Dataset Information

Prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy in stable coronary disease: comparative observational study of benefits and harms in unselected versus trial populations.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To estimate the potential magnitude in unselected patients of the benefits and harms of prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after acute myocardial infarction seen in selected patients with high risk characteristics in trials.

Design

Observational population based cohort study.

Setting

PEGASUS-TIMI-54 trial population and CALIBER (ClinicAl research using LInked Bespoke studies and Electronic health Records).

Participants

7238 patients who survived a year or more after acute myocardial infarction.

Interventions

Prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after acute myocardial infarction.

Main outcome measures

Recurrent acute myocardial infarction, stroke, or fatal cardiovascular disease. Fatal, severe, or intracranial bleeding.

Results

1676/7238 (23.1%) patients met trial inclusion and exclusion criteria ("target" population). Compared with the placebo arm in the trial population, in the target population the median age was 12 years higher, there were more women (48.6% v 24.3%), and there was a substantially higher cumulative three year risk of both the primary (benefit) trial endpoint of recurrent acute myocardial infarction, stroke, or fatal cardiovascular disease (18.8% (95% confidence interval 16.3% to 21.8%) v 9.04%) and the primary (harm) endpoint of fatal, severe, or intracranial bleeding (3.0% (2.0% to 4.4%) v 1.26% (TIMI major bleeding)). Application of intention to treat relative risks from the trial (ticagrelor 60 mg daily arm) to CALIBER's target population showed an estimated 101 (95% confidence interval 87 to 117) ischaemic events prevented per 10 000 treated per year and an estimated 75 (50 to 110) excess fatal, severe, or intracranial bleeds caused per 10 000 patients treated per year. Generalisation from CALIBER's target subgroup to all 7238 real world patients who were stable at least one year after acute myocardial infarction showed similar three year risks of ischaemic events (17.2%, 16.0% to 18.5%), with an estimated 92 (86 to 99) events prevented per 10 000 patients treated per year, and similar three year risks of bleeding events (2.3%, 1.8% to 2.9%), with an estimated 58 (45 to 73) events caused per 10 000 patients treated per year.

Conclusions

This novel use of primary-secondary care linked electronic health records allows characterisation of "healthy trial participant" effects and confirms the potential absolute benefits and harms of dual antiplatelet therapy in representative patients a year or more after acute myocardial infarction.

SUBMITTER: Timmis A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4916922 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEnd-stage renal disease yields susceptibility to both ischemia and bleeding. The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is not established in dialysis patients, who are usually excluded from randomized studies. Since recent studies implied the benefits of prolonged DAPT >12 months in chronic kidney disease, we investigated the effectiveness and safety of prolonged DAPT in dialysis patients with higher cardiovascular risks.MethodsIn this nationwide population-based study, we analyzed dialysis patients who underwent DES implantation from 2008 to 2015. Continued DAPT was compared with discontinued DAPT using landmark analyses, including free-of-event participants at 12 (n = 2246), 15 (n = 1925) and 18 months (n = 1692) after DES implantation. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs): a composite of mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization and stroke. Major bleeding was a safety outcome. Inverse probability of treatment weighting Cox regression was performed.ResultsMean follow-up periods were 278.3-292.4 days, depending on landmarks. Overall, incidences of major bleeding were far lower than those of MACE. Continued DAPT groups showed lower incidences of MACE and higher incidences of major bleeding, compared with discontinued DAPT groups. In Cox analyses, continued DAPT reduced the hazards of MACE at the 12- [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.90; P = 0.003], 15- (HR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.96; P = 0.019) and 18-month landmarks (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99; P = 0.041), but without a significant increase in major bleeding at 12 (HR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.90-2.16; P = 0.14), 15 (HR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.75-1.70; P = 0.55) or 18 months (HR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.83-1.95; P = 0.27).ConclusionsProlonged DAPT reduced MACE without significantly increasing major bleeding in patients who were event-free at 12 months after DES implantation. In deciding on DAPT duration, prolonged DAPT should be considered in dialysis patients.

Project description:BackgroundDual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary stenting prolongs survival by preventing both in-stent thrombosis and other cardiovascular atherothrombotic events. Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) typically have a heavy burden of unrevascularized coronary artery disease and also stand to benefit from increased atherothrombotic protection with DAPT. The potential benefit of DAPT compared with aspirin alone in patients with PAD is not well described.MethodsWe identified all patients undergoing an initial elective lower extremity revascularization (bypass or endovascular) from 2003 to 2016 in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry discharged on aspirin or aspirin plus a thienopyridine antiplatelet agent (DAPT). We first estimated models predicting the likelihood of receiving DAPT and then used inverse probability weighting to account for baseline differences in the likelihood of receiving DAPT and compared late survival. For sensitivity analysis, we also performed Cox proportion hazard modeling on the unweighted cohorts and generated adjusted survival curves.ResultsWe identified 57,041 patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization (28% bypass). Of 15,985 bypasses (69% for critical limb ischemia [CLI]), 38% were discharged on DAPT. Of 41,056 endovascular interventions (39% for CLI), 69% were discharged on DAPT. Analyses using inverse probability weighting demonstrated a small survival benefit to DAPT at 1 year for bypass (93% vs 92% [P = .001]) and endovascular interventions (93% vs 92% [P = .005]) that was sustained through 5 years of follow-up (bypass, 80% vs 78% [P = .004]; endovascular, 76% vs 73% [P = .002]). When stratified by severity of PAD, DAPT had a survival benefit for patients with CLI undergoing bypass (5 years, 70% vs 66% [P = .04]) and endovascular intervention (5 years, 71% vs 67% [P = .01]) but not for patients with claudication (bypass, 89% vs 88% [P = .36]; endovascular, 87% vs 85% [P = .46]). The protective effect of DAPT was similar when using Cox proportional hazard models after bypass (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.90]) and endovascular intervention (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95]).ConclusionsDAPT at time of discharge was associated with prolonged survival for patients with CLI undergoing lower extremity revascularization but not for those with claudication. Further research is needed to quantify the risks associated with DAPT and to identify subgroups at increased risk of thrombotic and bleeding complications to guide medical management of patients with PAD.

Project description:Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) combining aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor has been consistently shown to reduce recurrent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with aspirin monotherapy, but at the expense of an increased risk of major bleeding. Nevertheless, the optimal duration of DAPT for secondary prevention of CAD remains uncertain, owing to the conflicting results of several large randomised trials. Among patients with stable CAD undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES), shorter durations of DAPT (3-6 months) were shown non-inferior to 12 or 24 months duration with respect to MACE, but reduced the rates of major bleeding. Contrariwise, prolonged DAPT durations (18-48 months) reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis, but at a cost of an increased risk of major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Until more evidence becomes available, the choice of optimal DAPT regimen and duration for patients with CAD requires a tailored approach based on the patient clinical presentation, baseline risk profile and management strategy. Future studies are however needed to identify patients who may derive benefit from shortened or extended DAPT courses for secondary prevention of CAD based on their individual ischaemic and bleeding risk. Based on limited evidence, 12 months duration of DAPT is currently recommended in patients with ACS irrespective of their management strategy, but large ongoing randomised trials are currently assessing the efficacy and safety of a short-term DAPT strategy (3-6 months) for patients with ACS undergoing PCI with newer generation DES. Finally, several ongoing, large-scale, randomised trials are challenging the current concept of DAPT by investigating P2Y12 receptor inhibitors as single antiplatelet therapy and may potentially shift the paradigm of antiplatelet therapy after PCI in the near future. This article provides a contemporary state-of-the-art review of the current evidence on DAPT for secondary prevention of patients with CAD and its future perspectives.