Treatment of elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the nationwide POPular age registry.

OBJECTIVE: We describe the current treatment of elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) enrolled in a national registry. METHODS: The POPular AGE registry is a prospective, multicentre study of patients ≥ 75 years of age presenting with NSTEMI, performed in the Netherlands. Management was at the discretion of the treating physician. Cardiovascular events consisted of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke. Bleeding was classified according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 646 patients were enrolled between August 2016 and May 2018. Median age was 81 (IQR 77-84) years and 58% were male. Overall, 75% underwent coronary angiography, 40% percutaneous coronary intervention, and 11% coronary artery bypass grafting, while 49.8% received pharmacological therapy only. At discharge, dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor) was prescribed to 56.7%, and 27.4% received oral anticoagulation plus at least one antiplatelet agent. At 1­year follow-up, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke had occurred in 13.6% and major bleeding (BARC 3 and 5) in 3.9% of patients. The risk of both cardiovascular events and major bleeding was highest during the 1st month. However, cardiovascular risk was three times as high as bleeding risk in this elderly population, both after 1 month and after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: In this national registry of elderly patients with NSTEMI, the majority are treated according to current European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Both the cardiovascular and bleeding risk are highest during the 1st month after NSTEMI. However, the cardiovascular risk was three times as high as the bleeding risk.

Conservative versus Invasive Strategy in Elderly Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the International POPular Age Registry.

This registry assessed the impact of conservative and invasive strategies on major adverse clinical events (MACE) in elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Patients aged ≥75 years with NSTEMI were prospectively registered from European centers and followed up for one year. Outcomes were compared between conservative and invasive groups in the overall population and a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort. MACE included cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, and stroke. The study included 1190 patients (median age 80 years, 43% female). CAG was performed in 67% (N = 798), with two-thirds undergoing revascularization. Conservatively treated patients had higher baseline risk. After propensity score matching, 319 patient pairs were successfully matched. MACE occurred more frequently in the conservative group (total population 20% vs. 12%, adjHR 0.53, 95% CI 0.37-0.77, p = 0.001), remaining significant in the PSM cohort (18% vs. 12%, adjHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31-0.81, p = 0.004). In conclusion, an early invasive strategy was associated with benefits over conservative management in elderly patients with NSTEMI. Risk factors associated with ischemia and bleeding should guide strategy selection rather than solely relying on age.

Cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel vs. ticagrelor in patients of 70 years or older with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: The POPular AGE trial showed that clopidogrel significantly reduced bleeding risk compared with ticagrelor without any signs of an increase in thrombotic events. The aim of this analysis was to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel compared with ticagrelor in these patients aged 70 years or older with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHODS AND RESULTS: A 1-year decision tree based on the POPular AGE trial in combination with a lifelong Markov model was developed to compare clopidogrel with ticagrelor in terms of clinical outcomes, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in elderly patients (above 70 year) with NSTE-ACS. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from a Dutch healthcare system perspective. Events rates and utility data observed in the POPular AGE trial were combined with lifetime projections to evaluate costs and effects for a fictional cohort of 1000 patients. Treatment with clopidogrel instead of ticagrelor led to a cost saving of €1484 575 (€1485 per patient) and a decrease of 10.96 QALYs (0.011 QALY per patient) in the fictional cohort. In an alternative base case with equal distribution over health states in the first year, treatment with clopidogrel led to an increase in QALYs. In all scenario analyses, treatment with clopidogrel was cost-saving. CONCLUSION: Clopidogrel is a cost-saving alternative to ticagrelor in elderly patients after NSTE-ACS, though regarding overall cost-effectiveness clopidogrel was not superior to ticagrelor, as it resulted in a small negative effect on QALYs. However, based on the results of the alternative base case and clinical outcomes of the POPular AGE trial, clopidogrel could be a reasonable alternative to ticagrelor for elderly NSTE-ACS patients with a higher bleeding risk.

Clopidogrel in noncarriers of CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles versus ticagrelor in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome: A pre-specified sub analysis from the POPular Genetics and POPular Age trials CYP2C19 alleles in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who are carrying CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles derive less benefit from clopidogrel treatment. Despite this, in elderly patients, clopidogrel might be preferred over more potent P2Y12 inhibitors due to a lower bleeding risk. Whether CYP2C19 genotype-guided antiplatelet treatment in the elderly could be of benefit has not been studied specifically. METHODS: Patients aged 70 years and older with known CYP2C19*2 and *3 genotype were identified from the POPular Genetics and POPular Age trials. Noncarriers of loss-of-function alleles treated with clopidogrel were compared to patients, irrespective of CYP2C19 genotype, treated with ticagrelor and to clopidogrel treated carriers of loss-of-function alleles. We assessed net clinical benefit (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke and Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) major bleeding), atherothrombotic outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke) and bleeding outcomes (PLATO major and minor bleeding). RESULTS: A total of 991 patients were assessed. There was no significant difference in net clinical benefit (17.2% vs. 15.1%, adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.44), atherothrombotic outcomes (9.7% vs. 9.2%, adjHR 1.00, 95%CI 0.66-1.50), and bleeding outcomes (17.7% vs. 19.8%, adjHR 0.80, 95%CI 0.62-1.12) between clopidogrel in noncarriers of loss-of-function alleles and ticagrelor respectively. CONCLUSION: In ACS patients aged 70 years and older, there was no significant difference in net clinical benefit and atherothrombotic outcomes between noncarriers of a loss-of-function allele treated with clopidogrel and patients treated with ticagrelor. The bleeding rate was numerically; though not statistically significant, lower in patients using clopidogrel.

Rationale and Design of the Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (FORCE-ACS) Registry: Towards "Personalized Medicine" in Daily Clinical Practice.

Diagnostic and treatment strategies for acute coronary syndrome have improved dramatically over the past few decades, but mortality and recurrent myocardial infarction rates remain high. An aging population with increasing co-morbidities heralds new clinical challenges. Therefore, in order to evaluate and improve current treatment strategies, detailed information on clinical presentation, treatment and follow-up in real-world patients is needed. The Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (FORCE-ACS) registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03823547) is a multi-center, prospective real-world registry of patients admitted with (suspected) acute coronary syndrome. Both non-interventional and interventional cardiac centers in different regions of the Netherlands are currently participating. Patients are treated according to local protocols, enabling the evaluation of different diagnostic and treatment strategies used in daily practice. Data collection is performed using electronic medical records and quality-of-life questionnaires, which are sent 1, 12, 24 and 36 months after initial admission. Major end points are all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, revascularization and all bleeding requiring medical attention. Invasive therapy, antithrombotic therapy including patient-tailored strategies, such as the use of risk scores, pharmacogenetic guided antiplatelet therapy and patient reported outcome measures are monitored. The FORCE-ACS registry provides insight into numerous aspects of the (quality of) care for acute coronary syndrome patients.

Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Older Patients with NSTE-ACS Using Oral Anticoagulation: A Sub-Analysis of the POPular Age Trial.

There are no randomised data on which antiplatelet agent to use in elderly patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and an indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC). The randomised POPular Age trial, in patients of 70 years or older with NSTE-ACS, showed a reduction in bleeding without increasing thrombotic events in patients using clopidogrel as compared to ticagrelor. In this sub-analysis of the POPular AGE trial, we compare clopidogrel with ticagrelor in patients with a need for oral anticoagulation. The follow-up duration was one year. The primary bleeding outcome was Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) major and minor bleeding. The primary thrombotic outcome consisted of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke. The primary net clinical benefit outcome was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and PLATO major and minor bleeding. A total of 184/1011 (18.2%) patients on OAC were included in this subanalysis; 83 were randomized to clopidogrel and 101 to ticagrelor. The primary bleeding outcome was lower in the clopidogrel group (17/83, 20.9%) compared to the ticagrelor group (33/101, 33.5%; p = 0.051), as was the thrombotic outcome (7/83, 8.4% vs. 19/101, 19.2%; p = 0.035) and the primary net clinical benefit outcome (23/83, 27.7% vs. 49/101, 48.5%; p = 0.003). In this subgroup of patients using OAC, clopidogrel reduced PLATO major and minor bleeding compared to ticagrelor without increasing thrombotic risk. This analysis therefore suggests that, in line with the POPular Age trial, clopidogrel is a better option than ticagrelor in NSTE-ACS patients ≥70 years using OAC.

Effect of Adding Ticagrelor to Standard Aspirin on Saphenous Vein Graft Patency in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (POPular CABG): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) occlude during the first year after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) despite aspirin use. The POPular CABG trial (The Effect of Ticagrelor on Saphenous Vein Graft Patency in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery) investigated whether ticagrelor added to standard aspirin improves SVG patency at 1 year after CABG. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, patients with ≥1 SVGs were randomly assigned (1:1) after CABG to ticagrelor or placebo added to standard aspirin (80 mg or 100 mg). The primary outcome was SVG occlusion at 1 year, assessed with coronary computed tomography angiography, in all patients that had primary outcome imaging available. A generalized estimating equation model was used to perform the primary analysis per SVG. The secondary outcome was 1-year SVG failure, which was a composite of SVG occlusion, SVG revascularization, myocardial infarction in myocardial territory supplied by a SVG, or sudden death. RESULTS: Among 499 randomly assigned patients, the mean age was 67.9±8.3 years, 87.1% were male, the indication for CABG was acute coronary syndrome in 31.3%, and 95.2% of procedures used cardiopulmonary bypass. Primary outcome imaging was available in 220 patients in the ticagrelor group and 223 patients in the placebo group. The SVG occlusion rate in the ticagrelor group was 10.5% (51 of 484 SVGs) versus 9.1% in the placebo group (43 of 470 SVGs), odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.73-2.30]; P=0.38. SVG failure occurred in 35 (14.2%) patients in the ticagrelor group versus 29 (11.6%) patients in the placebo group (odds ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.72-2.05]). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, the addition of ticagrelor to standard aspirin did not reduce SVG occlusion at 1 year after CABG. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02352402.

Reasons for early discontinuing or switching of antiplatelet therapy in elderly patients after acute coronary syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine frequency and reasons for prematurely discontinuing or switching antiplatelet therapy in elderly patients admitted with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHOD: Patients of 75 years or older admitted with suspected NSTE-ACS were included between 2013 and 2016. Information was extracted from the patients' medical files. RESULTS: A total of 544 patients were included, 17.3% discontinued aspirin within one year, predominantly (57%) within 30 days. The most common reason was the start of a (non-vitamin-K) oral anticoagulant [(N)OAC], either combined with a P2Y12-inhibitor (43%) or as monotherapy (16%). The P2Y12-inhibitor was discontinued in 31.2% of patients within one year, of which 46% within 30 days. The most common reason was undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; 22%). Switching of clopidogrel seldom occurred; however, ticagrelor was switched in 50/179 patients mainly due to dyspnoea (42%). Independent predictors for prematurely discontinuing antiplatelet therapy were undergoing CABG [odds ratio (OR) 3.257 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.836-5.779)], need for (N)OAC [OR 2.167 (95% CI 1.423-3.300)] and type II ACS as final diagnosis [OR 3.793 (95% CI 1.721-8.361)]. Undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention [OR 0.393 (95% CI 0.243-0.634)] and use of clopidogrel [OR 0.441(95% CI 0.293-0.662)] were independent predictors of continuing antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSION: In elderly patients of at least 75 years with NSTE-ACS, antiplatelet therapy is frequently discontinued prematurely, most often within 30 days. Main reasons for discontinuing are need for (N)OAC, undergoing CABG or type II ACS as final diagnosis and suffering from dyspnoea while on ticagrelor.

A clinical risk score to identify patients at high risk of very late stent thrombosis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine predictors of very late stent thrombosis (VLST; >1 year after stenting), and to evaluate whether addition of these predictors to the dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) score would improve the ability to identify patients at high risk of VLST who might benefit from DAPT. BACKGROUND: VLST is a severe complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Extended knowledge about the predictors of VLST is needed to prevent this life-threatening complication. Recent data showed a reduction in VLST after treatment with prolonged DAPT. The DAPT study developed a prediction score to identify patients after PCI who might benefit from prolonged DAPT duration. METHODS: The Dutch stent thrombosis study is a multi-center case-control study. Consecutive patients with definite VLST were included between 2007 and 2014. Baseline characteristics from the index PCI were collected. Independent predictors of VLST were identified and added to the DAPT score to develop the VLST score. RESULTS: In total, 155 VLST cases and 155 matched controls were included. Suboptimal result of stenting, right coronary artery as target vessel, and diffuse coronary artery ectasia were independent predictors of VLST, and added to the DAPT score. The power of the VLST score to identify patients who experienced VLST was increased (AUC, 95%CI; DAPT score: 0.64, 0.57-0.70; VLST score: 0.70, 0.63-0.76, P = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of newly identified independent predictors of VLST resulted in a prediction model with a higher ability to identify patients at high risk of VLST who might benefit from prolonged DAPT.