| 1. |
- Armstrong, Paul W, et al.
(author)
-
ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes in PLATO : Insights from the ECG Substudy
- 2012
-
In: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 125:3, s. 514-521
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor, when compared with clopidogrel, reduced the 12-month risk of vascular death/myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in patients with ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (ST-E ACS) intended to undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. This pre-specified electrocardiogram (ECG) substudy explored whether ticagrelor's association with vascular death and MI within one year would be amplified by: 1) the extent of baseline ST shift; and 2) subsequently associated with less residual ST changes at hospital discharge. METHODS AND RESULTS: ECGs were evaluated centrally in a core laboratory in 3,122 ticagrelor- and 3,084 clopidogrel-assigned patients having at least 1mm ST-E in two contiguous leads as identified by site investigators on the qualifying ECG. Patients with greater ST-segment shift at baseline had higher rates of vascular death/MI within one year. Amongst those who also had an ECG at hospital discharge (n=4,798), patients with ≥50% ∑ST-deviation (∑ST-dev) resolution had higher event-free survival than those with incomplete resolution (6.4% vs. 8.8%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.69 (0.54-0.88), p=0.003). The extent of ∑ST-dev resolution was similar irrespective of treatment assignment. The benefit of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on clinical events was consistent irrespective of the extent of baseline ∑ST-dev (p(interaction)=0.728). When stratified according to conventional times from symptom onset i.e. ≤3 hours, 3-6 hours, >6 hours, the extent of baseline ∑ST-dev declined progressively over time. As time from symptom onset increased beyond three hours, the benefit of ticagrelor appeared to be more pronounced; however, the interaction between time and treatment was not significant (p=0.175). CONCLUSIONS: Ticagrelor did not modify ∑ST-dev resolution at discharge nor was its benefit affected by the extent of baseline ∑ST-dev. These hypothesis-generating observations suggest that the main effects of ticagrelor may not relate to the rapidity or the completeness of acute reperfusion, but rather the prevention of recurrent vascular events by more powerful platelet inhibition or other mechanisms.
|
|
| 2. |
- Goodman, Shaun G., et al.
(author)
-
Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Use on Cardiovascular Outcomes With Clopidogrel and Ticagrelor : Outcomes With Clopidogrel and Ticagrelor
- 2012
-
In: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 125:8, s. 978-986
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background-The clinical significance of the interaction between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remains unclear. Methods and Results-We examined the relationship between PPI use and 1-year cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) in patients with acute coronary syndrome randomized to clopidogrel or ticagrelor in a prespecified, nonrandomized subgroup analysis of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. The primary end point rates were higher for individuals on a PPI (n = 6539) compared with those not on a PPI (n = 12 060) at randomization in both the clopidogrel (13.0% versus 10.9%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 -1.38) and ticagrelor (11.0% versus 9.2%; HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.45) groups. Patients on non-PPI gastrointestinal drugs had similar primary end point rates compared with those on a PPI (PPI versus non-PPI gastrointestinal treatment: clopidogrel, HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.23; ticagrelor, HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.10). In contrast, patients on no gastric therapy had a significantly lower primary end point rate (PPI versus no gastrointestinal treatment: clopidogrel, HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12-1.49; ticagrelor, HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.14-1.49). Conclusions-The use of a PPI was independently associated with a higher rate of cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving clopidogrel. However, a similar association was observed between cardiovascular events and PPI use during ticagrelor treatment and with other non-PPI gastrointestinal treatment. Therefore, in the PLATO trial, the association between PPI use and adverse events may be due to confounding, with PPI use more of a marker for, than a cause of, higher rates of cardiovascular events.
|
|
| 3. |
- Tricoci, Pierluigi, et al.
(author)
-
Thrombin-receptor antagonist vorapaxar in acute coronary syndromes
- 2012
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 366:1, s. 20-33
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND:Vorapaxar is a new oral protease-activated-receptor 1 (PAR-1) antagonist that inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation.METHODS:In this multinational, double-blind, randomized trial, we compared vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization.RESULTS:Follow-up in the trial was terminated early after a safety review. After a median follow-up of 502 days (interquartile range, 349 to 667), the primary end point occurred in 1031 of 6473 patients receiving vorapaxar versus 1102 of 6471 patients receiving placebo (Kaplan-Meier 2-year rate, 18.5% vs. 19.9%; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.01; P=0.07). A composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 822 patients in the vorapaxar group versus 910 in the placebo group (14.7% and 16.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P=0.02). Rates of moderate and severe bleeding were 7.2% in the vorapaxar group and 5.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.58; P<0.001). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 1.1% and 0.2%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.78 to 6.45; P<0.001). Rates of nonhemorrhagic adverse events were similar in the two groups.CONCLUSIONS:In patients with acute coronary syndromes, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but significantly increased the risk of major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRACER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00527943.).
|
|
