Susanna R. Stevens

Ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes and diabetes: a substudy from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial

Aims Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have high platelet reactivity and are at increased risk of ischaemic events and bleeding post-acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, ticagrelor reduced the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, but with similar rates of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel. We aimed to investigate the outcome with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with DM or poor glycaemic control. Methods and results We analysed patients with pre-existing DM (n = 4662), including 1036 patients on insulin, those without DM (n = 13 951), and subgroups based on admission levels of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c; n = 15 150). In patients with DM, the reduction in the primary composite endpoint (HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.76–1.03), all-cause mortality (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66–1.01), and stent thrombosis (HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.36–1.17) with no increase in major bleeding (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.81–1.12) with ticagrelor was consistent with the overall cohort and without significant diabetes status-by-treatment interactions. There was no heterogeneity between patients with or without ongoing insulin treatment. Ticagrelor reduced the primary endpoint, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis in patients with HbA1c above the median (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70–0.91; HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.65–0.93; and HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39–1.00, respectively) with similar bleeding rates (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86–1.12). Conclusion Ticagrelor, when compared with clopidogrel, reduced ischaemic events in ACS patients irrespective of diabetic status and glycaemic control, without an increase in major bleeding events.

Response to Letter Regarding Article, “Renal Dysfunction as a Predictor of Stroke and Systemic Embolism in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: Validation of the R2CHADS2 Index in the ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once-Daily, Oral, Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) and ATRIA (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation) Study Cohorts”

Background —We sought to define the factors associated with the occurrence of stroke and systemic embolism in a large, international atrial fibrillation (AF) trial. Methods and Results —In ROCKET AF, 14,264 patients with nonvalvular AF and creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥30 mL/min were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to identify factors at randomization independently associated with the occurrence of stroke or non-central nervous system (CNS) embolism based on intention-to-treat analysis. A risk score was developed in ROCKET AF and validated in ATRIA, an independent AF patient cohort. Over a median follow-up of 1.94 years, 575 (4.0%) patients experienced primary endpoint events. Reduced CrCl was a strong, independent predictor of stroke and systemic embolism, second only to prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Additional factors associated with stroke and systemic embolism included elevated diastolic blood pressure and heart rate, and vascular disease of the heart and limbs (C-index 0.635). A model including CrCl (R2CHADS2) improved net reclassification index (NRI) by 6.2% when compared with CHA2DS2VASc (C-statistic=0.578) and 8.2% when compared with CHADS2 (C-statistic=0.575). The inclusion of estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 and prior stroke or TIA in a model with no other covariates led to a C-statistic of 0.590. Validation of R2CHADS2 in an external, separate population improved NRI by 17.4% (95% CI 12.1-22.5%) relative to CHADS2. Conclusions —In patients with nonvalvular AF at moderate to high risk of stroke, impaired renal function is a potent predictor of stroke and systemic embolism. Stroke risk stratification in patients with AF should include renal function. Clinical Trial Registration Information —ClinicalTrials.gov; Unique identifier: [NCT00403767][1]. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT00403767&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2Fearly%2F2012%2F12%2F03%2FCIRCULATIONAHA.112.107128.atom

Rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack: a subgroup analysis of ROCKET AF

BACKGROUND In ROCKET AF, rivaroxaban was non-inferior to adjusted-dose warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to investigate whether the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin is consistent among the subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). METHODS In ROCKET AF, patients with AF who were at increased risk of stroke were randomly assigned (1:1) in a double-blind manner to rivaroxaban 20 mg daily or adjusted dose warfarin (international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Between Dec 18, 2006, and June 17, 2009, 14 264 patients from 1178 centres in 45 countries were randomly assigned. The primary endpoint was the composite of stroke or non-CNS systemic embolism. In this substudy we assessed the interaction of the treatment effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin among patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat and safety analyses were done in the on-treatment population. ROCKET AF is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00403767. FINDINGS 7468 (52%) patients had a previous stroke (n=4907) or TIA (n=2561) and 6796 (48%) had no previous stroke or TIA. The number of events per 100 person-years for the primary endpoint in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (2·79% rivaroxaban vs 2·96% warfarin; hazard ratio [HR] 0·94, 95% CI 0·77-1·16) and those without (1·44%vs 1·88%; 0·77, 0·58-1·01; interaction p=0·23). The number of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding events per 100 person-years in patients treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was consistent among patients with previous stroke or TIA (13·31% rivaroxaban vs 13·87% warfarin; HR 0·96, 95% CI 0·87-1·07) and those without (16·69%vs 15·19%; 1·10, 0·99-1·21; interaction p=0·08). INTERPRETATION There was no evidence that the relative efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin was different between patients who had a previous stroke or TIA and those who had no previous stroke or TIA. These results support the use of rivaroxaban as an alternative to warfarin for prevention of recurrent as well as initial stroke in patients with AF. FUNDING Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development and Bayer HealthCare.

Outcomes After Cardioversion and Atrial Fibrillation Ablation in Patients Treated With Rivaroxaban and Warfarin in the ROCKET AF Trial

OBJECTIVES This study sought to investigate the outcomes following cardioversion or catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with warfarin or rivaroxaban. BACKGROUND There are limited data on outcomes following cardioversion or catheter ablation in AF patients treated with factor Xa inhibitors. METHODS We compared the incidence of electrical cardioversion (ECV), pharmacologic cardioversion (PCV), or AF ablation and subsequent outcomes in patients in a post hoc analysis of the ROCKET AF (Efficacy and Safety Study of Rivaroxaban With Warfarin for the Prevention of Stroke and Non-Central Nervous System Systemic Embolism in Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation) trial. RESULTS Over a median follow-up of 2.1 years, 143 patients underwent ECV, 142 underwent PCV, and 79 underwent catheter ablation. The overall incidence of ECV, PCV, or AF ablation was 1.45 per 100 patient-years (n = 321; 1.44 [n = 161] in the warfarin arm, 1.46 [n = 160] in the rivaroxaban arm). The crude rates of stroke and death increased in the first 30 days after cardioversion or ablation. After adjustment for baseline differences, the long-term incidence of stroke or systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61 to 3.11), cardiovascular death (HR: 1.57; 95% CI: 0.69 to 3.55), and death from all causes (HR: 1.75; 95% CI: 0.90 to 3.42) were not different before and after cardioversion or AF ablation. Hospitalization increased after cardioversion or AF ablation (HR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.51 to 2.68), but there was no evidence of a differential effect by randomized treatment (p value for interaction = 0.58). The incidence of stroke or systemic embolism (1.88% vs. 1.86%) and death (1.88% vs. 3.73%) were similar in the rivaroxaban-treated and warfarin-treated groups. CONCLUSIONS Despite an increase in hospitalization, there were no differences in long-term stroke rates or survival following cardioversion or AF ablation. Outcomes were similar in patients treated with rivaroxaban or warfarin. (An Efficacy and Safety Study of Rivaroxaban With Warfarin for the Prevention of Stroke and Non-Central Nervous System Systemic Embolism in Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation [ROCKET AF]; NCT00403767).

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes intended for non-invasive management: substudy from prospective randomised PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial

Objective To evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes in patients in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial who at randomisation were planned for a non-invasive treatment strategy. Design Pre-specified analysis of pre-randomisation defined subgroup of prospective randomised clinical trial. Setting 862 centres in 43 countries. Participants 5216 (28%) of 18 624 patients admitted to hospital for acute coronary syndrome who were specified as planned for non-invasive management. Interventions Randomised treatment with ticagrelor (n=2601) versus clopidogrel (2615). Main outcome measurements Primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; their individual components; and PLATO defined major bleeding during one year. Results 2183 (41.9%) patients had coronary angiography during their initial hospital admission, 1065 (20.4%) had percutaneous coronary intervention, and 208 (4.0%) had coronary artery bypass surgery. Cumulatively, 3143 (60.3%) patients had been managed non-invasively by the end of follow-up. The incidence of the primary end point was lower with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel (12.0% (n=295) v 14.3% (346); hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.00; P=0.04). Overall mortality was also lower (6.1% (147) v 8.2% (195); 0.75, 0.61 to 0.93; P=0.01). The incidence of total major bleeding (11.9% (272) v 10.3% (238); 1.17, 0.98 to 1.39; P=0.08) and non-coronary artery bypass grafting related major bleeding (4.0% (90) v 3.1% (71); 1.30, 0.95 to 1.77; P=0.10) was numerically higher with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel. Conclusions In patients with acute coronary syndrome initially intended for non-invasive management, the benefits of ticagrelor over clopidogrel were consistent with those from the overall PLATO results, indicating the broad benefits of P2Y12 inhibition with ticagrelor regardless of intended management strategy. Trial registration Clinical trials NCT00391872.

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

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.

Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes and a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack

Background— Patients with acute coronary syndromes and history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) have an increased rate of recurrent cardiac events and intracranial hemorrhages. Methods and Results— We evaluated treatment effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome with and without a history of prior stroke or TIA in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Of the 18 624 randomized patients, 1152 (6.2%) had a history of stroke or TIA. Such patients had higher rates of myocardial infarction (11.5% versus 6.0%), death (10.5% versus 4.9%), stroke (3.4% versus 1.2%), and intracranial bleeding (0.8% versus 0.2%) than patients without prior stroke or TIA. Among patients with a history of stroke or TIA, the reduction of the primary composite outcome and total mortality at 1 year with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel was consistent with the overall trial results: 19.0% versus 20.8% (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.66–1.13; interaction P=0.84) and 7.9% versus 13.0% (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.42–0.91). The overall PLATO-defined bleeding rates were similar: 14.6% versus 14.9% (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.71–1.37), and intracranial bleeding occurred infrequently (4 versus 4 cases, respectively). Conclusions— Patients with acute coronary syndrome with a prior history of ischemic stroke or TIA had higher rates of clinical outcomes than patients without prior stroke or TIA. However, the efficacy and bleeding results of ticagrelor in these high-risk patients were consistent with the overall trial population, with a favorable clinical net benefit and associated impact on mortality. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicatrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00391872.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation but underlying native mitral and aortic valve disease participating in the ROCKET AF trial

Aims We investigated clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with significant valvular disease (SVD) in the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) trial. Methods and results ROCKET AF excluded patients with mitral stenosis or artificial valve prostheses. We used Cox regression to adjust comparisons for potential confounders. Among 14 171 patients, 2003 (14.1%) had SVD; they were older and had more comorbidities than patients without SVD. The rate of stroke or systemic embolism with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin was consistent among patients with SVD [2.01 vs. 2.43%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55–1.27] and without SVD (1.96 vs. 2.22%; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75–1.07; interaction P = 0.76). However, rates of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding with rivaroxaban vs. warfarin were higher in patients with SVD (19.8% rivaroxaban vs. 16.8% warfarin; HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05–1.49) vs. those without (14.2% rivaroxaban vs. 14.1% warfarin; HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.94–1.10; interaction P = 0.034), even when controlling for risk factors and potential confounders. In intracranial haemorrhage, there was no interaction between patients with and without SVD where the overall rate was lower among those randomized to rivaroxaban. Conclusions Many patients with ‘non-valvular atrial fibrillation’ have significant valve lesions. Their risk of stroke is similar to that of patients without SVD after controlling for stroke risk factors. Efficacy of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin was similar in patients with and without SVD; however, the observed risk of bleeding was higher with rivaroxaban in patients with SVD but was the same among those without SVD. Atrial fibrillation patients with and without SVD experience the same stroke-preventive benefit of oral anticoagulants.

Predictors of Postdischarge Outcomes From Information Acquired Shortly After Admission for Acute Heart Failure A Report From the Placebo-Controlled Randomized Study of the Selective A1 Adenosine Receptor Antagonist Rolofylline for Patients Hospitalized With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Volume Overload to Assess Treatment Effect on Congestion and Renal Function (PROTECT) Study

Background —Acute heart failure (AHF) is a common reason for admission and outcome is often poor. Improved prognostic risk stratification may assist in the design of future trials and in patient management. Using data from a large randomized trial, we explored the prognostic value of clinical variables, measured at hospital admission for AHF, to determine whether a few selected variables were inferior to an extended data-set. Methods and Results —The prognostic model included 37 clinical characteristics collected at baseline in PROTECT, a study comparing rolofylline and placebo in 2,033 patients admitted with AHF. Pre-specified outcomes at 30 days were death or re-hospitalization for any reason, death or re-hospitalization for cardiovascular or renal reasons and, at both 30 and 180 days, all-cause mortality. No variable had a c-index >0.70 and few had values >0.60; c-indices were lower for composite outcomes than for mortality. Blood urea was generally the strongest single predictor. Eighteen variables contributed independent prognostic information but a reduced model using only eight items (age, prior heart failure hospitalization, peripheral edema, systolic blood pressure, serum sodium, urea, creatinine and albumin) performed similarly. For all-cause mortality at 180-days, the model C-index using all variables was 0.72 and for the simplified model, also 0.72. Conclusions —A few simple clinical variables measured on admission in patients with AHF predict a variety of adverse outcomes with similar accuracy to more complex models. However, predictive models were of only moderate accuracy, especially for outcomes that included non-fatal events. Better methods of risk-stratification are required. Clinical Trial Registration —URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: [NCT00328692][1] and [NCT00354458][2]. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT00328692&atom=%2Fcirchf%2Fearly%2F2013%2F11%2F26%2FCIRCHEARTFAILURE.113.000284.atom [2]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT00354458&atom=%2Fcirchf%2Fearly%2F2013%2F11%2F26%2FCIRCHEARTFAILURE.113.000284.atom

Elderly Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Managed Without Revascularization Insights Into the Safety of Long-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Reduced-Dose Prasugrel Versus Standard-Dose Clopidogrel

Background— Dual antiplatelet therapy in older versus younger patients with acute coronary syndromes is understudied. Low-dose prasugrel (5 mg/d) is recommended for younger, lower-body-weight patients and elderly patients with acute coronary syndromes to mitigate the bleeding risk of standard-dose prasugrel (10 mg/d). Methods and Results— A total of 9326 medically managed patients with acute coronary syndromes from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial (<75 years of age, n=7243; ≥75 years of age, n=2083) were randomized to prasugrel (10 mg/d; 5 mg/d for those ≥75 or <75 years of age and <60 kg in weight) or clopidogrel (75 mg/d) plus aspirin for ⩽30 months. A total of 515 participants ≥75 years of age (25% of total elderly population) had serial platelet reactivity unit measurements in a platelet-function substudy. Cumulative risks of the primary end point (cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke) and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding increased progressively with age and were ≥2-fold higher in older participants. Among those ≥75 years of age, TIMI major bleeding (4.1% versus 3.4%; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.57–2.08) and the primary end point rates were similar with reduced-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel. Despite a correlation between lower 30-day on-treatment platelet reactivity unit values and lower weight only in the prasugrel group, there was a nonsignificant treatment-by-weight interaction for platelet reactivity unit values among participants ≥75 years of age in the platelet-function substudy (P=0.06). No differences in weight were seen in all participants ≥75 years of age with versus without TIMI major/minor bleeding in both treatment groups. Conclusions— Older age is associated with substantially increased long-term cardiovascular risk and bleeding among patients with medically managed acute coronary syndromes, with no differences in ischemic or bleeding outcomes with reduced-dose prasugrel compared with clopidogrel in elderly patients. No significant interactions among weight, pharmacodynamic response, and bleeding risk were observed between reduced-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel in elderly patients. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home. Unique identifier: NCT0069999.Background— Dual antiplatelet therapy in older versus younger patients with acute coronary syndromes is understudied. Low-dose prasugrel (5 mg/d) is recommended for younger, lower-body-weight patients and elderly patients with acute coronary syndromes to mitigate the bleeding risk of standard-dose prasugrel (10 mg/d). Methods and Results— A total of 9326 medically managed patients with acute coronary syndromes from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial (<75 years of age, n=7243; ≥75 years of age, n=2083) were randomized to prasugrel (10 mg/d; 5 mg/d for those ≥75 or <75 years of age and <60 kg in weight) or clopidogrel (75 mg/d) plus aspirin for ≤30 months. A total of 515 participants ≥75 years of age (25% of total elderly population) had serial platelet reactivity unit measurements in a platelet-function substudy. Cumulative risks of the primary end point (cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke) and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding increased progressively with age and were ≥2-fold higher in older participants. Among those ≥75 years of age, TIMI major bleeding (4.1% versus 3.4%; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.57–2.08) and the primary end point rates were similar with reduced-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel. Despite a correlation between lower 30-day on-treatment platelet reactivity unit values and lower weight only in the prasugrel group, there was a nonsignificant treatment-by-weight interaction for platelet reactivity unit values among participants ≥75 years of age in the platelet-function substudy ( P =0.06). No differences in weight were seen in all participants ≥75 years of age with versus without TIMI major/minor bleeding in both treatment groups. Conclusions— Older age is associated with substantially increased long-term cardiovascular risk and bleeding among patients with medically managed acute coronary syndromes, with no differences in ischemic or bleeding outcomes with reduced-dose prasugrel compared with clopidogrel in elderly patients. No significant interactions among weight, pharmacodynamic response, and bleeding risk were observed between reduced-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel in elderly patients. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: NCT0069999. # Clinical Perspective {#article-title-32}