| 1. |
- Koshizaka, Masaya, et al.
(författare)
-
Obesity, Diabetes, and Acute Coronary Syndrome : Differences Between Asians and Whites
- 2017
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-9343 .- 1555-7162. ; 130:10, s. 1170-1176
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND:Most diabetes and cardiovascular studies have been conducted in white patients, with data being extrapolated to other population groups.METHODS:For this analysis, patient-level data were extracted from 5 randomized clinical trials in patients with acute coronary syndrome; we compared obesity levels between Asian and white populations, stratified by diabetes status. By using an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, hazard ratios (HRs) for cardiovascular outcomes after an acute coronary syndrome were determined.RESULTS:We identified 49,224 patient records from the 5 trials, with 3176 Asians and 46,048 whites. Whites with diabetes had higher body mass index values than those without diabetes (median 29.3 vs 27.2 kg/m(2); P <.0001), whereas Asians with diabetes and without diabetes had similar body mass index (24.7 vs 24.2 kg/m2). Asians with diabetes (HR, 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.02), whites with diabetes (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06-1.25), and Asians without diabetes (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.14-1.64) had higher rates of the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days than whites without diabetes. Asians with diabetes (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.47-2.31), whites with diabetes (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.33-1.62), and Asians without diabetes (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11-1.73) had higher rates of death at 1 year compared with whites without diabetes. There were no significant interactions between race and diabetes for ischemic outcomes.CONCLUSIONS:Although Asians with diabetes and acute coronary syndrome are less likely to be obese than their white counterparts, their risk for death or recurrent ischemic events was not lower.
|
|
| 2. |
- Velders, Matthijs A., et al.
(författare)
-
Safety and efficacy of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in primary percutaneous coronary intervention
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Heart. - : BMJ. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 102:8, s. 617-625
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The effects of ticagrelor in the subpopulation of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were consistent with those observed in the overall Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) study. However, this subgroup included patients initially or ultimately treated conservatively. The aim of this study is to compare treatment using ticagrelor with treatment using clopidogrel in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods: This post-hoc subgroup analysis compared ticagrelor with clopidogrel in 4949 PLATO patients with STEMI that were treated with primary PCI within 12h of admission. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke. The safety endpoint consisted of any major bleeding. Secondary endpoints included stent thrombosis. The analysis was not adequately powered to establish significance of any treatment effects.Results: During a median of 286days, the primary endpoint occurred in 7.9% of ticagrelor-treated patients versus 8.6% of clopidogrel-treated patients (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.12, p=0.38). Major bleeding occurred in 6.7% in ticagrelor-treated patients versus 6.8% of clopidogrel-treated patients (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.22, p=0.79). No interactions were observed for the treatment effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on the primary efficacy (p=0.40) and primary safety endpoints (p=0.15) as compared with the full PLATO population. Treatment with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel reduced the occurrence of definite stent thrombosis (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.89, p=0.013).Conclusions: In the subset of patients with STEMI treated with primary PCI, ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel was safe, and efficacy outcomes were consistent with the overall PLATO trial.
|
|
| 3. |
- Ducrocq, Gregory, et al.
(författare)
-
Balancing the risk of spontaneous ischemic and major bleeding events in acute coronary syndromes
- 2017
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - : MOSBY-ELSEVIER. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 186, s. 91-99
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Evaluation of antithrombotic treatments for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) requires balancing ischemic and bleeding risks to assess net benefit. We sought to compare the relative effects of ischemic and bleeding events on mortality.Methods: In the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, we compared spontaneous ischemic events (myocardial infarction or stroke) with spontaneous major bleeding events (PLATO major, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] major, Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries [GUSTO] severe) with respect to risk of mortality using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. The comparison was performed using ratio of hazard ratios for mortality increase after ischemic vs bleeding events.Results: A total of 822 patients (4.4%) had >= 1 spontaneous ischemic event; 485 patients (2.6%), >= 1 spontaneous PLATO major bleed, 282 (1.5%), >= 1 spontaneous TIMI major bleed; and 207 (1.1%), >= 1 spontaneous severe GUSTO bleed. In patients who had both events, bleeding occurred first in most patients. Regardless of classification, major bleeding events were associated with increased short- and long-term mortality that were not significantly different from the increase associated with spontaneous ischemic events: ratio of hazard ratios (95% Cls) for short- and long-term mortality after spontaneous ischemic vs bleeding events: 1.46 (0.98-2.19) and 0.92 (0.52-1.62) (PLATO major); 1.26 (0.80-1.96) and 1.19 (0.58-2.24) (TIMI major), 0.72 (0.47-1.10) and 0.83 (0.38-1.79) (GUSTO severe) (all P > 0.05)Conclusions: In patients with ACS on dual antiplatelet therapy, spontaneous major bleeding events seem "prognostically equivalent" to spontaneous ischemic complications. This result allows quantitative comparisons between both actual and predicted bleeding and ischemic risks. Our findings help to better define net clinical benefit of antithrombotic treatments and more accurately estimate mortality after ischemic and bleeding events in patients with ACS.
|
|
| 4. |
- Pollack, Charles V., Jr., et al.
(författare)
-
Relative efficacy and safety of ticagelor vs clopidogrel as a function of time to invasive management in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome in the PLATO trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 40:6, s. 390-398
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Guidelines suggest that "upstream" P2Y(12) receptor antagonists should be considered in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS).Hypothesis: Early use of ticagrelor in patients managed with an invasive strategy would be more effective than clopidogrel because of its more rapid onset of action and greater potency.Methods: In the PLATO trial, 6792 NSTE-ACS patients were randomized to ticagrelor or clopidogrel (started prior to angiography) and underwent angiography within 72 hours of randomization. We compared efficacy and safety outcomes of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel as a function of "early" (<3h) vs "late" (>= 3h) time to angiography. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models evaluated interaction between randomized treatment and time from randomization to angiography on subsequent outcomes.Results: Overall, a benefit of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel for cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke was seen at day 7 (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.67, P = 0.002), day 30 (HR: 0.81, P = 0.042), and 1 year (HR: 0.80, P = 0.0045). There were no significant interactions in the <3h vs >= 3h groups at any timepoint. For major bleeding, overall there was no significant increase (HR: 1.04, 95% confidence interval: 0.85-1.27); but there was a significant interaction with no difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the early group (HR: 0.79), but higher bleeding risk with ticagrelor in the late angiography group, at 7 days (HR: 1.51, P-int = 0.002). Patterns were similar at 30 days and 1 year.Conclusions: The benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel was consistent in those undergoing early and late angiography, supporting upstream use of ticagrelor
|
|
| 5. |
- Scirica, Benjamin M., et al.
(författare)
-
Safety of ticagrelor in patients with baseline conduction abnormalities : A PLATO (Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) analysis
- 2018
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 202, s. 54-60
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Although bradyarrhythmias have been observed with ticagrelor and its use with advanced atrioventricular block is not recommended, questions arise regarding its use in patients with mild conduction abnormalities. The objectives were to compare rates of clinically relevant arrhythmias in relation to any mild baseline conduction abnormality in patients with acute coronary syndrome randomized to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. Methods: We included all subjects in the electrocardiographic (ECG) substudy of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes trial, excluding those with missing baseline ECG or with a pacemaker at baseline (N = 15,460). Conduction abnormality was defined as sinus bradycardia, first-degree atrioventricular block, hemiblock, or bundle-branch block. The primary arrhythmic outcome was the composite of any symptomatic brady-or tachyarrhythmia, permanent pacemaker placement, or cardiac arrest through 12 months. Results: Patients with baseline conduction abnormalities (n = 4,256, 27.5%) were older and more likely to experience the primary arrhythmic outcome. There were no differences by ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in the composite arrhythmic end point in those with baseline conduction disease (1-year cumulative incidence rate: 17% for both study arms; hazard ratio: 0.99 [0.86-1.15]) or without baseline conduction disease (1-year cumulative incidence rate: clopidogrel 12.8% vs ticagrelor 12.4%; hazard ratio: 0.98 (0.88-1.09). There were also no statistically significant differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the rates of bradycardic (or any individual arrhythmic) events in patients with baseline conduction abnormalities. Conclusions: Ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel did not increase arrhythmic events even in subjects with acute coronary syndrome who present with mild conduction abnormalities on their baseline ECG. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc.
|
|
