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).     

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.     

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 Monotherapy Versus Ticagrelor With Aspirin in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess whether the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are consistent among patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and unstable angina treated with drug-eluting stents.BackgroundTicagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT has not been investigated in patients with STEMI.MethodsThis was a pre-specified, stratified, subgroup analysis of the STEMI cohort from the TICO (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial, which constituted 36% of the total population. The primary outcome was a composite of major bleeding and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or target vessel revascularization). The secondary outcomes were major bleeding and MACCE.ResultsThe incidence of the primary outcome was 4.4% in patients with STEMI (n = 1,103), 6.0% in those with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (n = 1,027), and 4.1% in those with unstable angina (n = 926), without statistical significance (p = 0.09). Compared with ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT, ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT showed consistent effects on the primary outcome across clinical presentations (p for interaction [p_int] = 0.64). Furthermore, the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy on the reduction of major bleeding was consistent across clinical presentations (p_int = 0.36). The effect of ticagrelor monotherapy on MACCE was also consistent in patients with STEMI, without evidence of a higher risk for MACCE (p_int = 0.14).ConclusionsThis pre-specified subgroup analysis revealed no heterogeneity in the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT, compared with 12-month DAPT, for the primary outcome, major bleeding, and MACCE across clinical presentations including STEMI, though larger studies are needed to demonstrate these findings with adequate power. (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome [TICO Study]; NCT02494895)     

Ticagrelor With or Without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundP2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy with ticagrelor after a brief period of dual antiplatelet therapy can reduce bleeding without increasing ischemic harm after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The impact of this approach among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remains unknown.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin among patients with DM undergoing PCI.MethodsThis was a pre-specified analysis of the DM cohort in the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial. After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were maintained on ticagrelor and randomized to aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The composite ischemic endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.ResultsPatients with DM comprised 37% (n = 2,620) of the randomized cohort and were characterized by more frequent comorbidities and a higher prevalence of multivessel disease. The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding was 4.5% and 6.7% among patients with DM randomized to ticagrelor plus placebo versus ticagrelor plus aspirin (hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% confidence interval: 0.47 to 0.91; p = 0.012). Ticagrelor monotherapy was not associated with an increase in ischemic events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin (4.6% vs. 5.9%; hazard ratio: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.55 to 1.09; p = 0.14). In the overall trial population, there was no significant interaction between DM status and treatment group for the primary bleeding or ischemic endpoints.ConclusionsCompared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy in reducing the risk of clinically relevant bleeding without any increase in ischemic events was consistent among patients with or without DM undergoing PCI. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242)     

Impact of Age on the Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients Undergoing PCI

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the impact of age on the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundAs the risk for bleeding and ischemic complications after PCI increases with age, the authors conducted a pre-specified analysis of the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial to evaluate the possible benefits of ticagrelor monotherapy according to age.MethodsThe TWILIGHT trial enrolled patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents who fulfilled at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk criterion. Age ≥65 years was a clinical entry criterion. After 3 months of dual-antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, event-free patients were randomized to ticagrelor plus placebo or ticagrelor plus aspirin for an additional 12 months. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.ResultsA total of 3,113 patients (47.7%) were ≥65 years of age. At 1 year after randomization, ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (4.5% vs. 8.2%; hazard ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.40 to 0.71) without increasing ischemic events (4.2% vs. 4.4%; hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 1.35) compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin among patients ≥65 years of age. These findings were consistent in patients <65 years of age with respect to the primary (p_interaction = 0.62) and key secondary (p_interaction = 0.77) endpoints and across different age categories.ConclusionsA strategy of ticagrelor monotherapy following 3 months of dual-antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced clinically relevant bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin without an increase in ischemic events, irrespective of age.     

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.     

Rivaroxaban Monotherapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation After Coronary Stenting: Insights From the AFIRE Trial

ObjectivesThe aim of this AFIRE (Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Events With Rivaroxaban in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease) trial subgroup analysis was to examine rivaroxaban monotherapy benefits and their relation to the time between stenting and enrollment among patients after coronary stenting.BackgroundOf 2,215 patients with atrial fibrillation and stable coronary artery disease in the AFIRE trial, rivaroxaban monotherapy was noninferior to rivaroxaban plus antiplatelet therapy (combination therapy) in terms of efficacy and superior for safety endpoints. However, thrombotic risk after antiplatelet therapy cessation remained a concern among 1,444 patients who had undergone coronary stenting >1 year before enrollment.MethodsThe benefits of rivaroxaban monotherapy in coronary stenting subgroups were assessed for efficacy (a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring revascularization, or death of any cause), safety (major bleeding defined according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria), ischemic endpoints, net adverse clinical event, and time between stenting and enrollment.ResultsEfficacy and safety endpoints for monotherapy were superior to combination therapy, with HRs of 0.70 for efficacy (95% CI: 0.50-0.98; P = 0.036) and 0.55 for safety (95% CI: 0.33-0.92; P = 0.019). For ischemic endpoints, the HR was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.58-1.15; P = 0.240). The HR became smaller with longer time between stenting and enrollment (efficacy, P for interaction = 0.158; safety, P = 0.097).ConclusionsIn patients with atrial fibrillation after coronary stenting, the benefits of rivaroxaban monotherapy for efficacy and safety endpoints were consistent with those in the whole AFIRE trial population. The benefits became apparent with longer time between stenting and enrollment. (Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Events With Rivaroxaban in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease Study [AFIRE]; UMIN000016612, NCT02642419)     

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)     

Ticagrelor to Reduce Myocardial Injury in Patients With High-Risk Coronary Artery Plaque

ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine whether ticagrelor reduces high-sensitivity troponin I concentrations in patients with established coronary artery disease and high-risk coronary plaque.BackgroundHigh-risk coronary atherosclerotic plaque is associated with higher plasma troponin concentrations suggesting ongoing myocardial injury that may be a target for dual antiplatelet therapy.MethodsIn a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients with multivessel coronary artery disease underwent coronary ¹⁸F-fluoride positron emission tomography/coronary computed tomography scanning and measurement of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily or matched placebo. The primary endpoint was troponin I concentration at 30 days in patients with increased coronary ¹⁸F-fluoride uptake.ResultsIn total, 202 patients were randomized to treatment, and 191 met the pre-specified criteria for inclusion in the primary analysis. In patients with increased coronary ¹⁸F-fluoride uptake (120 of 191), there was no evidence that ticagrelor had an effect on plasma troponin concentrations at 30 days (ratio of geometric means for ticagrelor vs. placebo: 1.11; 95% confidence interval: 0.90 to 1.36; p = 0.32). Over 1 year, ticagrelor had no effect on troponin concentrations in patients with increased coronary ¹⁸F-fluoride uptake (ratio of geometric means: 0.86; 95% confidence interval: 0.63 to 1.17; p = 0.33).ConclusionsDual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor did not reduce plasma troponin concentrations in patients with high-risk coronary plaque, suggesting that subclinical plaque thrombosis does not contribute to ongoing myocardial injury in this setting. (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Reduce Myocardial Injury [DIAMOND]; NCT02110303)     

DAPT Score and the Impact of Ticagrelor Monotherapy During the Second Year After PCI

ObjectivesThis study assessed the ability of the dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) score in stratifying ischemic and bleeding risk in a contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) population.BackgroundThe DAPT score is recommended by guidelines as a tool to stratify ischemic and bleeding risk. Its utility in contemporary PCI is unknown.MethodsThe study studied patients in GLOBAL LEADERS (A Clinical Study Comparing Two Forms of Anti-platelet Therapy After Stent Implantation) who were free of major ischemic and bleeding events and adhered to antiplatelet strategy during the first year after PCI. The primary ischemic endpoint was the composite of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. The primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5. Outcomes from 12 to 24 months after PCI were compared according to the DAPT score.ResultsOf 11,289 patients that were event-free after the first year, 6,882 and 4,407 patients had low (<2) and high (≥2) DAPT scores, respectively. Compared with a low DAPT score, patients with a high DAPT score had a higher rate of the composites of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis (0.70% vs. 1.55%; p < 0.0001). The rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding was 0.54% and 0.30% in the low and high DAPT score groups, respectively (p = 0.058). The effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin monotherapy on primary ischemic and bleeding endpoints during the second year were no different among the 2 groups.ConclusionsThe DAPT score can stratify ischemic but not bleeding risk in a contemporary PCI population during the second year. The score did not provide additional value for selection of antiplatelet strategy beyond the first year.     

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome in Relation to Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to their estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs).BackgroundThe outcomes of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to eGFR have not been defined.MethodsPatients (n = 4,012) were categorized into 3 groups: low eGFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m²), intermediate eGFR (≥60 and <90 mL/min/1.73 m²), and high eGFR (≥90 mL/min/1.73 m²). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding, both at 1 year.ResultsPatients with low eGFRs had a higher risk for the primary endpoint compared with patients with intermediate eGFRs (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.46-2.46]) and those with high eGFRs (adjusted HR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.57-3.46). A risk excess for low eGFR was also observed for bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.12-2.13] vs intermediate eGFR; adjusted HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.01-2.50] vs high eGFR). However, eGFR did not affect the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. In patients with low eGFR, the primary endpoint occurred in 20.5% with ticagrelor and in 14.7% with prasugrel (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; P = 0.029); there was no significant difference in bleeding.ConclusionsThese results show that among patients with ACS, reduction of eGFR is associated with increased risk for ischemic and bleeding events but has no significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800)     

Effect of Ticagrelor on Left Ventricular Remodeling in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (HEALING-AMI)

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on left ventricular (LV) remodeling after reperfusion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in humans.BackgroundAnimal studies have demonstrated that ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel better protects myocardium against reperfusion injury and improves remodeling after myocardial infarction.MethodsIn this investigator-initiated, randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded trial performed at 10 centers in Korea, patients were enrolled if they had naive STEMI successfully treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and at least 6-month planned duration of dual-antiplatelet treatment. The coprimary endpoints were LV remodeling index (LVRI) (a relative change of LV end-diastolic volume) measured on 3-dimensional echocardiography and N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide level at 6 months.ResultsAmong initially enrolled patients with STEMI (n = 336), 139 in each group completed the study. LVRI at 6 months was numerically lower with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel (0.6 ± 18.6% vs. 4.5 ± 16.5%; p = 0.095). Ticagrelor significantly reduced the 6-month level of N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (173 ± 141 pg/ml vs. 289 ± 585 pg/ml; p = 0.028). These differences were prominent in patients with pre-PCI TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) flow grade 0. By multivariate analysis, ticagrelor versus clopidogrel reduced the risk for positive LV remodeling (LVRI >0%) (odds ratio: 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.33 to 0.95; p = 0.030). The LV end-diastolic volume index remained unchanged during ticagrelor treatment (from 54.7 ± 12.2 to 54.2 ± 12.2 ml/m²; p = 0.629), but this value increased over time during clopidogrel treatment (from 54.6 ± 11.3 to 56.4 ± 13.9 ml/m²; p = 0.056) (difference −2.3 ml/m²; 95% confidence interval: −4.8 to 0.2 ml/m²; p = 0.073). Ticagrelor reduced LV end-systolic volume index (from 27.0 ± 8.5 to 24.7 ± 8.4 ml/m²; p < 0.001), whereas no reduction was seen with clopidogrel (from 26.2 ± 8.9 to 25.6 ± 11.0 ml/m²; p = 0.366) (difference −1.8 ml/m²; 95% confidence interval: −3.5 to −0.1 ml/m²; p = 0.040).ConclusionsTicagrelor was superior to clopidogrel for LV remodeling after reperfusion of STEMI with primary PCI. (High Platelet Inhibition With Ticagrelor to Improve Left Ventricular Remodeling in Patients With ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction [HEALING-AMI]; NCT02224534)     

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)     

Association of Acute Procedural Results With Long-Term Outcomes After CTO PCI

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the association of procedural outcomes with long-term mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) after chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundThe association between acute procedural results and subsequent outcomes has received limited study.MethodsBetween January 2010 and December 2013, a total of 2,659 CTO PCI patients were consecutively enrolled. Procedural results were categorized into 3 groups: 1) optimal recanalization, with reperfusion of the occluded vessel and side branches (if any) with TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) flow grade 3; 2) suboptimal recanalization, meeting any of the following criteria: persistence of significant side branch occlusion, final TIMI flow grade 1 or 2, or residual percentage diameter stenosis >30%; and 3) procedural failure (i.e., failure to cross a lesion with a balloon angioplasty catheter). The primary outcome was the 5-year composite endpoint of cardiac death and MI.ResultsOverall, optimal recanalization was achieved in 1,562 patients (58.7%), suboptimal recanalization was achieved in 399 patients (15.0%), and recanalization failed in 698 patients (26.3%). The 5-year incidence of the primary outcome was significantly higher in the suboptimal recanalization group compared with the optimal recanalization and the failure groups (10.1% vs. 6.5% vs. 6.3%; p = 0.046), which was driven mainly by higher risk for MI. In subgroup analysis, significant side branch occlusion was associated with numerically higher risk for 5-year MI (hazard ratio: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.99 to 2.43; p = 0.054).ConclusionsIn this large cohort of CTO PCI patients, suboptimal recanalization was associated with significantly higher long-term incidence of cardiac death and MI compared with optimal recanalization or procedural failure.     

Implications of Periprocedural Myocardial Biomarker Elevations and Commonly Used MI Definitions After Left Main PCI

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to: 1) assess the relationship of different thresholds of creatine kinase–myocardial band (CK-MB) and cardiac troponin with subsequent mortality; and 2) evaluate the prognostic significance of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) according to various definitions of myocardial infarction in patients with left main (LM) coronary artery disease.BackgroundThe magnitude of postprocedural biomarker elevation representing a clinically meaningful PMI after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is controversial.MethodsA total of 4,013 consecutive patients undergoing LM PCI at a single center from January 2004 to December 2016 were enrolled. CK-MB and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) were routinely collected at baseline and at frequent intervals between 8 and 48 hours after PCI. The primary and secondary outcomes were the covariate-adjusted 3-year rates of cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality, respectively.ResultsThe 3-year rate of CV mortality progressively increased with higher peak CK-MB values. CV mortality was first independently predicted by postprocedural CK-MB 3 to 5 times the upper reference limit (URL) (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-8.40), whereas all-cause death was independently predicted only by CK-MB ≥ 10 × URL (aHR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.37-7.70). In contrast, no level of peak postprocedural cTnI was associated with CV or all-cause death. PMI by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), Academic Research Consortium-2 (ARC-2), and fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (UDMI) occurred in 1.3%, 3.1%, and 5.1% of patients, respectively. The SCAI definition was significantly associated with 3-year CV mortality (aHR: 4.93; 95% CI: 1.92-12.69) and all-cause mortality (aHR: 3.11; 95% CI: 1.33-7.27), whereas the ARC-2 and fourth UDMI definitions were not.ConclusionsIn a large cohort of consecutive patients undergoing LM PCI, intermediate (≥3 × URL) and high (≥10 × URL) levels of peak postprocedural CK-MB independently predicted 3-year CV and all-cause mortality, respectively, whereas even large elevations of post-PCI cTnI did not. The SCAI definition (but not the ARC-2 or fourth UDMI) of PMI was independently associated with mortality after LM PCI.     

Renal Denervation in High-Risk Patients With Hypertension

BackgroundRenal denervation (RDN) is under investigation for treatment of uncontrolled hypertension and might represent an attractive treatment for patients with high cardiovascular (CV) risk. It is important to determine whether baseline CV risk affects the efficacy of RDN.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess blood pressure (BP) reduction and event rates after RDN in patients with various comorbidities, testing the hypothesis that RDN is effective and durable in these high-risk populations.MethodsBP reduction and adverse events over 3 years were evaluated for several high-risk subgroups in the GSR (Global proSpective registrY for syMPathetic renaL denervatIon in seleCted IndicatIons Through 3 Years Registry), an international registry of RDN in patients with uncontrolled hypertension (n = 2,652). Comparisons were made for patients age ≥65 years versus age <65 years, with versus without isolated systolic hypertension, with versus without atrial fibrillation, and with versus without diabetes mellitus. Baseline cardiovascular risk was estimated using the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score.ResultsReduction in 24-h systolic BP at 3 years was −8.9 ± 20.1 mm Hg for the overall cohort, and for high-risk subgroups, BP reduction was −10.4 ± 21.0 mm Hg for resistant hypertension, −8.7 ± 17.4 mm Hg in patients age ≥65 years, −10.2 ± 17.9 mm Hg in patients with diabetes, −8.6 ± 18.7 mm Hg in isolated systolic hypertension, −10.1 ± 20.3 mm Hg in chronic kidney disease, and −10.0 ± 19.1 mm Hg in atrial fibrillation (p < 0.0001 compared with baseline for all). BP reduction in patients with measurements at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months showed similar reductions in office and 24-h BP for patients with varying baseline ASCVD risk scores, which was sustained to 3 years. Adverse event rates at 3 years were higher for patients with higher baseline CV risk.ConclusionsBP reduction after RDN was similar for patients with varying high-risk comorbidities and across the range of ASCVD risk scores. The impact of baseline risk on clinical event reduction by RDN-induced BP changes could be evaluated in further studies. (Global proSpective registrY for syMPathetic renaL denervatIon in seleCted IndicatIons Through 3 Years Registry; NCT01534299)     

Effect of Smoking on Outcomes of Primary PCI in Patients With STEMI

BackgroundSmoking is a well-established risk factor for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); however, once STEMI occurs, smoking has been associated with favorable short-term outcomes, an observation termed the “smoker’s paradox.” It has been postulated that smoking might exert protective effects that could reduce infarct size, a strong independent predictor of worse outcomes after STEMI.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to determine the relationship among smoking, infarct size, microvascular obstruction (MVO), and adverse outcomes after STEMI.MethodsIndividual patient-data were pooled from 10 randomized trials of patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Infarct size was assessed at median 4 days by either cardiac magnetic resonance imaging or technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography. Multivariable analysis was used to assess the relationship between smoking, infarct size, and the 1-year rates of death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization and reinfarction.ResultsAmong 2,564 patients with STEMI, 1,093 (42.6%) were recent smokers. Smokers were 10 years younger and had fewer comorbidities. Infarct size was similar in smokers and nonsmokers (adjusted difference: 0.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −3.3% to 3.3%; p = 0.99). Nor was the extent of MVO different between smokers and nonsmokers. Smokers had lower crude 1-year rates of all-cause death (1.0% vs. 2.9%; p < 0.001) and death or HF hospitalization (3.3% vs. 5.1%; p = 0.009) with similar rates of reinfarction. After adjustment for age and other risk factors, smokers had a similar 1-year risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [adjHR]: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.84) and higher risks of death or HF hospitalization (adjHR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.02) as well as reinfarction (adjHR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.17 to 3.33).ConclusionsIn the present large-scale individual patient-data pooled analysis, recent smoking was unrelated to infarct size or MVO, but was associated with a worse prognosis after primary PCI in STEMI. The smoker’s paradox may be explained by the younger age and fewer cardiovascular risk factors in smokers compared with nonsmokers.     

Aspirin-Free Prasugrel Monotherapy Following Coronary Artery Stenting in Patients With Stable CAD: The ASET Pilot Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the hypothesis that prasugrel monotherapy following successful everolimus-eluting stent implantation is feasible and safe in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).BackgroundRecent studies have suggested that short dual-antiplatelet therapy strategies may provide an adequate balance between ischemic and bleeding risks. However, the complete omission of aspirin immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been tested so far.MethodsThe study was a multicenter, single-arm, open-label trial with a stopping rule based on the occurrence of definite stent thrombosis (if >3, trial enrollment would be terminated). Patients undergoing successful everolimus-eluting stent implantation for stable CAD with SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) scores <23 were included. All participants were on standard dual-antiplatelet therapy at the time of index PCI. Aspirin was discontinued on the day of the index procedure but given prior to the procedure; prasugrel was administered in the catheterization laboratory immediately after the successful procedure, and aspirin-free prasugrel became the therapy regimen from that moment. Patients were treated solely with prasugrel for 3 months. The primary ischemic endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, spontaneous target vessel myocardial infarction, or definite stent thrombosis, and the primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 and 5 bleeding up to 3 months.ResultsFrom February 22, 2018, to May 7, 2019, 201 patients were enrolled. All patients underwent PCI for stable CAD. Overall, 98.5% of patients were adherent to prasugrel at 3-month follow-up. The primary ischemic and bleeding endpoints occurred in 1 patient (0.5%). No stent thrombosis events occurred.ConclusionsAspirin-free prasugrel monotherapy following successful everolimus-eluting stent implantation demonstrated feasibility and safety without any stent thrombosis in selected low-risk patients with stable CAD. These findings may help underpin larger randomized controlled studies to evaluate the aspirin-free strategy compared with traditional dual-antiplatelet therapy following PCI. (Acetyl Salicylic Elimination Trial: The ASET Pilot Study [ASET]; NCT03469856)     

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)