Andexanet for Factor Xa Inhibitor-Associated Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage who are receiving factor Xa inhibitors have a risk of hematoma expansion. The effect of andexanet alfa, an agent that reverses the effects of factor Xa inhibitors, on hematoma volume expansion has not been well studied. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients who had taken factor Xa inhibitors within 15 hours before having an acute intracerebral hemorrhage to receive andexanet or usual care. The primary end point was hemostatic efficacy, defined by expansion of the hematoma volume by 35% or less at 12 hours after baseline, an increase in the score on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of less than 7 points (scores range from 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating worse neurologic deficit) at 12 hours, and no receipt of rescue therapy between 3 hours and 12 hours. Safety end points were thrombotic events and death. RESULTS: A total of 263 patients were assigned to receive andexanet, and 267 to receive usual care. Efficacy was assessed in an interim analysis that included 452 patients, and safety was analyzed in all 530 enrolled patients. Atrial fibrillation was the most common indication for factor Xa inhibitors. Of the patients receiving usual care, 85.5% received prothrombin complex concentrate. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 150 of 224 patients (67.0%) receiving andexanet and in 121 of 228 (53.1%) receiving usual care (adjusted difference, 13.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6 to 22.2; P = 0.003). The median reduction from baseline to the 1-to-2-hour nadir in anti-factor Xa activity was 94.5% with andexanet and 26.9% with usual care (P<0.001). Thrombotic events occurred in 27 of 263 patients (10.3%) receiving andexanet and in 15 of 267 (5.6%) receiving usual care (difference, 4.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 9.2; P = 0.048); ischemic stroke occurred in 17 patients (6.5%) and 4 patients (1.5%), respectively. There were no appreciable differences between the groups in the score on the modified Rankin scale or in death within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with intracerebral hemorrhage who were receiving factor Xa inhibitors, andexanet resulted in better control of hematoma expansion than usual care but was associated with thrombotic events, including ischemic stroke. (Funded by Alexion AstraZeneca Rare Disease and others; ANNEXA-I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03661528.).

Ticagrelor vs placebo for the reduction of vaso-occlusive crises in pediatric sickle cell disease: the HESTIA3 study.

The phase 3 HESTIA3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of the reversible P2Y12 inhibitor ticagrelor vs placebo in preventing vaso-occlusive crises in pediatric patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). Patients aged 2 to 17 years were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive weight-based doses of ticagrelor or matching placebo. The primary end point was the rate of vaso-occlusive crises, a composite of painful crises and/or acute chest syndrome (ACS). Key secondary end points included number and duration of painful crises, number of ACS events, and number of vaso-occlusive crises requiring hospitalization or emergency department visits. Exploratory end points included the effect of ticagrelor on platelet activation. In total, 193 patients (ticagrelor, n = 101; placebo, n = 92) underwent randomization at 53 sites across 16 countries. The study was terminated 4 months before planned completion for lack of efficacy. Median ticagrelor exposure duration was 296.5 days. The primary end point was not met: estimated yearly incidence of vaso-occlusive crises was 2.74 in the ticagrelor group and 2.60 in the placebo group (rate ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.50; P = .7597). There was no evidence of efficacy for ticagrelor vs placebo across secondary end points. Median platelet inhibition with ticagrelor at 6 months was 34.9% predose and 55.7% at 2 hours' postdose. Nine patients (9%) in the ticagrelor group and eight patients (9%) in the placebo group had at least one bleeding event. In conclusion, no reduction of vaso-occlusive crises was seen with ticagrelor vs placebo in these pediatric patients with SCD. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03615924.

Ticagrelor and Aspirin or Aspirin Alone in Acute Ischemic Stroke or TIA.

BACKGROUND: Trials have evaluated the use of clopidogrel and aspirin to prevent stroke after an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). In a previous trial, ticagrelor was not better than aspirin in preventing vascular events or death after stroke or TIA. The effect of the combination of ticagrelor and aspirin on prevention of stroke has not been well studied. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial involving patients who had had a mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke, with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of 5 or less (range, 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating more severe stroke), or TIA and who were not undergoing thrombolysis or thrombectomy. The patients were assigned within 24 hours after symptom onset, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive a 30-day regimen of either ticagrelor (180-mg loading dose followed by 90 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (300 to 325 mg on the first day followed by 75 to 100 mg daily) or matching placebo plus aspirin. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke or death within 30 days. Secondary outcomes were first subsequent ischemic stroke and the incidence of disability within 30 days. The primary safety outcome was severe bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 11,016 patients underwent randomization (5523 in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and 5493 in the aspirin group). A primary-outcome event occurred in 303 patients (5.5%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 362 patients (6.6%) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.96; P = 0.02). Ischemic stroke occurred in 276 patients (5.0%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 345 patients (6.3%) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.93; P = 0.004). The incidence of disability did not differ significantly between the two groups. Severe bleeding occurred in 28 patients (0.5%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 7 patients (0.1%) in the aspirin group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke (NIHSS score ≤5) or TIA who were not undergoing intravenous or endovascular thrombolysis, the risk of the composite of stroke or death within 30 days was lower with ticagrelor-aspirin than with aspirin alone, but the incidence of disability did not differ significantly between the two groups. Severe bleeding was more frequent with ticagrelor. (Funded by AstraZeneca; THALES ClinicalTrial.gov number, NCT03354429.).

Ticagrelor in Patients with Stable Coronary Disease and Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus who have not had a myocardial infarction or stroke are at high risk for cardiovascular events. Whether adding ticagrelor to aspirin improves outcomes in this population is unclear. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned patients who were 50 years of age or older and who had stable coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus to receive either ticagrelor plus aspirin or placebo plus aspirin. Patients with previous myocardial infarction or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding as defined by the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 19,220 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 39.9 months. Permanent treatment discontinuation was more frequent with ticagrelor than placebo (34.5% vs. 25.4%). The incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events (the primary efficacy outcome) was lower in the ticagrelor group than in the placebo group (7.7% vs. 8.5%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.99; P = 0.04), whereas the incidence of TIMI major bleeding was higher (2.2% vs. 1.0%; hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.94; P<0.001), as was the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (0.7% vs. 0.5%; hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.48; P = 0.005). There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.1%; hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.87 to 4.15; P = 0.11). The incidence of an exploratory composite outcome of irreversible harm (death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, fatal bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage) was similar in the ticagrelor group and the placebo group (10.1% vs. 10.8%; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, those who received ticagrelor plus aspirin had a lower incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events but a higher incidence of major bleeding than those who received placebo plus aspirin. (Funded by AstraZeneca; THEMIS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01991795.).

Balance of benefit and risk of ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease according to bleeding risk assessment with the CRUSADE score: Data from THEMIS and THEMIS PCI.

BACKGROUND: The THEMIS trial demonstrated that in high-risk patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without previous myocardial infarction or stroke, ticagrelor, in addition to aspirin, reduced the incidence of ischemic events but increased major bleeding. Identification of patients who could derive the greatest net benefit from the addition of ticagrelor appears important. We used the CRUSADE bleeding risk score to risk stratify the THEMIS population. METHODS: The population was divided into tertiles: score ≤22, 23 to 33, and ≥34. In each tertile, primary efficacy (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and safety (TIMI major bleeding) outcomes were analyzed. NACE (net adverse clinical events) was defined as the irreversible harm composite, in which all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, amputations, fatal bleeds, and intracranial hemorrhage were counted. RESULTS: Patients in the lower risk tertile experienced fewer ischemic events with ticagrelor than placebo, whereas there was no significant benefit from ticagrelor in the other tertiles (Pinteraction = .008). Bleeding rates were consistently increased with ticagrelor across all tertiles (Pinteraction = .79). Ticagrelor reduced NACE in the first tertile (HR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.61-0.90) but not in the others (HR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.86-1.23 and HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.91-1.22, respectively; Pinteraction = .012). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, only those at the lower end of the bleeding risk spectrum according to the CRUSADE score derived net benefit from ticagrelor.

Differential effect of clopidogrel and ticagrelor on leukocyte count in relation to patient characteristics, biomarkers and genotype: a PLATO substudy.

Inflammation plays a key role in cardiovascular disease by contributing to atherothrombosis. The PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) study (NCT00391872) compared ticagrelor to clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes and demonstrated fewer cardiovascular events with ticagrelor but lower white blood cell counts (WBC) with clopidogrel. In this further analysis of the PLATO biomarker substudy, we assessed associations between WBC and clinical characteristics, biomarker levels, and CYP2C19 polymorphisms.On-treatment mean (SD) WBC in the clopidogrel group was mildly reduced at each stage of follow-up compared with either the ticagrelor group (1 month: 7.27 (2.1) and 7.67 (2.23) x109/L for clopidogrel and ticagrelor, respectively; p < .001) or following cessation of clopidogrel (7.23 (1.97) x109/L, at 6 months vs 7.56 (2.28) x109/L after treatment cessation; P < .001). This occurred independently of baseline biomarkers and CYP2C19 genotype (where known). Adjusting for clinical characteristics and other biomarkers, no significant interaction was detected between clinical risk factors and the observed effect of clopidogrel on WBC.Clopidogrel weakly suppresses WBC, independent of clinical characteristics, baseline inflammatory biomarker levels, and CYP2C19 genotype. Further work is required to determine the mechanism for this effect and whether it contributes to clopidogrel's efficacy as well as therapeutic interaction with anti-inflammatory drugs.

Ischemic Benefit and Hemorrhage Risk of Ticagrelor-Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

Background and Purpose: In patients with acute mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, the THALES trial (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Ticagrelor and Aspirin for Prevention of Stroke and Death) demonstrated that when added to aspirin, ticagrelor reduced stroke or death but increased risk of severe hemorrhage compared with placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of THALES included hemorrhagic stroke and death, events also counted in the primary safety outcome. We sought to disentangle risk and benefit, assess their relative impact, and attempt to identify subgroups with disproportionate risk or benefit. Methods: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of patients with mild-to-moderate acute noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, patients were randomized within 24 hours after symptom onset to a 30-day regimen of either ticagrelor plus aspirin or matching placebo plus aspirin. For the present analyses, we defined the efficacy outcome, major ischemic events, as the composite of ischemic stroke or nonhemorrhagic death, and defined the safety outcome, major hemorrhage, as intracranial hemorrhage or hemorrhagic death. Net clinical impact was defined as the combination of these 2 end points. Results: In 11 016 patients (5523 ticagrelor-aspirin and 5493 aspirin), a major ischemic event occurred in 294 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and in 359 patients (6.5%) in the aspirin group (absolute risk reduction 1.19% [95% CI, 0.31%­2.07%]). Major hemorrhage occurred in 22 patients (0.4%) in the ticagrelor-aspirin group and 6 patients (0.1%) in the aspirin group (absolute risk increase 0.29% [95% CI, 0.10%­0.48%]). Net clinical impact favored ticagrelor-aspirin (absolute risk reduction 0.97% [95% CI, 0.08%­1.87%]). Findings were similar when different thresholds for disability were applied and over a range of predefined subgroups. Conclusions: In patients with mild-moderate ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack, ischemic benefits of 30-day treatment with ticagrelor-aspirin outweigh risks of hemorrhage. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03354429.

Ticagrelor Added to Aspirin in Acute Nonsevere Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack of Atherosclerotic Origin.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Among patients with a transient ischemic attack or minor ischemic strokes, those with ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis of cervicocranial vasculature have the highest risk of recurrent vascular events. METHODS: In the double-blind THALES (The Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Ticagrelor and ASA for Prevention of Stroke and Death) trial, we randomized patients with a noncardioembolic, nonsevere ischemic stroke, or high-risk transient ischemic attack to ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by 90 mg twice daily for days 2-30) or placebo added to aspirin (300-325 mg on day 1 followed by 75-100 mg daily for days 2-30) within 24 hours of symptom onset. The present paper reports a prespecified analysis in patients with and without ipsilateral, potentially causal atherosclerotic stenosis ≥30% of cervicocranial vasculature. The primary end point was time to the occurrence of stroke or death within 30 days. RESULTS: Of 11 016 randomized patients, 2351 (21.3%) patients had an ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis. After 30 days, a primary end point occurred in 92/1136 (8.1%) patients with ipsilateral stenosis randomized to ticagrelor and in 132/1215 (10.9%) randomized to placebo (hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.96], P=0.023) resulting in a number needed to treat of 34 (95% CI, 19-171). In patients without ipsilateral stenosis, the corresponding event rate was 211/4387 (4.8%) and 230/4278 (5.4%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]; P=0.23, Pinteraction=0.245). Severe bleeding occurred in 4 (0.4%) and 3 (0.2%) patients with ipsilateral atherosclerotic stenosis on ticagrelor and on placebo, respectively (P=NS), and in 24 (0.5%) and 4 (0.1%), respectively, in 8665 patients without ipsilateral stenosis (hazard ratio=5.87 [95% CI, 2.04-16.9], P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory analysis comparing ticagrelor added to aspirin to aspirin alone, we found no treatment by ipsilateral atherosclerosis stenosis subgroup interaction but did identify a higher absolute risk and a greater absolute risk reduction of stroke or death at 30 days in patients with ipsilateral atherosclerosis stenosis than in those without. In this easily identified population, ticagrelor added to aspirin provided a clinically meaningful benefit with a number needed to treat of 34 (95% CI, 19-171). Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03354429.

Ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (THEMIS-PCI): a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor. METHODS: The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population). FINDINGS: Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8-3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74-0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, pinteraction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78-1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75-1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48-2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36-3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74-1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75-0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, pinteraction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI. INTERPRETATION: In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Admission Levels of DKK1 (Dickkopf-1) Are Associated With Future Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Objective- The Wnt/wingless signaling antagonist DKK1 (dickkopf-1) regulates platelet-mediated inflammation and may contribute to plaque destabilization. We hypothesized that DKK1 would be associated with cardiovascular outcomes. Approach and Results- We determined DKK1 levels in serum samples obtained before randomization, at discharge, and 1 and 6 months in a subset of 5165 patients with acute coronary syndromes in the PLATO trial (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes; NCT00391872). The median (interquartile range) DKK1 concentrations were 0.61 (0.20-1.27) ng/mL at baseline and increased during follow-up. The hazard ratio (95% CIs) for the composite end point (cardiovascular death, nonprocedural spontaneous myocardial infarction, or stroke) during 1 year of follow-up, per 50% increase in baseline DKK1 concentration, was 1.06 (1.02-1.10), P=0.0011, and remained significant in fully adjusted analysis with 14 conventional clinical and demographic and 6 biochemical variables, including NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), hs-TnT (high-sensitivity troponin T), and GDF-15 (growth differentiation factor 15; 1.05 [1.00-1.09]; P=0.028). This association was mainly driven by the association with cardiovascular death, where a gradual increase in event rates was observed with increasing quartiles of DKK1 (2.7%, 3.0%, 4.3%, and 5.0%) and remained significant and unmodified in fully adjusted analysis (hazard ratio, 1.10 [1.04-1.17]; P=0.002). Change in DKK1 and levels at 1 month were unrelated to outcomes. A modifying effect of ticagrelor on DKK1 discharge levels was observed but not associated with prognosis. Conclusions- In patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with dual antiplatelet treatment, admission DKK1 levels were independently associated with a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke and with cardiovascular death alone.

Transcatheter heart valve interventions: where are we? Where are we going?

Transcatheter heart valve interventions have transformed the outcomes of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) who are unfavourable candidates for surgery. Technological advances have allowed extension of these interventions to younger or lower risk patients and those with other forms of VHD and may in the future permit earlier treatment of VHD in less symptomatic patients or those with moderate disease. The balance of risks and benefits is likely to differ between lower and higher risk patients, and more evidence is needed to evaluate the net benefit of transcatheter technology in these groups. As academic researchers, clinicians, industry, and patient stakeholders collaborate to research these broader indications for transcatheter valve interventions, it is essential to address (i) device durability and deliverability, (ii) specific anatomical needs (e.g. bicuspid aortic valves, aortic regurgitation, mitral and tricuspid valve disease), (iii) operator training, and (iv) the reinforced importance of the multidisciplinary Heart Team.

Effect of High-Dose Omega-3 Fatty Acids vs Corn Oil on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients at High Cardiovascular Risk: The STRENGTH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It remains uncertain whether the omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) reduce cardiovascular risk. Objective: To determine the effects on cardiovascular outcomes of a carboxylic acid formulation of EPA and DHA (omega-3 CA) with documented favorable effects on lipid and inflammatory markers in patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia and high cardiovascular risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial (enrollment October 30, 2014, to June 14, 2017; study termination January 8, 2020; last patient visit May 14, 2020) comparing omega-3 CA with corn oil in statin-treated participants with high cardiovascular risk, hypertriglyceridemia, and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). A total of 13 078 patients were randomized at 675 academic and community hospitals in 22 countries in North America, Europe, South America, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive 4 g/d of omega-3 CA (n = 6539) or corn oil, which was intended to serve as an inert comparator (n = 6539), in addition to usual background therapies, including statins. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy measure was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization. Results: When 1384 patients had experienced a primary end point event (of a planned 1600 events), the trial was prematurely halted based on an interim analysis that indicated a low probability of clinical benefit of omega-3 CA vs the corn oil comparator. Among the 13 078 treated patients (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [9.0] years; 35% women; 70% with diabetes; median low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level, 75.0 mg/dL; median triglycerides level, 240 mg/dL; median HDL-C level, 36 mg/dL; and median high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level, 2.1 mg/L), 12 633 (96.6%) completed the trial with ascertainment of primary end point status. The primary end point occurred in 785 patients (12.0%) treated with omega-3 CA vs 795 (12.2%) treated with corn oil (hazard ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90-1.09]; P = .84). A greater rate of gastrointestinal adverse events was observed in the omega-3 CA group (24.7%) compared with corn oil-treated patients (14.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among statin-treated patients at high cardiovascular risk, the addition of omega-3 CA, compared with corn oil, to usual background therapies resulted in no significant difference in a composite outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events. These findings do not support use of this omega-3 fatty acid formulation to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02104817.

Ticagrelor in patients with heart failure after acute coronary syndromes-Insights from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) following acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is associated with worse prognosis; however, the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor in patients with HF and if ticagrelor influences the risk of new-onset HF are unknown. METHODS: We examined the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in patients with ACS in the randomized PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial subdivided by strata: (1) previous HF and/or clinical signs of HF on admission or (2) no HF on admission. The primary outcome was the combination of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke evaluated by multivariable Cox regression models. The safety outcome was major bleeding. New-onset HF was defined as an HF event after discharge in patients without previous HF. RESULTS: Data were available in 18,556 patients, whom 2,862 (15.4%) patients had HF, including 1,584 (8.5%) patients with previous HF. Patients randomized to ticagrelor had lower risk of the composite end point regardless of HF status: hazard ratio (HR) 0.87 (95% CI: 0.73-1.03) in patients with HF and HR 0.84 (95% CI: 0.75-0.93) in patients with no HF (P = .76). Corresponding HR for major bleeding were HR 1.08 (95% CI: 0.87-1.34) and HR 1.03 (95% CI: 0.94-1.14) (P = .71). There was no difference in new-onset HF at 12 months between patients randomized to ticagrelor (4.1%, n = 278) or clopidogrel (4.0%, n = 276). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS, ticagrelor is more efficacious in protecting against new ischemic events and mortality than clopidogrel irrespective of the presence of HF. There is no difference between ticagrelor or clopidogrel treatment in new-onset HF post-ACS.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of platelet response to ticagrelor in stable coronary artery disease and prior myocardial infarction patients.

AIMS: To characterize ticagrelor exposure-response relationship for platelet inhibition in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and a history of myocardial infarction (MI), using nonlinear mixed effects modelling and simulation. METHODS: Platelet function data were integrated with plasma concentration data of ticagrelor and its active metabolite AR-C1249010XX in a population pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) model, based on two clinical studies. In the ONSET/OFFSET study, PK and platelet function were assessed in 123 CAD patients receiving placebo, ticagrelor (180 mg followed by 90 mg twice daily) or clopidogrel (600 mg followed by 75 mg once daily). In the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 platelet function substudy, PK and platelet function were assessed during maintenance dosing in 180 prior MI patients receiving placebo, ticagrelor 60 mg or ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Platelet inhibition by ticagrelor was described by a sigmoidal Emax model. On average, half maximal inhibition was reached at ticagrelor concentrations of 116 (RSE: 5.3%) nmol l-1 . Simulations showed that near maximal platelet inhibition is achieved with both ticagrelor 60 and 90 mg twice daily. At simulated lower doses, platelet inhibition is overall reduced, more variable between patients, and show greater peak-to-trough variability. Ticagrelor antiplatelet response was similar between the studied patient populations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable CAD or a history of MI, near maximal platelet inhibition is achieved with both ticagrelor 60 and 90 mg twice daily. At modelled doses <60 mg, the response is reduced overall, more variable between patients, and patients will display greater peak-to-trough variability.

Prevalence and relevance of abnormal glucose metabolism in acute coronary syndromes: insights from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and abnormal glucose metabolism are associated with cardiovascular (CV) disease. We investigated the prevalence and prognostic importance of dysglycaemia in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Diabetes was defined as known diabetes or HbA1c ≥ 6.5% or non-fasting glucose ≥ 11.1 mmol/L on admission, prediabetes as HbA1c ≥ 5.7% but < 6.5%, and no diabetes as HbA1c < 5.7%. The primary endpoint was the composite of CV death, spontaneous myocardial infarction type 1 (sMI) or stroke at 12 months. Multivariable Cox regression models, adjusting for baseline characteristics, and biomarkers NT-proBNP and troponin I, were used to explore the association between glycaemia and outcome. On admission, 16,007 (86.1%) patients had HbA1c and/or glucose levels available and were subdivided into DM 38.5% (6160) (1501 patients had no previous DM diagnosis), prediabetes 38.8% (6210), and no DM 22.7% (3637). Kaplan Meier event rates at 12 months for CV death, sMI or stroke per subgroups were 14.5% (832), 9.0% (522), and 8.5% (293), respectively with multivariable adjusted HRs, versus no diabetes, for diabetes: 1.71 (1.50-1.95) and for prediabetes 1.03 (0.90-1.19). Corresponding event rates for CV death were 6.9% (391), 3.4% (195) and 3.0% (102), respectively, with adjusted HRs for patients with DM of: 1.92 (1.42-2.60) and for prediabetes 1.02 (0.79-1.32). Abnormal glucose metabolism is common in ACS patients, but only patients with definite DM have an increased CV risk, indicating that prediabetes is not immediately associated with worse CV outcomes.

Equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 gene polymorphisms and clinical outcomes following acute coronary syndromes: findings from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) study.

In the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) study, the P2Y12 inhibitors ticagrelor and clopidogrel were compared in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Ticagrelor was shown to reduce occurrence of the primary end point - a composite of death from vascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke - compared to clopidogrel. Ticagrelor's pleiotropic effects on reuptake of adenosine via inhibition of equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (ENT1) have been hypothesized to contribute to this. Several polymorphisms of ENT1 are known to exist. We explored the interaction between ENT1 polymorphisms and clinical outcomes in ACS patients participating in the PLATO genetic substudy. Using genotyping data obtained in a genome-wide association study, the gene region encoding ENT1 was assessed and 94 polymorphisms were identified. After quality control filtering, data from 9943 participants were included. Subjects were divided into discovery (phase 1, n = 3970) and replication (phase 2, n = 5973) cohorts. Cox-regression analysis of the relationship between variants and seven efficacy and safety outcomes was performed in discovery, replication, and combined cohorts. Treatment-marker interactions were also determined. Although 35 variants were found with associations to the investigated outcomes reaching p < 0.05 in the discovery cohort, only one of these was replicated in phase 2 of the analysis and also reached the predetermined level of statistical significance in the combined data, taking into account the number of tests performed: the rare polymorphism rs141034817, with a frequency of 0.2%, was significantly associated with bleeding. Thirty-three treatment-marker interactions were found with a significance level of p < 0.05 in phase 1, but none was replicated in phase 2. We found no significant interaction between ENT1 genotype and clinical outcomes in ACS patients treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel, apart from the association between a rare polymorphism and bleeding that requires further study. If ticagrelor's pleiotropic effects on adenosine uptake are clinically relevant, these do not appear to be significantly affected by variation in the ENT1 gene.

Fibrin clot properties independently predict adverse clinical outcome following acute coronary syndrome: a PLATO substudy.

Aims: To determine whether fibrin clot properties are associated with clinical outcomes following acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods and results: Plasma samples were collected at hospital discharge from 4354 ACS patients randomized to clopidogrel or ticagrelor in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. A validated turbidimetric assay was employed to study plasma clot lysis time and maximum turbidity (a measure of clot density). One-year rates of cardiovascular (CV) death, spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI) and PLATO-defined major bleeding events were assessed after sample collection. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. After adjusting for CV risk factors, each 50% increase in lysis time was associated with CV death/spontaneous MI [HR 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.31; P < 0.01] and CV death alone (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17-1.59; P < 0.001). Similarly, each 50% increase in maximum turbidity was associated with increased risk of CV death (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.50; P = 0.024). After adjustment for other prognostic biomarkers (leukocyte count, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, high-sensitivity troponin T, cystatin C, N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, and growth differentiation factor-15), the association with CV death remained significant for lysis time (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1.01-1.42; P = 0.042) but not for maximum turbidity. These associations were consistent regardless of randomized antiplatelet treatment (all interaction P > 0.05). Neither lysis time nor maximum turbidity was associated with major bleeding events. Conclusion: Fibrin clots that are resistant to lysis independently predict adverse outcome in ACS patients. Novel therapies targeting fibrin clot properties might be a new avenue for improving prognosis in patients with ACS.

Efficacy and Safety of Ticagrelor in Relation to Aspirin Use Within the Week Before Randomization in the SOCRATES Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: SOCRATES (Acute Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack Treated With Aspirin or Ticagrelor and Patient Outcomes), comparing ticagrelor with aspirin in patients with acute cerebral ischemia, found a nonsignificant 11% relative risk reduction for stroke, myocardial infarction, or death (P=0.07). Aspirin intake before randomization could enhance the effect of ticagrelor by conferring dual antiplatelet effect during a high-risk period for subsequent stroke. Therefore, we explored the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus aspirin in the patients who received any aspirin the week before randomization. METHODS: A prespecified subgroup analysis in SOCRATES (n=13 199), randomizing patients with acute ischemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≤5) or transient ischemic attack (ABCD2 score of ≥4) to 90-day treatment with ticagrelor or aspirin. Patients in the prior-aspirin group had received any aspirin within the week before randomization. Primary end point was time to stroke, myocardial infarction, or death. Safety end point was PLATO (Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) major bleeding. RESULTS: The 4232 patients in the prior-aspirin group were older, had more vascular risk factors, and vascular disease than the other patients. In the prior-aspirin group, the primary end point occurred in 138/2130 (6.5%) of patients on ticagrelor and in 177/2102 (8.3%) on aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.95; P=0.02); in patients with no prior-aspirin usage an event occurred in 304/4459 (6.9%) and 320/4508 (7.1%) on ticagrelor and aspirin, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.12; P=0.59). The treatment-by-prior-aspirin interaction was not statistically significant (P=0.10). In the prior-aspirin group, major bleeding occurred in 0.7% and 0.4% of patients on ticagrelor and aspirin, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-3.65; P=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis from SOCRATES, fewer primary end points occurred on ticagrelor treatment than on aspirin in patients receiving aspirin before randomization, but there was no significant treatment-by-prior-aspirin interaction. A new study will investigate the benefit-risk of combining ticagrelor and aspirin in patients with acute cerebral ischemia (URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03354429). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01994720.

Genome-wide association and Mendelian randomization study of NT-proBNP in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a strong predictor of mortality in coronary artery disease and is widely employed as a prognostic biomarker. However, a causal relationship between NT-proBNP and clinical endpoints has not been established. We have performed a genome-wide association and Mendelian randomization study of NT-proBNP. We used a discovery set of 3740 patients from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, which enrolled 18 624 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). A further set of 5492 patients, from the same trial, was used for replication. Genetic variants at two novel loci (SLC39A8 and POC1B/GALNT4) were associated with NT-proBNP levels and replicated together with the previously known NPPB locus. The most significant SNP (rs198389, pooled P = 1.07 × 10(-15)) in NPPB interrupts an E-box consensus motif in the gene promoter. The association in SLC39A8 is driven by a deleterious variant (rs13107325, pooled P = 5.99 × 10(-10)), whereas the most significant SNP in POC1B/GALNT4 (rs11105306, pooled P = 1.02 × 10(-16)) is intronic. The SLC39A8 SNP was associated with higher risk of cardiovascular (CV) death (HR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.08-1.79, P = 0.0095), but the other loci were not associated with clinical endpoints. We have identified two novel loci to be associated with NT-proBNP in patients with ACS. Only the SLC39A8 variant, but not the NPPB variant, was associated with a clinical endpoint. Due to pleotropic effects of SLC39A8, these results do not suggest that NT-proBNP levels have a direct effect on mortality in ACS patients. PLATO Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00391872.

Safety of ticagrelor in patients with baseline conduction abnormalities: A PLATO (Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although bradyarrhythmias have been observed with ticagrelor and its use with advanced atrioventricular block is not recommended, questions arise regarding its use in patients with mild conduction abnormalities. The objectives were to compare rates of clinically relevant arrhythmias in relation to any mild baseline conduction abnormality in patients with acute coronary syndrome randomized to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. METHODS: We included all subjects in the electrocardiographic (ECG) substudy of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes trial, excluding those with missing baseline ECG or with a pacemaker at baseline (N = 15,460). Conduction abnormality was defined as sinus bradycardia, first-degree atrioventricular block, hemiblock, or bundle-branch block. The primary arrhythmic outcome was the composite of any symptomatic brady- or tachyarrhythmia, permanent pacemaker placement, or cardiac arrest through 12 months. RESULTS: Patients with baseline conduction abnormalities (n = 4,256, 27.5%) were older and more likely to experience the primary arrhythmic outcome. There were no differences by ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in the composite arrhythmic end point in those with baseline conduction disease (1-year cumulative incidence rate: 17% for both study arms; hazard ratio: 0.99 [0.86-1.15]) or without baseline conduction disease (1-year cumulative incidence rate: clopidogrel 12.8% vs ticagrelor 12.4%; hazard ratio: 0.98 (0.88-1.09). There were also no statistically significant differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the rates of bradycardic (or any individual arrhythmic) events in patients with baseline conduction abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: Ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel did not increase arrhythmic events even in subjects with acute coronary syndrome who present with mild conduction abnormalities on their baseline ECG.