Search

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus who have not had a myocardial infarction or stroke are at high risk for cardiovascular events. Whether adding ticagrelor to aspirin improves outcomes in this population is unclear., Methods: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned patients who were 50 years of age or older and who had stable coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus to receive either ticagrelor plus aspirin or placebo plus aspirin. Patients with previous myocardial infarction or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding as defined by the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria., Results: A total of 19,220 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 39.9 months. Permanent treatment discontinuation was more frequent with ticagrelor than placebo (34.5% vs. 25.4%). The incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events (the primary efficacy outcome) was lower in the ticagrelor group than in the placebo group (7.7% vs. 8.5%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.99; P = 0.04), whereas the incidence of TIMI major bleeding was higher (2.2% vs. 1.0%; hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.94; P<0.001), as was the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (0.7% vs. 0.5%; hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.48; P = 0.005). There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.1%; hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.87 to 4.15; P = 0.11). The incidence of an exploratory composite outcome of irreversible harm (death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, fatal bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage) was similar in the ticagrelor group and the placebo group (10.1% vs. 10.8%; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.02)., Conclusions: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, those who received ticagrelor plus aspirin had a lower incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events but a higher incidence of major bleeding than those who received placebo plus aspirin. (Funded by AstraZeneca; THEMIS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01991795.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Importance: Physician behavior in response to knowledge of a patient's CYP2C19 clopidogrel metabolizer status is unknown., Objective: To investigate the association of mandatory reporting of CYP2C19 pharmacogenomic testing, provided to investigators with no direct recommendations on how to use these results, with changes in P2Y12 inhibitor use, particularly clopidogrel, in the Randomized Trial to Compare the Safety of Rivaroxaban vs Aspirin in Addition to Either Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor in Acute Coronary Syndrome (GEMINI-ACS-1) clinical trial., Design, Setting, and Participants: The GEMINI-ACS-1 trial compared rivaroxaban, 2.5 mg twice daily, with aspirin, 100 mg daily, plus open-label clopidogrel or ticagrelor (provided), in patients with recent acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The trial included 371 clinical centers in 21 countries and 3037 patients with ACS. Data were analyzed between May 2017 and February 2019., Interventions: Investigators were required to prestipulate their planned response to CYP2C19 metabolizer status. In response to a regulatory mandate, results for all patients were reported to investigators approximately 1 week after randomization., Main Outcomes and Measures: Reasons for switching P2Y12 inhibitors and occurrence of bleeding and ischemic events were collected., Results: Of 3037 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 62.8 [9.0] years; 2275 men [74.9%], and 2824 white race/ethnicity [93.0%]), investigators initially treated 1704 (56.1%) with ticagrelor and 1333 (43.9%) with clopidogrel. Investigators prestipulated that they would use CYP2C19 metabolizer status to change P2Y12 inhibitor in 48.5% of genotyped clopidogrel-treated patients (n = 642 of 1324) and 5.5% of genotyped ticagrelor-treated patients (n = 93 of 1692). P2Y12 inhibitor switching for any reason occurred in 197 patients and was more common in patients treated with ticagrelor (146 of 1704 [8.6%]) compared with clopidogrel (51 of 1333 [3.8%]). Of patients initially treated with ticagrelor, only 1 (0.1% overall; 0.7% of all who switched) was switched based on CYP2C19 status. Of patients initially treated with clopidogrel, 23 (1.7% overall,;45.1% of all who switched) were switched owing to metabolizer status. Of 48 patients (3.6%) with reduced metabolizer status treated initially with clopidogrel, 15 (31.3%) were switched based on metabolizer status, including 48.1% (13 of 27) in which switching was prestipulated., Conclusions and Relevance: Physicians were evenly split on how to respond to knowledge of CYP2C19 metabolizer status in clopidogrel-treated patients. Mandatory provision of this information rarely prompted P2Y12 inhibitor switching overall, including a minority of patients with reduced metabolizer status. These findings highlight the clinical equipoise among physicians regarding use of this information and the reluctance to use information from routine genotyping in the absence of definitive clinical trial data demonstrating the efficacy of this approach., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02293395.

Background: Patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel coronary disease (MVD) are at high risk for recurrent coronary events., Objectives: The authors investigated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus placebo in patients with MVD in the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 54) trial., Methods: Patients with a history of MI 1 to 3 years before inclusion in the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial were stratified in a pre-specified analysis based on the presence of MVD. The effect of ticagrelor (60 mg and 90 mg) on the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE]), as well as the composite of coronary death, MI, or stent thrombosis (coronary events), and on TIMI major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and fatal bleeding were evaluated over a median of 33 months., Results: A total of 12,558 patients (59.4%) had MVD. In the placebo arm, compared with patients without MVD, those with MVD were at higher risk for MACE (9.37% vs. 8.57%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR adj ]: 1.24; p = 0.026) and for coronary events (7.67% vs. 5.34%, HR adj : 1.49; p = 0.0005). In patients with MVD, ticagrelor reduced the risk of MACE (7.94% vs. 9.37%, HR: 0.82; p = 0.004) and coronary events (6.02% vs. 7.67%, HR: 0.76; p < 0.0001), including a 36% reduction in coronary death (HR: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.48 to 0.85; p = 0.002). In this subgroup, ticagrelor increased the risk of TIMI major bleeding (2.52% vs. 1.08%, HR: 2.67; p < 0.0001), but not ICH or fatal bleeds., Conclusions: Patients with prior MI and MVD are at increased risk of MACE and coronary events, and experience substantial relative and absolute risk reductions in both outcomes with long-term ticagrelor treatment relative to those without MVD. Ticagrelor increases the risk of TIMI major bleeding, but not ICH or fatal bleeding. For patients with prior MI and MVD, ticagrelor is an effective option for long-term antiplatelet therapy. (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events [e.g., Death From Heart or Vascular Disease, Heart Attack, or Stroke] in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin [PEGASUS]; NCT01225562)., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin + a P2Y12 inhibitor is recommended for at least 12 months for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), with shorter durations considered for patients with increased bleeding risk. However, there are no decision support tools available to predict an individual patient's bleeding risk during DAPT treatment in the post-ACS setting., Methods: To develop a longitudinal bleeding risk prediction model, we analy sed 9240 patients with unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial, who were managed without revasculari sation and treated with DAPT for a median of 14.8 months., Results: We identified 10 significant baseline predictors of non-coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)-related Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries (GUSTO) severe/life-threatening/moderate bleeding: age, sex, weight, NSTEMI (vs unstable angina), angiography performed before randomi sation, prior peptic ulcer disease, creatinine, systolic blood pressure, haemoglobin and treatment with beta-blocker. The five significant baseline predictors of Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding included age, sex, angiography performed before randomi sation, creatinine and haemoglobin. The models showed good predictive accuracy with Therneau's C- indices: 0.78 (SE = 0.024) for the GUSTO model and 0.67 (SE = 0.023) for the TIMI model. Internal validation with bootstrapping gave similar C -indices of 0.77 and 0.65, respectively. External validation demonstrated an attenuated C -index for the GUSTO model (0.69) but not the TIMI model (0.68)., Conclusions: Longitudinal bleeding risks during treatment with DAPT in patients with ACS can be reliably predicted using selected baseline characteristics. The TRILOGY ACS bleeding models can inform risk -benefit considerations regarding the duration of DAPT following ACS., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00699998., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JA: consulting fees: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi-Aventis and Eli Lilly. Lecture fees: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Merck, Sharp & Dohme and Sanofi-Aventis. Research funding: AstraZeneca. BN and MN: none. DLB: advisory board: Cardax, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Medscape Cardiology, Regado Biosciences. Board of directors: Boston VA Research Institute, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care. Chair: American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines Steering Committee. Data monitoring committees: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Population Health Research Institute. Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees), Harvard Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committee), HMP Communications (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Associate Editor), Population Health Research Institute (clinical trial steering committee), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), WebMD (CME steering committees). Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor). Research funding: Amarin, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Ethicon, Forest Laboratories, Ischemix, Medtronic, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, St. Jude Medical, The Medicines Company. Trustee: American College of Cardiology. Unfunded research: FlowCo, PLx Pharma, Takeda. SGG: consulting fees: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Merck and Sanofi-Aventis. Research grants: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Sanofi-Aventis. All other disclosures (unrelated to this manuscript) are listed at: http://www.vigour.ualberta.ca/About/ConflictofInterest.aspx. PT: research grants: Merck, Sanofi-Aventis, CSL and Regeneron. Consulting payments: Merck and CSL. KWM: grant funding: Medtronic and St. Jude. Consulting payments: American College of Cardiology, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cubist, Eli Lilly, Elsevier, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson and Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Omthera, Portola, Spring Publishing, The Medicines Company and WebMD. JHC: consulting payments: Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp and Dohme, AstraZeneca and Merck. HDW: grant support from Sanofi-Aventis, Eli Lilly, The Medicines Company, NIH, Pfizer, Roche, Johnson & Johnson, Schering-Plough, Merck Sharp & Dohme, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Advisory boards: Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Roche and Regado Biosciences. KAAF: research grants: Lilly, Bayer, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca. Speakers bureau: Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and Sanofi-Aventis. Consulting/other: Lilly, Bayer, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly. DP: research grants: Eli Lilly and the Medtronic Foundation. Honoraria: Eli Lilly. KJW: employee and minor stockholder of Eli Lilly and Company. PWA: consulting fees: Eli Lilly, Hoffmann-La Roche, Merck, Axio Research and Orexigen. Grant support: Boehringer Ingelheim, Hoffmann-La Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Scios, Ortho Biotech, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Amylin Pharmaceuticals and Merck. Payment for developing educational presentations: AstraZeneca and Eli Lilly and Company. EMO: grant support and travel expenses: Daiichi Sankyo and Eli Lilly. Consulting fees: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Liposcience, Merck, Pozen, Hoffmann-La Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, The Medicines Company and Web MD. Grant support: Gilead Sciences. Lecture fees: Gilead Sciences, Boehringer Ingelheim and The Medicines Company. MTR: research funding: Eli Lilly, Sanofi-Aventis, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association and the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Foundation. Consulting payments or honoraria: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Amgen, Pri-Med and Elsevier Publishers. All conflicts of interest are listed at https://www.dcri.org/about-us/conflict-of-interest., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

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% CIs) 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., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The relationship between "on-treatment" low platelet reactivity and longitudinal risks of major bleeding dual antiplatelet therapy following acute coronary syndromes remains uncertain, especially for patients who do not undergo percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods and Results: We analyzed 2428 medically managed acute coronary syndromes patients from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial who had serial platelet reactivity measurements (P2Y 12 reaction units; PRUs) and were randomized to aspirin+prasugrel versus aspirin+clopidogrel for up to 30 months. Contal's method was used to determine whether a cut point for steady-state PRU values could distinguish high versus low bleeding risk using 2-level composites: Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) severe/life-threatening or moderate bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and non-CABG Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding. Exploratory analyses used 3-level composites that incorporated mild and minimal GUSTO and TIMI events. Continuous measures of PRUs (per 10-unit decrease) were not independently associated with the 2-level GUSTO (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.06) or TIMI composites (1.02; 0.98-1.07). Furthermore, no PRU cut point could significantly distinguish bleeding risk using the 2-level composites. However, the PRU cut point of 75 differentiated bleeding risk with the 3-level composites of GUSTO (26.5% vs 12.6%; adjusted HR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.77-2.94; P<0.001) and TIMI bleeding events (25.9% vs 12.2%; adjusted HR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.78-2.97; P<0.001)., Conclusions: Among medically managed non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes patients receiving prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, PRU values were not significantly associated with the long-term risk of major bleeding events, suggesting that low on-treatment platelet reactivity does not independently predict serious bleeding risk., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00699998., (© 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

Aims: We aimed to study the relationship of chronic kidney disease stages with long-term ischemic and bleeding outcomes in medically managed acute coronary syndrome patients and the influence of more potent antiplatelet therapies on platelet reactivity by chronic kidney disease stage., Methods and Results: We estimated creatinine clearance for 8953 medically managed acute coronary syndrome patients enrolled in the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes trial. Patients were classified by chronic kidney disease stage: normal renal function/mild (creatinine clearance >60 mL/min); moderate (creatinine clearance 30-60 mL/min); severe (creatinine clearance <30 mL/min). Kaplan-Meier event rates through 30 months were evaluated for ischemic (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; primary end point) and bleeding (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction bleeding) outcomes by chronic kidney disease stage and treatment allocation (prasugrel vs. clopidogrel) within each stage. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for moderate and for severe chronic kidney disease vs. normal/mild chronic kidney disease were estimated. Platelet reactivity at 30 days was assessed in a subset of patients (n = 1947). The majority of patients were in the normal/mild chronic kidney disease group (67%), followed by moderate chronic kidney disease (29%) and severe chronic kidney disease (4%). The incidence of ischemic and bleeding outcomes increased sharply across chronic kidney disease stages and no significant treatment interactions were observed. The adjusted risk of the primary end point increased across chronic kidney disease stages (moderate vs. normal/mild: hazard ratio 1.26; 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.46; severe vs. normal/mild: hazard ratio 1.60; 95% confidence interval 1.25-2.04). Platelet reactivity was lower in patients treated with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel, across all three chronic kidney disease stages., Conclusions: Among medically managed acute coronary syndrome patients, the long-term risks of ischemic and bleeding outcomes increased markedly with worse chronic kidney disease stages. Despite lower platelet reactivity of prasugrel compared with clopidogrel, no treatment interactions for ischemic and bleeding outcomes were observed., (© The European Society of Cardiology 2015.)

We evaluated the interaction between protease-activated receptor-1 antagonist vorapaxar and concomitant glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes who underwent PCI. In Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome trial, 12,944 patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes were randomized to vorapaxar or placebo. Administration of GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors was allowed at the treating physician's discretion. We investigated whether use of GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors modified vorapaxar's effect on non-coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)-related bleeding at 7 days and ischemic events at 30 days. In total, 7,455 patients underwent PCI during index hospitalization. Of these, 2,023 patients (27.1%) received inhibitors and 5,432 (72.9%) did not. Vorapaxar was associated with a numerically higher rate of non-CABG-related moderate/severe Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries (GUSTO) bleeding at 7 days compared with placebo in those who did (1.3% vs 1.0%) and did not (0.6% vs 0.4%) receive GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors. Ischemic end point rates at 30 days were not significantly lower with vorapaxar versus placebo. Increased rates of non-CABG GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding were observed in patients who received GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors versus those who did not (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 7.35 in placebo arm; adjusted HR 2.02, 95% CI 0.62 to 6.61 in vorapaxar arm) and in those who received vorapaxar versus placebo (adjusted HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 6.56 in the GP IIb/IIIa group; adjusted HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.44 to 4.07 in the no-GP IIb/IIIa group). No interaction was found between vorapaxar and inhibitor use up to 7 days (P interaction = 0.89) nor at the end of the treatment (P interaction = 0.74); however, the event rate was low. Also, no interaction was observed for efficacy end points after PCI at 30 days or at the end of the treatment. In conclusion, GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor use plus dual antiplatelet therapy in a population with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction planned for PCI was frequent but did not interact with vorapaxar's efficacy or safety. Nonetheless, GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors and vorapaxar were associated with increased bleeding risk, and their combined use may result in additive effects on bleeding rates., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The optimal platelet inhibition strategy for ACS patients managed without revascularization is unknown. We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in the non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) subgroup of the PLATO trial, in the total cohort, and in the subgroups managed with and without revascularization within 10 days of randomization., Methods and Results: We performed a retrospective analysis of the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke. Among 18 624 PLATO patients, 11 080 (59%) were categorized as NSTE-ACS at randomization. During the initial 10 days, 74% had angiography, 46% PCI, and 5% CABG. In NSTE-ACS patients, the primary endpoint was reduced with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel [10.0 vs. 12.3%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.74-0.93], as was myocardial infarction (6.6 vs. 7.7%; HR 0.86; 95% CI = 0.74-0.99), cardiovascular death (3.7 vs. 4.9%; HR 0.77; 95% CI = 0.64-0.93), and all-cause death (4.3 vs. 5.8%; HR 0.76; 95% CI = 0.64-0.90). Major bleeding rate was similar between treatment groups (13.4 vs. 12.6%; HR 1.07; 95% CI = 0.95-1.19), but ticagrelor was associated with an increase in non-CABG major bleeding (4.8 vs. 3.8%; HR 1.28; 95% CI = 1.05-1.56). Within the first 10 days, 5366 (48.4%) patients were managed without revascularization. Regardless of revascularization or not, ticagrelor consistently reduced the primary outcome (HR 0.86 vs. 0.85, interaction P = 0.93), and all-cause death (HR 0.75 vs. 0.73, interaction P = 0.89) with no significant increase in overall major bleeding., Conclusion: In patients with NSTE-ACS, benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel in reducing ischaemic events and total mortality was consistent with the overall PLATO trial, independent of actually performed revascularization during the initial 10 days., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Extensive coronary artery disease (CAD) is associated with higher risk. In this substudy of the PLATO trial, we examined the effects of randomized treatment on outcome events and safety in relation to the extent of CAD., Methods: Patients were classified according to presence of extensive CAD (defined as 3-vessel disease, left main disease, or prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery). The trial's primary and secondary end points were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression., Results: Among 15,388 study patients for whom the extent of CAD was known, 4,646 (30%) had extensive CAD. Patients with extensive CAD had more high-risk characteristics and experienced more clinical events during follow-up. They were less likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (58% vs 79%, P < .001) but more likely to undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery (16% vs 2%, P < .001). Ticagrelor, compared with clopidogrel, reduced the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients with extensive CAD (14.9% vs 17.6%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.85 [0.73-0.98]) similar to its reduction in those without extensive CAD (6.8% vs 8.0%, HR 0.85 [0.74-0.98], Pinteraction = .99). Major bleeding was similar with ticagrelor vs clopidogrel among patients with (25.7% vs 25.5%, HR 1.02 [0.90-1.15]) and without (7.3% vs 6.4%, HR 1.14 [0.98-1.33], Pinteraction = .24) extensive CAD., Conclusions: Patients with extensive CAD have higher rates of recurrent cardiovascular events and bleeding. Ticagrelor reduced ischemic events to a similar extent both in patients with and without extensive CAD, with bleeding rates similar to clopidogrel., (Published by Mosby, Inc.)

Background: Patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) who present with an acute coronary syndrome have a high risk for recurrent events. Whether intensive antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor might be beneficial compared with clopidogrel is unknown. In this substudy of the PLATO trial, we studied the effects of randomized treatment dependent on history of CABG., Methods: Patients participating in PLATO were classified according to whether they had undergone prior CABG. The trial's primary and secondary end points were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression., Results: Of the 18,613 study patients, 1,133 (6.1%) had prior CABG. Prior-CABG patients had more high-risk characteristics at study entry and a 2-fold increase in clinical events during follow-up, but less major bleeding. The primary end point (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) was reduced to a similar extent by ticagrelor among patients with (19.6% vs 21.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.91 [0.67, 1.24]) and without (9.2% vs 11.0%; adjusted HR, 0.86 [0.77, 0.96]; P(interaction) = .73) prior CABG. Major bleeding was similar with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel among patients with (8.1% vs 8.7%; adjusted HR, 0.89 [0.55, 1.47]) and without (11.8% vs 11.4%; HR, 1.08 [0.98, 1.20]; P(interaction) = .46) prior CABG., Conclusions: Prior-CABG patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome are a high-risk cohort for death and recurrent cardiovascular events but have a lower risk for major bleeding. Similar to the results in no-prior-CABG patients, ticagrelor was associated with a reduction in ischemic events without an increase in major bleeding., (© 2013.)

Context: The relationship of platelet function testing measurements with outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) initially managed medically without revascularization is unknown., Objective: To characterize the differences and evaluate clinical outcomes associated with platelet reactivity among patients with ACS treated with clopidogrel or prasugrel., Design, Setting, and Patients: Patients with medically managed unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were enrolled in the TRILOGY ACS trial (2008 to 2011) comparing clopidogrel vs prasugrel. Of 9326 participants, 27.5% were included in a platelet function substudy: 1286 treated with prasugrel and 1278 treated with clopidogrel., Interventions: Aspirin with either prasugrel (10 or 5 mg/d) or clopidogrel (75 mg/d); those 75 years or older and younger than 75 years but who weighed less than 60 kg received a 5-mg prasugrel maintenance dose., Main Outcome Measures: Platelet reactivity, measured in P2Y12 reaction units (PRUs), was performed at baseline, at 2 hours, and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 30 months after randomization. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke through 30 months., Results: Among participants younger than 75 years and weighing 60 kg or more, the median PRU values at 30 days were 64 (interquartile range [IQR], 33-128) in the prasugrel group vs 200 (IQR, 141-260) in the clopidogrel group (P < .001), a difference that persisted through all subsequent time points. For participants younger than 75 years and weighing less than 60 kg, the median 30-day PRU values were 139 (IQR, 86-203) for the prasugrel group vs 209 (IQR, 148-283) for the clopidogrel group (P < .001), and for participants 75 years or older, the median PRU values were 164 (IQR, 105-216) for the prasugrel group vs 222 (IQR, 148-268) for the clopidogrel group (P < .001). At 30 months the rate of the primary efficacy end point was 17.2% (160 events) in the prasugrel group vs 18.9% (180 events) in the clopidogrel group (P = .29). There were no significant differences in the continuous distributions of 30-day PRU values for participants with a primary efficacy end point event after 30 days (n = 214) compared with participants without an event (n = 1794; P = .07) and no significant relationship between the occurence of the primary efficacy end point and continuous PRU values (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for increase of 60 PRUs, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96-1.11; P = .44). Similar findings were observed with 30-day PRU cut points used to define high on-treatment platelet reactivity-PRU more than 208 (adjusted HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.89-1.52, P = .28) and PRU more than 230 (adjusted HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.90-1.61; P = .21)., Conclusions: Among patients with ACS without ST-segment elevation and initially managed without revascularization, prasugrel was associated with lower platelet reactivity than clopidogrel, irrespective of age, weight, and dose. Among those in the platelet substudy, no significant differences existed between prasugrel vs clopidogrel in the occurence of the primary efficacy end point through 30 months and no significant association existed between platelet reactivity and occurrence of ischemic outcomes., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00699998.

Background: The effect of intensified platelet inhibition for patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation who do not undergo revascularization has not been delineated., Methods: In this double-blind, randomized trial, in a primary analysis involving 7243 patients under the age of 75 years receiving aspirin, we evaluated up to 30 months of treatment with prasugrel (10 mg daily) versus clopidogrel (75 mg daily). In a secondary analysis involving 2083 patients 75 years of age or older, we evaluated 5 mg of prasugrel versus 75 mg of clopidogrel., Results: At a median follow-up of 17 months, the primary end point of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke among patients under the age of 75 years occurred in 13.9% of the prasugrel group and 16.0% of the clopidogrel group (hazard ratio in the prasugrel group, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.05; P=0.21). Similar results were observed in the overall population. The prespecified analysis of multiple recurrent ischemic events (all components of the primary end point) suggested a lower risk for prasugrel among patients under the age of 75 years (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.00; P=0.04). Rates of severe and intracranial bleeding were similar in the two groups in all age groups. There was no significant between-group difference in the frequency of nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events, except for a higher frequency of heart failure in the clopidogrel group., Conclusions: Among patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation, prasugrel did not significantly reduce the frequency of the primary end point, as compared with clopidogrel, and similar risks of bleeding were observed. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo; TRILOGY ACS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699998.).

Background: Habitual smoking has been associated with increased platelet reactivity, increased risk of thrombotic complications and greater efficacy of clopidogrel therapy over placebo. In the PLATO trial, ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) reduced the primary composite end point of vascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke, without increasing overall rates of major bleeding. We evaluated the results in relation to smoking habits., Methods: Interactions between habitual smokers (n = 6678) and in ex/nonsmokers (n = 11,932) and the effects of randomized treatments on ischemic and bleeding outcomes were evaluated by Cox regression analyses., Results: Habitual smokers had an overall lower risk profile and more often ST-elevation ACS. After adjustment for baseline imbalances, habitual smoking was associated with a higher incidence of definite stent thrombosis (adjusted HR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.07-1.94]); there were no significant associations with other ischemic or bleeding end points. The effects of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel were consistent for all outcomes regardless of smoking status. Thus, there was a similar reduction in the primary composite end point for habitual smokers (adjusted HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.68-1.00]) and ex/nonsmokers (adjusted HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.79-1.00]) (interaction P = .50), and in definite stent thrombosis for habitual smokers (adjusted HR, 0.59 [0.39-0.91]) and ex/nonsmokers (adjusted HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.45-1.07]) (interaction P = .61)., Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with ACS, habitual smoking is associated with a greater risk of subsequent stent thrombosis. The reduction of vascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and stent thrombosis by ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel is consistent regardless of smoking habits., (Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Translational platelet function investigations performed in the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-treated population receiving clopidogrel have identified high platelet reactivity to ADP (HPR) as a major risk factor for both acute as well as long-term ischaemic event occurrence, including stent thrombosis. Recent studies have highlighted the relation of single nucleotide polymorphisms of genes involved in clopidogrel absorption and metabolism to reduced pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to clopidogrel. CYP 2C19 loss-of-function (LoF) allele carriage has been associated with increased thrombotic risk in the PCI population. However, there is no information regarding the utility of platelet function testing to predict outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease and in medically managed patients with acute coronary syndromes. Additionally, few studies have included longitudinal assessment of platelet function to assess a potential time-dependent relation to ischaemic event occurrence and no phase-III antiplatelet-therapy trial has included a large enough platelet function sub-study to examine the relation between on-treatment platelet reactivity, bleeding, and ischaemic event occurrence. Therefore, futher studies are needed to delineate the role of platelet function testing across the spectrum of symptomatic coronary artery disease.

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.).

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: Apixaban, an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor, may reduce the risk of recurrent ischemic events when added to antiplatelet therapy after an acute coronary syndrome., Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial comparing apixaban, at a dose of 5 mg twice daily, with placebo, in addition to standard antiplatelet therapy, in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome and at least two additional risk factors for recurrent ischemic events., Results: The trial was terminated prematurely after recruitment of 7392 patients because of an increase in major bleeding events with apixaban in the absence of a counterbalancing reduction in recurrent ischemic events. With a median follow-up of 241 days, the primary outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke occurred in 279 of the 3705 patients (7.5%) assigned to apixaban (13.2 events per 100 patient-years) and in 293 of the 3687 patients (7.9%) assigned to placebo (14.0 events per 100 patient-years) (hazard ratio with apixaban, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.11; P=0.51). The primary safety outcome of major bleeding according to the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) definition occurred in 46 of the 3673 patients (1.3%) who received at least one dose of apixaban (2.4 events per 100 patient-years) and in 18 of the 3642 patients (0.5%) who received at least one dose of placebo (0.9 events per 100 patient-years) (hazard ratio with apixaban, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.50 to 4.46; P=0.001). A greater number of intracranial and fatal bleeding events occurred with apixaban than with placebo., Conclusions: The addition of apixaban, at a dose of 5 mg twice daily, to antiplatelet therapy in high-risk patients after an acute coronary syndrome increased the number of major bleeding events without a significant reduction in recurrent ischemic events. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; APPRAISE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00831441.).

Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes in patients in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial who at randomisation were planned for a non-invasive treatment strategy., Design: Pre-specified analysis of pre-randomisation defined subgroup of prospective randomised clinical trial., Setting: 862 centres in 43 countries., Participants: 5216 (28%) of 18,624 patients admitted to hospital for acute coronary syndrome who were specified as planned for non-invasive management., Interventions: Randomised treatment with ticagrelor (n=2601) versus clopidogrel (2615)., Main Outcome Measurements: Primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; their individual components; and PLATO defined major bleeding during one year., Results: 2183 (41.9%) patients had coronary angiography during their initial hospital admission, 1065 (20.4%) had percutaneous coronary intervention, and 208 (4.0%) had coronary artery bypass surgery. Cumulatively, 3143 (60.3%) patients had been managed non-invasively by the end of follow-up. The incidence of the primary end point was lower with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel (12.0% (n=295) v 14.3% (346); hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.00; P=0.04). Overall mortality was also lower (6.1% (147) v 8.2% (195); 0.75, 0.61 to 0.93; P=0.01). The incidence of total major bleeding (11.9% (272) v 10.3% (238); 1.17, 0.98 to 1.39; P=0.08) and non-coronary artery bypass grafting related major bleeding (4.0% (90) v 3.1% (71); 1.30, 0.95 to 1.77; P=0.10) was numerically higher with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel., Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndrome initially intended for non-invasive management, the benefits of ticagrelor over clopidogrel were consistent with those from the overall PLATO results, indicating the broad benefits of P2Y12 inhibition with ticagrelor regardless of intended management strategy., Trial Registration: Clinical trials NCT00391872.

Aims: patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have high platelet reactivity and are at increased risk of ischaemic events and bleeding post-acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, ticagrelor reduced the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, but with similar rates of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel. We aimed to investigate the outcome with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with DM or poor glycaemic control., Methods and Results: we analysed patients with pre-existing DM (n = 4662), including 1036 patients on insulin, those without DM (n = 13 951), and subgroups based on admission levels of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c; n = 15 150). In patients with DM, the reduction in the primary composite endpoint (HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.76-1.03), all-cause mortality (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66-1.01), and stent thrombosis (HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.36-1.17) with no increase in major bleeding (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.81-1.12) with ticagrelor was consistent with the overall cohort and without significant diabetes status-by-treatment interactions. There was no heterogeneity between patients with or without ongoing insulin treatment. ticagrelor reduced the primary endpoint, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis in patients with HbA1c above the median (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.91; HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.65-0.93; and HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39-1.00, respectively) with similar bleeding rates (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86-1.12)., Conclusion: ticagrelor, when compared with clopidogrel, reduced ischaemic events in ACS patients irrespective of diabetic status and glycaemic control, without an increase in major bleeding events.

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: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, is the standard antithrombotic treatment following acute coronary syndromes. The factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban reduced mortality and ischaemic events when added to DAPT, but caused increased bleeding. The safety of a dual pathway antithrombotic therapy approach combining low-dose rivaroxaban (in place of aspirin) with a P2Y12 inhibitor has not been assesssed in acute coronary syndromes. We aimed to assess rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily versus aspirin 100 mg daily, in addition to clopidogrel or ticagrelor (chosen at investigator discretion before randomisation), for patients with acute coronary syndromes started within 10 days after presentation and continued for 6-12 months.Methods: In this double-blind, multicentre, randomised trial (GEMINI-ACS-1) done at 371 clinical centres in 21 countries, eligible patients were older than 18 years with unstable angina, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), with positive cardiac biomarkers and either ischaemic electrocardiographic changes or an atherosclerotic culprit lesion identified during angiography. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) within 10 days after admission for the index acute coronary syndromes event to either aspirin or rivaroxaban based on a computer-generated randomisation schedule. Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks with size of four and was stratified based on the background P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or ticagrelor) intended to be used at the time of randomisation. Investigators and patients were masked to treatment assignment. Patients received a minimum of 180 days of double-blind treatment with rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily or aspirin 100 mg daily. The choice of clopidogrel or ticagrelor during trial conduct was not randomised and was based on investigator preference. The primary endpoint was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) clinically significant bleeding not related to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; major, minor, or requiring medical attention) up to day 390. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02293395.Findings: Between April 22, 2015, and Oct 14, 2016, 3037 patients with acute coronary syndromes were randomly assigned; 1518 to receive aspirin and 1519 to receive rivaroxaban. 1704 patients (56%) were in the ticagrelor and 1333 (44%) in the clopidogrel strata. Median duration of treatment was 291 days (IQR 239-354). TIMI non-CABG clinically significant bleeding was similar with rivaroxaban versus aspirin therapy (total 154 patients [5%]; 80 participants [5%] of 1519 vs 74 participants [5%] of 1518; HR 1·09 [95% CI 0·80-1·50]; p=0·5840).Interpretation: A dual pathway antithrombotic therapy approach combining low-dose rivaroxaban with a P2Y12 inhibitor for the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes had similar risk of clinically significant bleeding as aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor. A larger, adequately powered trial would be required to definitively assess the efficacy and safety of this approach.Funding: Janssen Research & Development and Bayer AG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) scale has been proposed to standardize bleeding endpoint definitions and reporting in cardiovascular trials. Validation in large cohorts of patients is needed.Objectives: This study sought to investigate the relationship between BARC-classified bleeding and mortality and compared its prognostic value against 2 validated bleeding scales: TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries).Methods: We analyzed bleeding in 12,944 patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, with or without early invasive strategy. The main outcome measure was all-cause death.Results: During follow-up (median: 502 days), noncoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) bleeding occurred in 1,998 (15.4%) patients according to BARC (grades 2, 3, or 5), 484 (3.7%) patients according to TIMI minor/major, and 514 (4.0%) patients according to GUSTO moderate/severe criteria. CABG-related bleeding (BARC 4) occurred in 155 (1.2%) patients. Patients with BARC (2, 3, or 4) bleeding had a significant increase in risk of death versus patients without bleeding (BARC 0 or 1); the hazard was highest in the 30 days after bleeding (hazard ratio: 7.35; 95% confidence interval: 5.59 to 9.68; p < 0.0001) and remained significant up to 1 year. The hazard of mortality increased progressively with non-CABG BARC grades. BARC 4 bleeds were significantly associated with mortality within 30 days (hazard ratio: 10.05; 95% confidence interval: 5.41 to 18.69; p < 0.0001), but not thereafter. Inclusion of BARC (2, 3, or 4) bleeding in the 1-year mortality model with baseline characteristics improved it to an extent comparable to TIMI minor/major and GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding.Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, bleeding assessed with the BARC scale was significantly associated with risk of subsequent death up to 1 year after the event and risk of mortality increased gradually with higher BARC grades. Our results support adoption of the BARC bleeding scale in ACS clinical trials. (Trial to Assess the Effects of Vorapaxar [SCH 530348; MK-5348] in Preventing Heart Attack and Stroke in Participants With Acute Coronary Syndrome [TRACER] [Study P04736]; NCT00527943). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]