Occurrence of intraocular hemorrhages under monotherapy or combination therapy of antiplatelets and anticoagulants using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report database.

Purpose: An intraocular hemorrhage is an adverse event that can lead to visual acuity impairment. Antithrombotic therapy with antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants may increase intraocular hemorrhage. However, since their frequency is low, studies on the risk of intraocular hemorrhage with these drugs, especially under combination therapy, are limited. This study aimed to investigate the occurrence of intraocular hemorrhages under monotherapy and combination therapy with antiplatelets and anticoagulants by analyzing a large pharmacovigilance database. Methods: Intraocular hemorrhage signals with oral antiplatelets and anticoagulants were evaluated by calculating reporting odds ratios and information components using the Japan Adverse Drug Reactions Report database from April 2004 to March 2022. In addition, differences in signals between younger and elderly patients, affecting factors, and time-to-onset from initial antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatments were analyzed. Results: Aspirin, clopidogrel, warfarin, apixaban, and rivaroxaban, but not ticagrelor, ticlopidine, prasugrel, dabigatran, and edoxaban showed intraocular hemorrhage signals under monotherapy. In combination therapy, dual therapy (aspirin + P2Y12 inhibitors, warfarin, direct oral anticoagulants, and P2Y12 inhibitors + warfarin) and triple therapy (aspirin + P2Y12 inhibitors + warfarin) resulted in intraocular hemorrhage signals. Intraocular hemorrhage signals were observed in younger patients receiving monotherapy with aspirin and in elderly patients receiving monotherapy and combination therapy with warfarin. Affecting factors were diabetes mellitus in patients with prasugrel, use of medications for intravitreal injections, and posterior sub-Tenon injections with some antiplatelets and anticoagulants. The median period of intraocular hemorrhage occurrence after starting monotherapy with aspirin, clopidogrel, warfarin, or rivaroxaban was within 90 days. Conclusion: In addition to monotherapy with several antiplatelets and anticoagulants, combination therapy using aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, and warfarin has the potential risk of intraocular hemorrhage. Particular attention should be paid to the occurrence of intraocular hemorrhages in younger patients taking aspirin, in elderly patients taking warfarin, and within the first 90 days of antiplatelet and anticoagulant use.

Rivaroxaban monotherapy versus combination therapy according to patient risk of stroke and bleeding in atrial fibrillation and stable coronary disease: AFIRE trial subanalysis.

BACKGROUND: In the AFIRE trial, rivaroxaban monotherapy was noninferior to combination therapy with rivaroxaban and an antiplatelet agent for thromboembolic events or death, and superior for major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable coronary artery disease. Little is known about impacts of stroke and bleeding risks on the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban monotherapy. METHODS: In this subanalysis of the AFIRE trial, we assessed the risk of stroke and bleeding by the CHADS2, CHA2DS2-VASc, and HAS-BLED scores. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina requiring revascularization, or death from any cause. The primary safety end point was major bleeding defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. RESULTS: Rivaroxaban monotherapy significantly reduced the primary efficacy and safety end points with no evidence of differential effects by stroke risk (CHADS2, p for interaction = 0.727 for efficacy, 0.395 for safety; CHA2DS2-VASc, p for interaction = 0.740 for efficacy, 0.265 for safety) or bleeding risk (HAS-BLED, p for interaction = 0.581 for efficacy, 0.225 for safety). There was also no evidence of statistical heterogeneity across patient risk categories for other end points; stroke or systemic embolism, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, MI, MI or unstable angina, death from any cause, any bleeding, or net adverse clinical events. CONCLUSIONS: The advantages of rivaroxaban monotherapy compared with those of combination therapy with respect to all prespecified end points, including thromboembolism, bleeding, and mortality were similar across patients with AF and stable coronary artery disease, irrespective of their risk for stroke and bleeding. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry number, UMIN000016612, and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02642419.

Vitamin D levels and platelet reactivity in diabetic patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy.

BACKGROUND: Hypovitaminosis D represents an emerging cardiovascular risk factor, and especially among higher-risk subsets of patients, such as in those with diabetes mellitus. The anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombotic properties of vitamin D, in fact, could be even more beneficial among diabetics, where platelet hyperreactivity and suboptimal response to antiplatelet drugs has been associated with poorer outcomes. However, no study has so far evaluated the impact of vitamin D levels on platelet reactivity and high-on treatment platelet reactivity (HRPR) among diabetic patients receiving dial antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). METHODS: Our population is represented by a consecutive cohort ofdiabetic patients treated with DAPT (ASA + clopidogrel or ticagrelor or dose-adjusted prasugrel) for an acute coronary syndrome or elective PCI, undergoing platelet reactivity assessment at 30-90 days post-discharge. Aggregation was assessed by multiple-electrode aggregometry. HRPR was defined for values above the lower limit of normality (in non-treated patients). RESULTS: We included 440 patients, that were divided according to quartiles values of vitamin D (< 9.4; 9.4-15.59; 15.6-21.64; ≥ 21.65 ng/ml). Among them, 31 were excluded as chronically treated with vitamin D supplementation. Lower vitamin D quartiles were associated with more advanced age (p = 0.01), female gender (p = 0.04), renal failure (p = 0.005), history of previous MI (p = 0.01), CABG and use of diuretics (p = 0.003), severe coronary disease (p = 0.002), but lower ejection fraction (p = 0.001), treatment with statins (p = 0.04) and new ADP-antagonists (p = 0.002). Vitamin D levels related with higher HbA1c (p = 0.001), cholesterol (p = 0.02) and creatinine (p = 0.004) and lower hemoglobin (p = 0.004). The prevalence of HRPR with ASA was low and not related to vitamin D quartiles (3.4% vs 2.7% vs 1.8% vs 2.1%, p = 0.44; adjusted OR[95%CI] = 1.16[0.60-2.26], p = 0.67). The prevalence of HRPR for ADP antagonists was associated to hypovitaminosis D (40.2% vs 29.1% vs 29.4% vs 25.5%, p = 0.03; (adjusted OR[95%CI] = 1.76[1.04-2.98], p = 0.036for I vs II-IV quartile). The impact of vitamin D quartiles, was significant only in patients on new ADP antagonists (n = 225, of whom 81 on prasugrel 5 mg; p = 0.03; adjusted OR[95%CI] = 3.12[1.34-7.49], p = 0.009) but not with clopidogrel (p = 0.85, adjusted OR[95%CI] = 1.05[0.49-2.24], p = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Among diabetic patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy for an acute coronary syndrome or elective percutaneous coronary intervention, severe vitamin D deficiency is associated with a higher ADP-mediated platelet reactivity and rate of HRPR, and especially for new ADP-antagonists over clopidogrel.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety Analysis of Dual Antiplatelet Therapies Within an Integrated Delivery System.

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy is a mainstay of care for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients; however, uncertainty exists in real-world practice about comparative effectiveness and safety outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes of different oral P2Y12 inhibitors in PCI patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients treated between July 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013. Patients received clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor, or more than 1 antiplatelet (switch) during PCI. Outcomes were evaluated for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and bleeding at 1 year. Propensity score matching with Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to determine predictors of MACE and bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 8127 patients were included: clopidogrel (n = 6872), prasugrel (n = 605), ticagrelor (n = 181), and switch (n = 469). Treatment with prasugrel was associated with the lowest risk of MACE using multivariate regression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.36-0.92; P = 0.02). In the propensity score-matched analysis, only the prasugrel group was associated with a lower risk of MACE compared with the clopidogrel group. Clopidogrel was associated with the lowest risk of major bleeding using multivariate regression (OR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.42-0.98; P = 0.042). Both ticagrelor (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.00; 95% CI = 1.11-3.59) and the switch groups (HR = 1.65; 95% CI = 1.09-2.50) were associated with a greater risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel. However, no differences were found in the propensity score-matched analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Dual antiplatelet therapies differed in both MACE and bleeds in a real-world setting of PCI. Prasugrel was associated with fewer MACE, whereas clopidogrel had fewer major bleeding events.

Solid cancers after antiplatelet therapy: Confirmations, controversies, and challenges.

The role of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents in tumour growth and prognosis is not new, and currently under intense investigation. Some randomised data strongly suggest that this association exists, but it is complex, and not necessarily pointed at the same direction. The potential mechanisms responsible for such harmful association include a direct hazard of novel antithrombotics on cancer, indirect promotion of tumour growth, easier metastatic dissemination due to instability of platelet-tumour cell aggregates, or/and inability to keep cancer cells locally in situ are considered. The latest randomised evidence ultimately rejected the drug-specific cancer risks, clearly indicating the class-effect. In lay terms "cancers follow bleeding", which seems to be true for antithrombotic agents in general. Significant excess of solid cancers which was similar after prasugrel in TRITON, and with vorapaxar in TRACER trials was confirmed by the FDA reviews. Later, extra cancer deaths reported following clopidogrel and prasugrel in DAPT, and after ticagrelor in PEGASUS are also of concern. However, there are remaining controversies with regard to published cancer risks after ticagrelor (PLATO), or another vorapaxar trial (TRA2P), while full disclosure of separate clopidogrel and prasugrel cancer data in DAPT is still lacking. In short, if we apply moderate antiplatelet strategies for over two years, or aggressive regimens including triple therapy for much less than one year, the solid cancer risks emerge. Currently, more delicate platelet inhibition, and shorter exposure to dual oral antiplatelet agents should prevail.

Impact of non-inhibited platelet supplementation on platelet reactivity in patients treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor for an acute coronary syndrome: An ex vivo study.

Managing bleeding in patients receiving P2Y12 inhibitors is challenging. Few data are available regarding the efficacy of platelet transfusion in patients treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor. The aim of this study was to evaluate the minimal amount of platelet supplementation (in terms of ratio of non-inhibited platelets to inhibited platelets) necessary to restore platelet reactivity in platelet-rich plasma (PRP) of patients treated with aspirin and a prasugrel or ticagrelor loading dose for an acute coronary syndrome. PRP samples from patients were mixed ex vivo with increasing proportions of pooled PRP from healthy volunteers. Platelet reactivity was challenged with adenosine diphosphate (ADP), arachidonic acid, collagen or thrombin receptor activating peptide using light transmission aggregometry. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patient samples recovering an ADP-induced maximal aggregation (ADP-Aggmax) value above 40%. In patients treated with prasugrel (n = 32), ADP-Aggmax increased progressively with supplements of pooled PRP, with an average increase of 7.9% (95% CI [7.1; 8.8], p < 0.001) per each 20% increase in the ratio of non-inhibited platelets to inhibited platelets. A ratio of 60% was associated with 90% of patients reaching the primary endpoint. In patients treated with ticagrelor (n = 15), ADP-Aggmax did not significantly increase with any level of supplements. In conclusions, ex vivo addition of non-inhibited platelets significantly improved ADP-Aggmax in patients treated with prasugrel with a dose-dependent effect. There was no evidence of such a reversal in patients treated with ticagrelor. These results suggest that platelet transfusion may be more effective in blunting bleeding in patients treated with prasugrel, than those treated with ticagrelor.