Search

Background: Patients with established coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease often have diabetes mellitus. These patients are at high risk of future vascular events., Methods: In a prespecified analysis of the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies), we compared the effects of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg daily) versus placebo plus aspirin in patients with diabetes mellitus versus without diabetes mellitus in preventing major vascular events. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included all-cause mortality and all major vascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major adverse limb events, including amputation). The primary safety end point was a modification of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria for major bleeding., Results: There were 10 341 patients with diabetes mellitus and 17 054 without diabetes mellitus in the overall trial. A consistent and similar relative risk reduction was seen for benefit of rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n=9152) versus placebo plus aspirin (n=9126) in patients both with (n=6922) and without (n=11 356) diabetes mellitus for the primary efficacy end point (hazard ratio, 0.74, P =0.002; and hazard ratio, 0.77, P =0.005, respectively, P interaction =0.77) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.81, P =0.05; and hazard ratio, 0.84, P =0.09, respectively; P interaction =0.82). However, although the absolute risk reductions appeared numerically larger in patients with versus without diabetes mellitus, both subgroups derived similar benefit (2.3% versus 1.4% for the primary efficacy end point at 3 years, Gail-Simon qualitative P interaction <0.0001; 1.9% versus 0.6% for all-cause mortality, P interaction =0.02; 2.7% versus 1.7% for major vascular events, P interaction <0.0001). Because the bleeding hazards were similar among patients with and without diabetes mellitus, the prespecified net benefit for rivaroxaban appeared particularly favorable in the patients with diabetes mellitus (2.7% versus 1.0%; Gail-Simon qualitative P interaction =0.001)., Conclusions: In stable atherosclerosis, the combination of aspirin plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily provided a similar relative degree of benefit on coronary, cerebrovascular, and peripheral end points in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Given their higher baseline risk, the absolute benefits appeared larger in those with diabetes mellitus, including a 3-fold greater reduction in all-cause mortality. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Aims: The role and selection of antithrombotic therapy to improve limb outcomes in chronic lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is still debated. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the efficacy and safety of antithrombotic and more intense antithrombotic therapy on limb outcomes and limb salvage in patients with chronic LEAD., Methods and Results: Study inclusion criteria were: enrolment of patients with LEAD, randomized allocation to more vs. less intense antithrombotic therapy [more vs. less intense single-antiplatelet therapy (SAPT); dual-antiplatelet therapy vs. SAPT; dual antithrombotic therapy vs. SAPT or oral anticoagulant]; enrolment of ≥200 patients; reporting of at least one of following outcomes: limb amputation or revascularization. Seven randomized studies enrolling 30 447 patients were included. Over a median follow-up of 24 months, more vs. less intense antithrombotic therapy or placebo significantly reduced the risk of limb revascularization [relative risk (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.94] and limb amputation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.86), as well as stroke (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.97). There was no statistically significant effect on the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87-1.11), all-cause (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.01), and cardiovascular death (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.86-1.08). Risk of major bleeding increased (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.44)., Conclusion: In patients with LEAD, more intense antithrombotic therapy reduces the risk of limb amputation and revascularization as well as stroke with an increase in the risk of bleeding events., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens may differ between patients with atrial fibrillation who have acute coronary syndromes (ACS), treated medically or with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and those undergoing elective PCI., Methods: Using a 2×2 factorial design, we compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonists and aspirin with placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation who had ACS or were undergoing PCI and were receiving a P2Y 12 inhibitor. We explored bleeding, death and hospitalization, as well as death and ischemic events, by antithrombotic strategy in 3 prespecified subgroups: patients with ACS treated medically, patients with ACS treated with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI., Results: Of 4614 patients enrolled, 1097 (23.9%) had ACS treated medically, 1714 (37.3%) had ACS treated with PCI, and 1784 (38.8%) had elective PCI. Apixaban compared with vitamin K antagonist reduced International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients with ACS treated medically (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.28-0.68]), patients with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-0.89]), and patients undergoing elective PCI (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.64-1.04]; P interaction =0.052) and reduced death or hospitalization in the ACS treated medically (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.54-0.92]), ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.74-1.06]), and elective PCI (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.72-1.04]; P interaction =0.345) groups. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events in the ACS treated medically, ACS treated with PCI, and elective PCI groups ( P interaction =0.356). Aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding than did placebo in patients with ACS treated medically (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 0.98-2.26]), those with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.53-2.67]), and those undergoing elective PCI (HR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.48-2.47]; P interaction =0.479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the 3 groups for the composite of death or hospitalization ( P interaction =0.787) and death and ischemic events ( P interaction =0.710)., Conclusions: An antithrombotic regimen consisting of apixaban and a P2Y 12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have ACS, whether managed medically or with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02415400.

Background & Aims: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial., Methods: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up., Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant., Conclusions: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424., (Copyright © 2019 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Antiplatelet agents are widely used to reduce these complications., Methods: This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, intermittent claudication with objective evidence of peripheral artery disease), of the carotid arteries (previous carotid artery revascularisation or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%), or coronary artery disease with an ankle-brachial index of less than 0·90. After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral rivaroxaban (2·5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban twice a day (5 mg with aspirin placebo once a day), or to aspirin once a day (100 mg and rivaroxaban placebo twice a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patient, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; the primary peripheral artery disease outcome was major adverse limb events including major amputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants., Findings: Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, we enrolled 7470 patients with peripheral artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (126 [5%] of 2492 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·90, p=0·0047), and major adverse limb events including major amputation (32 [1%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·54 95% CI 0·35-0·82, p=0·0037). Rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day compared with aspirin alone did not significantly reduce the composite endpoint (149 [6%] of 2474 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·69-1·08, p=0·19), but reduced major adverse limb events including major amputation (40 [2%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·45-1·00, p=0·05). The median duration of treatment was 21 months. The use of the rivaroxaban plus aspirin combination increased major bleeding compared with the aspirin alone group (77 [3%] of 2492 vs 48 [2%] of 2504; HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·12-2·31, p=0·0089), which was mainly gastrointestinal. Similarly, major bleeding occurred in 79 (3%) of 2474 patients with rivaroxaban 5 mg, and in 48 (2%) of 2504 in the aspirin alone group (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·17-2·40; p=0·0043)., Interpretation: Low-dose rivaroxaban taken twice a day plus aspirin once a day reduced major adverse cardiovascular and limb events when compared with aspirin alone. Although major bleeding was increased, fatal or critical organ bleeding was not. This combination therapy represents an important advance in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Rivaroxaban alone did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with asprin alone, but reduced major adverse limb events and increased major bleeding., Funding: Bayer AG., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention., Methods: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months., Results: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=-4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group., Conclusions: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events. (Funded by Bayer; COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01776424 .).

Background: Patients with stable ischemic heart disease and previous myocardial infarction (MI) vary in their risk for recurrent cardiovascular events. Atherothrombotic risk assessment may be useful to identify high-risk patients who have the greatest potential to benefit from more intensive secondary preventive therapy such as treatment with vorapaxar., Methods: We identified independent clinical indicators of atherothrombotic risk among 8598 stable, placebo-treated patients with a previous MI followed up for 2.5 years (median) in TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 [Thrombin Receptor Antagonist in Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Ischemic Events-TIMI 50]. The efficacy and safety of vorapaxar (SCH 530348; MK-5348) were assessed by baseline risk among patients with previous MI without prior stroke or transient ischemic attack for whom there is a clinical indication for vorapaxar. End points were cardiovascular death, MI, or ischemic stroke and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) severe bleeding., Results: The 9 independent risk predictors were age, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, peripheral arterial disease, previous stroke, previous coronary bypass grafting, heart failure, and renal dysfunction. A simple integer-based scheme using these predictors showed a strong graded relationship with the rate of cardiovascular death/MI/ischemic stroke and the individual components (P for trend <0.001 for all). High-risk patients (≥3 risk indicators; 20% of population) had a 3.2% absolute risk reduction in cardiovascular disease/MI/ischemic stroke with vorapaxar, and intermediate-risk patients (1-2 risk indicators; 61%) had a 2.1% absolute risk reduction (P<0.001 each), translating to a number needed to treat of 31 and 48. Bleeding increased across risk groups (P for trend<0.01); however, net clinical outcome was increasingly favorable with vorapaxar across risk groups. Fatal bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage was 0.9% with both treatments in high-risk patients., Conclusions: Stratification of baseline atherothrombotic risk can assist with therapeutic decision making for vorapaxar use for secondary prevention after MI., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00526474., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Our dual aims were as follows: (1) to classify new or recurrent myocardial infarctions (MI) in patients with stable atherosclerosis using the Universal Definition of MI classification system; and (2) to characterize the effects of vorapaxar, a first-in-class platelet protease-activated receptor -1 antagonist, on new or recurrent MI., Methods and Results: We analyzed data from TRA 2°P-TIMI 50, a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vorapaxar. This analysis included 20 770 patients with previous MI or peripheral arterial disease without a history of transient ischemic attack or stroke. Each new or recurrent MI after randomization that met the trial end point definition was further categorized according to the European Society of Cardiology, American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, World Heart Federation Universal Definition classification of type and size. Of 1095 incident MIs, 77% were spontaneous (Type 1), with a smaller number (9.8%) of secondary MIs (Type 2). Vorapaxar reduced Type 1 MI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, CI 0.73-0.98, P=0.024), with a similar pattern for Type 2 MI (HR 0.74, CI 0.49-1.10, P=0.13). Notably, vorapaxar showed a consistent pattern of reduction across size of MIs, including MIs in the highest Universal MI size class (≥10× upper reference limit, HR 0.83, CI 0.70-0.98, P=0.025). As such, there was a significant reduction in larger, spontaneous MIs (Type 1, ≥10× upper reference limit, HR 0.81, CI 0.67-0.99, P=0.036), and a consistent pattern with respect to fatal MI (HR 0.66, CI 0.39-1.11, P=0.12)., Conclusions: Among stable patients with established atherosclerosis, the most common type of incident MI is spontaneous MI, and the reduction in MI with vorapaxar was consistent across MIs of varying type and size, including spontaneous infarctions ≥10× upper reference limit., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00526474., (© 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

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: 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: Elderly patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are at high risk for death and recurrent thrombotic events. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of intensive treatment with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in an elderly population, and the relationships between age, timing of administration, and clinical outcomes., Methods: We used data from high-risk non-ST-segment elevation ACS patients randomized to early eptifibatide vs. delayed provisional use at percutaneous coronary intervention. In multivariable models, we included age×treatment interaction terms to assess whether treatment effect varied by age after adjusting for confounders., Results: Of 9406 patients, 13.9% were aged <55 years; 27.6%, 55-64 years; 33.2%, 65-74 years; and 25.3%, ≥ 75 years. For each 10-year age increase, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) for 96-hour death, myocardial infarction (MI), recurrent ischemia requiring urgent revascularization, or thrombotic bailout was 1.13 (1.04-1.23) and for 30-day death or MI was 1.13 (1.04-1.22). Increasing age was also associated with greater 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio per 10 years: 1.44, 95% CI 1.30-1.60). There was no interaction between age and treatment (p interaction=0.99, 0.54, and 0.87, respectively). Increasing age was associated with more non-coronary artery bypass grafting-related TIMI major bleeding (adjusted OR and 95% CI per 10 years: 1.54 [1.24-1.92]), GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding (1.52 [1.33-1.75]), and transfusion (1.25 [1.07-1.45]). The amount by which TIMI major bleeding was increased with early vs. delayed provisional eptifibatide use was significantly greater with increasing age (p interaction=0.02), but the age×treatment interactions were not significant for GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding or transfusion (p interaction=0.33 and 0.54, respectively)., Conclusion: Increasing age was associated with greater risk for ischemic events and more bleeding. Despite higher baseline ischemic risk in older patients, there was no preferential benefit of early vs. delayed provisional eptifibatide use for ischemic outcomes as age increased, but the incremental bleeding risk was amplified., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Eptifibatide is indicated during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with continuation for 18-24 hours post procedure but is associated with bleeding. We examined the efficacy and safety of shorter post-PCI eptifibatide infusions in high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS) patients., Methods: EARLY ACS patients treated with PCI and eptifibatide were grouped by post-procedure infusion duration: <10, 10-13, 13-17, and 17-25 (per protocol) hours. Adjusted estimated event rates for 96-hour death/myocardial infarction (MI)/recurrent ischaemia requiring urgent revascularization (RIUR), 30-day death/MI, post-PCI packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion, and GUSTO (Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries) moderate/severe bleeding were obtained using inverse-propensity weighting to account for informative censoring of infusions., Results: Among 3271 eptifibatide-treated PCI patients, there were 66 96-hour death/MI/RIUR events, 94 30-day death/MI events, 127 PRBC transfusions, and 115 GUSTO moderate/severe bleeds. Compared with per protocol, patients receiving post-PCI infusions <10 hours had similar adjusted estimated rates of 96-hour death/MI/RIUR (absolute difference 0.021 higher; 0.040 vs. 0.019, 95% CI -0.023 to 0.064; p=0.35) and 30-day death/MI (0.020 higher; 0.046 vs. 0.026, 95% CI -0.021 to 0.062; p=0.34). There were also no differences in ischaemic outcomes between infusions of 10-17 hours and per-protocol infusions. Adjusted estimated rates of PRBC transfusion were higher for the <10-hour infusion group compared with per protocol (0.048 higher; 0.079 vs. 0.031, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.091, p=0.03) but were similar for other groups. Adjusted GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding rates were similar to per-protocol rates for all groups., Conclusions: In high-risk NSTE ACS patients, post-PCI eptifibatide infusions <18 hours were not associated with worse ischaemic outcomes. Shorter eptifibatide infusions in this population may be feasible.

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.)

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.).

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: After an acute coronary syndrome, patients remain at risk of recurrent events. Apixaban, an oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, is a novel anticoagulant that may reduce these events but also poses a risk of bleeding., Methods and Results: Apixaban for Prevention of Acute Ischemic and Safety Events (APPRAISE) was a phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study. Patients (n=1715) with recent ST-elevation or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome were randomized to 6 months of placebo (n=611) or 1 of 4 doses of apixaban: 2.5 mg twice daily (n=317), 10 mg once daily (n=318), 10 mg twice daily (n=248), or 20 mg once daily (n=221). Nearly all patients received aspirin; 76% received clopidogrel. The primary outcome was International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. A secondary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, severe recurrent ischemia, or ischemic stroke. At the recommendation of the Data Monitoring Committee, the 2 higher-dose apixaban arms were discontinued because of excess total bleeding. Compared with placebo, apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 3.48; P=0.09) and 10 mg once daily (hazard ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.31 to 4.61; P=0.005) resulted in a dose-dependent increase in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 1.19; P=0.21) and 10 mg once daily (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 1.04; P=0.07) resulted in lower rates of ischemic events compared with placebo. The increase in bleeding was more pronounced and the reduction in ischemic events was less evident in patients taking aspirin plus clopidogrel than in those taking aspirin alone., Conclusions: We observed a dose-related increase in bleeding and a trend toward a reduction in ischemic events with the addition of apixaban to antiplatelet therapy in patients with recent acute coronary syndrome. The safety and efficacy of apixaban may vary depending on background antiplatelet therapy. Further testing of apixaban in patients at risk of recurrent ischemic events is warranted.

Background: Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors are indicated in patients with acute coronary syndromes who are undergoing an invasive procedure. The optimal timing of the initiation of such therapy is unknown., Methods: We compared a strategy of early, routine administration of eptifibatide with delayed, provisional administration in 9492 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation and who were assigned to an invasive strategy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either early eptifibatide (two boluses, each containing 180 microg per kilogram of body weight, administered 10 minutes apart, and a standard infusion > or = 12 hours before angiography) or a matching placebo infusion with provisional use of eptifibatide after angiography (delayed eptifibatide). The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent ischemia requiring urgent revascularization, or the occurrence of a thrombotic complication during percutaneous coronary intervention that required bolus therapy opposite to the initial study-group assignment ("thrombotic bailout") at 96 hours. The key secondary end point was a composite of death or myocardial infarction within the first 30 days. Key safety end points were bleeding and the need for transfusion within the first 120 hours after randomization., Results: The primary end point occurred in 9.3% of patients in the early-eptifibatide group and in 10.0% in the delayed-eptifibatide group (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.06; P=0.23). At 30 days, the rate of death or myocardial infarction was 11.2% in the early-eptifibatide group, as compared with 12.3% in the delayed-eptifibatide group (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.01; P=0.08). Patients in the early-eptifibatide group had significantly higher rates of bleeding and red-cell transfusion. There was no significant difference between the two groups in rates of severe bleeding or nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events., Conclusions: In patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, the use of eptifibatide 12 hours or more before angiography was not superior to the provisional use of eptifibatide after angiography. The early use of eptifibatide was associated with an increased risk of non-life-threatening bleeding and need for transfusion. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00089895.), (2009 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Introduction: Patients with renal dysfunction are more prone to bleeding when receiving antithrombotic drugs. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of clopidogrel on safety and efficacy in patients with renal dysfunction in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes., Methods and Results: Patients in the Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial were analysed to assess the relationship of chronic kidney disease to cardiovascular outcomes. Renal function was estimated by the glomerular filtration rate computed from the baseline serum creatinine measurements in 12 253 (97.5%) patients enrolled in the trial. Patients were grouped into tertiles of glomerular filtration rate. The primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke combined) occurred more frequently in the lowest glomerular filtration rate tertile. The bleeding risk was also significantly increased in patients in this tertile, compared with the other two. The beneficial effect of adding clopidogrel to standard treatment in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome was observed in all three tertiles of renal function {(lower third relative risk (RR)=0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.05]; medium third RR=0.68 (95% CI 0.56-0.84); upper third RR=0.74 (95% CI 0.60-0.93) (P for heterogeneity=0.11)}. Clopidogrel treatment significantly increased the risk of minor bleeding in all tertiles of renal function. The risk of major or life-threatening bleeding increased moderately with the addition of clopidogrel to standard treatment [lower third RR=1.12 (95% CI 0.83-1.51); medium third RR=1.4 (95% CI 0.97-2.02); upper third RR=1.83 (95% CI 1.23-2.73)], but this did not appear to be greatest in those with the lowest renal function., Conclusions: Even mild chronic kidney disease worsens the prognosis in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes. Clopidogrel was beneficial and safe in patients with and without chronic kidney disease.

Background: The CURE study demonstrated the benefit of clopidogrel in patients with non-ST elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), including those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It did not report the relation between clopidogrel and timing of PCI or, more specifically, the role of clopidogrel in patients managed with an early interventional strategy, the current preferred treatment option for patients with NSTE ACSs. In the present study, we examined the relation between clopidogrel therapy, timing of PCI, and cardiovascular (CV) events in patients participating in the CURE study., Methods: A total of 12562 patients with NSTE ACSs was randomized in double-blind fashion to clopidogrel or placebo (300 mg loading dose, then 75 mg/d) in addition to aspirin for up to 1 year. We analyzed the data of the 2658 CURE patients undergoing PCI and related the incidence of outcome events (CV death/myocardial infarction [MI]) to timing of PCI after randomization: early (< 48 hours, median 1.0 day, n = 370), intermediate (> or = 48 hours to initial hospital discharge, median 6.8 days, n = 1360), and late (after initial hospital discharge, median 47.6 days, n = 928)., Results: Clopidogrel showed consistent treatment benefit over the 12-month (mean 9 months) follow-up period irrespective of timing of PCI (relative risk [RR] 0.53 for the early group, RR 0.72 for the intermediate group, RR 0.70 for the late group). After adjustment for propensity to undergo PCI, the greatest treatment benefit of clopidogrel was observed in patients undergoing PCI < 48 hours after randomization (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21-0.96, P = .038), although with overlap between groups. The lowest absolute event rate (6.7% CV death/MI) was observed in patients treated with clopidogrel and undergoing PCI within 48 hours. There was no increased risk of major bleeding in the early PCI group., Conclusions: The benefit of therapy with clopidogrel in addition to aspirin in patients presenting with NSTE ACSs was significant irrespective of the timing of PCI. The combination of clopidogrel and an early (< 48 hours) interventional strategy was associated with low absolute event rates for CV death/nonfatal MI.

Context: The benefit of clopidogrel pretreatment before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debated and its use has not been universally adopted., Objective: To determine if clopidogrel pretreatment before PCI in patients with recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is superior to clopidogrel treatment initiated at the time of PCI in preventing major adverse cardiovascular events., Design, Setting, and Participants: The PCI-Clopidogrel as Adjunctive Reperfusion Therapy (CLARITY) study was a prospectively planned analysis of the 1863 patients undergoing PCI after mandated angiography in CLARITY-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 28, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of clopidogrel in patients receiving fibrinolytics for STEMI. Patients were enrolled at 319 sites in 23 countries from February 2003 through October 2004., Interventions: Patients received aspirin and were randomized to receive either clopidogrel (300 mg loading dose, then 75 mg once daily) or placebo initiated with fibrinolysis and given until coronary angiography, which was performed 2 to 8 days after initiation of the study drug. For patients undergoing coronary artery stenting, it was recommended that open-label clopidogrel (including a loading dose) be administered after the diagnostic angiogram., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of the composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, or stroke from PCI to 30 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included MI or stroke before PCI and the aforementioned composite from randomization to 30 days., Results: Pretreatment with clopidogrel significantly reduced the incidence of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke following PCI (34 [3.6%] vs 58 [6.2%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.35-0.85]; P = .008). Pretreatment with clopidogrel also reduced the incidence of MI or stroke prior to PCI (37 [4.0%] vs 58 [6.2%]; OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.40-0.95]; P = .03). Overall, pretreatment with clopidogrel resulted in a highly significant reduction in cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke from randomization through 30 days (70 [7.5%] vs 112 [12.0%]; adjusted OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.43-0.81]; P = .001; number needed to treat = 23). There was no significant excess in the rates of TIMI major or minor bleeding (18 [2.0%] vs 17 [1.9%]; P>.99)., Conclusions: Clopidogrel pretreatment significantly reduces the incidence of cardiovascular death or ischemic complications both before and after PCI and without a significant increase in major or minor bleeding. These data add further support to the early use of clopidogrel in STEMI and the strategy of routine clopidogrel pretreatment in patients undergoing PCI.

Background: We studied the benefits and risks of adding clopidogrel to different doses of aspirin in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Methods and Results: In the Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial, 12 562 patients with ACS using aspirin, 75 to 325 mg daily, were randomized to clopidogrel or placebo for up to 1 year. In this analysis, patients were divided into the following 3 aspirin dose groups: < or =100 mg, 101 through 199 mg, and > or =200 mg. The combined incidence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was reduced by clopidogrel regardless of aspirin dose, as follows: < or =100 mg, 10.5% versus 8.6% (relative risk [RR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.97]); 101 to 199 mg, 9.8% versus 9.5% (RR, 0.97 [95% CI 0.77 to 1.22]); and > or =200 mg, 13.6% versus 9.8% (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85]). The incidence of major bleeding increased with increasing aspirin dose both in the placebo group (1.9%, 2.8%, and 3.7%, respectively; P=0.0001) and the clopidogrel group (3.0%, 3.4%, and 4.9%, respectively; P=0.0009); thus, the excess risk with clopidogrel was 1.1%, 1.2%, and 1.2%, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio for major bleeding for the highest versus the lowest dose of aspirin was 1.9 (95% CI 1.29 to 2.72) in the placebo group, 1.6 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.23) in the clopidogrel group, and 1.7 (95% CI 1.36 to 2.20) in the combined group., Conclusions: In patients with ACS, adding clopidogrel to aspirin is beneficial regardless of aspirin dose. Bleeding risks increase with increasing aspirin dose, with or without clopidogrel, without any increase in efficacy. Our findings suggest that the optimal daily dose of aspirin may be between 75 and 100 mg, with or without clopidogrel.

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 18624 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. Clinical Trial Registration--URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00391872. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]