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
Ticagrelor is an oral, reversible, direct-acting inhibitor of the adenosine diphosphate
receptor P2Y12 that has a more rapid onset and more pronounced platelet inhibition
than clopidogrel.
In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial, we compared ticagrelor (180-mg
loading dose, 90 mg twice daily thereafter) and clopidogrel (300-to-600-mg loading
dose, 75 mg daily thereafter) for the prevention of cardiovascular events in 18,624
patients admitted to the hospital with an acute coronary syndrome, with or without
ST-segment elevation.
At 12 months, the primary end point--a composite of death from vascular causes, myocardial
infarction, or stroke--had occurred in 9.8% of patients receiving ticagrelor as compared
with 11.7% of those receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval
[CI], 0.77 to 0.92; P<0.001). Predefined hierarchical testing of secondary end points
showed significant differences in the rates of other composite end points, as well
as myocardial infarction alone (5.8% in the ticagrelor group vs. 6.9% in the clopidogrel
group, P=0.005) and death from vascular causes (4.0% vs. 5.1%, P=0.001) but not stroke
alone (1.5% vs. 1.3%, P=0.22). The rate of death from any cause was also reduced with
ticagrelor (4.5%, vs. 5.9% with clopidogrel; P<0.001). No significant difference in
the rates of major bleeding was found between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups
(11.6% and 11.2%, respectively; P=0.43), but ticagrelor was associated with a higher
rate of major bleeding not related to coronary-artery bypass grafting (4.5% vs. 3.8%,
P=0.03), including more instances of fatal intracranial bleeding and fewer of fatal
bleeding of other types.
In patients who have an acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation,
treatment with ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel significantly reduced the rate
of death from vascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke without an increase
in the rate of overall major bleeding but with an increase in the rate of non-procedure-related
bleeding. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00391872.)
2009 Massachusetts Medical Society
Although most clinical trials of coronary stents have measured nominally identical safety and effectiveness end points, differences in definitions and timing of assessment have created confusion in interpretation. The Academic Research Consortium is an informal collaboration between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe. Two meetings, in Washington, DC, in January 2006 and in Dublin, Ireland, in June 2006, sponsored by the Academic Research Consortium and including representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and all device manufacturers who were working with the Food and Drug Administration on drug-eluting stent clinical trial programs, were focused on consensus end point definitions for drug-eluting stent evaluations. The effort was pursued with the objective to establish consistency among end point definitions and provide consensus recommendations. On the basis of considerations from historical legacy to key pathophysiological mechanisms and relevance to clinical interpretability, criteria for assessment of death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis were developed. The broadly based consensus end point definitions in this document may be usefully applied or recognized for regulatory and clinical trial purposes. Although consensus criteria will inevitably include certain arbitrary features, consensus criteria for clinical end points provide consistency across studies that can facilitate the evaluation of safety and effectiveness of these devices.
Dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a thienopyridine is a cornerstone of treatment to prevent thrombotic complications of acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary intervention. To compare prasugrel, a new thienopyridine, with clopidogrel, we randomly assigned 13,608 patients with moderate-to-high-risk acute coronary syndromes with scheduled percutaneous coronary intervention to receive prasugrel (a 60-mg loading dose and a 10-mg daily maintenance dose) or clopidogrel (a 300-mg loading dose and a 75-mg daily maintenance dose), for 6 to 15 months. The primary efficacy end point was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The key safety end point was major bleeding. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 12.1% of patients receiving clopidogrel and 9.9% of patients receiving prasugrel (hazard ratio for prasugrel vs. clopidogrel, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.90; P<0.001). We also found significant reductions in the prasugrel group in the rates of myocardial infarction (9.7% for clopidogrel vs. 7.4% for prasugrel; P<0.001), urgent target-vessel revascularization (3.7% vs. 2.5%; P<0.001), and stent thrombosis (2.4% vs. 1.1%; P<0.001). Major bleeding was observed in 2.4% of patients receiving prasugrel and in 1.8% of patients receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.68; P=0.03). Also greater in the prasugrel group was the rate of life-threatening bleeding (1.4% vs. 0.9%; P=0.01), including nonfatal bleeding (1.1% vs. 0.9%; hazard ratio, 1.25; P=0.23) and fatal bleeding (0.4% vs. 0.1%; P=0.002). In patients with acute coronary syndromes with scheduled percutaneous coronary intervention, prasugrel therapy was associated with significantly reduced rates of ischemic events, including stent thrombosis, but with an increased risk of major bleeding, including fatal bleeding. Overall mortality did not differ significantly between treatment groups. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00097591 [ClinicalTrials.gov].) Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.