measured after standard treatment for 24 h. The disease history and laboratory data (before PCI) were obtained. We found 101 (46.12%) patients to be aspirin-resistant, and PAg-ADP% was the most prominent risk factor of aspirin resistance. Clopidogrel resistance was present in 157 of 219 patients. Patients in the clopidogrel-resistant group carried more CYP2C19*3 or *2, which was associated with higher clopidogrel resistance in this group (69.11%, 47/68) than in the control group (64.29%, 36/56). Platelet count (109/L) and hemoglobin (g/L) were the prominent risk factors of clopidogrel resistance. Among the 219 patients, 98 showed dual antiplatelet drug resistance, for which platelet count (109/L) and monocyte count (g/L) were the risk factors. Aspirin resistance was found to usually accompany clopidogrel resistance.

Cost-effectiveness of CYP2C19-guided antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndromes in Singapore.

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a genotype-guided strategy among patients with acute coronary syndromes using a decision-tree model based on the Singapore healthcare payer's perspective over a 1-year time horizon. Three dual antiplatelet strategies were considered: universal clopidogrel, genotype-guided, and universal ticagrelor. The prevalence of loss-of-function alleles was assumed to be 61.7% and model inputs were identified from the literature. Our primary outcome of interest was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared to universal clopidogrel. Both genotype-guided (72,158 SGD/QALY) and universal ticagrelor (82,269 SGD/QALY) were considered cost-effective based on a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of SGD 88,991. In our secondary analysis, the ICER for universal ticagrelor was 114,998 SGD/QALY when genotype-guided was taken as a reference. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that genotype-guided was the most cost-effective strategy when the WTP threshold was between SGD 70,000 to 100,000. Until more data are available, our study suggests that funding for a once-off CYP2C19 testing merits a consideration over 1 year of universal ticagrelor.

Comparison of 6-Month Costs Between Oral Antiplatelet Agents Following Acute Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), newer antiplatelet agents prasugrel and ticagrelor have lower rates of cardiovascular events when compared with clopidogrel. However, it is unclear whether there are differences in economic outcomes when comparing these agents in ACS-PCI patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess aggregated costs and medical resource utilization among ACS-PCI patients prescribed prasugrel, ticagrelor, or generic clopidogrel, using a large commercial insurance claims database. METHODS: Costs attributable to any medical and pharmacy service and resource utilization including number of admissions, length of hospital stay, emergency room visits, and office visits over the 180-day postdischarge period were compared. All-cause and cardiovascular health care costs and resource utilization were separately analyzed for patients enrolled in the data over the continuous follow-up (CFU) period, and for patients continuously taking their initial treatment for 6 months (CTX). Potential confounders collected over a 6-month baseline assessment period were controlled for, using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: Over the 180-day follow-up, prasugrel and ticagrelor patients underwent fewer admissions (rate ratio [RR] = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.80-0.95) from CFU and RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.71-0.89 from CTX) compared with clopidogrel patients. The newer agent cohort incurred more overall health care costs than the generic clopidogrel group, with added costs of $957 (95% CI = $236-$1,725) in the CFU group and $1,122 (95% CI = $455-$1,865) in the CTX group, which were smaller than the increase in all-cause outpatient pharmacy costs associated with the newer agents versus clopidogrel (CFU: $1,175, 95% CI = $1,079-$1,278 and CTX: $1,360, 95% CI = $1,256-$1,487). Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in the economic outcomes associated with prasugrel and ticagrelor. There were, however, significant correlations between all-cause and cardiovascular-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The higher price of prasugrel and ticagrelor was partially offset by a decrease in hospital admission compared with generic clopidogrel over a 6-month postdischarge period. Aggregated medical costs and resource utilization were not significantly different between prasugrel and ticagrelor patients. DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for this study. DiDomenico has received an honorarium from Amgen for preparation of a heart failure drug monograph for Pharmacy Practice News and serves as an advisory board member for a heart failure program at Otsuka America Pharmaceuticals and for Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Touchette has received unrestricted grant funding from Cardinal Health, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda and has served as a consultant to and director of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Practice-Based Research Network on a study funded by Pfizer. Walton has served as a paid consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Baxter, Merck, Genentech, Primus, Takeda, and Abbott. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Health Economic Analysis of Antiplatelet Therapy for Acute Coronary Syndromes in the Context of Five Eastern Asian Countries.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The economic outcomes of dual antiplatelet therapy in East Asian patients are still unclear. We aimed to evaluate the economic outcomes of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong. METHODS: A two-phase model consisting of a 1-year decision tree and a lifetime Markov model was used to estimate the economic outcomes. The data from the East Asian subgroup of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) and PHILO studies were used for the calculation of the events rate for ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the first 12 months, whereas the costs were obtained from East Asian sources and utility from the published literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test model robustness. RESULTS: Ticagrelor showed the marginal lifetime quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 0.0050, 0.0091, 0.0107, 0.0050, and 0.0050 in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong compared with clopidogrel, with marginal healthcare costs of (all values in US dollars) $562, $595, $975, $611, and $672, respectively. The marginal cost per QALY gained with ticagrelor was $112,051, $65,692, $91,207, $121,838, and $133,953 from a public healthcare system perspective of China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, respectively. The sensitivity analysis showed consistent results. CONCLUSION: Treatment of ACS for 12 months with ticagrelor is not a cost-effective option for the prevention of thrombotic events in East Asia.

Clinical utility of remote platelet function measurement using P-selectin: assessment of aspirin, clopidogrel, and prasugrel and bleeding disorders.

Vascular diseases such as myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke are associated with increased platelet function whilst the risk of recurrence is reduced by antiplatelet agents such as aspirin, clopidogrel, and prasugrel. However, some patients exhibit high platelet reactivity, especially with clopidogrel. Existing platelet function tests may not be ideal in that they can be expensive, are often time consuming, and measurements must be made near to the patient and within a few hours of blood collection. Platelet activation leads to translocation of P-selectin from alpha-granules to the cell surface. Following activation with arachidonic acid (which is blocked by aspirin) or adenosine diphosphate (inhibited by clopidogrel) and fixation, samples may be stored or posted to a laboratory performing flow cytometric quantification of platelet P-selectin expression. Acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke are associated with high platelet reactivity on clopidogrel in 6-58% of patients when assessed with P-selectin expression, and high reactivity was associated with an increased risk of recurrence after myocardial infarction. Use of P-selectin expression tests may also be of relevance to surgical and veterinary practice and the diagnosis of mild bleeding disorders. The present review explores this topic in further detail.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug choice and adverse outcomes in clopidogrel users: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the comparative safety of individual NSAIDs when given concomitantly with clopidogrel. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Medicaid claims from five US states during 1999-2010, supplemented with Medicare claims for dual-enrollees. The exposure of interest was the first concomitant use of clopidogrel and one of the 10 selected NSAIDs after a 1-year baseline period. The outcomes were: all-cause mortality; acute myocardial infarction (AMI)/ischemic stroke; and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB)/intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). We calculated the hazard ratio of each NSAID for each outcome, with ibuprofen as the reference drug, using high-dimensional propensity score-adjusted proportional-hazards regression models. RESULTS: Of 1,060,412 clopidogrel users, 268,114 concomitant NSAID users met inclusion/exclusion criteria, contributing 48,483 person-years. We observed 2,463 deaths, 2,822 AMI/ischemic stroke outcomes, and 2,620 GIB/ICH outcomes, for unadjusted incidence rates of 50.8, 58.6, and 54.3 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Compared with ibuprofen and controlling for potential confounders, rofecoxib (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04, 1.43) and valdecoxib (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.92) showed higher and lower hazards of mortality, respectively. Indomethacin showed an increased AMI/ischemic stroke hazard (HR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.74). For GIB/ICH, indomethacin (HR = 2.18; 95% CI: 1.74, 2.73), diclofenac (HR = 1.65; 95% CI: 1.39, 1.97), naproxen (HR = 1.47; 95% CI: 1.28, 1.70), and rofecoxib (HR = 1.26; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.48) showed higher hazards, and valdecoxib (HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.98) showed a lower hazard. CONCLUSION: The bleeding risks of individual NSAIDs varied more markedly than thrombotic risks when used concomitantly with clopidogrel. Moreover, bleeding risk and thrombotic risk among individual NSAIDs did not appear to be inversely related to each other in the presence of clopidogrel. Further studies are needed to elucidate underlying biological mechanisms and help clinical decision-making for a better NSAID choice in clopidogrel users.

Prasugrel vs. clopidogrel in contemporary Western European patients with acute coronary syndromes receiving drug-eluting stents: Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis from the BASKET-PROVE cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and cost-effectiveness of prasugrel vs. clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was only evaluated using TRITON-TIMI 38 event rates. A comparative analysis of both drugs in contemporary European ACS patients is lacking. METHODS: To address this issue, cardiac and bleeding events of 2 "sister" multicenter stent trials, BASKET-PROVE (BP) I with clopidogrel and BPII with prasugrel (for 12months each) were used in a hybrid analysis. Medication costs were 2015 sales prices, event costs modelled for Denmark (DNK), Germany (GER) and Switzerland (SUI) and quality adjusted life years (QALY) by EQ-5D-3L questionnaire. RESULTS: In BPI and II, 1012 and 985 ACS-patients received drug eluting stents, respectively, followed-up for 2years. Compared to clopidogrel, prasugrel-treated patients had no more major cardiac events (5.2% vs. 6.4%, p=0.422) nor cardiac deaths (1.6% vs. 1.0%, p=0.255), but more major bleedings (4.0% vs. 1.7%, p<0.001) and altogether no difference in QALYs (-0.027 (95%CI: -0.064/0.011)). Prasugrel caused higher total expenditures per patient: 1116.3 (DNK), 1063.5 (GER) and 880.8 (SUI) EURO, respectively. Accordingly, incremental cost-effectiveness was negative for prasugrel vs. clopidogrel with ratios of -45,907 (DNK), -39,909 (GER) and -33,435 (SUI) EURO/QALY gained, making clopidogrel an economically dominant strategy, even after accounting for the non-randomized comparison. CONCLUSION: Findings of this contemporary European ACS-cohort showed markedly lower cardiac event rates than TRITON-TIMI 38 and no significant difference in 2-year QALYs between prasugrel and clopidogrel-treated patients. At current drug prices, clopidogrel use resulted in an economically dominant treatment strategy in Western European patients.

CYP2C19-guided antiplatelet therapy: a cost-effectiveness analysis of 30-day and 1-year outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention.

AIM: Determine whether using CYP2C19 genotype to optimize antiplatelet therapy selection is cost effective over the initial 30 days and 1-year following percutaneous coronary intervention. MATERIALS & METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis compared 30-day and 1-year outcomes and cost across three treatment strategies (universal clopidogrel, universal prasugrel, genotype-guided) in a hypothetical cohort. RESULTS: Base-case scenario results at 30 days indicated that the incremental cost per major cardiovascular or bleeding event avoided for genotype-guided treatment was US$8525 and US$42,198 compared with universal clopidogrel and prasugrel, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that genotype-guided treatment was cost effective over 30 days and 1 year in 62 and 70% of simulations, respectively. CONCLUSION: Implementing a CYP2C19 genotype-guided approach to antiplatelet therapy could have a positive economic impact by preventing readmissions following percutaneous coronary intervention.

APpropriateness Assessment in Antiplatelet THerapY (APATHY) registry: Insight from current clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice there is a gap between guidelines recommendation and antiplatelet strategies used for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We sought to evaluate appropriateness of antiplatelet strategies employed in a tertiary center. METHODS AND RESULTS: From January to June 2014, 430 ACS were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention by 3 groups of interventional cardiologists. Aspirin and clopidogrel (52%) were the most commonly used antiplatelet therapies, being prasugrel associated with aspirin in 110 (25.5%) and ticagrelor in 97 (22.5%) ACS. Inappropriate use of prasugrel (Tia/Ictus) was found in 2 (1.8%) patients and not recommended use (>75years, without diabetes or previous myocardial infarction) in 11 (10%). Not recommended use of ticagrelor (plus warfarin) was found in 4 (4.4%). Switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel occurred in 29% [28 showing high residual platelet reactivity (HRPR: ADP 10µmol>70%), and 4 left main stenting], while from clopidogrel to ticagrelor occurred in 13.4% (all showing HRPR, but 1). The most powerful predictor for prescription of 3rd generation P2Y12 inhibitors was the HRPR (OR 5.473, 95%CI 2.41-12.43, p<0.0001), whereas the behavior of attending cardiologist (HR 0.674, 95%CI 0.573-0.847, p=0.001) and the older age reduced the probability of receiving it (OR0.963, 95%CI 0.943-0.984, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clopidogrel remained the most common P2Y12 inhibitor employed for ACS. Third generation P2Y12 inhibitor prescription was lower than the one expected by guidelines recommendations, and the switching was largely based on clopidogrel HRPR. These findings suggest the need for a greater effort to improve adherence of cardiology community to current guidelines.

A Multicenter Cohort Comparison Study of the Safety, Efficacy, and Cost of Ticagrelor Compared to Clopidogrel in Aneurysm Flow Diverter Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications are among the most feared adverse events in the endovascular treatment of aneurysms, and this is particularly the case for flow diverter devices. Dual antiplatelet therapy has become standard of care; however, the safety, efficacy, and cost profiles of newer antiplatelet agents are not well characterized in the neurovascular context. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety, efficacy, and cost of one of these newer agents, ticagrelor, to the most frequently used agent, clopidogrel. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, cohort comparison study design of consecutively treated aneurysms with flow diverter embolization device and treated with either ticagrelor or clopidogrel was performed. Data were collected on patient demographics and risk factors, procedural details, antiplatelet treatment regime, complications, and angiographic and functional outcomes. RESULTS: Fifty patients undergoing flow diverter device deployment and treatment with ticagrelor were compared to 53 patients undergoing flow diversion and treatment with clopidogrel. The patients' age, sex, smoking status, aneurismal morphology and size, and procedural details did not differ between the 2 groups; neither did the rate of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications, angiographical, and functional outcomes. Ticagrelor was more expensive when compared to clopidogrel. CONCLUSION: Ticagrelor is a safe and effective agent for prevention of thromboembolic complications following flow diverter deployment when compared to clopidogrel. However, ticagrelor remains significantly more expensive than clopidogrel, and, thus, we would advise ticagrelor be reserved for patients who are hyporesponsive to clopidogrel.

Antiplatelet Therapy and Clinical Outcomes Following Myocardial Infarction Among Patients in a U.S. Employer-Based Insurance Database.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of residual cardiovascular risks among patients who have experienced a recent acute myocardial infarction (MI) are predominantly derived from secondary prevention trial populations, patient registries, and population-based cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To generate real-world evidence of antiplatelet treatment and recurrent events following MI in patients on antiplatelet treatment among commercial, employer-based insured patients in a large administrative database. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort claims database study using the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental databases between 2007-2011. Patients with an acute MI hospitalization with a discharge date between 2008 and 2010 were included. Excluded were those patients with documentation of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or severe bleeding at or before index hospitalization and with concomitant use of anticoagulant therapy following index hospitalization. Patients treated with clopidogrel following the index MI hospitalization were followed up to 1 year for repeat MI, stroke, and coronary revascularization. RESULTS: Among 33,943 post-MI continuous clopidogrel users without history of stroke, TIA, or bleeding, 22% had diabetes, whereas angina and renal impairment were less prevalent (5% and 7%, respectively). Over the 1-year follow-up, 2.4% experienced a repeat MI or stroke, and 8.2% underwent coronary revascularization. Angina, diabetes, and renal impairment were associated with elevated 1-year risk of repeat MI or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there is residual cardiovascular risk, although relatively low, in an insured, secondary prevention population on antiplatelet treatment following an MI. In patients with MI, identifying angina, diabetes, and renal impairment may aid risk stratification and guide the effective management of these higher-risk patients. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this research was provided by Merck & Co. Although Merck & Co. formally reviewed a penultimate draft, the opinions expressed are those of the authorship and may not necessarily reflect those of the company. Reed Chase, Wu, Mavros, Heithoff, and Hanson are employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., and may own stock and/or hold stock options in the company. Patel was an employee of Merck & Co. during the conduct of this study and preparation of the manuscript. Simpson is a paid consultant for Merck, Pfizer, and Amgen and has received speaker's fees from Merck and Pfizer. Study concept and design were contributed by all authors except Hanson. Heifhoff and Patel collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by Simpson, Mavros, Patel, Wu, and Hanson. The manuscript was written by Hanson, Mavros, and Patel and revised by Heithoff, Wu, Simpson, and Reed Chase.

Prevalence, Management, and Long-Term (6-Year) Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation Among Patients Receiving Drug-Eluting Coronary Stents.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the incidence, management, and clinical relevance of atrial fibrillation (AF) during and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) and evaluate outcomes of different antithrombotic strategies. BACKGROUND: Uncertainty exists regarding the optimal antithrombotic strategy in patients with AF who are undergoing PCI with DES. METHODS: Using a consecutive series of 10,027 patients who underwent DES implantation between 2003 and 2011, we evaluated the overall prevalence and clinical impact of AF. In addition, we compared the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (aspirin plus clopidogrel) and triple therapy (DAPT plus warfarin) among patients with AF. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. RESULTS: Overall, 711 (7.1%) patients had a diagnosis of AF at the index PCI. Patients with AF were older, had more comorbid conditions, and more often had a history of strokes; most patients with AF (88.4%) received DAPT rather than triple therapy (10.5%) at discharge. The rate of primary outcome after PCI during the 6-year follow-up period was significantly higher in patients with AF than in those without AF (22.1% vs. 8.0%; p < 0.001). This trend was consistent for major bleeding (4.5% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the presence of AF was significantly associated with a higher risk of primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.95 to 2.79; p < 0.001) and major bleeding (HR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.32 to 3.06; p = 0.001). Among patients with AF, adjusted risk for the primary outcome was similar between the DAPT group and the triple therapy group (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.69; p = 0.98), but triple therapy was associated with a significantly higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke (HR: 7.73; 95% CI: 2.14 to 27.91; p = 0.002) and major bleeding (HR: 4.48; 95% CI: 1.81 to 11.08; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving DES implantation, AF was not rare and was associated with increased ischemic and bleeding risk. In patients with AF, triple therapy was not associated with decreased ischemic events but was associated with increased bleeding risk compared to DAPT.

Assessment of 'on-treatment platelet reactivity' and relationship with cerebral micro-embolic signals in asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between on-treatment platelet reactivity and cerebral micro-embolic signals (MES) is unknown, and has not been previously simultaneously assessed in asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis patients. METHODS: Consecutive eligible patients with ≥50% asymptomatic or recently symptomatic carotid stenosis (≤4weeks following TIA/ischaemic stroke) were recruited to this pilot study. Symptomatic patients were followed up to the 'late' phase (≥3months) following symptom onset or carotid intervention; longitudinal data were analysed from symptomatic patients with data available at both time-points. Platelet function/reactivity was assessed with the PFA-100® to measure collagen-ADP (C-ADP) and collagen-epinephrine (C-EPI) closure times in citrate-anticoagulated whole blood. Bilateral simultaneous 1-hour transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) monitoring of the middle cerebral arteries was performed to classify patients as MES +ve or MES -ve. RESULTS: 31 patients with ≥50% asymptomatic and 46 with early symptomatic carotid stenosis or occlusion were included. 35 symptomatic patients were followed up to the late phase (23 following carotid intervention). Prevalence of 'high on-treatment platelet reactivity' (HTPR) on the C-EPI cartridge did not differ between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients overall, but was lower in 'symptomatic post-intervention' than asymptomatic patients on aspirin monotherapy (10% vs. 50%; p=0.03). The prevalence of HTPR on the C-EPI cartridge decreased between the early and late phases in symptomatic patients (63% vs. 34%; p=0.017), including those on aspirin monotherapy (p=0.016). There were no significant differences in HTPR status between asymptomatic vs. early or late symptomatic MES +ve or MES -ve patients. DISCUSSION: Carotid interventional treatment, presumably in combination with resolution of the acute phase response, may decrease the prevalence of HTPR in patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis over time. Preliminary subgroup analysis suggests that successful intervention may reduce the prevalence of aspirin-HTPR in symptomatic patients to lower levels than asymptomatic medically-treated patients on aspirin monotherapy. Larger, longitudinal studies are warranted to reassess the impact of more intensive secondary preventive treatment on ex vivo platelet function at different levels of shear stress in carotid stenosis patients.

Association of measured platelet reactivity with changes in P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy and outcomes after myocardial infarction: Insights into routine clinical practice from the TReatment with ADP receptor iNhibitorS: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events after Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the use of platelet function testing to guide choice of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: We studied 671 myocardial infarction (MI) patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention in the TRANSLATE-ACS Registry who had VerifyNow platelet function testing performed while on clopidogrel treatment during their index hospitalization (April 2010-October 2012). RESULTS: High platelet reactivity (>208 platelet reactivity units [PRU]) was present in 261 (38.9%) patients. Clopidogrel was switched in-hospital to prasugrel in 80 (30.7%) patients with high platelet reactivity and 18 (4.4%) patients with therapeutic platelet reactivity (≤208 PRU). Among high platelet reactivity patients, switch to prasugrel was associated with lower major adverse cardiovascular events (death, MI, stroke, or unplanned revascularization) at 1year (10.0% vs 22.7%, P=.02; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.85, P=.02) and no significant difference in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher bleeding (23.8% vs 22.1%, P=.77; adjusted OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.48-1.7, P=.77) compared with patients continued on clopidogrel. No significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular event (22.2% vs 12.8%, P=.25; adjusted OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.47-7.3, P=.38) or bleeding (22.2% vs 19.4%, P=.77; adjusted OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.27-6.8, P=.72) were observed among therapeutic platelet reactivity patients between switching and continuation on clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS: Only one-third of percutaneous coronary intervention-treated MI patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity were switched to a more potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. Intensification of antiplatelet therapy was associated with lower risk of ischemic events at 1year among HPR patients.

Clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor use and clinical outcome in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A nationwide long-term registry analysis from 2009 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: The beneficial use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and P2Y12 õinhibitors has been established for patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, the optimal duration of DAPT is under debate. The aim of the present study was to investigate the long-term utilization and clinical outcome of clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor in patients with ACS from 2009 to 2014 in Austria. METHODS: We analysed data from 13 Austrian health insurance funds for the years 2009 to 2014, on 72,676 patients with a hospital discharge diagnosis of ACS. The primary end point was recurrence of ACS or death >30days after the index event. RESULTS: 32,830 subjects received a prescription of a P2Y12 inhibitor within 30days after the index ACS. 18,640 (56.8%) subjects were discharged with clopidogrel, 6683 (20.4%) with prasugrel, and 7507 (22.9%) with ticagrelor, respectively. Data from 32,174 patients with 4975 events during a median follow-up period of 24.9months were available for survival analysis. The cumulative incidence for recurrence of ACS or death at two years was 18.7% in patients receiving clopidogrel, and 8.7% and 12.0% in those receiving prasugrel or ticagrelor, respectively. CONCLUSION: Utilization of P2Y12 inhibitors in patients with ACS was consistent with guideline recommendations. Prasugrel and ticagrelor are increasingly used in ACS patients and associated with a lower number of recurrence of ACS or death compared to clopidogrel. However, clopidogrel was predominantly used in older patients with more co-morbidities.

Platelet Reactivity and Clinical Outcomes After Coronary Artery Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stents in Subjects With Peripheral Arterial Disease: Analysis From the ADAPT-DES Study (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents).

BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) have high rates of adverse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention and may additionally have heightened platelet reactivity. This study assessed the relationship between platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions among subjects with and without PAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a prospective, multicenter registry of patients treated with coronary drug-eluting stents. Platelet reactivity was assessed by the VerifyNow point-of-care assay; high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) was defined as P2Y12 reaction units >208. A propensity-adjusted multivariable analysis was performed to determine the relationship between PAD, platelet reactivity, and subsequent adverse events (definite or probable stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and clinically relevant bleeding). Among 8582 patients, 10.2% had a history of PAD. Patients with PAD were older and more likely to have comorbid conditions; however, mean P2Y12 reaction units and HPR were not significantly different between PAD and no PAD groups. Patients with PAD had higher 2-year rates of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and clinically relevant bleeding. Associations between HPR and adverse events were similar in PAD and no PAD groups, without evidence of interaction; however, adverse event rates were highest among subjects with both PAD and HPR. In a propensity-adjusted multivariable model, both PAD and HPR were independent predictors of myocardial infarction at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: A history of PAD was associated with ischemic and bleeding outcomes 2 years after successful coronary drug-eluting stent implantation; however, these associations did not seem to be directly mediated by heightened platelet reactivity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00638794.

The budget impact of using enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg + immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg to prevent recurrent cardiovascular events.

OBJECTIVE: Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid; ASA) is commonly used for secondary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events, but may be associated with gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events, which can reduce adherence. Use of ASA co-therapy with proton pump inhibitors in patients at risk may be suboptimal. PA32540 (Yosprala™) is a coordinated-delivery tablet combining EC-ASA 325 mg and immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg. The objective of this flexible budget impact model was to project the financial consequences of introducing PA32540 325 mg/40 mg to prevent recurrent CV events, while reducing ASA-associated GI events in US adults. METHODS: A Markov Model was employed to estimate health state transitions associated with ASA 75-325 mg, ASA 75-325 mg + generic delayed-release omeprazole 40 mg, PA32540, or clopidogrel 75 mg to prevent recurrent CV events. Health states included ulcers, GI bleeding, CV events, and death. Model inputs included demographics, treatment dosages, treatment costs, adverse GI and CV events, and premature death. Data from peer-reviewed literature and censuses enabled appropriate allocation of CV and GI disease prevalence and mortality. The PA32540 non-adherence rate was conservatively set at 20%. PA32540 market share was set to 50%. RESULTS: The model projected annual savings of $81.0 million to $190.9 million within 1-5 years after PA32540 introduction to the plan, which included 134,558 members at risk for recurrent CV events. These values translate into savings of $602 (year 5) to $1,419 (year 1) per patient per year, and $81 (year 5) to $191 (year 1) per member per year. These values were robust to variations in parameters under a deterministic sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: PA32540 use to prevent recurrent CV events was associated with cost reductions in each year examined with the model. From a health plan perspective, PA32540 is likely to have a net overall effect, resulting in significant cost savings.

Switching of adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor after hospital discharge among myocardial infarction patients: Insights from the Treatment with Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events after Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) observational study.

The reasons for postdischarge adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor (ADPri) switching among patients with myocardial infarction (MI) are unclear. We sought to describe the incidence and patterns of postdischarge ADPri switching among patients with acute MI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: We used TRANSLATE-ACS (2010-2012) data to assess postdischarge ADPri switching among 8,672 MI patients discharged after percutaneous coronary intervention who remained on ADPri therapy 1 year post-MI. We examined patient-reported reasons for switching, GUSTO moderate or severe bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and definite stent thrombosis events around the time of the switch. RESULTS: Among patients still on ADPri therapy 1 year post-MI, 663 (7.6%) switched ADPri during that year. Switching occurred at a median of 50 days postdischarge and most frequently in patients discharged on ticagrelor (64/226; 28.3%), followed by prasugrel (383/2,489; 15.4%) and clopidogrel (216/5,957; 3.6%) (P < .001). Among patients discharged on prasugrel, 97.3% of switches were to clopidogrel and 87.5% of ticagrelor switches were to clopidogrel; both of these groups most often cited cost as a reason for switching (43.6% and 39.1%, respectively), whereas 60.7% who switched from clopidogrel cited physician decision as a reason. In the 7 days preceding the switch from clopidogrel, 40 (18.5%) had a MACE and 12 (5.6%) had a definite stent thrombosis event, whereas that from prasugrel or ticagrelor, a GUSTO moderate or severe bleeding event occurred in 1 (0.3%) and 0 patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postdischarge ADPri switching occurred infrequently within the first year post-MI and uncommonly was associated with MACEs or bleeding events.

Latin American Clinical Epidemiology Network Series - Paper 8: Ticagrelor was cost-effective vs. clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome in Chile.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the use of ticagrelor as a substitute for clopidogrel for secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome in Chile. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a Markov model: Safety and effectiveness data of ticagrelor were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Costs are expressed in Chilean pesos (CLP) as of 2013. The evaluation was conducted from the payer standpoint. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis comprising discount rates and national cost variability was done. A budget impact analysis estimated for 2015 was conducted to calculate the total cost for both treatments. RESULTS: The ICER with a discount rate of 6% for ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel was CLP 4,893,126 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (=9,689 US$). In the budget impact analysis for the baseline scenario, considering 100% of treatment, coverage, and adherence, ticagrelor represented an additional cost of CLP 5,233,854,272, for 979 QALYs gained compared with clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS: Ticagrelor is cost-effective in comparison with clopidogrel for the secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome. These findings are similar to those reported in other international cost-effectiveness studies.