Differential effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel by homocysteine levels on risk of recurrent stroke: a post hoc analysis of the CHANCE-2 trial
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10861269 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor-aspirin versus clopidogrel-aspirin in Chinese patients by the presence and clinical presentation of intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS) using randomized trial data from the CHANCE-2 (Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients With Acute Nondisabling Cerebrovascular Events-II) trial. Methods and Results A total of 6412 patients with minor stroke or transient ischemic attack who carried CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles were randomized to either the ticagrelor-aspirin or clopidogrel-aspirin group. Patients without imaging of the intracranial artery were excluded from the nonprespecified subgroup analysis of CHANCE-2. All patients included were classified into the following groups: without ICAS, symptomatic ICAS, or asymptomatic ICAS. The primary efficacy outcome was new strokes within 90 days. There were 5893 patients (median age, 64.8 years; 33.9% women) included, and 172 (4.9%), 171 (10.5%), and 57 (7.7%) cases of new strokes occurred within 90 days in the without ICAS, with symptomatic ICAS, and with asymptomatic ICAS groups, respectively. Ticagrelor-aspirin was associated with reduced risk of new stroke in patients without ICAS (62 [3.5%] versus 110 [6.3%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.57 [95% CI, 0.41-0.78]) but not in those with symptomatic ICAS (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.56-1.05]) or in those with asymptomatic ICAS (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.43-1.38]) compared with clopidogrel-aspirin (P for interaction=0.14). There were no significant differences in the proportion of severe or moderate bleeding events among different ICAS groups. Conclusions Patients without ICAS received a significantly greater benefit from ticagrelor-aspirin than clopidogrel-aspirin after minor ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, and there was no statistically significant difference between treatments in patients with symptomatic ICAS or asymptomatic ICAS. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04078737.
| S-EPMC10727397 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecurrent stroke is a frequent, disabling event after ischemic stroke. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet regimens--aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA-ERDP) versus clopidogrel.MethodsIn this double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive 25 mg of aspirin plus 200 mg of extended-release dipyridamole twice daily or to receive 75 mg of clopidogrel daily. The primary outcome was first recurrence of stroke. The secondary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular causes. Sequential statistical testing of noninferiority (margin of 1.075), followed by superiority testing, was planned.ResultsA total of 20,332 patients were followed for a mean of 2.5 years. Recurrent stroke occurred in 916 patients (9.0%) receiving ASA-ERDP and in 898 patients (8.8%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11). The secondary outcome occurred in 1333 patients (13.1%) in each group (hazard ratio for ASA-ERDP, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07). There were more major hemorrhagic events among ASA-ERDP recipients (419 [4.1%]) than among clopidogrel recipients (365 [3.6%]) (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.32), including intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.83). The net risk of recurrent stroke or major hemorrhagic event was similar in the two groups (1194 ASA-ERDP recipients [11.7%], vs. 1156 clopidogrel recipients [11.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11).ConclusionsThe trial did not meet the predefined criteria for noninferiority but showed similar rates of recurrent stroke with ASA-ERDP and with clopidogrel. There is no evidence that either of the two treatments was superior to the other in the prevention of recurrent stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.)
| S-EPMC2714259 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hypothesis: In the care of acute myocardial infarction, ticagrelor attenuates post-ischemic myocardial damage and inhibits platelet activity to a greater extent than clopidogrel. Methods: Scholarly articles published in the last 10 years were compiled from a PubMed MeSH search focusing on acute coronary infarction and the antiplatelet therapies clopidogrel and ticagrelor. The databases used were PubMed, Google Scholar, Dynamed, and EBSCOhost. Eight articles were chosen based on subject matter related to the hypothesis, including cardioprotective effects, mortality benefits, platelet reactivity, angiographic effects, and electrocardiography changes. Results: Evidence from randomized clinical trials demonstrates that ticagrelor reduces infarct size, prevents remodeling, and reduces mortality rate after acute myocardial infarction to a greater extent than clopidogrel. However, some angiography studies show no difference between the two treatment regimes. Two articles show that ticagrelor is more effective in treating individuals with high platelet reactivity (HPR). In addition, there is some evidence of increased dyspnea and significant bleeding with ticagrelor. Discussion: Although there is growing evidence that ticagrelor is the better antiplatelet drug post-acute coronary infarction, more research needs to be done to determine the situations in which ticagrelor provides the optimal treatment regime in regards to cardioprotective effects, antiplatelet effects and an overall decrease in mortality. Conclusion: Ticagrelor was found to be superior to clopidogrel in relation to cardioprotective effects, mortality, and antiplatelet activity.
| S-EPMC6737723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, we tested the effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on platelet reactivity in patients with minor stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). A pre-specified subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial was conducted. Platelet reactivity was assessed by thrombelastography (TEG) platelet mapping. Patients were divided into carriers and non-carriers according to the carrier status of CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) alleles. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HOPR) (defined as maximum amplitude induced by adenosine diphosphate > 47mm) at 90±7 days. Clinical outcomes within 90±7 days were followed up. Among 339 patients, 170 were randomized to ticagrelor/aspirin and 169 to clopidogrel/aspirin. Compared with clopidogrel/aspirin, the proportion of HOPR at 90±7 days in ticagrelor/aspirin was significantly lower (12.2% versus 30.0%, P < 0.001). Ticagrelor/aspirin had a lower proportion of HOPR among carriers (11.0% versus 35.6%, P < 0.001), but not among non-carriers (13.5% versus 22.4%, P = 0.17). Ticagrelor was superior to clopidogrel in inhibiting platelet reactivity measured by TEG platelet mapping among patients with acute minor stroke or TIA, particularly in carriers of the CYP2C19 LOF alleles. Large randomised controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.
| S-EPMC7655198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe potential benefits of P2Y12 inhibitor deescalation for acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention may be influenced by body mass index (BMI).ObjectivesTo investigate the association of BMI on deescalation outcomes after 12 months in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention who were initially treated with aspirin plus ticagrelor for 1 month, and to assess whether BMI-based switching from aspirin plus ticagrelor (active control strategy) to aspirin plus clopidogrel (deescalation strategy) is associated with individualized benefits.Design, setting, and participantsThis study is a post hoc analysis, based on BMI, of data from the TALOS-AMI (Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel in Stabilized Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction) randomized clinical trial. Data were collected from February 14, 2014, to December 31, 2018, with follow-up to January 21, 2021. Analyses were conducted from December 1, 2021, to August 21, 2024. Among 2697 trial participants from 32 centers in South Korea, 2686 participants whose BMI data were available were included.ExposureAll patients received aspirin plus ticagrelor for 1 month after percutaneous coronary intervention. Stabilized patients were then randomized to either the active control or deescalation strategy for an additional 11 months.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding type 2, 3, or 5 at 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention. The trial compared the active control and deescalation strategies according to BMIs, including an interaction test.ResultsOf the 2686 patients included (mean [SD] age, 60.0 [11.4] years; 2234 [83.2%] male), 2344 (1161 in the deescalation group and 1183 in the active control group) had a BMI less than 28, and 342 (184 in the deescalation group and 158 in the active control group) had a BMI of 28 or greater. The deescalation strategy was associated with significantly reduced composite outcomes compared with the active control strategy in the group with a BMI less than 28 (53 [4.6%] vs 98 [8.3%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-0.76; P < .001), primarily due to fewer bleeding complications. There was no association in the group with a BMI of 28 or greater (6 [3.3%] vs 5 [3.2%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.33-3.50; P = .91).Conclusions and relevanceIn this post hoc analysis of the TALOS-AMI randomized clinical trial, in stabilized patients with acute myocardial infarction, an unguided deescalation strategy of switching from ticagrelor to clopidogrel after 1 month was associated with better clinical outcomes in those with lower BMIs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02018055.
| S-EPMC11868972 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background We aimed to evaluate the age-dependent effect of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) versus ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT on major bleeding and cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Methods and Results From the TICO trial (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus-eluting Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome), which randomized 3056 patients (median age, 61 years) to the ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT group or ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT group, this post hoc analysis evaluated the age-dependent effect of the treatment strategies on the primary end point (a composite of major bleeding, death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or target-vessel revascularization) using the subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot. The cutoff age for distinguishing patients with greater benefit from this strategy was also determined. The risk reduction effect of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT versus ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT on the primary end point gradually increased with age and was more marked from the subpopulation of age 64 years with the change point. With this cutoff value of 64 years, the occurrence of the primary end point was significantly lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT group than in the ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT group (4.4% versus 9.0%; P=0.002) in patients aged ≥64 years (n=1278), but it was not different in those aged <64 years (n=1778) with a significant interaction (P-interaction=0.036). Conclusions The age-dependent increase in the benefit of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT versus ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT was observed in the patients with acute coronary syndrome. In elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome, ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT might be more optimal than ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT.
| S-EPMC9075234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeRandomized trials demonstrated the benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack. We sought to determine whether the presence of carotid stenosis was associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke and whether the addition of clopidogrel to aspirin was associated with more benefit in patients with versus without carotid stenosis.MethodsThis is a post-hoc analysis of the POINT trial (Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and Minor Ischemic Stroke) that randomized patients with minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack within 12 hours from last known normal to receive either clopidogrel plus aspirin or aspirin alone. The primary predictor was the presence of ≥50% stenosis in either cervical internal carotid artery. The primary outcome was ischemic stroke. We built Cox regression models to determine the association between carotid stenosis and ischemic stroke and whether the effect of clopidogrel was modified by ≥50% carotid stenosis.ResultsAmong 4881 patients enrolled POINT, 3941 patients met the inclusion criteria. In adjusted models, ≥50% carotid stenosis was associated with ischemic stroke risk (hazard ratio, 2.45 [95% CI, 1.68-3.57], P<0.001). The effect of clopidogrel (versus placebo) on ischemic stroke risk was not significantly different in patients with <50% carotid stenosis (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.93], P=0.014) versus those with ≥50% carotid stenosis (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.45-1.72], P=0.703), P value for interaction=0.573.ConclusionsThe presence of carotid stenosis was associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke during follow-up. The effect of added clopidogrel was not significantly different in patients with versus without carotid stenosis. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03354429.
| S-EPMC8268075 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsWe aimed to demonstrate whether coronary microvascular function is improved after ticagrelor administration compared to clopidogrel administration in STEMI subjects undergoing thrombolysis.Methods and resultsMIRTOS is a multicentre study of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in STEMI subjects treated with fibrinolysis. We enrolled 335 patients <75 years old with STEMI eligible for thrombolysis, of whom 167 were randomised to receive clopidogrel and 168 to receive ticagrelor together with thrombolysis. Primary outcome was the difference in post-PCI corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC). All clinical events were recorded in a three-month follow-up period. From the 335 patients who were randomised, 259 underwent PCI (129 clopidogrel and 130 ticagrelor) and 154 angiographies were analysable for the study primary endpoint. No significant difference was found between the clopidogrel (n=85) and ticagrelor (n=69) groups for CTFC (24.33±17.35 vs 28.33±17.59, p=0.10). No significant differences were observed in MACE and major bleeding events between randomisation groups (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 0.18-22.2, p=0.99).ConclusionsThrombolysis with ticagrelor in patients <75 years old was not able to demonstrate superiority compared to clopidogrel in terms of microvascular injury, while there was no difference between the two groups in MACE and major bleeding events.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02429271. EudraCT Number 2014-004082-25.
| S-EPMC9724948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the setting of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the faster and stronger antiplatelet action of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel, as well as its pleiotropic effects, could result in a greater degree of cardioprotection and final infarct size (FIS) limitation. The aim of our study was to comparatively evaluate the effect of ticagrelor and clopidogrel on myocardial salvage index (MSI) in STEMI patients undergoing thrombolysis.MethodsForty-two STEMI patients treated with thrombolysis were randomized to receive clopidogrel (n = 21) or ticagrelor (n = 21), along with aspirin. Myocardial area at risk (AAR) was calculated according to the BARI and the APPROACH jeopardy scores. FIS was quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) performed 5-6 months post-randomization. MSI was calculated as (AAR-FIS)/AAR × 100%. Primary endpoint of our study was MSI. Secondary endpoints were FIS and CMR-derived left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 5 -6 months post-randomization.ResultsBy using the BARI score for AAR calculation, mean MSI was 52.25 ± 30.5 for the clopidogrel group and 54.29 ± 31.08 for the ticagrelor group (p = 0.83), while mean MSI using the APPROACH score was calculated at 51.94 ± 30 and 53.09 ± 32.39 (p = 0.9), respectively. Median CMR-derived FIS-as a percentage of LV-was 10.7% ± 8.25 in the clopidogrel group and 12.09% ± 8.72 in the ticagrelor group (p = 0.6). Mean LVEF at 5-6 months post-randomization did not differ significantly between randomization groups.ConclusionsOur results suggest that the administration of ticagrelor in STEMI patients undergoing thrombolysis offer a similar degree of myocardial salvage, compared to clopidogrel.
| S-EPMC9250208 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with enhanced platelet reactivity and impaired response to oral antiplatelet therapy, including clopidogrel. This post hoc analysis investigated the pharmacodynamic effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel loading dose (LD) in troponin-negative acute coronary syndrome patients with or without DM undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the Ad Hoc PCI study. Patients randomized (1:1) to receive ticagrelor 180 mg LD or clopidogrel 600 mg LD were assessed by diabetic status. Platelet reactivity (P2Y12 reaction units [PRU] on VerifyNow® assay) was measured pre-LD, at 0.5, 2, and 8 hours post-LD, and at the end of the percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was PRU levels 2 hours post-LD; secondary endpoints included rates of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (PRU≥208). Of 100 randomized patients, 51 received ticagrelor (DM, n=20; non-DM, n=31) and 49 clopidogrel (DM, n=16; non-DM, n=33). At 2 hours post-LD, mean (SD) PRU levels in DM patients were 130.1 (111.7) with ticagrelor versus 287.6 (71.9) with clopidogrel (mean [95%CI] difference -157.5 [-225.3, -89.8]; P<0.001); in non-DM patients, they were 75.3 (75.7) versus 243.0 (72.4) (mean difference -167.7 [-207.1, -128.3]; P<0.001). High on-treatment platelet reactivity rates at 2 hours post-LD were also significantly (P<0.001) reduced with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in DM and non-DM patients. Between-treatment differences for PRU and high on-treatment platelet reactivity were not significant at earlier time points but were at 8 hours post-LD (P<0.001). Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor achieved faster, enhanced platelet inhibition and reduced high on-treatment platelet reactivity rates, in DM and non-DM patients. URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01603082.
| S-EPMC5533039 | biostudies-literature