Philip E. Aylward

Prasugrel versus Clopidogrel for Acute Coronary Syndromes without Revascularization

BACKGROUND The effect of intensified platelet inhibition for patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation who do not undergo revascularization has not been delineated. METHODS In this double-blind, randomized trial, in a primary analysis involving 7243 patients under the age of 75 years receiving aspirin, we evaluated up to 30 months of treatment with prasugrel (10 mg daily) versus clopidogrel (75 mg daily). In a secondary analysis involving 2083 patients 75 years of age or older, we evaluated 5 mg of prasugrel versus 75 mg of clopidogrel. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 17 months, the primary end point of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke among patients under the age of 75 years occurred in 13.9% of the prasugrel group and 16.0% of the clopidogrel group (hazard ratio in the prasugrel group, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.05; P=0.21). Similar results were observed in the overall population. The prespecified analysis of multiple recurrent ischemic events (all components of the primary end point) suggested a lower risk for prasugrel among patients under the age of 75 years (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.00; P=0.04). Rates of severe and intracranial bleeding were similar in the two groups in all age groups. There was no significant between-group difference in the frequency of nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events, except for a higher frequency of heart failure in the clopidogrel group. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation, prasugrel did not significantly reduce the frequency of the primary end point, as compared with clopidogrel, and similar risks of bleeding were observed. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo; TRILOGY ACS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699998.).

Thrombin-Receptor Antagonist Vorapaxar in Acute Coronary Syndromes

BACKGROUND Vorapaxar is a new oral protease-activated-receptor 1 (PAR-1) antagonist that inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation. METHODS In this multinational, double-blind, randomized trial, we compared vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization. RESULTS Follow-up in the trial was terminated early after a safety review. After a median follow-up of 502 days (interquartile range, 349 to 667), the primary end point occurred in 1031 of 6473 patients receiving vorapaxar versus 1102 of 6471 patients receiving placebo (Kaplan-Meier 2-year rate, 18.5% vs. 19.9%; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.01; P=0.07). A composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 822 patients in the vorapaxar group versus 910 in the placebo group (14.7% and 16.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P=0.02). Rates of moderate and severe bleeding were 7.2% in the vorapaxar group and 5.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.58; P<0.001). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 1.1% and 0.2%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.78 to 6.45; P<0.001). Rates of nonhemorrhagic adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with acute coronary syndromes, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but significantly increased the risk of major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRACER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00527943.).

Time from symptom onset to treatment and outcomes after thrombolytic therapy

OBJECTIVES This study sought to examine the relations among patient characteristics, time to thrombolysis and outcomes in the international GUSTO-I trial. BACKGROUND Studies have shown better left ventricular function and decreased infarct size as well as increased survival with earlier thrombolysis, but the relative benefits of various thrombolytic agents with earlier administration are uncertain. METHODS We evaluated the relations of baseline characteristics to three prospectively defined time variables: symptom onset to treatment, symptom onset to hospital arrival (presentation delay) and hospital arrival to treatment (treatment delay). We also examined the relations of delays to clinical outcomes and to the relative 30-day mortality benefit with accelerated tissue-type plasminogen activator (t-PA) versus streptokinase. RESULTS Female, elderly, diabetic and hypertensive patients had longer delays at all stages. Previous infarction or bypass surgery was an additional risk factor for treatment delay. Early thrombolysis was associated with lower overall mortality rate (< 2 h, 5.5%; > 4 h, 9.0%), but no additional relative benefit resulted from earlier treatment with accelerated t-PA versus streptokinase (p = 0.38). Longer presentation and treatment delays were both associated with increased mortality rate (presentation delay < 1 h, 5.6% and > 4 h, 8.6%; treatment delay < 1 h, 5.4%, and > 90 min, 8.1%). As time to treatment increased, the incidence of recurrent ischemia or reinfarction decreased, but the rates of shock, heart failure and stroke increased. CONCLUSIONS Earlier treatment resulted in better outcomes, regardless of thrombolytic strategy. Elderly, female and diabetic patients were treated later, adding to their already substantial risk.

Stroke After Thrombolysis Mortality and Functional Outcomes in the GUSTO-I Trial

BACKGROUND Stroke is the most feared complication of thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction because of the resulting mortality and disability. We analyzed the incidence, timing, and outcomes of stroke in an international trial. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients were randomly assigned to one of four thrombolytic strategies. Neurological events were confirmed clinically and anatomically and were adjudicated by a blinded committee. Stroke survivors, categorized by residual deficit and disability, assessed their quality of life with a time trade-off technique. Multivariable regression identified patient characteristics associated with intracranial hemorrhage. Over-all, 1.4% of the patients had a stroke (93% anatomic documentation). The risk ranged from 1.19% with streptokinase/subcutaneous heparin therapy to 1.64% with combination thrombolytic therapy (P = .007). Primary intracranial hemorrhage rates ranged from 0.46% with streptokinase/subcutaneous heparin to 0.88% with combination therapy (P < .001). Of all strokes, 41% were fatal, 31% were disabling, and 24% were nondisabling, with no significant treatment-related differences. Stroke subtype affected prognosis: 60% of patients with primary intracranial hemorrhage died and 25% were disabled versus 17% dead and 40% disabled with nonhemorrhagic infarctions. Patients with moderate or severe residual deficits showed significantly decreased quality of life. Advanced age, lower weight, prior cerebrovascular disease or hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, randomization to tissue plasminogen activator, and an interaction between age and hypertension were significant predictors of intracranial hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS Stroke remains a rare but catastrophic complication of thrombolysis. Additional studies should assess the net clinical benefit of thrombolysis in high-risk subgroups, particularly the elderly and patients with prior cerebrovascular events.

Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndromes in Relation to Renal Function Results From the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) Trial

Background— Reduced renal function is associated with a poorer prognosis and increased bleeding risk in patients with acute coronary syndromes and may therefore alter the risk-benefit ratio with antiplatelet therapies. In the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel reduced the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke at 12 months but with similar major bleeding rates. Methods and Results— Central laboratory serum creatinine levels were available in 15 202 (81.9%) acute coronary syndrome patients at baseline, and creatinine clearance, estimated by the Cockcroft Gault equation, was calculated. In patients with chronic kidney disease (creatinine clearance <60 mL/min; n=3237), ticagrelor versus clopidogrel significantly reduced the primary end point to 17.3% from 22.0% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.90) with an absolute risk reduction greater than that of patients with normal renal function (n=11 965): 7.9% versus 8.9% (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.02). In patients with chronic kidney disease, ticagrelor reduced total mortality (10.0% versus 14.0%; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89). Major bleeding rates, fatal bleedings, and non–coronary bypass–related major bleedings were not significantly different between the 2 randomized groups (15.1% versus 14.3%; HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.30; 0.34% versus 0.77%; HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.15 to 1.54; and 8.5% versus 7.3%; HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.68). The interactions between creatinine clearance and randomized treatment on any of the outcome variables were nonsignificant. Conclusions— In acute coronary syndrome patients with chronic kidney disease, ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel significantly reduces ischemic end points and mortality without a significant increase in major bleeding but with numerically more non–procedure-related bleeding. Clinical Trial Registration— URL:http://www.clinicatrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00391872.

Darapladib for Preventing Ischemic Events in Stable Coronary Heart Disease

BACKGROUND Elevated lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 activity promotes the development of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques, and elevated plasma levels of this enzyme are associated with an increased risk of coronary events. Darapladib is a selective oral inhibitor of lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2. METHODS In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 15,828 patients with stable coronary heart disease to receive either once-daily darapladib (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included the components of the primary end point as well as major coronary events (death from coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia) and total coronary events (death from coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or any coronary revascularization). RESULTS During a median follow-up period of 3.7 years, the primary end point occurred in 769 of 7924 patients (9.7%) in the darapladib group and 819 of 7904 patients (10.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the darapladib group, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.03; P=0.20). There were also no significant between-group differences in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. Darapladib, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of major coronary events (9.3% vs. 10.3%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.00; P=0.045) and total coronary events (14.6% vs. 16.1%; hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.98; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS In patients with stable coronary heart disease, darapladib did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; STABILITY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00799903.).

Age and Outcome With Contemporary Thrombolytic Therapy Results From the GUSTO-I Trial

BACKGROUND Elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction have much to gain from reperfusion with thrombolytic therapy but are also at increased risk of adverse events. We examined outcomes according to age of patients receiving thrombolysis in an international trial. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients were randomized to streptokinase plus subcutaneous heparin, streptokinase plus intravenous heparin, accelerated tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) plus intravenous heparin, or streptokinase and TPA plus intravenous heparin. Clinical outcomes at 30 days (death, stroke, and nonfatal, disabling stroke) and 1-year mortality were summarized descriptively for patients aged < 65 (n = 24,708), 65 to 74 (n = 11,201), 75 to 85 (n = 4625), and > 85 years (n = 412) and assessed as continuous functions of age. Older patients had a higher-risk profile with regard to baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. Mortality at 30 days increased markedly with age (3.0%, 9.5%, 19.6%, and 30.3% in the four groups, respectively), as did stroke, cardiogenic shock, bleeding, and reinfarction. Combined death or disabling stroke occurred less often with accelerated TPA in all but the oldest patients, who showed a weak trend toward a lower incidence with streptokinase plus subcutaneous heparin: odds ratio 1.13; 95% confidence interval 0.6, 2.1. Similarly, accelerated TPA treatment resulted in lower 1-year mortality in all but the oldest patients (47% TPA versus 40.3% streptokinase). CONCLUSIONS Lower mortality and greater net clinical benefit were seen with accelerated TPA in patients aged < or = 85 years. Because data are limited for patients aged > 85 years, the relative superiority of a given thrombolytic regimen cannot be determined. The interactions of stroke and mortality with newer thrombolytic strategies must be examined explicitly in older patients.

Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting After Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock Results From the Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) Trial

Background—The Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) trial demonstrated the survival advantage of emergency revascularization versus initial medical stabilization in patients developing cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. The relative merits of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with shock have not been defined. The objective of this analysis was to compare the effects of PCI and CABG on 30-day and 1-year survival in the SHOCK trial. Methods and Results—Of the 302 trial patients, 128 with predominant left ventricular failure had emergency revascularization. The selection of revascularization procedures was individualized. Eighty-one patients (63.3%) had PCI, and 47 (36.7%) had CABG. The median time from randomization to intervention was 0.9 hours (interquartile range [IQR], 0.3 to 2.2 hours) for PCI and 2.7 hours (IQR, 1.3 to 5.5 hours) for CABG. Baseline demographics and hemodynamics were similar, except that there were more diabetics (48.9% versus 26.9%; P=0.02), 3-vessel disease (80.4% versus 60.3%; P=0.03), and left main coronary disease (41.3% versus 13.0%; P=0.001) in the CABG group. In the PCI group, 12.3% had 2-vessel and 2.5% had 3-vessel interventions. In the CABG group, 84.8% received ≥2 grafts, 52.2% received ≥3 grafts, and 87.2% were deemed completely revascularized. The survival rates were 55.6% in the PCI group compared with 57.4% in the CABG group at 30 days (P=0.86) and 51.9% compared with 46.8%, respectively, at 1 year (P=0.71). Conclusions—Among SHOCK trial patients randomized to emergency revascularization, those treated with CABG had a greater prevalence of diabetes and worse coronary disease than those treated with PCI. However, survival rates were similar. Emergency CABG is an important component of an optimal treatment strategy in patients with cardiogenic shock, and should be considered a complementary treatment option in patients with extensive coronary disease.

Efficacy and Safety of Apixaban Compared With Warfarin at Different Levels of Predicted International Normalized Ratio Control for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Background— In the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial, apixaban compared with warfarin reduced stroke and systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality. We evaluated treatment effects in relation to 2 predictions of time in therapeutic range (TTR). Methods and Results— The trial randomized 18 201 patients with atrial fibrillation to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin for at least 12 months. For each patient, a center average TTR was estimated with the use of a linear mixed model on the basis of the real TTRs in its warfarin-treated patients, with a fixed effect for country and random effect for center. For each patient, an individual TTR was also predicted with the use of a linear mixed effects model including patient characteristics as well. Median center average TTR was 66% (interquartile limits, 61% and 71%). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality were consistently lower with apixaban than with warfarin across center average TTR and individual TTR quartiles. In the lowest and highest center average TTR quartiles, hazard ratios for stroke or systemic embolism were 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53–1.00) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.57–1.35) (Pinteraction=0.078), for mortality were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.74–1.13) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71–1.16) (Pinteraction=0.34), and for major bleeding were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.36–0.70) and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.58–0.97) (Pinteraction=0.095), respectively. Similar results were seen for quartiles of individual TTR. Conclusions— The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin for stroke or systemic embolism, bleeding, and mortality appear similar across the range of centers’ and patients’ predicted quality of international normalized ratio control. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00412984.

Bivalirudin pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: effect of renal function, dose, and gender.

These studies were conducted to determine whether bivalirudin clearance and pharmacodynamics are dependent on dose, renal function, or gender.