Search

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic strategies by age in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention in AUGUSTUS., Methods: Patients were stratified into 3 age groups: <65, 65-74, and ≥75 years. Outcomes of interest were major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, major bleeding, death or rehospitalization, and ischemic events. Treatment effects of apixaban vs. vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and aspirin vs. placebo were assessed across age groups using Cox models., Results: Of 4614 patients, 1267 (27.5%) were <65, 1802 (39.0%) were 65-74, and 1545 (33.5%) were ≥75 years. Apixaban was associated with lower rates of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding than VKA (<65: HR 0.69 [0.47-1.00]; 65-74: HR 0.57 [0.43-0.75]; ≥75: HR 0.81 [0.63-1.04]). Death or hospitalization occurred less often with apixaban, regardless of age. No differences were observed in rates of ischemic events between apixaban and VKA according to age. Aspirin was associated with higher rates of bleeding than placebo (<65: HR 1.67 [1.15-2.43]; 65-74: HR 2.32 [1.73-3.10]; ≥75: HR 1.69 [1.31-2.19]). Rates of death or rehospitalization and ischemic events were similar among patients receiving aspirin or placebo across age groups., Conclusions: Apixaban was associated with greater absolute reduction in bleeding than VKA in older age groups, reflecting their higher hemorrhagic risk. Aspirin increased bleeding in all age groups vs. placebo. Our findings support the use of apixaban plus a purinergic receptor P2Y 12 (P2Y 12 ) inhibitor without aspirin in patients with atrial fibrillation and recent acute coronary syndrome/percutaneous coronary intervention, regardless of age., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is not known., Objectives: The authors sought to determine which antithrombotic regimen best balances safety and efficacy., Methods: AUGUSTUS, a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial design randomized trial compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and aspirin with placebo in patients with AF with recent ACS and/or PCI treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor. We conducted a 4-way analysis comparing safety and efficacy outcomes in the 4 randomized groups. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes over 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary endpoint., Results: A total of 4,614 patients were enrolled. All patients were treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor. The primary endpoint occurred in 21.9% of patients randomized to apixaban plus placebo, 27.3% randomized to apixaban plus aspirin, 28.0% randomized to VKA plus placebo, and 33.3% randomized to VKA plus aspirin. Rates of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding and hospitalization for cardiovascular causes were lower with apixaban and placebo compared with the other 3 antithrombotic strategies. There was no difference between the 4 randomized groups with respect to all-cause death., Conclusions: In patients with AF and a recent ACS and/or PCI, an antithrombotic regimen that included a P2Y 12 inhibitor and apixaban without aspirin resulted in a lower incidence of the composite of death, bleeding, or cardiovascular hospitalization than regimens including VKA, aspirin, or both. (An Open-label, 2 x 2 Factorial, Randomized Controlled, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Aspirin Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; NCT02415400)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The AUGUSTUS study and this analysis were funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Dr Berwanger has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bayer, Amgen, Novartis, Servier, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Fanaroff has received research grants from the American Heart Association and National Institutes of Health; and has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories. Dr Granger has received research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, The Medicines Company, Medtronic Foundation, Medtronic Inc, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Abbvie, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, The Medicines Company, National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Sirtex, Verseon, Apple, Medscape, LLC, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Rho Pharmaceuticals. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly/Daiichi-Sankyo, Medtronic, Novartis, and OrbusNeich; has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Medscape, Siemens Medical Solutions, Roivant Sciences Inc, and Sanofi; has consulted (no fees) for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc; has received institutional consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Spectranetics/Phillips/Volcano Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Watermark Research; is an executive committee member for Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb; and has <1% equity in Claret Medical and Elixir Medical. Dr Aronson is an employee of Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Windecker has received institutional research and educational grants from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. Dr Goodman has received research grant support and/or speaker/consulting honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Fenix Group International, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen/Johnson and Johnson, Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Matrizyme, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tenax Therapeutics, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto, Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Duke Clinical Research Institute, and PERFUSE. Dr Alexander has received research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, CryoLife, CSL Behring, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, Sanofi, and VoluMetrix; and has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Quantum Genomics, Teikoku Pharmaceuticals, VA Cooperative Studies, and Zafgen. Dr Lopes has received research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has received funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Novo Nordisk; and has received funding for consulting or other services from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The American College of Cardiology Reduce the Risk: PCI Bleed Campaign was a hospital-based quality improvement campaign designed to reduce post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) bleeding events. The aim of the campaign was to provide actionable evidence-based tools for participants to review, adapt, and adopt, depending upon hospital resources and engagement., Methods: We used data from 8 757 737 procedures in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry between 2015 and 2021 to compare patient and hospital characteristics and bleeding outcomes among campaign participants (n=195 hospitals) and noncampaign participants (n=1384). Post-PCI bleeding risk was compared before and after campaign participation. Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine the adjusted association between campaign participation and post-PCI bleeding events. Prespecified subgroups were examined., Results: Campaign hospitals were more often higher volume teaching facilities located in urban or suburban locations. After adjustment, campaign participation was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of bleeding (bleeding: adjusted odds ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.71]). Campaign hospitals had a greater decrease in bleeding events than noncampaign hospitals. In a subgroup analysis, the reduction in bleeding was noted in non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients, but no significant reduction was seen in patients without acute coronary syndrome., Conclusions: Participation in the American College of Cardiology Reduce the Risk: PCI Bleed Campaign was associated with a significant reduction in post-PCI bleeding. Our results underscore that national quality improvement efforts can be associated with a significant impact on PCI outcomes., Competing Interests: Dr Amin has institutional grant support (modest) from GE Healthcare and Chiesi. Dr Abbott has the following relationships with industry: research: Boston Scientific and Microport; consulting: Abbott, Medtronic, Penumbra, Shockwave, and Philips. Dr Masoudi had a contract with the American College of Cardiology for his role as the Chief Scientific Advisor, National Cardiovascular Data Registry. The other authors report no conflicts.

Background: Heart failure (HF) may complicate acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and is associated with a high burden of short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Only limited data regarding future ischemic events and rehospitalization are available for patients who suffer HF before or during ACS., Methods: A secondary analysis of 4 large ACS trials (PLATO, APPRAISE-2, TRACER, and TRILOGY ACS) using Cox proportional hazards models was performed to investigate the association of HF status (no HF, chronic HF, de novo HF) at presentation for ACS with all-cause and cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE ), myocardial infarction, stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) by 1 year. Cumulative incidence plots are presented at 30 days and 1 year., Results: A total of 11.1% of the 47,474 patients presenting with ACS presented with evidence of acute HF, 55.0% of whom presented with de novo HF. Patients with chronic HF presented with evidence of acute HF at a higher rate than those with no previous HF (40.3% vs 6.9%). Compared to those without HF, those with chronic and de novo HF had higher rates of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-2.34 and aHR 1.47, 95% CI1.15-1.88, respectively), MACE (aHR 1.47, 95% CI1.31-1-.66 and aHR 1.38, 95% CI1.12-1.69), and HHF (aHR 2.29, 95% CI2.02-2.61 and aHR 1.48, 95% CI 1.20-1.82) at 1 year., Conclusion: In this large cohort of patients with ACS, both prior and de novo HF complicating ACS were associated with significantly higher risk-adjusted rates of death, ischemic events and HHF at 30 days and 1 year. Further studies examining the association between HF and outcomes in this high-risk population are warranted, especially given the advent of more contemporary HF therapies., Competing Interests: Disclosures JAU reports speaker/consulting honoraria from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi; grant support to his institutions: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi; and is supported by an Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities Early Researcher Award (ER15-11-037); University of Toronto Department of Medicine Merit Award; Women's College Research Institute and Department of Medicine, Women's College Hospital; and the Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital. JB is a consultant to Abbott, Adrenomed, American Regent, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Vifor. JLJ is a trustee of the American College of Cardiology and a Board member of Imbria Pharmaceuticals, has received grant support from Applied Therapeutics, Innolife, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Abbott Diagnostics and consulting income from Abbott, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics and participates in clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, CVRx, Janssen, MyoKardia, and Takeda, and is supported in part by the Hutter Family Professorship. PBP has served on the Advisory Board for AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals and as a consultant for Medtronic. SJ reports research grants from Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, and Jansen Pharmaceuticals. JHA reports research grants through Duke University from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CryoLife, CSL Behring, Ferring, the US Food and Drug Administration, Glaxosmithkline, Humacyte, the US National Institutes of Health, and XaTek and consultant/honoraria payments from AbbVie, Akros, Atricure, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CryoLife, Ferring, Glaxosmithkline, Janssen, Pfizer, Portola, and the US Veterans Administration. AFH reports research grants from American Regent, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, and Verily and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Merck, and Novartis. WSJ reports research grants from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, National Institutes of Health, and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and honoraria/other from Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. All other authors report no disclosures., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are at risk for recurrent adverse events, and multiple reports suggest that this risk is increased in patients with concomitant diabetes mellitus (DM) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). The aim of this article was to investigate cardiovascular outcomes in patients with DM presenting with ACS, stratified by PAD status. Data were derived from 4 randomized post-ACS trials (PLATO [Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes], APPRAISE-2 p Apixaban for Prevention of Acute Ischemic Events 2], TRILOGY [Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage], and TRACER [Thrombin Receptor Agonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome]). Using Cox regression analysis, we investigated major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), a composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke and the individual components of MACE and all-cause mortality in patients with DM, presenting with ACS, stratified by PAD status as the risk modifier. This study included 15,387 patients with a diagnosis of DM and ACS, of whom 1,751 had an additional diagnosis of PAD. PAD was associated with more than doubled rates of MACE (hazard ratio [HR] 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81 to 2.27), all-cause mortality (HR 2.48, 95% CI 2.14 to 2.87), cardiovascular mortality (HR 2.42, 95% CI 2.04 to 2.86), and MI (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.38). Patients with both PAD and DM were also more optimally treated with antihypertensive, antidiabetic, and statin medication at baseline. In conclusion, this analysis of 4 major post-ACS trials showed that patients with DM and PAD had a substantially higher risk of MACE, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and MI despite being optimally treated with guideline-based therapies., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Data are limited regarding the risk of cerebrovascular ischemic events and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Objective: Determine the efficacy and safety of apixaban or vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and aspirin or placebo according to prior stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or thromboembolism (TE)., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, multicenter, 2-by-2 factorial, randomized clinical trial, post hoc parallel analyses were performed to compare randomized treatment regimens according to presence or absence of prior stroke/TIA/TE using Cox proportional hazards models. Patients with AF, recent ACS or PCI, and planned use of P2Y12 inhibitors for 6 months or longer were included; 33 patients with missing data about prior stroke/TIA/TE were excluded., Interventions: Apixaban (5 mg or 2.5 mg twice daily) or VKA and aspirin or placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: Major or clinically relevant nonmajor (CRNM) bleeding., Results: Of 4581 patients included, 633 (13.8%) had prior stroke/TIA/TE. Patients with vs without prior stroke/TIA/TE were older; had higher CHA2DS2-VASC and HAS-BLED scores; and more frequently had prior bleeding, heart failure, diabetes, and prior oral anticoagulant use. Apixaban was associated with lower rates of major or CRNM bleeding and death or hospitalization than VKA in patients with (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.03) and without (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.82) prior stroke/TIA/TE. Patients without prior stroke/TIA/TE receiving aspirin vs placebo had higher rates of bleeding; this difference appeared less substantial among patients with prior stroke/TIA/TE (P = .01 for interaction). Aspirin was associated with numerically lower rates of death or ischemic events than placebo in patients with (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.42-1.20) and without (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.72-1.21) prior stroke/TIA/TE (not statistically significant)., Conclusions and Relevance: The safety and efficacy of apixaban compared with VKA was consistent with the AUGUSTUS findings, irrespective of prior stroke/TIA/TE. Aspirin increased major or CRNM bleeding, particularly in patients without prior stroke/TIA/TE. Although aspirin may have some benefit in patients with prior stroke, our findings support the use of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin for the majority of patients with AF and ACS and/or PCI, regardless of prior stroke/TIA/TE status., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02415400.

Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) have not been shown to benefit from statins. In a post hoc analysis, we evaluated outcomes in ODYSSEY OUTCOMES in patients with vs. without a history of HF randomized to the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor alirocumab or placebo., Methods and Results: Among 18 924 patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) receiving intensive or maximum-tolerated statin treatment, the primary outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was compared in patients with or without a history of HF. The pre-specified secondary outcome of hospitalization for HF was also analysed. Overall, 2815 (14.9%) patients had a history of HF. Alirocumab reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lipoprotein(a) similarly in patients with or without HF. Overall, alirocumab reduced MACE compared with placebo [hazard ratio (HR): 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78-0.93; P = 0.0001]. This effect was observed among patients without a history of HF (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.70-0.86; P < 0.0001), but not in those with a history of HF (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.97-1.40; P = 0.10) (Pinteraction = 0.0001). Alirocumab did not reduce hospitalization for HF, overall or in patients with or without prior HF., Conclusion: Alirocumab reduced MACE in patients without a history of HF but not in patients with a history of HF. Alirocumab did not reduce hospitalizations for HF in either group. Patients with a history of HF are a high-risk group that does not appear to benefit from PCSK9 inhibition after ACS., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The use of apixaban instead of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) as well as dropping aspirin results in less bleeding and comparable ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor., Objectives: The authors assessed the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens according to HAS-BLED and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores in AUGUSTUS (The Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention)., Methods: In AUGUSTUS, 4,614 patients were randomized in a 2-by-2 factorial design to open-label apixaban or VKA and blinded aspirin or placebo. The primary endpoint was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding over 6 months of follow-up. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess treatment effects by baseline HAS-BLED (≤2 vs ≥3) and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (≤2 vs ≥3) scores., Results: Of 4,386 (95.1%) patients with calculable scores, 66.8% had HAS-BLED ≥3 and 81.7% had CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥3. Bleeding rates were lower with apixaban than VKA irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.78 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59-0.88 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.23). Aspirin increased bleeding irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.36-2.56 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.47-2.23 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.88). Apixaban resulted in a lower risk of death or hospitalization than VKA without a significant interaction with baseline stroke risk (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.25 [CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≤2]; HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.73-0.94 [CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥3]; interaction P = 0.53)., Conclusions: Our findings support the use of apixaban and a P2Y 12 inhibitor without aspirin for most patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention, irrespective of a patient's baseline bleeding and stroke risk (NCT02415400)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The AUGUSTUS trial and this analysis were supported by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Dr Fanaroff has received research grants and consulting fees from the American Heart Association; and has received research grants from Boston Scientific. Dr Lopes has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic PLC, and Sanofi; and has received consulting fees from Amgen, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Goodman has received research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and/or speaker/consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, JAMP Pharma, Janssen/Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, and Valeo Pharma; and has received salary support/honoraria from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) (Chair), Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Centre for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, and PERFUSE Research Institute. Dr Thomas has received institutional research grants from Akili Interactive Labs Inc, Amgen Inc, Gilead, and Novartis. Dr Aronson is an employee of Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Windecker has received Institutional research and educational grants from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly/Daiichi-Sankyo, Medtronic, Novartis, and OrbusNeich; has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Medscape, Siemens Medical Solutions, Roivant Sciences Inc, and Sanofi; has performed consulting (no fees) for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; has received institutional consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Spectranetics/Phillips/Volcano Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Watermark Research; has served as an executive committee member for Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb; and has <1% equity in Claret Medical and Elixir Medical. Dr Granger has received research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, The Medicines Company, Medtronic Foundation, Medtronic Inc, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Abbvie, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, The Medicines Company, National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Sirtex, Verseon, Apple, Medscape, LLC, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Rho Pharmaceuticals. Dr Alexander has received institutional research grants and consulting fees/honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and CSL Behring; has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, CryoLife, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, Sanofi, VoluMetrix, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received consulting fees/honoraria from Pfizer, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, NovoNordisk, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Quantum Genetics, Teikoku Pharmaceuticals, VA Cooperative Studies Program, and Zafgen. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Managing antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is challenging and can be affected by prior oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment. We examined the relationship between prior OAC use and outcomes in the AUGUSTUS trial., Methods: This prespecified secondary analysis is from AUGUSTUS, an open-label, 2-by-2 factorial, RCT to evaluate the safety of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and aspirin versus placebo in patients with AF and ACS and/or PCI. The primary endpoint, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding and clinical outcomes were compared in patients receiving (n=2262) or not receiving (n=2352) an OAC prior to enrolment., Results: Patients with prior OAC use had more comorbidities, higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASC and HAS-BLED scores, and were more likely enrolled following elective PCI. There was no difference in major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding with or without prior OAC (30 days: 5.1% vs 5.9% (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06); 180 days: 13.5% vs 13.5% (aHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16)). Patients with prior OAC use had a lower risk of death or ischaemic events (30 days: 1.7% vs 2.8% (aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.92); 180 days: 5.4% vs 7.6% (aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88)). No interactions between randomised treatment (apixaban vs VKA, aspirin vs placebo) and prior OAC status were observed for outcomes, apart from apixaban (vs VKA) being associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction with prior OAC use (180 days: 2.0% vs 3.7% (aHR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.91()., Conclusions: In AUGUSTUS, prior OAC use was associated with fewer ischaemic events but not more bleeding. In patients with AF and ACS and/or undergoing PCI, clinicians can be assured that the trial results can be applied to patients regardless of their prior OAC status., Trial Registration Number: NCT02415400., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RW: Research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and/or speaker/consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, HLS Therapeutics, and Pfizer. PD: reports no conflicts of interest. RL: Institutional research grants and consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic PLC, and Sanofi; and consulting fees from Amgen, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Wojdyla: Nothing to report. RA: Employee of Bristol Myers Squibb. CBG: Research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, US Food & Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, The Medicines Company, Medtronic Foundation, Medtronic, and Novartis; consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Abbvie, Armetheon, Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, The Medicines Company, National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Sirtex, Verseon, Apple, Medscape, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Rho Pharmaceuticals. SW: Research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, BMS, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Johnson&Johnson, Medtronic, Querbet, Polares, Sanofi, Terumo, Sinomed. SW serves as unpaid advisory board member and/or unpaid member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, BMS, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Sinomed, V-Wave and Xeltis, but has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers. He is also member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigated-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration. SW is an unpaid member of the Pfizer Research Award selection committee in Switzerland. ANV: Consulting for Medtronic. DV: Research grants from BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, and Daiichi Sankyo; personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, and Daiichi Sankyo. Halvorsen: Speaker fees from Bayer, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Merck. AP: Research grants and consulting/speaker fees from Bayer, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, NovoNordisk; research grants from Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, CSL Behring. Bahit: Lecture fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer; consulting fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, and CSL Behring. RM: Institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly/Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, Novartis, and OrbusNeich; consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Medscape, Siemens Medical Solutions, Roivant Sciences, and Sanofi; consulting (no fees) from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; institutional consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Spectranetics/Phillips/Volcano Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Watermark Research; executive committee member for Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb; has <1% equity in Claret Medical and Elixir Medical. AP: Institutional research grants and consulting fees/honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and CSL Behring; institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, CryoLife, US Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, Sanofi, VoluMetrix, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and consulting fees/honoraria from Pfizer, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, NovoNordisk, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Quantum Genetics, Teikoku Pharmaceuticals, VA Cooperative Studies Program, and Zafgen. SG: Research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and/or speaker/consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier; and salary support/honoraria from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) Chair, Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre and PERFUSE Research Institute., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: In the AUGUSTUS trial (An Open-Label, 2×2 Factorial, Randomized Controlled, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban Versus Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin Versus Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), apixaban resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations than vitamin K antagonists, and aspirin caused more bleeding than placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor. We evaluated the risk-benefit balance of antithrombotic therapy according to kidney function., Methods: In 4456 patients, the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) formula was used to calculate baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The effect of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonists and aspirin versus placebo was assessed across kidney function categories by using Cox models. The primary outcome was International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included death or hospitalization and ischemic events (death, stroke, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis [definite or probable], or urgent revascularization). Creatinine clearance <30 mL/min was an exclusion criterion in the AUGUSTUS trial., Results: Overall, 30%, 52%, and 19% had an eGFR of >80, >50 to 80, and 30 to 50 mL·min -1 ·1.73 m -2 , respectively. At the 6-month follow-up, a total of 543 primary outcomes of bleeding, 1125 death or hospitalizations, and 282 ischemic events occurred. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, patients assigned apixaban had lower rates for all 3 outcomes across most eGFR categories without significant interaction. The absolute risk reduction with apixaban was most pronounced in those with an eGFR of 30 to 50 mL·min -1 ·1.73 m -2 for bleeding events with rates of 13.1% versus 21.3% (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84). Patients assigned aspirin had a higher risk of bleeding in all eGFR categories with an even greater increase among those with eGFR >80 mL·min -1 ·1.73 m -2 : 16.6% versus 5.6% (hazard ratio, 3.22; 95% CI, 2.19-4.74; P for interaction=0.007). The risk of death or hospitalization and ischemic events were comparable to aspirin and placebo across eGFR categories with hazard ratios ranging from 0.97 (95% CI, 0.76-1.23) to 1.28 (95% CI, 1.02-1.59) and from 0.75 (95% CI, 0.48-1.17) to 1.34 (95% CI, 0.81-2.22), respectively., Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of apixaban was consistent irrespective of kidney function, compared with warfarin, and in accordance with the overall trial results. The risk of bleeding with aspirin was consistently higher across all kidney function categories. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02415400.

Aims: Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduces cardiovascular risk irrespective of age, but the evidence is less strong for older patients., Methods and Results: This prespecified analysis from ODYSSEY OUTCOMES compared the effect of alirocumab vs. placebo in 18 924 patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to age. We examined the effect of assigned treatment on occurrence of the primary study outcome, a composite of coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization [major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE)] and all-cause death. Relative risk reductions were consistent for patients ≥65 vs. <65 years for MACE [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.91 vs. 0.89, 0.80-1.00; Pinteraction = 0.19] and all-cause death [HR 0.77, 0.62-0.95 vs. 0.94, 0.77-1.15; Pinteraction = 0.46], and consistent for MACE when dichotomizing at age 75 years (HR 0.85, 0.64-1.13 in ≥75 vs. 0.85, 0.78-0.93 in <75, Pinteraction = 0.19). When considering age as a continuous variable in regression models, advancing age increased risk of MACE, as well as the absolute reduction in MACE with alirocumab, with numbers-needed-to-treat for MACE at 3 years of 43 (25-186) at age 45 years, 26 (15-97) at age 75 years, and 12 (6-81) for those at age 85 years. Although adverse events were more frequent in older patients, there were no differences between alirocumab and placebo., Conclusion: In patients with recent ACS, alirocumab improves outcomes irrespective of age. Increasing absolute benefit but not harm with advancing age suggests that LDL-C lowering is an important preventive intervention for older patients after ACS., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: In AUGUSTUS (Open-Label, 2×2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), patients with atrial fibrillation and a recent acute coronary syndrome and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention had less bleeding with apixaban than vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and with placebo than aspirin. However, the number of ischemic events was numerically higher with placebo. The aim of this analysis is to assess the tradeoff of risk (bleeding) and benefit (ischemic events) over time with apixaban versus VKA and aspirin versus placebo., Methods: In AUGUSTUS, 4614 patients with atrial fibrillation and recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention on a P2Y 12 inhibitor were randomized to blinded aspirin or placebo and to open-label apixaban or VKA for 6 months. In a post hoc analysis, we compared the risk of 3 composite bleeding outcomes and 3 composite ischemic outcomes from randomization through 30 days and from 30 days to 6 months with apixaban and VKA and with aspirin and placebo., Results: Compared with VKA, apixaban had either a lower or a similar risk of bleeding and ischemic outcomes from randomization to 30 days and from 30 days to 6 months. From randomization to 30 days, aspirin caused more severe bleeding (absolute risk difference, 0.97% [95% CI, 0.23-1.70]) and fewer severe ischemic events (absolute risk difference, -0.91% [95% CI, -1.74 to -0.08]) than placebo. From 30 days to 6 months, the risk of severe bleeding was higher with aspirin than placebo (absolute risk difference, 1.25% [95% CI, 0.23-2.27]), whereas the risk of severe ischemic events was similar (absolute risk difference, -0.17% [95% CI, -1.33 to 0.98])., Conclusions: In patients with atrial fibrillation and recent acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention receiving a P2Y 12 inhibitor, apixaban is preferred over VKA. Use of aspirin immediately and for up to 30 days results in an equal tradeoff between an increase in severe bleeding and a reduction in severe ischemic events. After 30 days, aspirin continues to increase bleeding without significantly reducing ischemic events. These results inform shared, patient-centric decision making on the ideal duration of the use of aspirin after an acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02415400.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and abnormal glucose metabolism are associated with cardiovascular (CV) disease. We investigated the prevalence and prognostic importance of dysglycaemia in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Diabetes was defined as known diabetes or HbA1c ≥ 6.5% or non-fasting glucose ≥ 11.1 mmol/L on admission, prediabetes as HbA1c ≥ 5.7% but < 6.5%, and no diabetes as HbA1c < 5.7%. The primary endpoint was the composite of CV death, spontaneous myocardial infarction type 1 (sMI) or stroke at 12 months. Multivariable Cox regression models, adjusting for baseline characteristics, and biomarkers NT-proBNP and troponin I, were used to explore the association between glycaemia and outcome. On admission, 16,007 (86.1%) patients had HbA1c and/or glucose levels available and were subdivided into DM 38.5% (6160) (1501 patients had no previous DM diagnosis), prediabetes 38.8% (6210), and no DM 22.7% (3637). Kaplan Meier event rates at 12 months for CV death, sMI or stroke per subgroups were 14.5% (832), 9.0% (522), and 8.5% (293), respectively with multivariable adjusted HRs, versus no diabetes, for diabetes: 1.71 (1.50-1.95) and for prediabetes 1.03 (0.90-1.19). Corresponding event rates for CV death were 6.9% (391), 3.4% (195) and 3.0% (102), respectively, with adjusted HRs for patients with DM of: 1.92 (1.42-2.60) and for prediabetes 1.02 (0.79-1.32). Abnormal glucose metabolism is common in ACS patients, but only patients with definite DM have an increased CV risk, indicating that prediabetes is not immediately associated with worse CV outcomes.

Background: Heart failure (HF) following acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is associated with worse prognosis; however, the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor in patients with HF and if ticagrelor influences the risk of new-onset HF are unknown., Methods: We examined the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in patients with ACS in the randomized PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial subdivided by strata: (1) previous HF and/or clinical signs of HF on admission or (2) no HF on admission. The primary outcome was the combination of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke evaluated by multivariable Cox regression models. The safety outcome was major bleeding. New-onset HF was defined as an HF event after discharge in patients without previous HF., Results: Data were available in 18,556 patients, whom 2,862 (15.4%) patients had HF, including 1,584 (8.5%) patients with previous HF. Patients randomized to ticagrelor had lower risk of the composite end point regardless of HF status: hazard ratio (HR) 0.87 (95% CI: 0.73-1.03) in patients with HF and HR 0.84 (95% CI: 0.75-0.93) in patients with no HF (P = .76). Corresponding HR for major bleeding were HR 1.08 (95% CI: 0.87-1.34) and HR 1.03 (95% CI: 0.94-1.14) (P = .71). There was no difference in new-onset HF at 12 months between patients randomized to ticagrelor (4.1%, n = 278) or clopidogrel (4.0%, n = 276)., Conclusions: In patients with ACS, ticagrelor is more efficacious in protecting against new ischemic events and mortality than clopidogrel irrespective of the presence of HF. There is no difference between ticagrelor or clopidogrel treatment in new-onset HF post-ACS., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are known to have an increased risk of ischemic cardiovascular events. However, the influence of concomitant PAD on first and subsequent recurrent ischemic events after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains poorly characterized., Methods: We analyzed the combined data set from 4 randomized trials (PLATO, APPRAISE-2, TRA-CER, and TRILOGY ACS) in ACS for a follow-up length of 1 year. Using multivariable regression, we examined the association between PAD and major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Among patients with a nonfatal first event, we evaluated the incidence and type of a second recurrent event., Results: A total of 4,098 of 48,094 (8.5%) post-ACS patients had a history of PAD. The unadjusted frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events was 2-fold higher in patients with PAD (14.3% vs 7.5%) over a median (25th-75th) follow-up of 353 (223-365) days with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.63 (95% CI: 1.48-1.78; P < .001). The frequency of recurrent ischemic events among those patients with a first, nonfatal event was higher among those with PAD (40.0% vs 27.7%). The relative frequency of each event type (cardiovascular death, noncardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) within first and subsequent ischemic events was similar regardless of PAD status at baseline., Conclusions: Patients with PAD have a significantly higher risk of first and recurrent ischemic events in the post-ACS setting. These findings highlight the opportunity for improved treatments in patients with PAD who experience an ACS., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: Perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) has been associated with adverse outcome. Whether perioperative MI should be treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is unknown. We compared the effect of DAPT versus aspirin alone on short-term outcomes among patients with perioperative MI following CABG., Methods: We used data from 3 clinical trials that enrolled patients undergoing isolated CABG: PREVENT IV (2002-2003), MEND-CABG II (2004-2005), and RED-CABG (2009-2010) (n = 9117). Perioperative MI was defined as CK-MB >5 times the upper limit of normal within 24 h of surgery (n = 2052). DAPT was defined as DAPT given after surgery and prior to discharge. A Cox regression model was used to assess the association between DAPT and 30-day nonfatal MI, stroke, or mortality after adjustment for baseline covariates., Results: DAPT (n = 527) and aspirin alone (n = 1525) cohorts were similar in baseline comorbidities. Off pump bypass was used in 5.2% (n = 106) of patients. There was no difference in the 30-day composite of death, MI or stroke between patients receiving DAPT versus aspirin alone, nor in any of the individual components. There were fewer all-cause re-hospitalizations at 30 days following surgery among patients in the DAPT group (adjusted HR 0.71, CI 0.52-0.97, P = .033)., Conclusion: One-quarter of CABG patients who had perioperative MI were treated with DAPT. DAPT was not associated with a difference in MI, stroke, or mortality at 30 days, but was associated with fewer re-hospitalizations. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal antiplatelet regimen following perioperative MI. What is already known about this subject? Perioperative myocardial infarction portends poor outcome but optimal management is currently unclear. While dual antiplatelet therapy is standard of care for acute coronary syndrome, its role in perioperative myocardial infarction is unknown. What does this study add? Dual antiplatelet therapy use during perioperative myocardial infarction was not associated with a difference in myocardial infarction, stroke or mortality at 30 days. It was, however, associated with fewer re-hospitalizations at 30 days. How might this impact on clinical practice? Dual antiplatelet therapy may be a potential treatment option for perioperative myocardial infarction after CABG surgery. Further studies are needed to better understand treatment for this disease process., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Studies have suggested a relationship between higher baseline serum uric acid (sUA) levels and an elevated risk of subsequent ischemic cardiovascular outcomes among acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients; this relationship may be modified by a clinical history of gout and has not been studied in large patient cohorts. We sought to understand the effect of sUA and gout on ACS outcomes., Methods: Using PLATO and TRACER data on 27,959 ACS patients, we evaluated baseline sUA levels in relation to a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. We assessed interaction terms to determine if a baseline clinical diagnosis of gout modified this putative relationship; 46% (n=12,882) had sUA levels elevated >6.0 mg/dL., Results: Patients with elevated levels were more often male with a history of prior MI, diabetes, and heart failure compared with those with sUA <6.0 mg/dL. The unadjusted risk of the composite endpoint increased with corresponding elevations in sUA levels (per 1 mg/dL increase) (HR=1.23 [95% CI: 1.20-1.26]) above the statistical inflection point of 5.0 mg/dL. After adjustment, the association between sUA level and the composite outcome remained significant (HR=1.07 [95% CI: 1.04-1.10]), and baseline gout did not modify this relationship., Conclusions: In patients with ACS, increasing levels of sUA are associated with an elevated risk of cardiovascular events, regardless of a clinical diagnosis of gout. Further investigation is warranted to determine the mechanism behind this relationship and to delineate whether sUA is an appropriate therapeutic target to reduce cardiovascular risk., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) complicating percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. To date, no studies have evaluated the association of blood transfusion with AKI in patients undergoing PCI., Methods and Results: We used a retrospective cohort study of all patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI from CathPCI Registry (n=1 756 864). The primary outcome was AKI defined as the rise in serum creatinine post procedure ≥0.5 mg/dL or ≥25% above baseline values. AKI developed in 9.0% of study sample. Patients with AKI were older, more often women, and had high prevalence of comorbidities, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and advanced stages of chronic kidney disease at baseline. Blood transfusion was utilized in 2.2% of patients. In the overall sample, AKI developed in 35.1% of patients who received transfusion versus 8.4% of patients without transfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 4.87 [4.71-5.04]). In the subgroup of patients who sustained bleeding event and received transfusion, the rate of AKI was significantly increased across all preprocedure hemoglobin levels versus no blood transfusion. Similar findings were seen in the subgroup of patients with no bleeding event., Conclusions: Blood transfusion is strongly associated with AKI in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI. Further investigation is needed to determine whether a restrictive blood transfusion strategy might improve PCI outcomes by reducing the risk of AKI., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Importance: In the current therapeutic era, the risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) after non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS) has not been characterized completely., Objective: To determine the cumulative incidence of SCD during long-term follow-up after NSTE ACS, to develop a risk model and risk score for SCD after NSTE ACS, and to assess the association between recurrent events after the initial ACS presentation and the risk for SCD., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pooled cohort analysis merged individual data from 48 286 participants in 4 trials: the Apixaban for Prevention of Acute Ischemic Events 2 (APPRAISE-2), Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO), Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRACER), and Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trials. The cumulative incidence of SCD and cardiovascular death was examined according to time after NSTE ACS. Using competing risk and Cox proportional hazards models, clinical factors at baseline and after the index event that were associated with SCD after NSTE ACS were identified. Baseline factors were used to develop a risk model. Data were analyzed from January 2, 2014, to December 11, 2015., Main Outcomes and Measures: Sudden cardiac death., Results: Of the initial 48 286 patients, 37 555 patients were enrolled after NSTE ACS (67.4% men; 32.6% women; median [interquartile range] age, 65 [57-72] years). Among these, 2109 deaths occurred after a median follow-up of 12.1 months. Of 1640 cardiovascular deaths, 513 (31.3%) were SCD. At 6, 18, and 30 months, the cumulative incidence estimates of SCD were 0.79%, 1.65%, and 2.37%, respectively. Reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, older age, diabetes mellitus, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, higher heart rate, prior myocardial infarction, peripheral artery disease, Asian race, male sex, and high Killip class were significantly associated with SCD. A model developed to calculate the risk for SCD in trials with systematic collection of left ventricular ejection fraction had a C index of 0.77. An integer-based score was developed from this model and yielded a calculated SCD probability ranging from 0.1% to 56.7% (C statistic, 0.75). In a multivariable model that included time-dependent clinical events occurring after the index hospitalization for ACS, SCD was associated with recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio [HR], 2.95; 95% CI, 2.29-3.80; P < .001) and any hospitalization (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.98-3.03; P < .001), whereas coronary revascularization had a negative relationship with SCD (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: In the current therapeutic era, SCD accounts for about one-third of cardiovascular deaths after NSTE ACS. Risk stratification can be performed with good accuracy using commonly collected clinical variables. Clinical events occurring after the index hospitalization are underappreciated but important risk factors.

Background: Bleeding limits anticoagulant treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS)., Objectives: We investigated whether background concomitant antiplatelet therapy influences the effects of apixaban after ACS., Methods: This study examined high-risk ACS patients who were treated with aspirin or aspirin plus clopidogrel and who were randomized to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or placebo. In a post-hoc analysis, we assessed whether the effect of apixaban on efficacy and safety outcomes varied by the concomitant antiplatelet regimen by using simple Cox modeling and marginal structural models with propensity scores and antiplatelet therapy as a time-dependent covariate., Results: At baseline, of 7,364 patients, 16.3% (n = 1,202) were on aspirin alone, and 79.0% (n = 5,814) were on aspirin plus clopidogrel. A total of 19.2% (n = 1,415) switched antiplatelet therapy during follow-up. No differential effect of apixaban versus placebo was observed for the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke in patients taking aspirin (12.21 per 100 patient-years vs. 13.21 per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62 to 1.32) or aspirin plus clopidogrel (13.22 vs. 14.24; adjusted HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.14; p(interaction)= 0.84). Compared with placebo, apixaban increased Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction major bleeding in patients taking aspirin (1.48 vs. 0.25; adjusted HR: 6.62; 95% CI: 0.75 to 51.73) and in patients taking aspirin plus clopidogrel (2.58 vs. 1.02; adjusted HR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.34 to 4.45; p(interaction)= 0.41). Similar results were obtained with marginal structural models and in patients treated with and without percutaneous coronary intervention., Conclusions: Post-ACS treatment with apixaban versus placebo showed no efficacy, but it increased bleeding regardless of concomitant therapy with aspirin alone or aspirin plus clopidogrel. (Apixaban for Prevention of Acute Ischemic Events 2 [APPRAISE-2]; NCT00831441)., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Little is known about the incidence, predictors, or outcomes of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS). We aimed to determine the incidence and timing of ICH, characterize the location of ICH, and identify independent baseline predictors of ICH in NSTE ACS patients., Methods and Results: We pooled patient-level data from 4 contemporary antithrombotic therapy trials. Multivariable modeling identified independent predictors of ICH. ICHs were adjudicated by a clinical events committee. Of 37 815 patients, 135 (0.4%) had an ICH. The median (25th, 75th percentiles) follow-up was 332 (184, 434) days but differed across trials. Locations of ICH were intracerebral (50%), subdural (31%), subarachnoid (18.5%), and intraventricular (11%). Independent predictors of ICH were older age (HR per 10 years, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.91); prior stroke/transient ischemic attack; HR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.35), higher systolic blood pressure; HR per 10 mm Hg increase, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.18), and larger number of antithrombotic agents (HR per each additional agent, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.49 to 2.84). Of all ICHs, 45 (33%) were fatal., Conclusions: In patients with NSTE ACS enrolled in recent clinical trials of antithrombotic therapies, ICH was uncommon. Patients with older age, prior transient ischemic attack/stroke, higher systolic blood pressure, or larger number of antithrombotic agents were at increased risk. One-third of patients with ICH died. These data may be useful to trialists and data and safety monitoring committees for trial conduct and monitoring., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifiers: TRACER: NCT00527943, PLATO: NCT00391872, APPRAISE-2: NCT00831441, TRILOGY ACS: NCT00699998., (© 2015 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

Aims: To determine the effect of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS)., Methods and Results: PLATO (n = 18,624) was a multicentre, double-blind, randomized trial in ACS, that showed a 16% reduction in cardiovascular death (CV-death), myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel, without significant increase in overall major bleeding. We performed a post-hoc analysis of cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes in PLATO according to reported PAD status at baseline. At one year, CV death, MI or stroke occurred in 19.3% of patients with PAD (n = 1144) compared to 10.2% in patients without PAD (p < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier one year event rate for the primary endpoint of CV death, MI or stroke in PAD patients treated with ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel, was 18% vs 20.6% (HR: 0.85 95% CI 0.64-1.11; for PAD status by treatment interaction, p = 0.99) and for death from any cause 8.7% vs 11.9%, (HR: 0.74 95% CI 0.50-1.08; interaction p = 0.73). PLATO-defined major bleeding event rates at one year were 14.8% for ticagrelor compared to 17.9% for clopidogrel, (HR: 0.81 95% CI 0.59-1.10; interaction p = 0.09)., Conclusion: PAD patients have a high rate of ischaemic and bleeding events post ACS. The reduction of CV death, MI or stroke with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in PAD patients was consistent with the overall trial result although it did not reach statistical significance. Overall major bleeding was similar between the therapies., (© The European Society of Cardiology 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between sex and clinical outcomes and treatment-related complications in patients with ST-elevation or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS) randomized to treatment with ticagrelor or clopidogrel in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial., Methods: The associations between sex subgroup and the primary composite outcomes, secondary outcomes, and major bleeding endpoints as well as interaction of sex subgroup with treatment effects were analysed using Cox proportional-hazards models., Results: Sex was not significantly associated with the probability of the primary composite endpoint [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.02 (0.91-1.16)], or other adverse cardiovascular endpoints. Ticagrelor was similarly more effective than clopidogrel in reducing rates of the primary endpoint in women 11.2 vs. 13.2% [adjusted HR: 0.88 (0.74-1.06)] and men 9.4 vs. 11.1% [adjusted HR: 0.86 (0.76-0.97)] (interaction P-value 0.78), all-cause death in women 5.8 vs. 6.8% [adjusted HR: 0.90 (0.69-1.16)] and men 4.0 vs. 5.7% [adjusted HR: 0.80 (0.67-0.96)] (interaction P-value 0.49), and definite stent thrombosis in women 1.2 vs. 1.4% [adjusted HR: 0.71 (0.36-1.38)] and men 1.4 vs. 2.1% [adjusted HR: 0.63 (0.45-0.89)] (interaction P-value 0.78). The treatments did not differ for PLATO-defined overall major bleeding complications in women [adjusted HR: 1.01 (0.83-1.23)] or men [adjusted HR: 1.10 (0.98-1.24)]. Sex had no significant association with these outcomes (interactions P = 0.43-0.88)., Conclusion: Female sex is not an independent risk factor for adverse clinical outcomes in moderate-to-high risk ACS patients. Ticagrelor has a similar efficacy and safety profile in men and women., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The transition of patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease from the acute phase of the disease to the chronic stable atherosclerosis (CSA) phase has not been well characterized. We sought to compare ischemic and bleeding outcomes in hospitalized patients enrolled in clinical trials of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with patients enrolled in outpatient trials of CSA., Hypothesis: The risk for recurrent events will differ between the 2 populations., Methods: Patient-level outcome data were evaluated from 3 consecutive trials of patients with ACS with long-term follow-up and 2 trials of patients with CSA. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for ischemic and bleeding outcomes., Results: In total, 37 370 patients were included in these analyses. Of these, 28 489 (76.2%) were from ACS trials and 8881 (23.8%) from chronic trials. During the first year of follow-up, 1353 deaths, 1081 cardiovascular (CV) deaths, 2113 myocardial infarctions (MIs), and 397 strokes occurred across the trials. Six-month Kaplan-Meier event rates for CV death, MI, or stroke were higher in the ACS trials compared with the CSA trials (8.6% vs 2.7%), as were the 1-year CV death rate (3.6% vs 1.7%) and 1-year rates for GUSTO moderate or severe bleeding (6.0% vs 1.3%). Qualitatively, the Kaplan-Meier curves appear to show an early increased risk as well as a continued increased risk over time., Conclusions: Patients with ACS enrolled while in the hospital appear to have different risk profiles for ischemic and bleeding outcomes compared with outpatients enrolled with CSA, including those patients with ACS after the acute phase., (© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: This study sought to report the treatment effect of ticagrelor on myocardial infarction (MI) and the strategy for and impact of event adjudication in the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) trial., Background: In PLATO, ticagrelor reduced cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS)., Methods: A clinical events committee (CEC) prospectively defined and adjudicated all suspected MI events, on the basis of events reported by investigators and by triggers on biomarkers. Treatment comparisons used CEC-adjudicated data, and per protocol, excluded silent MI., Results: Overall, 1,299 (610 ticagrelor, 689 clopidogrel) MIs reported by the CEC occurred during the trial. Of these, 1,097 (504 ticagrelor, 593 clopidogrel) contributed to the primary composite endpoint. Site investigators reported 1,198 (580 ticagrelor, 618 clopidogrel) MIs. Ticagrelor significantly reduced overall MI rates (12-month CEC-adjudicated Kaplan-Meier rates: 5.8% ticagrelor, 6.9% clopidogrel; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 0.95). Nonprocedural MI (HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.01) and MI related to percutaneous coronary intervention or stent thrombosis tended to be lower with ticagrelor. MIs related to coronary artery bypass graft surgery were few, but numerical excess was observed in patients assigned ticagrelor. Analyses of overall MIs using investigator-reported data showed similar results but did not reach statistical significance (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.00)., Conclusions: In patients with ACS, ticagrelor significantly reduced the incidence of MI compared with clopidogrel, with consistent results across most MI subtypes. CEC procedures identified more MI endpoints compared with site investigators. (A Comparison of Ticagrelor [AZD6140] and Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [PLATO]; NCT00391872)., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We aimed to describe the effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on stent thrombosis in the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial., Methods and Results: Of 18 624 patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndromes, 11 289 (61%) had at least 1 intracoronary stent. Ticagrelor reduced stent thrombosis compared with clopidogrel across all definitions: definite, 1.37% (n=71) versus 1.93% (n=105; hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.90; P=0.0091); definite or probable, 2.21% (n=118) versus 2.87% (n=157; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.95; P=0.017); and definite, probable, and possible, 2.94% (n=154) versus 3.77 (n=201; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.95). The reduction in definite stent thrombosis was consistent regardless of acute coronary syndrome type, presence of diabetes mellitus, stent type (drug-eluting or bare metal stent), CYP2C19 genetic status, loading dose of aspirin, dose of clopidogrel before randomization, and use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors at randomization. The reduction in stent thrombosis with ticagrelor was numerically greater for late (>30 days; HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.96) and subacute (4 hours-30 days; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39-0.93) compared with acute (<24 hours; HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.43-2.05) stent thrombosis or for patients compliant to therapy (ie, taking blinded study treatment ≥80% of the time) compared with less compliant patients. Randomization to ticagrelor was a strong independent inverse predictor of definite stent thrombosis (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.88)., Conclusion: Ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel reduces the incidence of stent thrombosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes, with consistent benefit across a broad range of patient, stent, and treatment characteristics.

Objectives: The PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) angiographic substudy sought to compare the efficacy of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel with respect to angiographic outcomes before and after PCI in the setting of acute coronary syndrome., Background: Greater platelet inhibition has been associated with improved angiographic outcomes before and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Therefore, it was hypothesized that treatment with ticagrelor, which achieves more rapid, higher, and more consistent platelet inhibition, would be associated with improved angiographic outcomes when compared with those of clopidogrel treatment., Methods: The angiographic cohort consists of 2,616 patients drawn from the 18,624-patient PLATO trial. Clopidogrel naïve or pre-treated patients were randomized to 180 mg of ticagrelor or 300 mg of clopidogrel (75 mg for clopidogrel pre-treated patients). PCI patients were administered, as per treatment group: 1) an additional 90 mg of ticagrelor if >24 h following the initial loading dose; or 2) an optional further 300 mg of clopidogrel or placebo (total 600 mg) prior to PCI. The substudy primary endpoint was the incidence of post-PCI TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) myocardial perfusion grade 3 (TMPG 3) among patients who received a study drug prior to PCI., Results: In total, 21.3% of patients were pretreated with clopidogrel prior to randomization. There was a short time interval between randomization and PCI (median: 0.68 [interquartile range (IQR): 0.30 to 2.21] h) among all patients. Post-PCI TMPG 3 was similar between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups (47.1% vs. 46.9%; p = 0.96). Likewise, the following pre-PCI outcomes were similar in the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups, respectively: TMPG 3 (30.5% vs. 31.2%), TIMI flow grade 3 (37.1% vs. 39.3%), corrected TIMI frame count (median: 100 vs. 71 frames), TIMI thrombus grade 0 (24.1% vs. 27.6%), minimum lumen diameter (median: 0.3 [IQR: 0.0 to 0.6] vs. 0.3 [IQR: 0.0 to 0.6] mm) and percentage of diameter stenosis (median: 89 [IQR: 78 to 100] vs. 89 [IQR: 77 to 100])., Conclusions: Neither coronary flow nor myocardial perfusion, evaluated on coronary angiograms performed before or following PCI procedures within a few hours after the start of oral antiplatelet treatment in the setting of acute coronary syndromes, demonstrated a difference with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. (A Comparison of Ticagrelor [AZD6140] and Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [PLATO]; NCT00391872)., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome are at high risk of recurrent ischemic events and death, and for both antithrombotic therapy and catheter-based complications. This prespecified analysis investigates the effect and treatment-related complications of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elderly patients (≥75 years of age) with acute coronary syndrome compared with those <75 years of age., Methods and Results: The association between age and the primary composite outcome, as well as major bleeding were evaluated in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial using Cox proportional hazards. Similar models were used to evaluate the interaction of age with treatment effects. Hazard ratios were adjusted for baseline characteristics. The clinical benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel was not significantly different between patients aged ≥75 years of age (n=2878) and those <75 years of age (n=15 744) with respect to the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (interaction P=0.56), myocardial infarction (P=0.33), cardiovascular death (P=0.47), definite stent thrombosis (P=0.81), or all-cause mortality (P=0.76). No increase in PLATO-defined overall major bleeding with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel was observed in patients aged ≥75 years (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.27) or patients aged <75 years (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.15). Dyspnea and ventricular pauses were more common during ticagrelor than clopidogrel treatment, with no evidence of an age-by-treatment interaction., Conclusions: The significant clinical benefit and overall safety of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome patients in the PLATO cohort were not found to depend on age.

AIMS More intense platelet-directed therapy for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may increase bleeding risk. The aim of the current analysis was to determine the rate, clinical impact, and predictors of major and fatal bleeding complications in the PLATO study. METHODS AND RESULTS PLATO was a randomized, double-blind, active control international, phase 3 clinical trial in patients with acute ST elevation and non-ST-segment elevation ACS. A total of 18 624 patients were randomized to either ticagrelor, a non-thienopyridine, reversibly binding platelet P2Y(12) receptor antagonist, or clopidogrel in addition to aspirin. Patients randomized to ticagrelor and clopidogrel had similar rates of PLATO major bleeding (11.6 vs. 11.2%; P = 0.43), TIMI major bleeding (7.9 vs. 7.7%, P = 0.56) and GUSTO severe bleeding (2.9 vs. 3.1%, P = 0.22). Procedure-related bleeding rates were also similar. Non-CABG major bleeding (4.5 vs. 3.8%, P = 0.02) and non-procedure-related major bleeding (3.1 vs. 2.3%, P = 0.05) were more common in ticagrelor-treated patients, primarily after 30 days on treatment. Fatal bleeding and transfusion rates did not differ between groups. There were no significant interactions for major bleeding or combined minor plus major bleeding between treatment groups and age ≥75 years, weight <60 kg, region, chronic kidney disease, creatinine clearance <60 mL/min, aspirin dose >325 mg on the day of randomization, pre-randomization clopidogrel administration, or clopidogrel loading dose. CONCLUSION Ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel was associated with similar total major bleeding but increased non-CABG and non-procedure-related major bleeding, primarily after 30 days on study drug treatment. Fatal bleeding was low and did not differ between groups.

Background: Reduced renal function is associated with a poorer prognosis and increased bleeding risk in patients with acute coronary syndromes and may therefore alter the risk-benefit ratio with antiplatelet therapies. In the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel reduced the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke at 12 months but with similar major bleeding rates., Methods and Results: Central laboratory serum creatinine levels were available in 15 202 (81.9%) acute coronary syndrome patients at baseline, and creatinine clearance, estimated by the Cockcroft Gault equation, was calculated. In patients with chronic kidney disease (creatinine clearance <60 mL/min; n=3237), ticagrelor versus clopidogrel significantly reduced the primary end point to 17.3% from 22.0% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.90) with an absolute risk reduction greater than that of patients with normal renal function (n=11 965): 7.9% versus 8.9% (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.02). In patients with chronic kidney disease, ticagrelor reduced total mortality (10.0% versus 14.0%; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89). Major bleeding rates, fatal bleedings, and non-coronary bypass-related major bleedings were not significantly different between the 2 randomized groups (15.1% versus 14.3%; HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.30; 0.34% versus 0.77%; HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.15 to 1.54; and 8.5% versus 7.3%; HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.68). The interactions between creatinine clearance and randomized treatment on any of the outcome variables were nonsignificant., Conclusions: In acute coronary syndrome patients with chronic kidney disease, ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel significantly reduces ischemic end points and mortality without a significant increase in major bleeding but with numerically more non-procedure-related bleeding., Clinical Trial Registration: URL:http://www.clinicatrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00391872.

Background: Variation in and irreversibility of platelet inhibition with clopidogrel has led to controversy about its optimum dose and timing of administration in patients with acute coronary syndromes. We compared ticagrelor, a more potent reversible P2Y12 inhibitor with clopidogrel in such patients., Methods: At randomisation, an invasive strategy was planned for 13 408 (72.0%) of 18 624 patients hospitalised for acute coronary syndromes (with or without ST elevation). In a double-blind, double-dummy study, patients were randomly assigned in a one-to-one ratio to ticagrelor and placebo (180 mg loading dose followed by 90 mg twice a day), or to clopidogrel and placebo (300-600 mg loading dose or continuation with maintenance dose followed by 75 mg per day) for 6-12 months. All patients were given aspirin. The primary composite endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00391872., Findings: 6732 patients were assigned to ticagrelor and 6676 to clopidogrel. The primary composite endpoint occurred in fewer patients in the ticagrelor group than in the clopidogrel group (569 [event rate at 360 days 9.0%] vs 668 [10.7%], hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.94; p=0.0025). There was no difference between clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups in the rates of total major bleeding (691 [11.6%] vs 689 [11.5%], 0.99 [0.89-1.10]; p=0.8803) or severe bleeding, as defined according to the Global Use of Strategies To Open occluded coronary arteries, (198 [3.2%] vs 185 [2.9%], 0.91 [0.74-1.12]; p=0.3785)., Interpretation: Ticagrelor seems to be a better option than clopidogrel for patients with acute coronary syndromes for whom an early invasive strategy is planned., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background--Patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have largely been excluded from trials of antithrombotic therapies leaving little data to guide agent choice in this population. Methods and Results--The National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry was used to identify patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing PCI who received monotherapy with either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) (n=71 675). In hospital bleeding and mortality were compared and adjusted using the CathPCI Registry logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations with UFH as the reference. Bivalirudin was used in 51.3% of patients versus 48.7% for UFH. The use of bivalirudin decreased over time, and in 2014, UFH became the most frequently used. Patients receiving UFH were more likely to have an acute coronary syndrome presentation (37.8% versus 27.4%) or have cardiogenic shock (3.74% versus 1.98%). The observed rates for in hospital bleeding (7.0% versus 9.5%; adjusted odds ratio,0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.87) and mortality (2.6% versus 4.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.97) were lower for patients receiving bivalirudin compared with those receiving UFH. Conclusions--In patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing PCI, bivalirudin and UFH were used with similar frequency although the patterns of use changed over the enrollment period. Patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing PCI had a lower adjusted risk of in hospital outcomes with bivalirudin; however, given the observational nature of this analysis, a randomized trial is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background-In the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, a prespecified subgroup analysis showed a significant interaction between treatment and region (P=0.045), with less effect of ticagrelor in North America than in the rest of the world. Methods and Results-Reasons for the interaction were explored independently by 2 statistical groups. Systematic errors in trial conduct were investigated. Statistical approaches evaluated the likelihood of play of chance. Cox regression analyses were performed to quantify how much of the regional interaction could be explained by patient characteristics and concomitant treatments, including aspirin maintenance therapy. Landmark Cox regressions at 8 time points evaluated the association of selected factors, including aspirin dose, with outcomes by treatment. Systematic errors in trial conduct were ruled out. Given the large number of subgroup analyses performed and that a result numerically favoring clopidogrel in at least 1 of the 4 prespecified regions could occur with 32% probability, chance alone cannot be ruled out. More patients in the United States (53.6%) than in the rest of the world (1.7%) took a median aspirin dose =300 mg/d. Of 37 baseline and postrandomization factors explored, only aspirin dose explained a substantial fraction of the regional interaction. In adjusted analyses, both Cox regression with median maintenance dose and landmark techniques showed that, in patients taking low-dose maintenance aspirin, ticagrelor was associated with better outcomes compared with clopidogrel, with statistical superiority in the rest of the world and similar outcomes in the US cohort. Conclusions-The regional interaction could arise from chance alone. Results of 2 independently performed analyses identified an underlying statistical interaction with aspirin maintenance dose as a possible explanation for the regional difference. The lowest risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel is associated with a low maintenance dose of concomitant aspirin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe the incidence, timing, and characteristics of stent thrombosis and its consequences in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in the AUGUSTUS trial1 who received a coronary stent during their qualifying admission (acute coronary syndrome [ACS] or elective percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) and the randomized treatment effects of low-dose aspirin (compared with placebo) and apixaban (compared with vitamin K antagonist [VKA]) on the risk of stent thrombosis. We included patients who received a stent during their qualifying admission. We excluded patients with medically-managed ACS (n=1097) or an unknown qualifying index event (n=19). The protocol was approved by appropriate ethics committees; patients provided written informed consent prior to participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]