Dataset Information

Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel After Fibrinolytic Therapy in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:The bleeding safety of ticagrelor in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with fibrinolytic therapy remains uncertain. Objective:To evaluate the short-term safety of ticagrelor when compared with clopidogrel in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with fibrinolytic therapy. Design, Setting and Participants:We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label with blinded end point adjudication trial that enrolled 3799 patients (younger than 75 years) with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction receiving fibrinolytic therapy in 152 sites from 10 countries from November 2015 through November 2017. The prespecified upper boundary for noninferiority for bleeding was an absolute margin of 1.0%. Interventions:Patients were randomized to ticagrelor (180-mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily thereafter) or clopidogrel (300-mg to 600-mg loading dose, 75 mg daily thereafter). Patients were randomized with a median of 11.4 hours after fibrinolysis, and 90% were pretreated with clopidogrel. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding through 30 days. Results:The mean (SD) age was 58.0 (9.5) years, 2928 of 3799 patients (77.1%) were men, and 2177 of 3799 patients (57.3%) were white. At 30 days, TIMI major bleeding had occurred in 14 of 1913 patients (0.73%) receiving ticagrelor and in 13 of 1886 patients (0.69%) receiving clopidogrel (absolute difference, 0.04%; 95% CI, -0.49% to 0.58%; P < .001 for noninferiority). Major bleeding defined by the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes criteria and by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 23 patients (1.20%) in the ticagrelor group and in 26 patients (1.38%) in the clopidogrel group (absolute difference, -0.18%; 95% CI, -0.89% to 0.54; P = .001 for noninferiority). The rates of fatal (0.16% vs 0.11%; P = .67) and intracranial bleeding (0.42% vs 0.37%; P = .82) were similar between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups, respectively. Minor and minimal bleeding were more common with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel. The composite of death from vascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 76 patients (4.0%) treated with ticagrelor and in 82 patients (4.3%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.67-1.25; P = .57). Conclusions and Relevance:In patients younger than 75 years with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, delayed administration of ticagrelor after fibrinolytic therapy was noninferior to clopidogrel for TIMI major bleeding at 30 days. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02298088.

SUBMITTER: Berwanger O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5875327 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEuropean guidelines recommend the use of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This recommendation is based on inconclusive results and subanalyses from clinical trials. Few data are available on the effects of ticagrelor in a real-world population.MethodsTo compare the effects of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in a real-world STEMI population, we conducted a pre-post case-control study examining all patients with STEMI included in the Cardio-STEMI Sanremo registry between February 2011 and June 2013. Cases and controls were defined according to P2Y12 inhibitors, correcting the bias due to lack of randomization by propensity score analysis. Ticagrelor was introduced in 2012 in both in-hospital and pre-hospital settings independently of this study.ResultsOf the 416 patients enrolled in the Cardio-STEMI registry, 401 with a definite diagnosis of STEMI were included in this study. One hundred forty-two patients received ticagrelor and 259 received clopidogrel. Regarding clinical presentation and procedural data, those in the ticagrelor group had lower CRUSADE scores (23 [14-36] vs 27 [18-38]; p = 0.015] but a higher proportion of radial access (33% vs 14%; p < 0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; 92% vs 81 %; p = 0.002) and primary PCI ≤ 12 h (82% vs 66%; p = 0.001). The patients in the ticagrelor group had a higher procedural success rate (100% vs. 96%; p = 0.044). There was no difference in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding and in unadjusted incidence of hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) but there was a significant reduction in unadjusted cardiac hospital death in the ticagrelor group (0.7% vs 5.4%; p = 0.024). After correcting for propensity score, hospital death (p = 0.22) and hospital MACE (p = 0.96) did not differ in both groups. The unadjusted survival at 1 year after STEMI was higher in the ticagrelor group (97.8% vs 87.8%; p = 0.024), and this result was confirmed by propensity score analysis (hazard ratio = 0.29 [0.08-0.99]; p = 0.048).ConclusionsIn this real-word propensity score analysis, ticagrelor did not affect the risk of MACE during the hospital phase, or the incidence of hospital bleeding in patients with STEMI. However, in this mono-centric experience, ticagrelor resulted in improved 1-year survival, even after correction by propensity score.

Project description:Importance:Dual anti-platelet therapy represents standard care for treating patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Ticagrelor is a direct-acting P2Y12 inhibitor and, unlike clopidogrel and prasugrel, does not require metabolic activation. Objective:To evaluate whether chewing a loading dose (LD) of ticagrelor, 180 mg, vs traditional oral administration of an equal dose enhances platelet inhibition at 30 minutes and 1 hour after LD administration in patients with STEMI. Design, Setting, and Participants:A randomized clinical trial was conducted in adults aged 30 to 87 years from May to October 2016 in a large tertiary care center. Analyses were intention-to-treat. Interventions:Fifty patients with STEMI were randomized to either chewing an LD of ticagrelor, 180 mg, or standard oral administration of an equal dose. Main Outcomes and Measures:P2Y12 reaction units were evaluated using VerifyNow (Accumentrics) at baseline, 30 minutes, 1 hour, and 4 hours after LD. Results:Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. The mean (SD) of P2Y12 reaction units in the chewing group compared with the standard group at baseline, 30 minutes, 1 hour, and 4 hours after ticagrelor LD were 224 (33) vs 219 (44) (95% CI, -16.77 to 27.73; P?=?.26), 168 (78) vs 230 (69) (95% CI, -103.77 to -19.75; P?=?.003), 106 (90) vs 181 (89) (95% CI, -125.15 to -26.29; P?=?.005), and 43 (41) vs 51 (61) (95% CI, -36.34 to 21.14; P?=?.30), respectively. Platelet reactivity in the chewing group was significantly reduced by 24% at 30 minutes after LD (95% CI, 19.75 to 103.77; P?=?.001). The relative inhibition of platelet aggregation in the chewing vs the standard group were 51% vs 10% (95% CI, 13.69 to 67.67; P?=?.005) at 1 hour and 81% vs 76% (95% CI, -12.32 to 16.79; P?=?.24) at 4 hours, respectively. Major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular event rate at 30 days was low (4%) and occurred in 1 patient in each group (95% CI, 0.06 to 16.93; P?>?.99). Conclusions and Relevance:Chewing an LD of ticagrelor, 180 mg, in patients with STEMI is feasible and facilitates better early platelet inhibition compared with a standard oral LD. Larger studies are warranted to see if our preliminary findings translate into clinical outcomes. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02725099.

Project description:ObjectivesThe primary aim was to investigate the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) using ticagrelor (T-DAPT) versus clopidogrel (C-DAPT) in a real-world ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 655 consecutive patients having primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia (from January 2013 to April 2016). Medical and procedural therapies were at clinician discretion. Patient data were retrieved from hospital records and primary clinicians.ResultsT-DAPT (65%) was used more frequently, and in patients with lower mean CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes with Early Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) score, than C-DAPT (24.6 vs. 32.2; p < 0.0001, respectively). All-cause mortality was 9.0% at 2.7 years follow-up, with fewer deaths for T-DAPT (4.5% vs. 17.2%; p < 0.0001). T-DAPT incurred less BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) 3-5 major bleeding (5.0% vs. 12.4%; p < 0.0001). Multivariate regression showed that C-DAPT, GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Cardiac Events) score, and renal insufficiency were independently associated with mortality. Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and GRACE score independently predicted BARC 3-5 bleeding. Early DAPT discontinuation (1.7%) and ticagrelor intolerance (7.6%) was rare. Switching DAPT regimen was infrequent (21.7%) and mostly attributed to clinician preference (73.2%). Independent determinants of C-DAPT selection were older age, diabetes, prior PCI, IABP, and higher CRUSADE score.ConclusionTicagrelor was preferred in low bleeding risk patients, which may have contributed to less BARC 3-5 bleeding and lower mortality for T-DAPT. Thus, bleeding mitigation is a clinical priority when selecting DAPT for PCI-treated STEMI patients. Continuation of initial DAPT regimen was typical, but early switching from clopidogrel to ticagrelor shows willingness to optimize DAPT. Patients with very low CRUSADE scores (<21.5) may be appropriate for switching to a potent P2Y12 inhibitor.

Dataset Information

Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel After Fibrinolytic Therapy in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets