Thrombotic risk in patients with acute coronary syndromes discharged on prasugrel or clopidogrel: results from the PROMETHEUS study.

Aims: Based on recent clinical data, the 2020 ESC guidelines on non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) suggest to tailor antithrombotic strategy on individual thrombotic risk. Nonetheless, prevalence and prognostic impact of the high thrombotic risk (HTR) criteria proposed are yet to be described. In this analysis from the PROMETHEUS registry, we assessed prevalence and prognostic impact of HTR, defined according to the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines, and if the benefits associated with prasugrel vs. clopidogrel vary with thrombotic risk.
Methods and Results: PROMETHEUS was a multicentre prospective study comparing prasugrel vs. clopidogrel in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Patients were at HTR if presenting with one clinical plus one procedural risk feature. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned revascularization, at 1 year. Adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with propensity score stratification and multivariable Cox regression. Among 16 065 patients, 4293 (26.7%) were at HTR and 11 772 (73.3%) at low-to-moderate thrombotic risk. The HTR conferred increased incidence of MACE (23.3 vs. 13.6%, HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.71-2.00, P < 0.001) and its single components. Prasugrel was prescribed in patients with less comorbidities and risk factors and was associated with reduced risk of MACE (HTR: adjHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68-1.02; low-to-moderate risk: adjHR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.88; pinteraction = 0.32).
Conclusion: High thrombotic risk, as defined by the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines, is highly prevalent among ACS patients undergoing PCI. The HTR definition had a strong prognostic impact, as it successfully identified patients at increased 1 year risk of ischaemic events.
Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: M.B.E. receives a pension from and has equity in Eli Lilly and Company. G.S. reports a research grant from Boston Scientific and speaker or consulting fees from B. Braun, Biosensors, and Boston Scientific. T.H. has received research grant support from Eli Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo. S.S. has received from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. U.B. has received honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. G.D. has received consulting fees and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, consulting fees from Biosensors, and previously holding stock in Medtronic. R.M. reports grants from Abbott Laboratories, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, DSI, Medtronic, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and OrbusNeich; personal fees from Abbott Laboratories, Boston Scientific, Medscape/WebMD, Siemens Medical Solutions, PLx Opco Inc/dba PLx Pharma Inc., Roivant Sciences, Sanofi, and Medtelligence (Janssen Scientific Affairs); other from Abbott laboratories, other from Abiomed, other from Bristol Myers Squibb, other from Claret Medical, other from Elixir Medical, other from The Medicines eCompany, other from Spectranetics/Philips/Volcano Corp., and other from Watermark Research Partners; and non-financial support and other from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.
(© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)