Dataset Information

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Patients on Chronic Dialysis

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Although oral P2Y12 inhibitors (P2Y12-Is) are one of the most commonly prescribed medication classes in patients with end stage kidney disease on dialysis (ESKD), scarce data exist regarding their benefits and risks.

Methods

We compared effectiveness and safety of clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor in a longitudinal study using the United States Renal Data System registry of Medicare beneficiaries with ESKD. Individuals who filled new P2Y12-I prescriptions between 2011 and 2015 were included and followed until death or censoring. The primary exposure variable was P2Y12-I assignment. The primary outcome variable was death. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular (CV) death, coronary revascularization, and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage. Survival analyses were performed after propensity matching.

Results

Of 44,619 patients with ESKD who received P2Y12-Is, 95% received clopidogrel (n = 42,523), 3% prasugrel (n = 1205), and 2% ticagrelor (n = 891). To balance baseline differences, propensity-matching was performed: 1:6 for prasugrel (n = 1189) versus clopidogrel (n = 7134); 1:4 for ticagrelor (n = 880) versus clopidogrel (n = 3520); and 1:1 for ticagrelor versus prasugrel (n = 880). Prasugrel was associated with a reduced risk for death versus clopidogrel and ticagrelor (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.73–0.93 and 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64–0.95). Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel reduced risk for coronary revascularization (HR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86–0.96). There were no differences in GI hemorrhage between P2Y12-Is.

Conclusion

In patients with ESKD, prasugrel compared with others reduced risk of death possibly by reducing risk for coronary revascularizations and without worsening gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Future trials are imperative to compare efficacy and safety of P2Y12-Is in patients with ESKD. Graphical abstract

SUBMITTER: Jain N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8418979 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Trends and clinical factors associated with prescribing choices for oral P2Y12 inhibitors (P2Y12-I) remain unknown for patients on chronic dialysis, i.e., with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). METHODS:From 2011-2014 U.S. Renal Data System registry, we identified 36,542 ESRD patients who received new prescriptions for P2Y12-I (median age 64.0 years and 54% males). Of the cohort, 93% were receiving hemodialysis and 7% on peritoneal dialysis. We analyzed trends and investigated clinical factors associated with specific P2Y12-I prescribed. RESULTS:Clopidogrel was prescribed for 95%, prasugrel for 3%, and ticagrelor for 2%. Clopidogrel was favored for those ≥75 years (18% of cohort). Compared to Caucasians, African Americans (36% of cohort) and Hispanics (19% of cohort) were less likely to receive prasugrel and ticagrelor (P<0.05). Patients receiving hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis were less likely to receive prasugrel over clopidogrel, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.67 (0.55-0.82). Each additional year of dialysis decreased the odds of receiving prasugrel over clopidogrel, aOR 0.91 (0.85-0.98). History of atrial fibrillation reduced the odds of receiving ticagrelor or prasugrel over clopidogrel, aOR 0.69 (0.54-0.89) and 0.73 (0.60-0.89), respectively. Concomitant oral anticoagulant use was not associated with choice of P2Y12-I. Occurrence of non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention within the 6-month period prior to the index date favored ticagrelor over prasugrel, aOR 1.31 (1.06-1.62) and 1.29 (1.01-1.66), respectively. However, prescribing trends favoring ticagrelor over prasugrel were not observed for deployment of drug-eluting, or multiple coronary stents. CONCLUSION:Between 2011 and 2014, clopidogrel remained the most common P2Y12-I whereas ticagrelor and prasugrel remained underutilized in ESRD patients. Prescribing practices for these drugs were based upon clinically approved indication for their use in the general population as well as perceived complexity of an ESRD patient including demographics, dialysis-related factors and comorbidities. Comparative effectiveness studies involving ESRD patients are needed to prove that ticagrelor and prasugrel are just as safe and effective as clopidogrel before clinicians can make informed decisions for choice of P2Y12-I in this patient population.

Project description:Abstract Aims Cangrelor is the only intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor available. Safety, efficacy, and transitioning from cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibitors were recorded in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The ARCANGELO study aims to assess the safety of cangrelor on bleeding and the effects of the transition to oral P2Y12 inhibitors in a real-world setting according to the European Medical Agency’s requirement. Methods and results Adult patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) receiving cangrelor were included in the study. Patients were followed for 30 days. Incidence of bleeding events, major adverse cardiac events, and transition strategy to oral P2Y12 were recorded. Among 1004 ACS patients undergoing PCI, 995 (99.1%) were eligible for the analysis; 597 (60.0%) of them had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A total of 925 (93.1%) patients underwent PCI by radial catheter access, and 972 (97.2%) received drug-eluting stents. All eligible patients received bolus and cangrelor infusion between 2 and 4 h in 95% of the cases. A total of 730 patients (73.4%) received ticagrelor, 127 (12.8%) prasugrel, and 138 (13.9%) clopidogrel as transition therapy. Bleeding, according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria, within 30 days post-PCI occurred in 5.2% of patients (95% confidence interval: 3.9–6.8%); 0.5% experienced a moderate (BARC 3), and all others mild (BARC 1–2) bleeding events. Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 14 (1.4%) patients, principally all-cause mortality (n = 6 patients) and myocardial infarction (n = 7 patients). Conclusion The use of cangrelor in ACS patients undergoing PCI and the transition strategy to P2Y12 inhibitors are confirmed as safe and effective in daily practice. Graphical Abstract Graphical Abstract ACS, acute coronary syndrome; BARC, bleeding academic research consortium; GUSTO, global use of strategies to open occluded coronary arteries; NSTE-ACS, non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; STEMI: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Project description:Aims: Observational studies of various dose levels of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) found that a high proportion of patients received a dose lower than the target dose tested in randomized controlled trials. There is a need to compare low-dose DOACs with warfarin or other DOACs on effectiveness and safety. Methods: Using administrative data from Quebec province, Canada, we built a cohort of new warfarin or DOAC users discharged from hospital between 2011 and 2017. We determined CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, and comorbidities for 3-year prior cohort entry. The primary effectiveness endpoint was a composite of ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE), and secondary outcomes included a safety composite of major bleeding (MB) events and effectiveness composite (stroke/SE, death) at 1-year follow-up. We contrasted each low-dose DOAC with warfarin or other DOACs as references using inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate marginal Cox hazard ratios (HRs). Results: The cohort comprised 22,969 patients (mean age: 80-86). We did not find a significant risk reduction for the stroke/SE primary effectiveness endpoint for DOACs vs. warfarin; however, we observed a significantly lower risk for low-dose dabigatran vs. warfarin (HR [95%CI]: 0.59 [0.42-0.81]) for effectiveness composite, mainly due to a lower death rate. The differences in effectiveness and safety composites between low-dose rivaroxaban vs. warfarin were not significant. However, low-dose apixaban had a better safety composite (HR: 0.68 [0.53-0.88]) vs. warfarin. Comparisons of dabigatran vs. apixaban showed a lower risk of stroke/SE (HR: 0.53 [0.30-0.93]) and a 2-fold higher risk of MB. The MB risk was higher for rivaroxaban than for apixaban (HR: 1.58 [1.09-2.29]). Conclusions: The results of this population-based study suggest that low-dose dabigatran has a better effective composite than warfarin. Compared with apixaban, low-dose dabigatran had a better effectiveness composite but a worse safety profile. Low-dose apixaban had a better safety composite than warfarin and other low-dose DOACs. Given that the comparative effectiveness and safety seem to vary from one DOAC to another, pharmacokinetic data for specific populations are now warranted.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with atrial fibrillation and severely decreased kidney function were excluded from the pivotal non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) trials, thereby raising questions about comparative safety and effectiveness in patients with reduced kidney function. The study aimed to compare oral anticoagulants across the range of kidney function in patients with atrial fibrillation.Methods and resultsUsing a US administrative claims database with linked laboratory data, 34 569 new users of oral anticoagulants with atrial fibrillation and estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥15 mL/(min·1.73 m2) were identified between October 1, 2010 to November 29, 2017. The proportion of patients using NOACs declined with decreasing kidney function-73.5%, 69.6%, 65.4%, 59.5%, and 45.0% of the patients were prescribed a NOAC in estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥90, 60 to 90, 45 to 60, 30 to 45, 15 to 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 groups, respectively. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance 4 treatment groups (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin) on 66 baseline characteristics. In comparison to warfarin, apixaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57 [0.43-0.75]; P<0.001), major bleeding (HR, 0.51 [0.44-0.61]; P<0.001), and mortality (HR, 0.68 [0.56-0.83]; P<0.001); dabigatran was associated with a similar risk of stroke but a lower risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.57 [0.43-0.75]; P<0.001) and mortality (HR, 0.68 [0.48-0.98]; P=0.04); rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke (HR, 0.69 [0.51-0.94]; P=0.02), major bleeding (HR, 0.84 [0.72-0.99]; P=0.04), and mortality (HR, 0.73 [0.58-0.91]; P=0.006). There was no significant interaction between treatment and estimated glomerular filtration rate categories for any outcome. When comparing one NOAC to another NOAC, there was no significant difference in mortality, but some differences existed for stroke or major bleeding. No relationship between treatments and falsification end points was found, suggesting no evidence for substantial residual confounding.ConclusionsRelative to warfarin, NOACs are used less frequently as kidney function declines. However, NOACs appears to have similar or better comparative effectiveness and safety across the range of kidney function.