Ticagrelor vs Prasugrel in a Contemporary Real-World Cohort Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundPotent P2Y₁₂ agents such as ticagrelor and prasugrel are increasingly utilized across the clinical spectrum of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There is a paucity of data supporting their use in a patient population inclusive of both acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients.ObjectivesThe authors compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in a real-world contemporary PCI cohort.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2019 discharged on either prasugrel or ticagrelor were included from the prospectively collected institutional PCI registry. Primary endpoint was the composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with secondary outcomes including rates of bleeding, stroke, and target vessel revascularization at 1 year.ResultsOverall, 3,858 patients were included in the study (ticagrelor: n = 2,771; prasugrel: n = 1,087), and a majority (48.4%) underwent PCI in the context of CCS. Patients prescribed ticagrelor were more likely to be female, have a history of cerebrovascular disease, and have ACS presentation, while those receiving prasugrel were more likely to be White with a higher prevalence of prior revascularization. No difference in the risk of death or MI was noted across the groups (ticagrelor vs prasugrel: 3.3% vs 3.1%; HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.54-1.43; P = 0.59). Rates of target vessel revascularization were significantly lower in the ticagrelor cohort (9.3% vs 14.0%; adjusted HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55-0.91; P = 0.007) with no differences in stroke or bleeding. The results were consistent in patients with CCS (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54) and ACS (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54), without evidence of interaction (P = 0.37), and confirmed across multivariable adjustment and propensity score stratification analysis.ConclusionsIn this contemporary patient population undergoing PCI, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar 1-year efficacy and safety.     

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes and Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in whom invasive therapy was planned.BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS with DM undergoing invasive treatment remain unknown.MethodsThis pre-specified analysis of the ISAR-REACT (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment) 5 trial included 892 patients with ACS with DM and 3,124 patients with ACS without DM randomized to prasugrel or ticagrelor. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding (both assessed 12 months after randomization).ResultsThe primary endpoint occurred in 51 patients (11.2%) in the ticagrelor group and 55 patients (13.0%) in the prasugrel group in the DM cohort (hazard ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval: 0.58 to 1.24; p = 0.383) and in 132 patients (8.6%) in the ticagrelor group and 81 patients (5.2%) in the prasugrel group in the non-DM cohort (hazard ratio: 1.70; 95% confidence interval: 1.29 to 2.24; p < 0.001). There was a significant treatment arm–by–diabetic status interaction (p_int = 0.0035). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 27 patients (6.9%) in the ticagrelor group and 19 patients (5.5%) in the prasugrel group (p = 0.425) in the DM cohort and in 68 patients (5.2%) in the ticagrelor group and 60 patients (4.6%) in the prasugrel group in the non-DM cohort (p = 0.500).ConclusionsDM seems to affect the efficacy of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ACS. In patients with DM, the efficacy of ticagrelor was comparable with that of prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800)     

Bleeding and Ischemic Outcomes With Ticagrelor Monotherapy According to Body Mass Index

BackgroundThere is a paucity of data regarding the safety and efficacy of different antiplatelet regimens according to standardized body mass index (BMI) categories.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate bleeding and ischemic outcomes according to BMI in the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial.MethodsThe TWILIGHT trial randomized high-risk patients to ticagrelor plus aspirin or ticagrelor plus placebo at 3 months after percutaneous coronary intervention. In this secondary analysis, patients were stratified by standard BMI categories, as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis (normal weight [BMI 18.5-24.99 kg/m²], overweight [BMI 25-29.99 kg/m²], and obese [BMI ≥30 kg/m²]) and by median BMI, as prespecified in the protocol.ResultsAmong 7,038 patients randomized and with available BMI, 1,807 (25.7%) were normal weight, 2,927 (41.6%) were overweight, and 2,304 (32.7%) were obese. In normal-weight, overweight, and obese patients, ticagrelor monotherapy, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, reduced the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (normal weight: HR: 0.48 [95% CI: 0.32-0.73]; overweight: HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41-0.78]; obese: HR: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.44-0.91]; P for interaction = 0.627), without any increase in the composite ischemic endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (normal weight: HR: 1.36 [95% CI: 0.84-2.19]; overweight: HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.63-1.35]; obese: HR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.56-1.25]; P for interaction = 0.290). These findings were consistent with the prespecified analysis by median BMI.ConclusionsAmong high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor monotherapy, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, reduced bleeding events without any increase in ischemic risk across different BMI categories.     

Ticagrelor Monotherapy After PCI in High-Risk Patients With Prior MI: A Prespecified TWILIGHT Substudy

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate if patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) could benefit from ticagrelor monotherapy in terms of bleeding reduction without any compromise in ischemic event prevention.BackgroundPatients with history of MI who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain at risk for recurrent ischemic events. The optimal antithrombotic strategy for this cohort remains debated.MethodsIn this prespecified analysis of the randomized TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, the authors evaluated the impact of history of MI on treatment effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stent with at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk feature and free from adverse events at 3 months after index PCI. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, and the key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, MI, or stroke, both at 12 months after randomization.ResultsA total of 1,937 patients (29.7%) with and 4,595 patients (70.3%) without prior MI were randomized to ticagrelor and placebo or ticagrelor and aspirin. At 1 year after randomization, patients with prior MI experienced higher rates of death, MI, or stroke (5.7% vs 3.2%; P < 0.001) but similar BARC types 2 to 5 bleeding (5.0% vs 5.5%; P = 0.677) compared with patients without prior MI. Ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced the risk for the primary bleeding outcome in patients with (3.4% vs 6.7%; HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.33-0.76) and without (4.2% vs 7.0%; HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.76; P_interaction = 0.54) prior MI. Rates of the key secondary ischemic outcome were not significantly different between treatment groups irrespective of history of MI (prior MI, 6.0% vs 5.5% [HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.75-1.58]; no prior MI, 3.1% vs 3.3% [HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.28]; P_interaction = 0.52).ConclusionsTicagrelor monotherapy is associated with significantly lower risk for bleeding events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, without any compromise in ischemic prevention, among high-risk patients with history of MI undergoing PCI. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242)     

Dabigatran Dual Therapy Versus Warfarin Triple Therapy Post–PCI in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Diabetes

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate dabigatran dual therapy versus warfarin triple therapy in patients with or without diabetes mellitus in the RE-DUAL PCI (Randomized Evaluation of Dual Antithrombotic Therapy With Dabigatran Versus Triple Therapy With Warfarin in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial.BackgroundIt is unclear whether dual therapy is as safe and efficacious as triple therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation with diabetes following percutaneous coronary intervention.MethodsIn RE-DUAL PCI, 2,725 patients with atrial fibrillation (993 with diabetes) who had undergone PCI were assigned to warfarin triple therapy (warfarin, clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin) or dabigatran dual therapy (dabigatran 110 mg or 150 mg twice daily and clopidogrel or ticagrelor). Median follow-up was 13 months. The primary outcome was the composite of major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, and the main efficacy outcome was the composite of death, thromboembolic events, or unplanned revascularization.ResultsAmong patients with diabetes, the incidence of major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was 15.2% in the dabigatran 110 mg dual therapy group versus 27.5% in the warfarin triple therapy group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35 to 0.67) and 23.8% in the dabigatran 150 mg dual therapy group versus 25.1% in the warfarin triple therapy group (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.22). Risk for major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was also reduced with both dabigatran doses among patients without diabetes (dabigatran 110 mg dual therapy: HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.70; dabigatran 150 mg dual therapy: HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.83). Risk for the efficacy endpoint was comparable between treatment groups for both patients with and those without diabetes. No interaction between treatment and diabetes subgroup could be observed, either for bleeding or for composite efficacy endpoints.ConclusionsIn this subgroup analysis, dabigatran dual therapy had a lower risk for bleeding and a comparable rate of the efficacy endpoint compared with warfarin triple therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation with or without diabetes following percutaneous coronary intervention.     

Clopidogrel Monotherapy After 1-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Diabetes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundDiabetes was reported to be associated with an impaired response to clopidogrel.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of clopidogrel monotherapy after very short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with diabetes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsA subgroup analysis was conducted on the basis of diabetes in the STOPDAPT-2 (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2) Total Cohort (N = 5,997) (STOPDAPT-2, n = 3,009; STOPDAPT-2 ACS [Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2 for the Patients With ACS], n = 2,988), which randomly compared 1-month DAPT followed by clopidogrel monotherapy with 12-month DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel after cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent implantation. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke) or bleeding (TIMI [Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction] major or minor) endpoints at 1 year.ResultsThere were 2,030 patients with diabetes (33.8%) and 3967 patients without diabetes (66.2%). Regardless of diabetes, the risk of 1-month DAPT relative to 12-month DAPT was not significant for the primary endpoint (diabetes, 3.58% vs 4.12% [HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.56-1.37; P = 0.55]; nondiabetes, 2.46% vs 2.49% [HR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.67-1.48; P = 0.97]; P_interaction = 0.67) and for the cardiovascular endpoint (diabetes, 3.28% vs 3.05% [HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.67-1.81; P = 0.70]; nondiabetes, 1.95% vs 1.43% [HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 0.85-2.25; P = 0.20]; P_interaction = 0.52), while it was lower for the bleeding endpoint (diabetes, 0.30% vs 1.50% [HR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06-0.68; P = 0.01]; nondiabetes, 0.61% vs 1.21% [HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.25-1.01; P = 0.054]; P_interaction = 0.19).ConclusionsClopidogrel monotherapy after 1-month DAPT compared with 12-month DAPT reduced major bleeding events without an increase in cardiovascular events regardless of diabetes, although the findings should be considered as hypothesis generating, especially in patients with acute coronary syndrome, because of the inconclusive result in the STOPDAPT-2 ACS trial. (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2 [STOPDAPT-2], NCT02619760; Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2 for the Patients With ACS [STOPDAPT-2 ACS], NCT03462498)     

Long-Term Clinical Impact of Contrast-Associated Acute Kidney Injury Following PCI: An ADAPT-DES Substudy

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine correlates and consequences of contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) on clinical outcomes in patients with or without pre-existing chronic kidney disease (CKD).BackgroundThe incidence and impact of CA-AKI on clinical outcomes during contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not fully defined.MethodsThe ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy With Drug Eluting Stents) study was a prospective, multicenter registry of 8,582 patients treated with ≥1 drug-eluting stent(s). CA-AKI was defined as a post-PCI increase in serum creatinine of >0.5 mg/dL or a relative increase of ≥25% compared with pre-PCI. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m². The primary endpoint was the 2-year rate of net adverse clinical events (NACE): All-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), definite or probable stent thrombosis, or major bleeding.ResultsOf 7287 (85%) patients with evaluable data, 476 (6.5%) developed CA-AKI. In a multivariable model, older age, female sex, Caucasian race, congestive heart failure, diabetes, hypertension, CKD, presentation with ST-segment elevation MI, Killip class II to IV, radial access, intra-aortic balloon pump use, hypotension, and number of stents were independent predictors of CA-AKI. The 2-year NACE rate was higher in patients with CA-AKI (adjusted HR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.42-2.49), as was each component of NACE (all-cause mortality, HR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.22-2.55; MI, HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.18-2.36; definite/probable stent thrombosis, HR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.10-2.65; and major bleeding, HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.06-1.80). Compared with the CA-AKI–/CKD– group, the CA-AKI+/CKD– (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.33-2.52), CA-AKI–/CKD+ (HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.15-2.13), CA-AKI+/CKD+ (HR: 3.29; 95% CI: 1.92-5.67), and maintenance dialysis (HR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.65-4.31) groups were at higher risk of NACE.ConclusionsCA-AKI was relatively common after contemporary PCI and was associated with increased 2-year rates of NACE. Patients with pre-existing CKD were at particularly high risk for NACE after CA-AKI.     

Burden and Outcomes of Heart Failure Hospitalizations in Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease

BackgroundData on rates of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, recurrent hospitalizations, and outcomes related to HF hospitalizations in chronic kidney disease (CKD) are limited.ObjectivesThis study examined rates of HF hospitalizations and re-hospitalizations within a large CKD population and evaluated the burden of HF hospitalizations with the risk of subsequent CKD progression and death.MethodsThe prospective CRIC (Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort) study measured the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) at baseline. The crude rates and rate ratios of HF hospitalizations and 30-day HF re-hospitalizations were calculated using Poisson regression models. Cox regression was used to assess the association of the frequency of HF hospitalizations within the first 2 years of follow-up with risk of subsequent CKD progression and death.ResultsAmong 3,791 participants, the crude rate of HF admissions was 5.8 per 100 person-years (with higher rates of HF with preserved ejection fraction vs. HF with reduced ejection fraction). The adjusted rate of HF was higher with a lower eGFR (vs. eGFR >45 ml/min/1.73 m²); the rate ratios were 1.7 and 2.2 for eGFR 30 to 44 and <30 ml/min/1.73 m² (vs. >45 ml/min/1.73 m²), respectively. Similarly, the adjusted rates of HF hospitalization were significantly higher in those with higher urine ACR (vs. urine ACR <30 mg/g); the rate ratios were 1.9 and 2.6 for urine ACR 30 to 299 and ≥300 mg/g, respectively. Overall, 20.6% of participants had a subsequent HF re-admission within 30 days. HF hospitalization within 2 years of study entry was associated with greater adjusted risks for CKD progression (1 hospitalization: hazard ratio [HR]: 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.40 to 2.67; 2+ hospitalizations: HR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.30 to 3.54) and all-cause death (1 hospitalization: HR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.71 to 2.84; 2+ hospitalizations: HR: 3.06; 95% CI: 2.23 to 4.18).ConclusionsWithin a large U.S. CKD population, the rates of HF hospitalizations and re-hospitalization were high, with even higher rates across categories of lower eGFR and higher urine ACR. Patients with CKD hospitalized with HF had greater risks of CKD progression and death. HF prevention and treatment should be a public health priority to improve CKD outcomes.     

Índice de masa corporal y eficacia y seguridad del ticagrelor frente al prasugrel en pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo

Introduction and objectivesThe efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) according to body mass index (BMI) remain unstudied. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with ACS according to BMI.MethodsPatients (n = 3987) were grouped into 3 categories: normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m²; n = 1084), overweight (BMI ≥ 25 to < 30 kg/m²; n = 1890), and obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; n = 1013). The primary efficacy endpoint was the 1 year incidence of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary safety endpoint was the 1 year incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding.ResultsThe primary endpoint occurred in 63 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 39 patients assigned to prasugrel in the normal weight group (11.7% vs 7.5%; HR, 1.62; 95%CI, 1.09-2.42; P = .018), 78 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 58 patients assigned to prasugrel in the overweight group (8.3% vs 6.2%; HR, 1.36; 95%CI, 0.97-1.91; P = .076), and 43 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 37 patients assigned to prasugrel in the obesity group (8.6% vs 7.3%; HR, 1.18; 95%CI, 0.76-1.84; P = .451). The 1-year incidence of bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with normal weight (6.5% vs 6.6%; P = .990), overweight (5.6% vs 5.0%; P = .566) or obesity (4.4% vs 2.8%; P = .219). There was no significant treatment arm-by-BMI interaction regarding the primary endpoint (P_int = .578) or secondary endpoint (P_int = .596).ConclusionsIn patients with ACS, BMI did not significantly impact the treatment effect of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in terms of efficacy or safety.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01944800.     

Comparative Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Unconscious and Conscious Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BackgroundUp to 70% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients have a relevant coronary stenosis which may need revascularization. The short- and long-term ischemic and bleeding risk of unconscious and conscious OHCA patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is largely unknown.ObjectivesThis study sought to compare the occurrence of 1-year outcomes after PCI between OHCA patients, stratified on the basis of state of consciousness, with patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) not preceded by OHCA.MethodsThe study assessed the unadjusted and adjusted risk of cardiovascular events in a prospective single-center cohort of 9,303 consecutive PCI patients.ResultsAt 1 year, all-cause mortality was higher in unconscious (49.5%) but not in conscious OHCA (8.9%) patients than in ACS patients (8.0%), and both unconscious and conscious OHCA patients were more likely than ACS patients to experience definite stent thrombosis (4.4% and 3.5% vs 1.3%) and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding (17.8% and 9.0% vs 5.1%). The higher hazards were largely determined by events occurring in the first 30 days. After multivariable adjustment, only unconscious OHCA patients remained at increased risk of death (adjusted HR: 3.27; 95% CI: 2.65-4.05), definite stent thrombosis (adjusted HR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.30-4.43), and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding (adjusted HR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.82-3.47) at 1 year.ConclusionsAt 1 year after PCI, unconscious OHCA patients were at higher risk of death, definite stent thrombosis, and bleeding, while conscious OHCA patients had similar hazards compared with an all-comer ACS population without OHCA. Dedicated PCI strategies for OHCA patients taking into account their state of consciousness after resuscitation are warranted.     

Efficacy and Safety of Evolocumab in Chronic Kidney Disease in the FOURIER Trial

BackgroundData on PCSK9 inhibition in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is limited.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare outcomes with evolocumab and placebo according to kidney function.MethodsThe FOURIER (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with Elevated Risk) trial randomized individuals with clinically evident atherosclerosis and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 mg/dl or non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥100 mg/dl to evolocumab or placebo. The primary endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization), key secondary endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), and safety were analyzed according to chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage estimated from CKD-epidemiology estimated glomerular filtration rate.ResultsThere were 8,077 patients with preserved kidney function, 15,034 with stage 2 CKD, and 4,443 with ≥stage 3 CKD. LDL-C reduction with evolocumab compared with placebo at 48 weeks was similar across CKD groups at 59%, 59%, and 58%, respectively. Relative risk reduction for the primary endpoint was similar for preserved function (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.94), stage 2 (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.77 to 0.94), and stage ≥3 CKD (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.05); p_int = 0.77. Relative risk reduction for the secondary endpoint was similar across CKD stages (p_int = 0.75)—preserved function (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.90), stage 2 (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.93), stage ≥3 (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.65 to 0.95). Absolute RRs at 30 months for the secondary endpoint were −2.5% (95% CI: -4.7% to -0.4%) for stage ≥3 CKD compared with −1.7% (95% CI: -2.8% to 0.5%) with preserved kidney function. Adverse events, including estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, were infrequent and similar regardless of CKD stage.ConclusionsLDL-C lowering and relative clinical efficacy and safety of evolocumab versus placebo were consistent across CKD groups. Absolute reduction in the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke with evolocumab was numerically greater with more advanced CKD. (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk [FOURIER]; NCT01764633)     

Prognostic Implications of Declining Hemoglobin Content in Patients Hospitalized With Acute Coronary Syndromes

BackgroundContemporary definitions of bleeding endpoints are restricted mostly to clinically overt events. Whether hemoglobin drop per se, with or without overt bleeding, adversely affects the prognosis of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains unclear.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine in the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox) trial the incidence, predictors, and prognostic implications of in-hospital hemoglobin drop in patients with ACS managed invasively stratified by the presence of in-hospital bleeding.MethodsPatients were categorized by the presence and amount of in-hospital hemoglobin drop on the basis of baseline and nadir hemoglobin values and further stratified by the occurrence of adjudicated in-hospital bleeding. Hemoglobin drop was defined as minimal (<3 g/dl), minor (≥3 and <5 g/dl), or major (≥5 g/dl). Using multivariate Cox regression, we modeled the association between hemoglobin drop and mortality in patients with and without overt bleeding.ResultsAmong 7,781 patients alive 24 h after randomization with available hemoglobin data, 6,504 patients (83.6%) had hemoglobin drop, of whom 5,756 (88.5%) did not have overt bleeding and 748 (11.5%) had overt bleeding. Among patients without overt bleeding, minor (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32 to 4.24; p = 0.004) and major (HR: 2.58; 95% CI: 0.98 to 6.78; p = 0.054) hemoglobin drop were independently associated with higher 1-year mortality. Among patients with overt bleeding, the association of minor and major hemoglobin drop with 1-year mortality was directionally similar but had wider CIs (minor: HR: 3.53 [95% CI: 1.06 to 11.79]; major: HR: 13.32 [95% CI: 3.01 to 58.98]).ConclusionsAmong patients with ACS managed invasively, in-hospital hemoglobin drop ≥3 g/dl, even in the absence of overt bleeding, is common and is independently associated with increased risk for 1-year mortality. (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox; NCT01433627)     

Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: An Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare ticagrelor monotherapy with dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents.BackgroundThe role of abbreviated DAPT followed by an oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitor after PCI remains uncertain.MethodsTwo randomized trials, including 14,628 patients undergoing PCI, comparing ticagrelor monotherapy with standard DAPT on centrally adjudicated endpoints were identified, and individual patient data were analyzed using 1-step fixed-effect models. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019143120). The primary outcomes were the composite of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding tested for superiority and, if met, the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year, tested for noninferiority against a margin of 1.25 on a hazard ratio (HR) scale.ResultsBleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding occurred in fewer patients with ticagrelor than DAPT (0.9% vs. 1.7%, respectively; HR: 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41 to 0.75; p < 0.001). The composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 231 patients (3.2%) with ticagrelor and in 254 patients (3.5%) with DAPT (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.10; p < 0.001 for noninferiority). Ticagrelor was associated with lower risk for all-cause (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.96; p = 0.027) and cardiovascular (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.99; p = 0.044) mortality. Rates of myocardial infarction (2.01% vs. 2.05%; p = 0.88), stent thrombosis (0.29% vs. 0.38%; p = 0.32), and stroke (0.47% vs. 0.36%; p = 0.30) were similar.ConclusionsTicagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk for major bleeding compared with standard DAPT, without a concomitant increase in ischemic events.     

Prognostic Value of RCA Pericoronary Adipose Tissue CT-Attenuation Beyond High-Risk Plaques,Plaque Volume,and Ischemia

ObjectivesThis study was designed to assess the prognostic value of pericoronary adipose tissue computed tomography attenuation (PCATa) beyond quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)–derived plaque volume and positron emission tomography (PET) determined ischemia.BackgroundInflammation plays a crucial role in atherosclerosis. PCATa has been shown to assess coronary-specific inflammation and is of prognostic value in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).MethodsA total of 539 patients who underwent CCTA and [¹⁵O]H₂O PET perfusion imaging because of suspected CAD were included. Imaging assessment included coronary artery calcium score (CACS), presence of obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis) and high-risk plaques (HRPs), total plaque volume (TPV), calcified/noncalcified plaque volume (CPV/NCPV), PCATa, and myocardial ischemia. The endpoint was a composite of death and nonfatal myocardial infarction. Prognostic thresholds were determined for quantitative CCTA variables.ResultsDuring a median follow-up of 5.0 (interquartile range: 4.7 to 5.0) years, 33 events occurred. CACS >59 Agatston units, obstructive CAD, HRPs, TPV >220 mm³, CPV >110 mm³, NCPV >85 mm³, and myocardial ischemia were associated with shorter time to the endpoint with unadjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of 4.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.80 to 9.64), 4.88 (95% CI: 1.88 to 12.65), 3.41 (95% CI: 1.72 to 6.75), 7.91 (95% CI: 3.05 to 20.49), 5.82 (95% CI: 2.40 to 14.10), 8.07 (95% CI: 3.33 to 19.55), and 4.25 (95% CI: 1.84 to 9.78), respectively (p < 0.05 for all). Right coronary artery (RCA) PCATa above scanner specific thresholds was associated with worse prognosis (unadjusted HR: 2.84; 95% CI: 1.44 to 5.63; p = 0.003), whereas left anterior descending artery and circumflex artery PCATa were not related to outcome. RCA PCATa above scanner specific thresholds retained is prognostic value adjusted for imaging variables and clinical characteristics associated with the endpoint (adjusted HR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.23 to 4.93; p = 0.011).ConclusionsParameters associated with atherosclerotic burden and ischemia were more strongly associated with outcome than RCA PCATa. Nonetheless, RCA PCATa was of prognostic value beyond clinical characteristics, CACS, obstructive CAD, HRPs, TPV, CPV, NCPV, and ischemia.     

Ticagrelor With or Without Aspirin After Complex PCI

BackgroundWhether a regimen of ticagrelor monotherapy attenuates bleeding complications without increasing ischemic risk in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients undergoing complex PCI from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor with Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial.MethodsIn the TWILIGHT trial, after 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free and adherent patients remained on ticagrelor and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin or placebo for 1 year. Complex PCI was defined as any of the following: 3 vessels treated, ≥3 lesions treated, total stent length >60 mm, bifurcation with 2 stents implanted, atherectomy device use, left main PCI, surgical bypass graft or chronic total occlusion as target lesions. Bleeding and ischemic endpoints were evaluated at 1 year after randomization.ResultsAmong 7,119 patients randomized in the main trial, complex PCI was performed in 2,342 patients. Compared to ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor plus placebo resulted in significantly lower rates of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (4.2% vs. 7.7%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 0.76). BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding was also significantly reduced (1.1% vs. 2.6%; HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.80). There were no significant between-group differences in death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (3.8% vs. 4.9%; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.15), nor in stent thrombosis.ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing complex PCI who initially completed 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, continuation of ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with lower incidence of bleeding without increasing the risk of ischemic events compared to continuing ticagrelor plus aspirin. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242)     

Ticagrelor With or Without Aspirin After PCI: The TWILIGHT Platelet Substudy

BackgroundAn evolving strategy in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) involves withdrawal of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), or aspirin, while maintaining P2Y₁₂ inhibition. However, the pharmacodynamic effects of this approach on blood thrombogenicity and platelet reactivity remain unknown.ObjectivesThis study sought to compare the antithrombotic potency of ticagrelor alone versus ticagrelor plus ASA among high-risk patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents.MethodsThis was a mechanistic substudy within the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial, which randomized patients undergoing PCI to ticagrelor plus placebo versus ticagrelor plus ASA following 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy. Substudy participants were enrolled after randomization, at which time ex vivo assays to quantify thrombus size under dynamic flow conditions and platelet reactivity were performed. Pharmacodynamic assessments were repeated 1 to 6 months thereafter. The primary endpoint was thrombus size at the post-randomization visit with platelet reactivity following stimuli to arachidonic acid, collagen, adenosine diphosphate, and thrombin as secondary endpoints. Results were analyzed using analysis of covariance.ResultsA total of 51 patients were enrolled, among whom 42 underwent perfusion assays at baseline and follow-up with a median time between studies of 1.5 months. The adjusted mean difference in post-randomization thrombus area was similar between groups: −218.2 μm² (95% confidence interval [CI]: −575.9 to 139.9 μm²; p = 0.22). Markers sensitive to cyclo-oxygenase-1 blockade, including platelet reactivity in response to arachidonic acid (mean difference: 10.9 U; 95% CI: 1.9 to 19.9 U) and collagen (mean difference: 9.8 U; 95% CI: 0.8 to 18.8 U) stimuli were higher among patients receiving placebo, whereas levels of platelet reactivity were similar with adenosine diphosphate and thrombin.ConclusionsAmong high-risk patients receiving drug-eluting stents, the antithrombotic potency of ticagrelor monotherapy is similar to that of ticagrelor plus ASA with respect to ex vivo blood thrombogenicity, whereas markers sensitive to cyclo-oxygenase-1 blockade are increased in the absence of ASA. (Platelet Substudy of the TWILIGHT Trial; NCT04001374).     

P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy or Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Complex Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

BackgroundIt remains unclear whether P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy preserves ischemic protection while limiting bleeding risk compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).ObjectivesWe sought to assess the effects of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after 1-month to 3-month DAPT vs standard DAPT in relation to PCI complexity.MethodsWe pooled patient-level data from randomized controlled trials comparing P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy and standard DAPT on centrally adjudicated outcomes after coronary revascularization. Complex PCI was defined as any of 6 criteria: 3 vessels treated, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation with 2 stents implanted, total stent length >60 mm, or chronic total occlusion. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. The key safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding.ResultsOf 22,941 patients undergoing PCI from 5 trials, 4,685 (20.4%) with complex PCI had higher rates of ischemic events. The primary efficacy endpoint was similar between P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy and DAPT among patients with complex PCI (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.64-1.19) and noncomplex PCI (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.76-1.09; P_interaction = 0.770). The treatment effect was consistent across all the components of the complex PCI definition. Compared with DAPT, P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy consistently reduced BARC 3 or 5 bleeding in complex PCI (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.84) and noncomplex PCI patients (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.37-0.64; P_interaction = 0.920).ConclusionsP2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after 1-month to 3-month DAPT was associated with similar rates of fatal and ischemic events and lower risk of major bleeding compared with standard DAPT, irrespective of PCI complexity. (PROSPERO [P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy Versus Standard Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Revascularization: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials]; CRD42020176853)     

Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Liver Disease

BackgroundAdvanced liver disease is known to increase the risk for bleeding and affects the hepatic clearance and metabolism of drugs. Subjects with active liver disease were excluded from pivotal clinical trials of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), so the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of DOACs in patients with liver disease is lacking.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare DOACs with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and liver disease.MethodsUsing the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, subjects with atrial fibrillation and active liver disease treated with oral anticoagulation were included (12,778 with warfarin and 24,575 with DOACs), and analyzed ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, major bleeding, all-cause death, and the composite outcome. Propensity score weighting was used to balance covariates between the 2 groups.ResultsDOACs were associated with lower risks for ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.548; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.485 to 0.618), intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 0.479; 95% CI 0.394 to 0.581), gastrointestinal bleeding (HR: 0.819; 95% CI: 0.619 to 0.949), major bleeding (HR: 0.650; 95% CI: 0.575 to 0.736), all-cause death (HR: 0.698; 95% CI: 0.636 to 0.765), and the composite outcome (HR: 0.610; 95% CI: 0.567 to 0.656) than warfarin. Among the total study population, 13% of patients (n = 4,942) were identified as having significant active liver disease. A consistent benefit was observed in patients with significant active liver disease (HR for the composite outcome: 0.691; 95% CI: 0.577 to 0.827).ConclusionsIn this large Asian population with atrial fibrillation and liver disease, DOACs showed better effectiveness and safety than warfarin, which was consistent in those with significant active liver disease.     

Oral Anticoagulation for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Long-Term Dialysis

BackgroundPatients on long-term dialysis are at increased risk of bleeding. Although oral anticoagulants (OACs) are recommended for atrial fibrillation (AF) to reduce the risk of stroke, randomized trials have excluded these populations. As such, the net clinical benefit of OACs among patients on dialysis is unknown.ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of OACs in patients with AF on long-term dialysis.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through June 10, 2019, for studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of different OAC strategies in patients with AF on long-term dialysis. The efficacy outcomes were ischemic stroke and/or systemic thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and the safety outcome was major bleeding.ResultsThis study identified 16 eligible observational studies (N = 71,877) regarding patients on long-term dialysis who had AF. Only 2 of 16 studies investigated direct OACs. Outcomes for dabigatran and rivaroxaban were limited to major bleeding events. Compared with no anticoagulants, apixaban and warfarin were not associated with a significant decrease in stroke and/or systemic thromboembolism (apixaban 5 mg, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30 to 1.17; apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.93; warfarin, HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.16). Apixaban 5 mg was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality (vs. warfarin, HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.93; vs. apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.90; vs. no anticoagulant, HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.90). Warfarin was associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than apixaban 5 min/2.5 mg and no anticoagulant (vs. apixaban 5 mg, HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.88; vs. apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.82; vs. no anticoagulant, HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.50). Dabigatran and rivaroxaban were also associated with significantly higher risk of major bleeding than apixaban and no anticoagulant.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that OACs were not associated with a reduced risk of thromboembolism in patients with AF on long-term dialysis. Warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban were associated with significantly higher bleeding risk compared with apixaban and no anticoagulant. The benefit-to-risk ratio of OACs in patients with AF on long-term dialysis warrants validation in randomized clinical trials.     

Revascularization Deferral of Nonculprit Stenoses on the Basis of Fractional Flow Reserve: 1-Year Outcomes of 8,579 Patients

BackgroundIntracoronary physiology is increasingly used in nonculprit stenoses of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, evidence regarding the safety of fractional flow reserve-based deferral in patients with ACS, compared with patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP), is scarce.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of revascularization deferral on the basis of fractional flow reserve interrogation of nonculprit lesions in patients with ACS.MethodsA pooled analysis was performed of individual patient data included in 5 large international published studies on physiology-guided revascularization. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization) at 1-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes of patients with ACS and SAP were compared in both the deferred and the revascularized groups.ResultsA total of 8,579 patients were included in the analysis, 6,461 with SAP and 2,118 with ACS and nonculprit stenoses. Using fractional flow reserve, revascularization was deferred in 5,129 patients (59.8%) and performed in 3,450 patients (40.2%). In the deferred ACS group, a higher MACE rate was observed compared with the deferred SAP group (4.46% vs. 2.83%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 2.53; p < 0.01). In particular, early unplanned revascularization (3.34% and 2.04% in ACS and SAP; adjusted HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.00; p = 0.02) contributed to this excess in MACE but the difference between the ACS and SAP groups did not reach statistical significance. On the contrary, no differences in outcomes linked to clinical presentation were found in treated patients (MACE rate 6.51% vs. 6.20%; adjusted HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.26; p = 0.24).ConclusionsPatients with ACS in whom revascularization of nonculprit lesions was deferred on the basis of fractional flow reserve have more MACE at 1 year compared with patients with SAP with deferred revascularization. Unplanned revascularization mainly contributed to this excess of MACE.