Dual antiplatelet therapy de-escalation in acute coronary syndrome: an individual patient meta-analysis.

AIMS: Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a potent P2Y12 inhibitor is the standard treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). De-escalation of the potent P2Y12 inhibtor is an appealing concept to balance the ischaemic and bleeding risks after PCI. An individual patient data meta-analysis was performed to compare de-escalation versus standard DAPT in patients with ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database, were searched to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the de-escalation strategy with the standard DAPT after PCI in patients with ACS. Individual patient-level data were collected from the relevant trials. The co-primary endpoints of interest were the ischaemic composite endpoint (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular events) and bleeding endpoint (any bleeding) at 1-year post-PCI. Four RCTs (the TROPICAL-ACS, POPular Genetics, HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS, and TALOS-AMI trials) including 10 133 patients were analysed. The ischaemic endpoint was significantly lower in the patients assigned to the de-escalation strategy than in those assigned to the standard strategy (2.3% vs. 3.0%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.761, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.597-0.972, log rank P = 0.029). Bleeding was also significantly lower in the de-escalation strategy group (6.5% vs. 9.1%, HR 0.701, 95% CI 0.606-0.811, log rank P < 0.001). No significant intergroup differences were observed in terms of all-cause death and major bleeding events. Subgroup analyses revealed that compared to guided de-escalation, unguided de-escalation had a significantly larger impact on bleeding endpoint reduction (P for interaction = 0.007); no intergroup differences were observed for the ischaemic endpoints. CONCLUSION: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, DAPT-based de-escalation was associated with both decreased ischaemic and bleeding endpoints. Reduction in bleeding endpoints was more prominent for the unguided than the guided de-escalation strategy. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study was registered in the PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021245477).

Platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndrome patients treated with prasugrel and clopidogrel: a pre-specified exploratory analysis from the TROPICAL-ACS trial.

AIMS: The value of platelet function testing (PFT) in predicting clinical outcomes and guiding P2Y12-inhibitor treatment is uncertain. In a pre-specified sub-study of the TROPICAL-ACS trial, we assessed ischaemic and bleeding risks according to high platelet reactivity (HPR) and low platelet reactivity (LPR) to ADP in patients receiving uniform prasugrel vs. PFT-guided clopidogrel or prasugrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: Acute coronary syndrome patients with PFT done 14 days after hospital discharge were included with prior randomization to uniform prasugrel for 12 months (control group, no treatment modification) vs. early de-escalation from prasugrel to clopidogrel and PFT-guided maintenance treatment (HPR: switch-back to prasugrel, non-HPR: clopidogrel). The composite ischaemic endpoint included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, while key safety outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2-5 bleeding, from PFT until 12 months. We identified 2527 patients with PFT results available: 1266 were randomized to the guided and 1261 to the control group. Before treatment adjustment, HPR was more prevalent in the guided group (40% vs. 15%), while LPR was more common in control patients (27% vs. 11%). Compared to control patients without HPR on prasugrel (n = 1073), similar outcomes were observed in guided patients kept on clopidogrel [n = 755, hazard ratio (HR): 1.06 (0.57-1.95), P = 0.86] and also in patients with HPR on clopidogrel switched to prasugrel [n = 511, HR: 0.96 (0.47-1.96), P = 0.91]. In contrast, HPR on prasugrel was associated with a higher risk for ischaemic events in control patients [n = 188, HR: 2.16 (1.01-4.65), P = 0.049]. Low platelet reactivity was an independent predictor of bleeding [HR: 1.74 (1.18-2.56), P = 0.005], without interaction (Pint = 0.76) between study groups. CONCLUSION: Based on this substudy of a randomized trial, selecting prasugrel or clopidogrel based on PFT resulted in similar ischaemic outcomes as uniform prasugrel therapy without HPR. Although infrequent, HPR on prasugrel was associated with increased risk of ischaemic events. Low platelet reactivity was a strong and independent predictor of bleeding both on prasugrel and clopidogrel.

P2Y12-ADP Receptor Blockade in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Because of its high prevalence, chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains a major health hazard throughout the world. Patients with CKD have a high prevalence and incidence of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Despite decades of improved care, their higher risk profile persists and cardiovascular diseases remain their leading cause of death. Along with the reduction of glomerular filtration rate, several physiological processes are impacted and participate in the pathophysiology of ischemic and bleeding events. CKD is associated with an accelerated and severe course of atherothrombotic disease, and this relates to a modified vascular milieu with alterations on the level of the coagulation cascade and platelet aggregation. In addition, pharmacokinetics of several drugs, in particular antithrombotics, are altered and differ from that of non-CKD patients. Patients with CKD therefore represent a challenging population for both physicians and researchers. In addition to these perturbations of physiological processes, CKD patients face 2 major issues. First, there is a clear gap in scientific research as they are commonly underrepresented or excluded from major clinical trials. This is particularly true regarding antithrombotic treatment during ACS. Second, there is a gap in offering evidence-based treatment for these patients including state-of-the art options for revascularization and modern antiplatelet treatment, both of which are commonly underused. During the last decade, new potent oral P2Y12-ADP receptor antagonists, prasugrel and ticagrelor, which are more potent antiplatelet agents compared with clopidogrel, were introduced for ACS treatment. However, despite the fact that CKD patients represent a large proportion of those experiencing an ACS and are considered at high risk, there is a lack of dedicated trials and we are left with subgroup analysis of large randomized clinical trials were stage 4 and dialysis patients were rare. In the present review we summarize the mechanisms involved in the high ischemic and bleeding risk of CKD patients and the risk-benefit ratio of potent antiplatelet drugs during ACS.

Guided de-escalation of DAPT in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with BVS implantation: a post-hoc analysis from the randomized TROPICAL-ACS trial.

To investigate the safety and efficacy of an early platelet function testing (PFT)-guided de-escalation of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS). Early DAPT de-escalation is a new non-inferior alternative to 12-months DAPT in patients with biomarker positive ACS treated with stent implantation. In this post-hoc analysis of the TROPICAL-ACS trial, which randomized 2610 ACS patients to a PFT-guided DAPT de-escalation (switch from prasugrel to clopidogrel) or to control group (uniform prasugrel), we compared clinical outcomes of patients (n = 151) who received a BVS during the index PCI. The frequency of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke or BARC ≥ 2 bleeding) was 8.8% (n = 6) in the de-escalation group vs. 12.0% (n = 10) in the control group (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.26-1.98, p = 0.52) at 12 months. One early definite stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in the control group (day 19) and 1 possible ST (sudden cardiovascular death) in the de-escalation group (day 86), both despite prasugrel treatment and in a background of high on-treatment platelet reactivity assessed at day 14 after randomization (ADP-induced platelet aggregation values of 108 U and 59 U, respectively). A PFT-guided DAPT de-escalation strategy could potentially be a safe and effective strategy in ACS patients with BVS implantation but the level of platelet inhibition may be of particular importance. This hypothesis-generating post-hoc analysis requires verification in larger studies with upcoming BVS platforms.

Age and outcomes following guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the randomized TROPICAL-ACS trial.

Aims: Guided de-escalation of P2Y12-inhibitor treatment was recently identified as an effective alternative treatment strategy in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Safety and efficacy of this strategy may differ in relation to patient's age. This pre-specified analysis of the TROPICAL-ACS trial aimed to assess the impact of age on clinical outcomes following guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in ACS patients. Methods and results: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 fashion to either standard treatment with prasugrel for 12 months (control group) or to a guided de-escalation regimen (1 week prasugrel followed by 1 week clopidogrel and platelet function testing guided maintenance therapy with clopidogrel or prasugrel from day 14 after hospital discharge; guided de-escalation group). We used Cox regression models to assess the associations of age on clinical endpoints and interactions. In younger patients (age ≤70, n = 2240), the 1 year incidence of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or bleeding ≥ grade 2 according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria) was significantly lower in guided de-escalation vs. control group [5.9% vs. 8.3%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.96; P = 0.03, number needed to treat = 42]. In elderly patients (age >70, n = 370), the absolute risk of events was higher without significant differences between guided de-escalation vs. control group (15.5% vs. 13.6%; HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.69-2.01; P = 0.56). When the impact of age, as a continuous variable, was analysed on outcomes after guided de-escalation vs. control treatment, an increasing relative risk reduction was observed in the primary endpoint by decreasing age (Pint = 0.02), due to significant reductions in bleeding. Conclusion: Treatment effects of guided de-escalation for P2Y12 inhibitors depend on patient's age with younger patients deriving a significant net clinical benefit. Although the safety and efficacy of guided de-escalation in the elderly was similar to uniform prasugrel therapy, this should be further investigated due to the limited sample size of this group.

International Expert Consensus on Switching Platelet P2Y12 Receptor-Inhibiting Therapies.

Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor is the treatment of choice for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndromes and for those undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. The availability of different oral P2Y12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor) has enabled physicians to contemplate switching among therapies because of specific clinical scenarios. The recent introduction of an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor (cangrelor) further adds to the multitude of modalities and settings in which switching therapies may occur. In clinical practice, it is not uncommon to switch P2Y12 inhibitor, and switching may be attributed to a variety of factors. However, concerns about the safety of switching between these agents have emerged. Practice guidelines have not fully elaborated on how to switch therapies, leaving clinicians with limited guidance on when and how to switch therapies when needed. This prompted the development of this expert consensus document by key leaders from North America and Europe with expertise in basic, translational, and clinical sciences in the field of antiplatelet therapy. This expert consensus provides an overview of the pharmacology of P2Y12 inhibitors, different modalities and definitions of switching, and available literature and recommendations for switching between P2Y12 inhibitors.

Guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (TROPICAL-ACS): a randomised, open-label, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend potent platelet inhibition with prasugrel or ticagrelor for 12 months after an acute coronary syndrome managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the greatest anti-ischaemic benefit of potent antiplatelet drugs over the less potent clopidogrel occurs early, while most excess bleeding events arise during chronic treatment. Hence, a stage-adapted treatment with potent platelet inhibition in the acute phase and de-escalation to clopidogrel in the maintenance phase could be an alternative approach. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of early de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment from prasugrel to clopidogrel guided by platelet function testing (PFT). METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, assessor-blinded, multicentre trial (TROPICAL-ACS) done at 33 sites in Europe, patients were enrolled if they had biomarker-positive acute coronary syndrome with successful PCI and a planned duration of dual antiplatelet treatment of 12 months. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an internet-based randomisation procedure with a computer-generated block randomisation with stratification across study sites to either standard treatment with prasugrel for 12 months (control group) or a step-down regimen (1 week prasugrel followed by 1 week clopidogrel and PFT-guided maintenance therapy with clopidogrel or prasugrel from day 14 after hospital discharge; guided de-escalation group). The assessors were masked to the treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was net clinical benefit (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke or bleeding grade 2 or higher according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC]) criteria) 1 year after randomisation (non-inferiority hypothesis; margin of 30%). Analysis was intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01959451, and EudraCT, 2013-001636-22. FINDINGS: Between Dec 2, 2013, and May 20, 2016, 2610 patients were assigned to study groups; 1304 to the guided de-escalation group and 1306 to the control group. The primary endpoint occurred in 95 patients (7%) in the guided de-escalation group and in 118 patients (9%) in the control group (pnon-inferiority=0·0004; hazard ratio [HR] 0·81 [95% CI 0·62-1·06], psuperiority=0·12). Despite early de-escalation, there was no increase in the combined risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke in the de-escalation group (32 patients [3%]) versus in the control group (42 patients [3%]; pnon-inferiority=0·0115). There were 64 BARC 2 or higher bleeding events (5%) in the de-escalation group versus 79 events (6%) in the control group (HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·59-1·13]; p=0·23). INTERPRETATION: Guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment was non-inferior to standard treatment with prasugrel at 1 year after PCI in terms of net clinical benefit. Our trial shows that early de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment can be considered as an alternative approach in patients with acute coronary syndrome managed with PCI. FUNDING: Klinikum der Universität München, Roche Diagnostics, Eli Lilly, and Daiichi Sankyo.

Genome-wide and candidate gene approaches of clopidogrel efficacy using pharmacodynamic and clinical end points-Rationale and design of the International Clopidogrel Pharmacogenomics Consortium (ICPC).

RATIONALE: The P2Y12 receptor inhibitor clopidogrel is widely used in patients with acute coronary syndrome, percutaneous coronary intervention, or ischemic stroke. Platelet inhibition by clopidogrel shows wide interpatient variability, and high on-treatment platelet reactivity is a risk factor for atherothrombotic events, particularly in high-risk populations. CYP2C19 polymorphism plays an important role in this variability, but heritability estimates suggest that additional genetic variants remain unidentified. The aim of the International Clopidogrel Pharmacogenomics Consortium (ICPC) is to identify genetic determinants of clopidogrel pharmacodynamics and clinical response. STUDY DESIGN: Based on the data published on www.clinicaltrials.gov, clopidogrel intervention studies containing genetic and platelet function data were identified for participation. Lead investigators were invited to share DNA samples, platelet function test results, patient characteristics, and cardiovascular outcomes to perform candidate gene and genome-wide studies. RESULTS: In total, 17 study sites from 13 countries participate in the ICPC, contributing individual patient data from 8,829 patients. Available adenosine diphosphate-stimulated platelet function tests included vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay, light transmittance aggregometry, and the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. A proof-of-principle analysis based on genotype data provided by each group showed a strong and consistent association between CYP2C19*2 and platelet reactivity (P value=5.1 × 10-40). CONCLUSION: The ICPC aims to identify new loci influencing clopidogrel efficacy by using state-of-the-art genetic approaches in a large cohort of clopidogrel-treated patients to better understand the genetic basis of on-treatment response variability.

De novo implantation vs. upgrade cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Patients with conventional pacemakers or implanted defibrillators are often considered for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Our aim was to summarize the available evidences regarding the clinical benefits of upgrade procedures. A systematic literature search was performed from studies published between 2006 and 2017 in order to compare the outcome of CRT upgrade vs. de novo implantations. Outcome data on all-cause mortality, heart failure events, New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class, QRS narrowing and echocardiographic parameters were analysed. A total of 16 reports were analysed comprising 489,568 CRT recipients, of whom 468,205 patients underwent de novo and 21,363 upgrade procedures. All-cause mortality was similar after CRT upgrade compared to de novo implantations (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.88-1.60, p = 0.27). The risk of heart failure was also similar in both groups (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.70-1.32, p = 0.81). There was no significant difference in clinical response after CRT upgrade compared to de novo implantations in terms of improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (ΔEF de novo - 6.85% vs. upgrade - 9.35%; p = 0.235), NYHA class (ΔNYHA de novo - 0.74 vs. upgrade - 0.70; p = 0.737) and QRS narrowing (ΔQRS de novo - 9.6 ms vs. upgrade - 29.5 ms; p = 0.485). Our systematic review and meta-analysis of currently available studies reports that CRT upgrade is associated with similar risk for all-cause mortality compared to de novo resynchronization therapy. Benefits on reverse remodelling and functional capacity improved similarly in both groups suggesting that CRT upgrade may be safely and effectively offered in routine practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero Database-CRD42016043747.

Dissimilar impact of type 2 diabetes on cardiovascular outcomes according to age categories: a nationwide population study from Hungary.

BACKGROUND: The excess risks of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is well known. In this nationwide study, we assessed risks of mortality and cardiovascular events comparing patients with T2DM and matched controls. METHODS: We identified patients with T2DM in a retrospective cohort study using the database of the National Health Insurance Fund between 1 January 2010 and 31 December, 2013. Controls were randomly included and matched according to age, gender, and zip code of residence. Patients were divided into subgroups according to age decades for outcome analyses. RESULTS: During the mean follow-up period of 2.3 years, 152,678 patients with T2DM and 305,356 matched controls were included. Patients with T2DM showed significantly higher risk for all-cause mortality (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.22-1.29, p < 0.0001), myocardial infarction (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.69-1.94, p < 0.0001) and stroke (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.35-1.46, p < 0.0001) compared to matched controls. The higher risk associated with T2DM for mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke differed significantly between age groups (pinteraction < 0.05 for all outcomes) with significantly higher risk observed in younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality is significantly higher in patients with T2DM. Notably, the relative hazard increases with decreasing age suggesting that younger patients with T2DM should receive more attention for cardiovascular prevention.

Impact of CT-apelin and NT-proBNP on identifying non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy.

CONTEXT: Assessment of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is essential. OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive value of CT-apelin together with NT-proBNP in patients undergoing CRT. METHODS: Serum CT-apelin and NT-proBNP were measured by ELISA before, and six months after CRT. Primary endpoint was non-response (<4% increase in LVEF) after six months. RESULTS: From 81 patients, 15 proved to be non-responders. Six-month CT-apelin was superior compared to NT-proBNP in identifying non-responders by multivariate ROC (CT-apelin: p = 0.01, NT-proBNP: p = 0.13) and by logistic regression (CT-apelin: p = 0.01, NT-proBNP: p = 0.41) analyses. CONCLUSION: Six-month CT-apelin might be a valuable novel biomarker in identifying non-responders to CRT that was superior to NT-proBNP.

Platelet Function Testing in Patients on Antiplatelet Medications.

Guidelines provide a Class IA recommendation for the use of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there is interindividual variability in the pharmacodynamic response to antiplatelet medications. Some patients present with a status of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) during platelet function testing after standard doses of antiplatelet drugs, reflecting a failure to achieve adequate platelet inhibition. As an example, patients with HPR on clopidogrel are at increased risk for thrombotic events, particularly for stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction, but cardiovascular mortality is also elevated. On the contrary, low on-treatment platelet reactivity or an enhanced response to antiplatelet medications has been linked to a higher risk for bleeding. Although both thrombotic and bleeding events are multifactorial in origin, there is supportive evidence for the prognostic value of platelet function testing for risk prediction of both sides of the coin. However, although small studies have provided evidence that treatment adjustments based on platelet function testing results may improve clinical outcomes, the available randomized controlled trials showed no benefit of modifying antiplatelet treatment based on platelet function testing. This review presents the current evidence regarding platelet function testing in patients undergoing PCI. The prognostic value of platelet function testing regarding ischemic and bleeding events is highlighted. Furthermore, the value of platelet function testing for guiding treatment and possible explanations for the so-far negative trial results are presented. The possible future role of platelet function testing for individualized antiplatelet treatment regimens in high-risk patients will be also discussed.

Eptifibatide-induced thrombocytopenia leading to acute stent thrombosis.

A 71-year old female patient with inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 3 h of symptom onset. She was preloaded with 300 mg aspirin and 600 mg clopidogrel before PCI. Coronary angiogram showed occlusion of the right coronary artery. During PCI, eptifibatide was initiated due to the large thrombus burden. Few hours after the procedure, on eptifibatide infusion, a severe drop in platelet count was observed (from 210,000/µl to 35,000/µl) and the infusion was discontinued. One hour later, still under eptifibatide effect and with severe thrombocytopenia, acute stent thrombosis developed. Lack of prior heparin exposure, quick onset of thrombocytopenia made heparin induced thrombocytopenia improbable that was later excluded by specific immunoassay. However, platelet function testing suggested that eptifibatide induced thrombocytopenia was mediated by activating autoantibodies since platelet reactivity was paradoxically very high at the time of stent thrombosis but decreased radically with eptifibatide washout. The patient was successfully managed without further complications on the basis of platelet function data obtained in the subsequent days. This rare subtype of thrombocytopenia highlights that not only platelet count but also platelet function should be closely monitored in case of severe thrombocytopenia to better balance bleeding and thrombosis.

Bleeding and stent thrombosis on P2Y12-inhibitors: collaborative analysis on the role of platelet reactivity for risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention.

AIMS: Although platelet reactivity during P2Y12-inhibitors is associated with stent thrombosis (ST) and bleeding, standardized and clinically validated thresholds for accurate risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are lacking. We sought to determine the prognostic value of low platelet reactivity (LPR), optimal platelet reactivity (OPR), or high platelet reactivity (HPR) by applying uniform cut-off values for standardized devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: Authors of studies published before January 2015, reporting associations between platelet reactivity, ST, and major bleeding were contacted for a collaborative analysis using consensus-defined, uniform cut-offs for standardized platelet function assays. Based on best available evidence for each device (exploratory studies), LPR-OPR-HPR categories were defined as <95, 95-208, and >208 PRU for VerifyNow, <19, 19-46, and >46 U for the Multiplate analyser and <16, 16-50, and >50% for VASP assay. Seventeen studies including 20 839 patients were used for the analysis; 97% were treated with clopidogrel and 3% with prasugrel. Patients with HPR had significantly higher risk for ST [risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI: 2.73 (2.03-3.69), P < 0.00001], yet a slight reduction in bleeding [RR: 0.84 (0.71-0.99), P = 0.04] compared with those with OPR. In contrast, patients with LPR had a higher risk for bleeding [RR: 1.74 (1.47-2.06), P < 0.00001], without any further benefit in ST [RR: 1.06 (0.68-1.65), P = 0.78] in contrast to OPR. Mortality was significantly higher in patients with HPR compared with other categories (P < 0.05). Validation cohorts (n = 14) confirmed all results of exploratory studies (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Platelet reactivity assessment during thienopyridine-type P2Y12-inhibitors identifies PCI-treated patients at higher risk for mortality and ST (HPR) or at an elevated risk for bleeding (LPR).

Apixaban and risk of myocardial infarction: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The coagulation system contributes greatly to the evolution of myocardial infarction (MI). Anticoagulation may reduce the occurrence of MI as monotherapy or with concomitant use of aspirin. Activated factor X antagonists (anti-Xa) and direct thrombin inhibitors have promising results in various indications in non-inferiority trials. However, results regarding their cardiovascular safety are heterogeneous. We systematically evaluated the risk of MI and mortality in patients receiving the new-generation oral anti-Xa agent apixaban. Electronic databases were searched to find prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCT) that evaluated the clinical impact of apixaban. Efficacy measures included frequency of MI, cardiovascular and overall mortality. Outcome parameters of RCTs were pooled with a random-effects model. Between January 2000 and December 2013, 12 RCTs comprising 54,054 patients were identified. Based on the pooled results, there was no increase in the risk of MI in patients treated with apixaban [odds ratio (OR) 0.90; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.05; p = 0.17] compared to different controls. Cardiovascular and overall mortality with apixaban was comparable to the control groups (OR 0.88; 95 % CI 0.72-1.06; p = 0.18, OR 0.89; 95 % CI 0.77-1.03; p = 0.11, respectively). The pooled risk of major bleeding was lower in the apixaban treated groups (OR 0.84; 95 % CI 0.62-1.12; p = 0.23) however this reached significant level only in subgroup analysis of trials with anticoagulant regimes in the control (OR 0.66; 95 % CI 0.51-0.87; p = 0.003). In a broad spectrum of patients and compared to different controls apixaban treatment was not associated with an increase in MI or mortality.

Effect of aliskiren and valsartan combination versus aliskiren monotherapy on hemostatic biomarkers in hypertensive diabetics: Aliskiren and Valsartan Impact in Diabetics pilot trial.

Valsartan is known to inhibit platelet activity in both in vitro and ex vivo clinical setting, whereas aliskiren in vitro modulates antithrombin-III in plasma. The authors tested how aliskiren and valsartan combination versus aliskiren monotherapy will affect hemostatic biomarkers in mild-to-moderate hypertensive diabetics in the frame of the Aliskiren and Valsartan Impact in Diabetics (AVID) trial. A total of 52 patients with type 2 diabetes and mild-to-moderate hypertension were equally randomized to aliskiren (150-300 mg/d) and valsartan (160 mg/d) versus aliskiren (150-300 mg/d) alone for 4 weeks. A total of 25 biomarkers were serially measured, of which 16 are related to platelet function, 6 to coagulation, and 3 to fibrinolysis. Aliskiren monotherapy has no significant impact on any of the assessed biomarkers. In contrast, valsartan on top of aliskiren provided significant inhibition of ADP-induced platelet aggregation (P=0.032), decreased shear-induced activation measured with PFA-100 analyzer (P=0.041), and diminished expression of GP IIb/IIIa activity (P=0.027) measured by PAC-1 antibody, GP Ib (CD42b, P=0.033), vitronectin receptor (CD51/61, P=0.046), P-selectin (CD62p, P=0.026), lysosome-associated membrane protein (CD107a, P=0.042), and CD40-ligand (CD154, P=0.048). In AVID trial, valsartan in combination with aliskiren mildly but significantly inhibited platelets, confirming previous observations. In contrast, aliskiren monotherapy does not enhance antithrombin activity, suggesting that previous data probably represent a laboratory artifact. Importantly, these randomized data were generated on top of low-dose daily aspirin, supporting extra benefit for combination use of angiotensin receptor blockers and renin inhibitors in high-risk diabetic population.

Impact of body mass on P2Y12-inhibitor de-escalation in acute coronary syndromes-a substudy of the TROPICAL-ACS trial.

AIMS: Clinical guidelines recommend de-escalation antiplatelet strategies to reduce bleeding risk in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, albeit with a weak recommendation. This substudy of the TROPICAL-ACS trial aimed to determine the impact of body mass on the efficacy of a platelet function testing-guided de-escalation regimen in ACS patients after percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were randomized to prasugrel (control group) or a platelet function testing-guided regimen with clopidogrel or prasugrel defined after 1-week clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was the net clinical benefit [cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2-5 bleeding] for 12 months. Overweight was defined as a body mass index >25 kg/m2.Patients without overweight showed a significant net clinical benefit from the de-escalation strategy, while in overweight cases de-escalation was comparable to prasugrel treatment [hazard ratio (HR): 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.31-0.88; P = 0.013 and HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.69-1.31, P = 0.717, P-non-inferiority = 0.03, respectively, P-interaction = 0.053]. The benefit of de-escalation in terms of the risk of bleeding or of the ischaemic events did not reach statistical significance. Bleeding events with de-escalation were less frequent in non-overweight patients but comparable in overweight patients (HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.30-1.03; P = 0.057 and HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.64-1.41, respectively, P-interaction = 0.147). Non-overweight patients had lower ischaemic event rates with de-escalation, while overweight cases had slightly less (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.18-1.25; P = 0.128 and HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.53-1.50, respectively, P-interaction = 0.261). CONCLUSION: The strategy of guided dual antiplatelet therapy de-escalation was associated with a significant net clinical benefit in non-overweight patients, while the two strategies were equivalent in overweight patients.

Mortality on DOACs Versus on Vitamin K Antagonists in Atrial Fibrillation: Analysis of the Hungarian Health Insurance Fund Database.

PURPOSE: Limited real-world data are available on the survival of patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) versus with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). In this nationwide registry, we analyzed the mortality risk of patients with nonvalvular AF taking DOACs versus VKAs, with a special attention to the early treatment period. METHODS: The Hungarian National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) database was searched to identify patients treated with VKA or DOAC as a thromboembolic prophylaxis for nonvalvular AF between 2011 and 2016. The overall and the early (0-3, 4-6, and 7-12 months) mortality risks with the 2 types of anticoagulation were compared. A total of 144,394 patients with AF treated with either a VKA (n = 129,925) or a DOAC (n = 14,469) were enrolled. FINDINGS: A 28% improvement in 3-year survival with DOAC treatment compared with VKA treatment was shown. Mortality reduction with DOACs was consistent across different subgroups. However, younger patients (30-59 years old) initiated on DOAC therapy had the greatest RRR (53%) in mortality. Furthermore, DOAC treatment also yielded a benefit of greater magnitude (HR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.40-0.77, P = 0.001) in the lower (0-1) CHA2DS2-VASc score segment and in those with fewer (0-1) bleeding risk factors (HR = 0.50, CI 0.34-0.73, P = 0.001). The RRR in mortality with DOACs was 33% within the first 3 months, and 6% in the second year. IMPLICATIONS: Thromboembolic prophylaxis with DOACs in this study yielded significantly lower mortality compared with VKA treatment in patients with nonvalvular AF. The largest benefit was shown in the early period after treatment initiation, as well as in younger patients, those with a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score, and those with fewer bleeding risk factors.

Justification of 150 mg clopidogrel in patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity.

BACKGROUND: The GRAVITAS trial showed that 150 mg clopidogrel did not improve outcome in patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity (HPR) screened by the VerifyNow assay. We aimed to determine the impact of 150 mg clopidogrel in stable angina patients with HPR identified with conventional aggregometry (LTA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clopidogrel-naive stable angina patients before ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention were recruited into a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT00638326). Twelve to 24 h after the 600-mg loading dose of clopidogrel, ADP(5µM)-stimulated maximal (AGGmax), late platelet aggregation (AGGlate) and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation (VASP-PRI) were evaluated. Patients with HPR (AGGmax ≥ 34%) were randomly allocated to 75 or 150 mg clopidogrel after 4 weeks. After control platelet function measurements at day 28, 75 mg clopidogrel was administered to all patients until 1 year. RESULTS: The study was prematurely terminated at the stage of 200 enroled patients. Administration of 150 mg clopidogrel significantly reduced platelet aggregation (AGGmax: 45·0 ± 6·8 vs. 33·8 ± 15·1, P < 0·01; AGGlate: 27·1 ± 14·7 vs. 13·8 ± 18·0, P < 0·01) and VASP-PRI (57·5 ± 15·2 vs. 37·2 ± 17·1; P < 0·01), while platelet reactivity remained unchanged in patients with HPR receiving 75 mg clopidogrel. The higher maintenance dose of clopidogrel was associated with a significant reduction in cardiovascular (CV) death and myocardial infarction (MI) (0% vs. 11·4%, P = 0·04) and in CV death, MI or target vessel revascularization (24·6% vs. 3·1%; P = 0·01) during 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: One-month administration of 150 mg maintenance dose of clopidogrel reduces platelet reactivity and might decrease the risk of thrombo-ischaemic complications in stable angina patients with HPR identified by LTA.

Tailoring clopidogrel dose according to multiple electrode aggregometry decreases the rate of ischemic complications after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Multiple studies have shown a correlation between high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) and ischemic complications after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI); however, the role of platelet reactivity testing in order to adjust clopidogrel dose is debated. We sought to determine whether a strategy incorporating platelet reactivity testing with the Multiplate analyzer to tailor the dose of clopidogrel is superior to standard clopidogrel treatment after PCI. Between May 2008 and June 2009, 192 consecutive patients undergoing PCI were randomized to a tailored treatment strategy using the Multiplate analyzer or to uniform administration of 75 mg clopidogrel. In the tailored group, platelet function was assessed 24 h after clopidogrel loading, and patients with HPR (>46 U) received an additional 600 mg loading dose and 150 mg clopidogrel thereafter for one month. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke or definite/probable stent thrombosis during six months. In the tailored group, a repeated loading dose of 600 mg clopidogrel significantly decreased platelet reactivity in patients with HPR (61.0 U [IQR: 52.5-71.5] vs. 21.5 U [15.8-30.5]; P < 0.0001) that remained unchanged during the maintenance phase on 150 mg clopidogrel (25.0 U [IQR: 19.8-27.0]; P = 0.20). The incidence of the primary endpoint was significantly higher in the standard clopidogrel group as compared to the Multiplate-tailored arm (5.3% vs. 0%, P = 0.03). In parallel, MACCE-free survival significantly improved in patients with Multiplate-tailored therapy (Kaplan-Meier log-rank: P = 0.02). Increasing the dose of clopidogrel according to the Multiplate assay may reduce ischemic complications in patients on clopidogrel after PCI.