Dataset Information

Clopidogrel versus ticagrelor in the treatment of Chinese patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: effects on platelet function assessed by platelet function tests and mean platelet volume.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Knowledge on the pharmacodynamic effects of antiplatelet drugs including clopidogrel and ticagrelor on Asian patients is scarce. We aim to evaluate the effects of the two drugs on platelet reactivity in the treatment of Chinese patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), using two platelet function tests (PFT). Meanwhile, the relationship between mean platelet volume (MPV), a routine index of platelet size, and high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) is also investigated.

Methods

Patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were scheduled for the assessment of platelet reactivity at 2-3 days after PCI. Two PFTs, light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP)-FCM assay, were applied in the evaluation of platelet reactivity. The MPV was measured simultaneously with EDTA plasma using a Sysmex XN 2000 automated hematology analyzer.

Results

The final study population included the aspirin + clopidogrel group (n = 46) and the aspirin + ticagrelor group (n = 66). In the aspirin + ticagrelor group, the maximal light transmittance (LT) changes in response to 5 μM ADP assessed by LTA was obviously lower than that in the aspirin + clopidogrel group (P < 0.001). The platelet reactivity index (PRI) level in the VASP test was also markedly lower in the group given aspirin and ticagrelor (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in HPR between the two groups. MPV showed a potent ability to predict the presence of HPR at VASP assay (AUC = 0.788, 95% CI: 0.701-0.875, P < 0.001) in receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis.

Conclusions

Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor has dramatically greater antiplatelet effect, with a superiority in suppressing platelet function and a lower HPR rate. In addition, there existed a significant independent association between MPV and high prevalence of HPR in the VASP assay.

SUBMITTER: Zhang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8650403 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPotent P2Y12 inhibitors such as ticagrelor and prasugrel are superior to clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether this benefit extends to a patient population with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) is unclear.AimsWe sought to compare the safety and efficacy of prasugrel and ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients undergoing PCI for CCS.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing PCI for CCS at a tertiary centre between 2014 and 2019 who were discharged on prasugrel or ticagrelor were compared with those on clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was the composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with secondary outcomes including rates of bleeding, stroke, and target vessel revascularisation at 1 year.ResultsOverall, 11,508 patients were included in the study (ticagrelor/prasugrel n=2,860 [24.9%], clopidogrel n=8,648 [75.1%]) with an increasing frequency of potent P2Y12 inhibitor use over the study period (ptrend<0.001). Clopidogrel was used more frequently in patients with multimorbid risk factors, whereas anatomical or procedural complexity was associated with ticagrelor/prasugrel use (left main PCI, bifurcation PCI, number of lesions, rotational atherectomy). No difference in the incidence of death or MI was noted across the groups (ticagrelor/prasugrel vs clopidogrel: 2.7% vs 3.1%, adjusted hazard ratio [adjHR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-1.17; p=0.33) or secondary outcomes including bleeding (adjHR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.46-1.21; p=0.23) on propensity score stratification analysis. Additionally, no difference in the primary outcome was observed across subgroups, including those undergoing complex PCI.ConclusionsTicagrelor and prasugrel are increasingly used in patients with CCS undergoing PCI with similar 1-year efficacy and safety when compared to clopidogrel. Whether use of these agents can be beneficial in patients undergoing PCI for CCS with a high thrombotic and low bleeding risk warrants further study.

Project description:IntroductionSepsis is a public health problem due to its high prevalence and mortality. Mean platelet volume (MPV), a biomarker reported in routine blood counts, has been investigated and shows promise for determining fatal outcomes in septic patients.ObjectiveEvaluate whether the mean platelet volume (MPV) and mean platelet volume-to-platelet count (MPV/P) ratio are predictors of clinical severity and mortality in patients with sepsis.MethodsA prospective population cohort of 163 patients aged 18-97 years was recruited at the Intensive Care Unit of Pablo Arturo Hospital, Quito, Ecuador from 2017-2019 and followed up for 28 days. Patients were diagnosed with sepsis based on SEPSIS-3 septic shock criteria; in which the MPV and the MPV/P ratio were measured on days 1, 2, and 3. Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and presence of septic shock assessed clinical severity. Mortality on day 28 was considered the fatal outcome.ResultsThe average age of the patients was 61,15 years (SD 20,94) and female sex was predominant. MPV cutoff points at days 1, 2 and 3 were >9,45fL, >8,95fL and >8, 85fL; and (MPV/P) ratio >8, 18, >4, 12 y >3, 95, respectively. MPV at days 2 (9,85fL) and 3 (8,55fL) and (MPV/P) ratio at days 1 (4,42), 2 (4,21), and 3 (8,55), were predictors of clinical severity assessed by septic shock, which reached significance in the ROC curves. MPV and (MPV/P) ratio were also predictors of clinical severity determined by SOFA at days 1, 2, and 3, where higher values were observed in non-survivors reaching significance in all categories. MPV and MPV/P ratio at days 1, 2 and 3 were independent predictor factors of mortality using Cox proportional hazards model (HR 2,31; 95% CI 1,36-3,94), (HR 2,11; 95% CI 1,17-3,82), (HR 2,13; 95% CI 1,07-4,21) and (HR 2,38; 95% CI 1,38-4,12), (HR 2,15; 95% CI 1,14-4,06), (HR 4,43; 95% CI, 1,72-11,37) respectively.ConclusionsMPV and the MPV/P ratio are predictors of clinical severity and mortality in sepsis. The MPV and its coefficient are indicators of the biological behavior of platelets in sepsis. They should be considered as a cost-effective and rapidly available tool that guides the treatment.

Project description:ImportanceCurrent guidelines recommend ticagrelor as the preferred P2Y12 platelet inhibitor for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), primarily based on a single large randomized clinical trial. The benefits and risks associated with ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in routine practice merits attention.ObjectiveTo determine the association of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel with ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ACS in clinical practice.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study of patients with ACS who underwent PCI and received ticagrelor or clopidogrel was conducted using 2 United States electronic health record-based databases and 1 nationwide South Korean database from November 2011 to March 2019. Patients were matched using a large-scale propensity score algorithm, and the date of final follow-up was March 2019.ExposuresTicagrelor vs clopidogrel.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was net adverse clinical events (NACE) at 12 months, composed of ischemic events (recurrent myocardial infarction, revascularization, or ischemic stroke) and hemorrhagic events (hemorrhagic stroke or gastrointestinal bleeding). Secondary outcomes included NACE or mortality, all-cause mortality, ischemic events, hemorrhagic events, individual components of the primary outcome, and dyspnea at 12 months. The database-level hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled to calculate summary HRs by random-effects meta-analysis.ResultsAfter propensity score matching among 31 290 propensity-matched pairs (median age group, 60-64 years; 29.3% women), 95.5% of patients took aspirin together with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. The 1-year risk of NACE was not significantly different between ticagrelor and clopidogrel (15.1% [3484/23 116 person-years] vs 14.6% [3290/22 587 person-years]; summary HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.00-1.10]; P = .06). There was also no significant difference in the risk of all-cause mortality (2.0% for ticagrelor vs 2.1% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.81-1.16]; P = .74) or ischemic events (13.5% for ticagrelor vs 13.4% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.98-1.08]; P = .32). The risks of hemorrhagic events (2.1% for ticagrelor vs 1.6% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.13-1.61]; P = .001) and dyspnea (27.3% for ticagrelor vs 22.6% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.17-1.26]; P < .001) were significantly higher in the ticagrelor group.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with ACS who underwent PCI in routine clinical practice, ticagrelor, compared with clopidogrel, was not associated with significant difference in the risk of NACE at 12 months. Because the possibility of unmeasured confounders cannot be excluded, further research is needed to determine whether ticagrelor is more effective than clopidogrel in this setting.

Project description:ImportanceGuidelines currently recommend ticagrelor over clopidogrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) based on randomized clinical trial data in which ticagrelor reduced major adverse coronary events (MACE) vs clopidogrel but increased bleeding and dyspnea.ObjectiveTo compare the risk of MACE with ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in patients with ACS treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), to compare major bleeding and dyspnea, and to evaluate the association between P2Y12 inhibitor adherence and MACE.Design, setting, and participantsPopulation-based cohort study using data of patients discharged alive after PCI for ACS from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease registry from April 1, 2012, to March 31, 2016, with follow-up to 1 year. Analysis began April 2018.ExposuresOutpatient prescription for ticagrelor or clopidogrel within 31 days after PCI. Adherence was defined as a medication refill adherence value of 80% or higher.Main outcomes and measuresMajor adverse coronary events, a composite of all-cause death, hospitalization for ACS, unplanned coronary revascularization, or stent thrombosis within 365 days after index PCI. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization for major bleeding and emergency department visit for dyspnea.ResultsOf 11 185 individuals who underwent PCI, the median (interquartile range) age was 61 (54-71) years, and 2760 (24.7%) were women. Ticagrelor users (4076 [36.4%]) were generally younger and had fewer cardiac and noncardiac comorbidities than clopidogrel users. Ticagrelor was not associated with lower risk of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85-1.10); however, it was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (aHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29-1.78) and dyspnea (aHR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.47-2.65). A total of 3328 ticagrelor users (81.6%) were adherent during the study vs 5256 of clopidogrel users (73.9%) (P < .001; χ2 = 86.4). In the full cohort, adherence was associated with a lower MACE risk (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90 for adherence of ≥80% vs <80%). Differences in other secondary outcomes were not statistically significant. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were consistent with primary analyses.Conclusions and relevanceIn this population-based cohort study of patients with ACS who underwent PCI, outpatient use of ticagrelor was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in MACE vs clopidogrel; however, it was associated with more major bleeding and dyspnea.