Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2022 · 13 citations · 28 references
PharmacyPharmacologyPharmacotherapyCardiovascular PharmacotherapyClinical PharmacologyPharmacovigilanceAnticoagulant TherapyAntiplatelet TherapyAntithrombotic TherapyCardiovascular Drug SafetyThrombosisThrombosis PreventionAcute Coronary Syndrome Antithrombotic TherapyAcute Coronary Syndrome ManagementAdverse Drug EventsComparative Drug SafetyIn-stent ThrombosisNet Clinical BenefitTarget Lesion RevascularizationTriple Antiplatelet Therapy
Background: The net clinical benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has recently been questioned by observational studies which did not account for time-dependent confounders. We aimed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel accounting for non-adherence in a real-life setting. Methods: inhibitor therapy with 1-year risk of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium Type 3 or 5 bleeding; major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite endpoint of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, or urgent target lesion revascularization; definite/probable stent thrombosis; vascular death; and net adverse clinical event (a composite endpoint of major bleeding and MACE) were analyzed according to the "on-treatment" principle, using fully adjusted Cox and Fine-Gray regression models with doubly robust inverse probability of censoring weighted estimators. Results: Among 2,070 patients (mean age 63 years, 27% women, 62.5% ST-elevation MI), 1,035 were discharged on ticagrelor and clopidogrel, respectively. Ticagrelor-treated patients were younger and had few comorbidities, but high rates of medication non-compliance, compared with clopidogrel users. After comprehensive multivariate adjustments, ticagrelor did not increase the risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel [subhazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-2.05], while proved superior in reducing MACE (hazard ratio 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.90), vascular death (subhazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97) and definite/probable stent thrombosis (subhazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79); thereby resulting in a favorable net clinical benefit (hazard ratio 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-0.98) compared with clopidogrel. Results from sensitivity analyses were consistent with those from the primary analysis, whereas those from the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis went in the opposite direction. Conclusion: Among all-comers with ACS, ticagrelor did not significantly increase the risk of major bleeding, while resulting in a net clinical benefit compared with clopidogrel. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in high bleeding risk populations. CREA-ARIAM Andalucía: (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02500290); Current pre-specified analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04630288).
28
Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes
Lars Wallentin, Richard C. Becker, Andrzej Budaj et al. · New England Journal of Medicine · 2009 · 7.1K citations · Full text
Fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (2018)
Kristian Thygesen, Joseph S. Alpert, Allan S. Jaffe et al. · European Heart Journal · 2018 · 5.8K citations · Full text
Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials
Donald E. Cutlip, Stephan Windecker, Roxana Mehran et al. · Circulation · 2007 · 5.4K citations
Standardized Bleeding Definitions for Cardiovascular Clinical Trials
Roxana Mehran, Sunil V. Rao, Deepak L. Bhatt et al. · Circulation · 2011 · 4.4K citations
Medicine, Cardiology, Hematology +10