| 1. |
- Bhatt, Deepak L., et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the effect of ticagrelor on health outcomes in diabetes mellitus patients Intervention study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 42:5, s. 498-505
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the setting of prior myocardial infarction, the oral antiplatelet ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced the risk of recurrent ischemic events, especially, in those with diabetes mellitus. Patients with stable coronary disease and diabetes are also at elevated risk and might benefit from dual antiplatelet therapy. The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS, NCT01991795) is a Phase 3b randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of ticagrelor vs placebo, on top of low dose aspirin. Patients >= 50 years with type 2 diabetes receiving anti-diabetic medications for at least 6 months with stable coronary artery disease as determined by a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention, bypass grafting, or angiographic stenosis of >= 50% of at least one coronary artery were enrolled. Patients with known prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety endpoint is Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding. A total of 19 220 patients worldwide have been randomized and at least 1385 adjudicated primary efficacy endpoint events are expected to be available for analysis, with an expected average follow-up of 40 months (maximum 58 months). Most of the exposure is on a 60 mg twice daily dose, as the dose was lowered from 90 mg twice daily partway into the study. The results may revise the boundaries of efficacy for dual antiplatelet therapy and whether it has a role outside acute coronary syndromes, prior myocardial infarction, or percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
| 2. |
- Guigliano, Robert P, et al.
(författare)
-
Early versus delayed, provisional eptifibatide in acute coronary syndromes.
- 2009
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - : Massachusetts Medical Society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 360:21, s. 2176-2190
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors are indicated in patients with acute coronary syndromes who are undergoing an invasive procedure. The optimal timing of the initiation of such therapy is unknown. Methods We compared a strategy of early, routine administration of eptifibatide with delayed, provisional administration in 9492 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation and who were assigned to an invasive strategy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either early eptifibatide (two boluses, each containing 180 µg per kilogram of body weight, administered 10 minutes apart, and a standard infusion 12 hours before angiography) or a matching placebo infusion with provisional use of eptifibatide after angiography (delayed eptifibatide). The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent ischemia requiring urgent revascularization, or the occurrence of a thrombotic complication during percutaneous coronary intervention that required bolus therapy opposite to the initial study-group assignment ("thrombotic bailout") at 96 hours. The key secondary end point was a composite of death or myocardial infarction within the first 30 days. Key safety end points were bleeding and the need for transfusion within the first 120 hours after randomization. Results The primary end point occurred in 9.3% of patients in the early-eptifibatide group and in 10.0% in the delayed-eptifibatide group (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.06; P=0.23). At 30 days, the rate of death or myocardial infarction was 11.2% in the early-eptifibatide group, as compared with 12.3% in the delayed-eptifibatide group (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.01; P=0.08). Patients in the early-eptifibatide group had significantly higher rates of bleeding and red-cell transfusion. There was no significant difference between the two groups in rates of severe bleeding or nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events. Conclusions In patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, the use of eptifibatide 12 hours or more before angiography was not superior to the provisional use of eptifibatide after angiography. The early use of eptifibatide was associated with an increased risk of non–life-threatening bleeding and need for transfusion.
|
|
