Effect of P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy on Cardiovascular Events in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The SMART-CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Data on P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-duration dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are limited. Objective: To determine whether P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT is noninferior to 12 months of DAPT in patients undergoing PCI. Design, Setting, and Participants: The SMART-CHOICE trial was an open-label, noninferiority, randomized study that was conducted in 33 hospitals in Korea and included 2993 patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents. Enrollment began March 18, 2014, and follow-up was completed July 19, 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor for 3 months and thereafter P2Y12 inhibitor alone (n = 1495) or DAPT for 12 months (n = 1498). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) at 12 months after the index procedure. Secondary end points included the components of the primary end point and bleeding defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 to 5. The noninferiority margin was 1.8%. Results: Among 2993 patients who were randomized (mean age, 64 years; 795 women [26.6%]), 2912 (97.3%) completed the trial. Adherence to the study protocol was 79.3% of the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and 95.2% of the DAPT group. At 12 months, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 42 patients in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and in 36 patients in the DAPT group (2.9% vs 2.5%; difference, 0.4% [1-sided 95% CI, -∞% to 1.3%]; P = .007 for noninferiority). There were no significant differences in all-cause death (21 [1.4%] vs 18 [1.2%]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.18; 95% CI, 0.63-2.21; P = .61), myocardial infarction (11 [0.8%] vs 17 [1.2%]; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.31-1.40; P = .28), or stroke (11 [0.8%] vs 5 [0.3%]; HR, 2.23; 95% CI, 0.78-6.43; P = .14) between the 2 groups. The rate of bleeding was significantly lower in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group than in the DAPT group (2.0% vs 3.4%; HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.92; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT compared with prolonged DAPT resulted in noninferior rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Because of limitations in the study population and adherence, further research is needed in other populations. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02079194.

Rationale and design of the comparison between a P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy versus dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing implantation of coronary drug-eluting stents (SMART-CHOICE): A prospective multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor reduces thrombotic events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but these benefits come at the expense of increased risk of bleeding when compared with aspirin monotherapy. It is unclear whether P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy might maintain anti-ischemic efficacy while reducing the bleeding risk compared with DAPT after implantation of the current generation of drug-eluting stents (DES). STUDY DESIGN: The SMART-CHOICE trial is a prospective, open-label, multi-center, and randomized study designed to test the non-inferiority of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy compared with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor after mandatory 3-month DAPT in patients undergoing PCI with current-generation DES. A total of 3000 patients will be randomized to 1 of the 2 antiplatelet treatment strategy groups. Randomization will be stratified by stent type (cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents, platinum-chromium everolimus-eluting stents, and sirolimus-eluting stents with bioresorbable polymer), P2Y12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor), clinical presentation (acute coronary syndrome and stable ischemic heart disease), and investigational centers. The primary end point is a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular events at 12 months after the index procedure. The key secondary end points are definite/probable stent thrombosis defined by the Academic Research Consortium, and bleeding defined by Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2-5. CONCLUSIONS: The SMART-CHOICE trial aims to examine the non-inferiority of monotherapy with one of any available oral P2Y12 inhibitors versus conventional DAPT of an identical P2Y12 inhibitor plus aspirin in a broad spectrum of patients receiving representative current-generation DES.

Long-term Effects of P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: 3-Year Follow-up of the SMART-CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Although P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a minimum period of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is a well-known way to reduce the risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), data comparing long-term clinical outcomes between P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy and extended DAPT in patients undergoing PCI have been unavailable. Objective: To identify the long-term safety and efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy following 3 months of DAPT after PCI. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Smart Angioplasty Research Team: Comparison Between P2Y12 Antagonist Monotherapy and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Undergoing Implantation of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stents (SMART-CHOICE) trial was an open-label, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial, enrolling patients who underwent PCI with drug-eluting stent at 33 hospitals in Korea from March 2014 through July 2017. Clinical follow-up was extended to 3 years and completed in August 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to either P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT or DAPT for 12 months or longer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) at 3 years. The secondary end points included the components of the primary end point, bleeding (defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 2-5), and major bleeding (BARC types 3-5). Results: In total, 2993 patients were randomly assigned to receive P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT (1495 patients [50%]; mean [SD] age, 64.6 [10.7] years; 1087 [72.7%] male) or prolonged DAPT (1498 patients [50%]; mean [SD] age, 64.6 [10.7] years; 1111 [74.2%] male) after PCI. At 3 years, the primary end point occurred in 87 individuals (6.3%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and 83 (6.1%) in the prolonged DAPT group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06 [95% CI, 0.79-1.44]; P = .69). P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy significantly reduced the risk of bleeding (BARC types 2-5: 112 [3.2%] vs 44 [8.2%]; HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.28-0.55]; P < .001) and major bleeding (BARC types 3-5; 17 [1.2%] vs 31 [2.4%]; HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.31-0.99]; P = .048), compared with prolonged DAPT. The landmark analyses between 3 months and 3 years and per-protocol analyses showed consistent results. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients who underwent PCI and completed 3-month DAPT, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of clinically relevant major bleeding than prolonged DAPT. Although the 3-year risk of ischemic cardiovascular events was comparable between the 2 groups, this result should be interpreted with caution owing to the limited number of events and sample size. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02079194.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after coronary stenting according to type of P2Y12 inhibitor.

OBJECTIVE: To compare P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with 12-month DAPT according to the type of P2Y12 inhibitor in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: The Smart Angioplasty Research Team: Comparison Between P2Y12 Antagonist Monotherapy vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Undergoing Implantation of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stents (SMART-CHOICE) randomised trial compared 3-month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with 12-month DAPT. In this trial, 2993 patients undergoing successful PCI with drug-eluting stent were enrolled in Korea. As a prespecified analysis, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT versus 12-month DAPT were compared among patients receiving clopidogrel and those receiving potent P2Y12 inhibitor (ticagrelor or prasugrel), respectively. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or stroke at 12 months after the index procedure. RESULTS: Among 2993 patients (mean age 64 years), 58.2% presented with acute coronary syndrome. Clopidogrel was prescribed in 2312 patients (77.2%) and a potent P2Y12 inhibitor in 681 (22.8%). There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint between the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and the DAPT group among patients receiving clopidogrel (3.0% vs 3.0%; HR: 1.02; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.65; p=0.93) as well as among patients receiving potent P2Y12 inhibitors (2.4% vs 0.7%; HR: 3.37; 95% CI 0.77 to 14.78; p=0.11; interaction p=0.1). Among patients receiving clopidogrel, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy compared with DAPT showed consistent treatment effects across various subgroups for the primary endpoint. Among patients receiving potent P2Y12 inhibitors, the rate of bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 2- 5) was significantly lower in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group than in the DAPT group (1.5% vs 5.0%; HR: 0.33; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.87; p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 12-month DAPT, clopidogrel monotherapy after 3-month DAPT showed comparable cardiovascular outcomes in patients undergoing PCI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02079194.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in complex percutaneous coronary intervention: A post-hoc analysis of SMART-CHOICE randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether P2Y12 monotherapy, especially clopidogrel, following short-duration dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is associated with favorable outcomes in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Therefore, this study analyzed the efficacy and safety of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, mostly clopidogrel (78%), in complex PCI following short-term DAPT. METHODS: The post-hoc analysis of the SMART-CHOICE trial involving 2,993 patients included 498 cases of complex PCIs, defined by at least one of the following features: 3 vessels treated, ≥ 3 stents implanted, ≥ 3 lesions treated, bifurcation with ≥ 2 stents implanted, and a total stent length of ≥ 60 mm. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. The primary safety endpoint included bleeding, defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) types 2 to 5. RESULTS: Complex PCI group had a higher risk of MACCE (4.0% vs. 2.3%, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-2.89, p = 0.033) and a similar risk of BARC types 2-5 bleeding (2.6% vs. 2.6%, HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.56-1.86, p = 0.939) compared with those without complex PCIs. Patients undergoing complex PCIs, followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy and 12 months of DAPT exhibited similar rates of MACCE (3.8% vs. 4.2%, HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.38-2.21, p = 0.853). CONCLUSIONS: P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, mostly clopidogrel, following 3 months of DAPT did not increase ischemic events in patients with complex PCIs.

Safety of 3-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Ultrathin Sirolimus-Eluting Stents With Biodegradable Polymer (Orsiro): Results From the SMART-CHOICE Trial.

Background This study sought to investigate the safety of 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients receiving ultrathin sirolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer (Orsiro). Methods and Results The SMART-CHOICE (Smart Angioplasty Research Team: Comparison Between P2Y12 Antagonist Monotherapy vs Dual Anti- platelet Therapy in Patients Undergoing Implantation of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stents) randomized trial compared 3-month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with 12-month DAPT in 2993 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The present analysis was a prespecified subgroup analysis for patients receiving Orsiro stents. As a post hoc analysis, comparisons between Orsiro and everolimus-eluting stents were also done among patients receiving 3-month DAPT. Of 972 patients receiving Orsiro stents, 481 patients were randomly assigned to 3-month DAPT and 491 to 12-month DAPT. At 12 months, the target vessel failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization, occurred in 8 patients (1.7%) in the 3-month DAPT group and in 14 patients (2.9%) in the 12-month DAPT group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.24-1.39; P=0.22). In whole population who were randomly assigned to receive 3-month DAPT (n=1495), there was no significant difference in the target vessel failure between the Orsiro group and the everolimus-eluting stent group (n=1014) (1.7% versus 1.8%; HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.41-2.22; P=0.92). Conclusions In patients receiving Orsiro stents, clinical outcomes at 1 year were similar between the 3-month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy and 12-month DAPT strategies. With 3-month DAPT, there was no significant difference in target vessel failure between Orsiro and everolimus-eluting stents. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02079194.

Safety and Efficacy of Biodegradable Polymer-biolimus-eluting Stents (BP-BES) Compared with Durable Polymer-everolimus-eluting Stents (DP-EES) in Patients Undergoing Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are no data comparing clinical outcomes of complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between biodegradable polymer-biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and durable polymer-everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES). We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BP-BES compared with DP-EES in patients undergoing complex PCI. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the SMART-DESK registry were stratified into 2 categories based on the complexity of PCI. Complex PCI was defined as having at least one of the following features: unprotected left main lesion, ≥2 lesions treated, total stent length >40 mm, minimal stent diameter ≤2.5 mm, or bifurcation as target lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 1,999 patients, 1,145 (57.3%) underwent complex PCI: 521 patients were treated with BP-BES and 624 with DP-EES. In propensity-score matching analysis (481 pairs), the risks of TLF (3.8% vs. 5.2%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.578; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.246-1.359; p=0.209), cardiac death (2.5% vs. 2.5%, adjusted HR, 0.787; 95% CI, 0.244-2.539; p=0.689), TV-MI (0.5% vs. 0.4%, adjusted HR, 1.128; 95% CI, 0.157-8.093; p=0.905), and TLR (1.1% vs. 2.9%, adjusted HR, 0.390; 95% CI, 0.139-1.095; p=0.074) did not differ between 2 stent groups after complex PCI. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes of BP-BES were comparable to those of DP-EES at 2 years after complex PCI. Our data suggest that use of BP-BES is acceptable, even for complex PCI.

Clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting BioMatrix stents versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting Xience stents.

There are limited data about clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting BioMatrix stents (BP-BES) and durable polymer everolimus-eluting Xience stents (DP-EES) in real world practice. We sought to compare the clinical outcomes of BP-BES and DP-EES in real world cohorts of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A prospective multicenter registry enrolled 999 patients treated with BP-BES and 1,000 patients treated with DP-EES. The primary outcome was target lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. Definite or probable stent thrombosis was also compared in total and propensity score-matched cohorts. The median follow-up duration was 24 months, and mean age was 65 years (interquartile range, 56-72 years). Patients receiving BP-BES had a lower prevalence of acute coronary syndrome, prior myocardial infarction, multi-vessel disease, bifurcation lesions, and left anterior descending artery lesions than those receiving DP-EES. After propensity score matching (692 pairs), target lesion failure occurred in 22 patients receiving BP-BES and in 25 patients receiving DP-EES (3.2% versus 3.6%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 1.60; p = 0.77). The risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis did not differ between the 2 groups (0.4% versus 0.4%; adjusted HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.21 to 4.98; p = 0.97). The results were consistent across various subgroups. In the propensity score-matched analysis of real world cohorts, BP-BES showed similar clinical outcomes compared to DP-EES. We need to investigate about whether differences in clinical outcome emerge during long-term follow-up.

Conservative versus aggressive treatment strategy with angiographic guidance alone in patients with intermediate coronary lesions: The SMART-CASE randomized, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Although coronary angiography is still the technique most widely used to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the appropriate angiographic indication of revascularization for intermediate coronary lesions remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare conservative versus aggressive strategies with angiographic guidance alone in patients with intermediate coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 899 patients with intermediate coronary lesions between 50% and 70% diameter stenosis by quantitative coronary analysis were randomly assigned to the conservative group (n=449) or the aggressive group (n=450). For intermediate lesions, PCI was performed using everolimus-eluting stents in the aggressive group, but was deferred in the conservative group. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or any revascularization at 1year. The number of treated lesions per patient was 0.8±0.9 in the conservative group and 1.7±0.9 in the aggressive group (p<0.001). The cumulative rate of the primary endpoint was 7.3% in the conservative group and 6.8% in the aggressive group (the upper limit of the one-sided 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4%; p=0.006 for non-inferiority with a predefined non-inferiority margin of 5.0%). The risk of death or myocardial infarction (hazard ratio [HR] 0.50; 95% CI, 0.19-1.33; p=0.17) and revascularization (HR 1.42; 95% CI, 0.80-2.52; p=0.23) was not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative revascularization was non-inferior to aggressive revascularization for intermediate coronary lesions. Revascularization of intermediate lesions can be safely deferred in patients undergoing PCI with angiographic guidance alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00743899.