49
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome with or without revascularization: results from the PLATO trial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims

          The optimal platelet inhibition strategy for ACS patients managed without revascularization is unknown.

          We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in the non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) subgroup of the PLATO trial, in the total cohort, and in the subgroups managed with and without revascularization within 10 days of randomization.

          Methods and results

          We performed a retrospective analysis of the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke. Among 18 624 PLATO patients, 11 080 (59%) were categorized as NSTE-ACS at randomization. During the initial 10 days, 74% had angiography, 46% PCI, and 5% CABG. In NSTE-ACS patients, the primary endpoint was reduced with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel [10.0 vs. 12.3%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.74–0.93], as was myocardial infarction (6.6 vs. 7.7%; HR 0.86; 95% CI = 0.74–0.99), cardiovascular death (3.7 vs. 4.9%; HR 0.77; 95% CI = 0.64–0.93), and all-cause death (4.3 vs. 5.8%; HR 0.76; 95% CI = 0.64–0.90). Major bleeding rate was similar between treatment groups (13.4 vs. 12.6%; HR 1.07; 95% CI = 0.95–1.19), but ticagrelor was associated with an increase in non-CABG major bleeding (4.8 vs. 3.8%; HR 1.28; 95% CI = 1.05–1.56). Within the first 10 days, 5366 (48.4%) patients were managed without revascularization. Regardless of revascularization or not, ticagrelor consistently reduced the primary outcome (HR 0.86 vs. 0.85, interaction P = 0.93), and all-cause death (HR 0.75 vs. 0.73, interaction P = 0.89) with no significant increase in overall major bleeding.

          Conclusion

          In patients with NSTE-ACS, benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel in reducing ischaemic events and total mortality was consistent with the overall PLATO trial, independent of actually performed revascularization during the initial 10 days.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Randomized double-blind assessment of the ONSET and OFFSET of the antiplatelet effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with stable coronary artery disease: the ONSET/OFFSET study.

          Ticagrelor is the first reversibly binding oral P2Y(12) receptor antagonist. This is the first study to compare the onset and offset of platelet inhibition (IPA) with ticagrelor using the PLATO (PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes) trial loading dose (180 mg) with a high loading dose (600 mg) of clopidogrel. In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, 123 patients with stable coronary artery disease who were taking aspirin therapy (75 to 100 mg/d) received ticagrelor (180-mg load, 90-mg BID maintenance dose [n=57]), clopidogrel (600-mg load, 75-mg/d maintenance dose [n=54]), or placebo (n=12) for 6 weeks. Greater IPA (20 micromol/L ADP, final extent) occurred with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after loading and at 6 weeks (P 50% IPA (98% versus 31%, P 70% IPA (90% versus 16%, P<0.0001) in the ticagrelor group than in the clopidogrel group, respectively. A faster offset occurred with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel (4-to-72-hour slope [% IPA/h] -1.04 versus -0.48, P<0.0001). At 24 hours after the last dose, mean IPA was 58% for ticagrelor versus 52% for clopidogrel (P=NS). IPA for ticagrelor on day 3 after the last dose was comparable to clopidogrel at day 5; IPA on day 5 for ticagrelor was similar to clopidogrel on day 7 and did not differ from placebo (P=NS). Ticagrelor achieved more rapid and greater platelet inhibition than high-loading-dose clopidogrel; this was sustained during the maintenance phase and was faster in offset after drug discontinuation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of ticagrelor with clopidogrel in patients with a planned invasive strategy for acute coronary syndromes (PLATO): a randomised double-blind study.

            Variation in and irreversibility of platelet inhibition with clopidogrel has led to controversy about its optimum dose and timing of administration in patients with acute coronary syndromes. We compared ticagrelor, a more potent reversible P2Y12 inhibitor with clopidogrel in such patients. At randomisation, an invasive strategy was planned for 13 408 (72.0%) of 18 624 patients hospitalised for acute coronary syndromes (with or without ST elevation). In a double-blind, double-dummy study, patients were randomly assigned in a one-to-one ratio to ticagrelor and placebo (180 mg loading dose followed by 90 mg twice a day), or to clopidogrel and placebo (300-600 mg loading dose or continuation with maintenance dose followed by 75 mg per day) for 6-12 months. All patients were given aspirin. The primary composite endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00391872. 6732 patients were assigned to ticagrelor and 6676 to clopidogrel. The primary composite endpoint occurred in fewer patients in the ticagrelor group than in the clopidogrel group (569 [event rate at 360 days 9.0%] vs 668 [10.7%], hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.94; p=0.0025). There was no difference between clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups in the rates of total major bleeding (691 [11.6%] vs 689 [11.5%], 0.99 [0.89-1.10]; p=0.8803) or severe bleeding, as defined according to the Global Use of Strategies To Open occluded coronary arteries, (198 [3.2%] vs 185 [2.9%], 0.91 [0.74-1.12]; p=0.3785). Ticagrelor seems to be a better option than clopidogrel for patients with acute coronary syndromes for whom an early invasive strategy is planned. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dose comparisons of clopidogrel and aspirin in acute coronary syndromes.

              Clopidogrel and aspirin are widely used for patients with acute coronary syndromes and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, evidence-based guidelines for dosing have not been established for either agent. We randomly assigned, in a 2-by-2 factorial design, 25,086 patients with an acute coronary syndrome who were referred for an invasive strategy to either double-dose clopidogrel (a 600-mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 150 mg daily for 6 days and 75 mg daily thereafter) or standard-dose clopidogrel (a 300-mg loading dose and 75 mg daily thereafter) and either higher-dose aspirin (300 to 325 mg daily) or lower-dose aspirin (75 to 100 mg daily). The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days. The primary outcome occurred in 4.2% of patients assigned to double-dose clopidogrel as compared with 4.4% assigned to standard-dose clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.06; P=0.30). Major bleeding occurred in 2.5% of patients in the double-dose group and in 2.0% in the standard-dose group (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.46; P=0.01). Double-dose clopidogrel was associated with a significant reduction in the secondary outcome of stent thrombosis among the 17,263 patients who underwent PCI (1.6% vs. 2.3%; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.85; P=0.001). There was no significant difference between higher-dose and lower-dose aspirin with respect to the primary outcome (4.2% vs. 4.4%; hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.09; P=0.61) or major bleeding (2.3% vs. 2.3%; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.17; P=0.90). In patients with an acute coronary syndrome who were referred for an invasive strategy, there was no significant difference between a 7-day, double-dose clopidogrel regimen and the standard-dose regimen, or between higher-dose aspirin and lower-dose aspirin, with respect to the primary outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by Sanofi-Aventis and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00335452.)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur Heart J
                Eur. Heart J
                eurheartj
                ehj
                European Heart Journal
                Oxford University Press
                0195-668X
                1522-9645
                14 August 2014
                11 April 2014
                11 April 2014
                : 35
                : 31
                : 2083-2093
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Sciences, Cardiology and Uppsala Clinical Research Center , Uppsala University , MTC Building, Uppsala Science Park, Dag Hammarskjölds väg 14B, SE-752 37 Uppsala, Sweden
                [2 ]TIMI Study Group, Brigham and Women's Hospital , Boston, MA, USA
                [3 ]Department of Medicine, Stanford University , Stanford, CA, USA
                [4 ]AstraZeneca Research and Development , Mölndal, Sweden
                [5 ]AstraZeneca Research and Development , Wilmington, DE, USA
                [6 ]Medical Department, Hospital Unit West , Herning/Holstbro, Denmark
                [7 ]INSERM-Unité 1148 , Paris, France
                [8 ]Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Département Hospitalo-Universitaire FIRE, Hôpital Bichat , Paris, France
                [9 ]NHLI Imperial College, ICMS, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK
                [10 ]Université Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne-Paris Cité , Paris, France
                [11 ]Department of Cardiology, Medisch Centrum Alkmaar , Alkmaar, The Netherlands
                [12 ]Department of Cardiovascular Science, University of Sheffield , Sheffield, UK
                [13 ]Duke Clinical Research Institute , Duke University Medical Center , Durham, NC, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Tel: +46 18 611 95 00, Email: stefan.james@ 123456ucr.uu.se
                Article
                ehu160
                10.1093/eurheartj/ehu160
                4132637
                24727884
                © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@ 123456oup.com

                Product
                Categories
                Clinical Research
                Acute Coronary Syndromes
                Editor's choice

                Cardiovascular Medicine

                platelet inhibition, acute coronary syndrome

                Comments

                Comment on this article