THE COMPARISON OF EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TICAGRELOR VERSUS CLOPIDOGREL IN THE MANAGEMENT OF ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (original) (raw)
Related papers
Vascular Health and Risk Management, 2010
Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are the leading cause of mortality and one of the main reasons for hospital admissions in the developed nations. Due to high rates of mortality and reinfarction, ACS represent a major public health concern. Platelets play a central role in atherothrombosis, the main pathologic substrate in ACS. Sufficient inhibition of platelet aggregation is therefore one of the key targets in the treatment of ACS. Blockade of the P2Y 12 subtype of adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor on platelet cell membranes has been established as a key mechanism of platelet inhibition. Clopidogrel, an ADP receptor antagonist and a second-generation thienopyridine, has been demonstrated to be of clinical benefit in patients with ACS when added to aspirin. A delayed onset of action due to two-step conversion to the active metabolite, irreversible binding to P2Y 12 receptors, and broad interindividual variability in levels of platelet response are the main limitations of clopidogrel. Prasugrel, a novel thirdgeneration thienopyridine, provides faster and stronger inhibition of platelet aggregation than clopigodrel. However, like the active metabolite of clopidogrel, prasugrel binds irreversibly to the P2Y 12 ADP receptor site, causing inhibition of platelet aggregation for the life of the platelet. Although in a randomized, double-blind trial prasugrel demonstrated superiority for multiple cardiovascular endpoints compared with standard-dose clopidogrel, it was also associated with an increased bleeding risk, including fatal bleeding. This review discusses the optimal antiplatelet regimens for management of patients with ACS, with special focus on ticagrelor, the first oral agent in a new chemical class of nonthienopyridine antiplatelet agents termed cyclopentyltriazolo-pyrimidines. Faster and greater platelet inhibition than clopidogrel, quick recovery of platelet function, and high efficacy regardless of clopidogrel response status, are the obvious advantages of ticagrelor as compared with thienopyridines. The prospective, randomized Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes trial has established the clinical utility, enhanced efficacy, and similar safety of ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel in a wide range of patients with ACS managed with contemporary antithrombotic therapies and invasive strategies when indicated. Dyspnea, ventricular pauses $3 seconds, and elevation of serum creatinine and uric acid are the most common known adverse effects associated with ticagrelor, and require further comprehensive assessment.
Circulation, 2009
Background— 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. Methods and Results— 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 μmol/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 <0.0001 for all); by 2 hours after loading, a greater proportion of patients achieved >50% IPA (98% versus 31%, P <0.0001) and >70% IPA (90% versus 16%, P <0.0001) in the ...
American Heart Journal, 2016
Background Ticagrelor reduced cardiovascular events compared with clopidogrel in PLATO without increasing overall major bleeding. We evaluated whether the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) impacts the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel. Methods PLATO randomized 18,624 subjects with acute coronary syndrome to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. The primary efficacy end point was cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke, and the primary safety end point was major bleeding. The use of GPI was at the physician's discretion and open-label. We evaluated outcomes at 30 days stratified by GPI use in the subgroup of 9,983 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 72 hours. Results A total of 4,020 (40%) received a GPI. Those receiving a GPI were more likely to be younger, be male, and undergo multivessel PCI. There was no interaction between treatment and GPI use for the primary efficacy and safety end points. Patients treated without GPI had a lower rate of definite stent thrombosis and higher rate of minor/major bleeding with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel (P b .05), whereas there was no such difference with GPI (P interaction b .05). Conclusions In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing early PCI, the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel were not modified by GPI use according to the primary efficacy and safety end point of the trial, although there were indications of greater benefit on definite stent thrombosis and more major or minor bleeding with ticagrelor in patients without (vs with) GPI treatment.
A critical overview on ticagrelor in acute coronary syndromes
QJM, 2013
Until a few years ago, the mainstay of anti-platelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel, a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. However, current clinical practice has now changed with the introduction of ticagrelor, a more potent cardiovascular drug than clopidogrel, without the limitations related to clopidogrel therapy. In this review, we provide a critical overview of ticagrelor in ACS, highlight the results with ticagrelor in several subgroups of patients and discuss the future trials.
Internal Medicine Journal, 2017
Background/Aim: We studied clinical outcomes and discontinuation rates in a 'realworld' population presenting with myocardial infarction treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. Methods: Between January 2012 and May 2015, 992 patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing invasive management and adequately pre-treated with dual antiplatelet therapy were prospectively enrolled. Platelet aggregation was measured using the Multiplate analyser. Baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes and 1-year outcomes were collected. Results: Patients treated with ticagrelor were younger and less likely to be diabetic, have a previous myocardial infarction or present with a ST-elevation myocardial infarction (all P < 0.05). Those treated with ticagrelor also had lower CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA guidelines; 20 AE 9.4 vs 23 AE 10.1, P < 0.0001) and GRACE (119 AE 28 vs 126 AE 32, P = 0.002) scores. High platelet reactivity was greatly reduced with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel (16.1% vs 37.0%, respectively; P < 0.0001). Non-coronary artery bypass grafting-related thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major and minor bleeding occurred at similar rates in those treated with ticagrelor and clopidogrel. Rates of drug discontinuation in those treated with ticagrelor and clopidogrel were similar in hospital (20.2% vs 16.2%, P = 0.18) and between discharge and 1 year (29.9% vs 27.9%, P = 0.63). However, discontinuation due to dyspnoea, (3.3% vs 0%, P < 0.0001) and discontinuation due to any possible drug-related adverse event (9.3% vs 2.2%, P = 0.0001) was more common in those treated with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel Conclusion: Ticagrelor is paradoxically being used in lower-risk patients rather than those most likely to benefit. Ticagrelor was associated with similar rates of bleeding but higher discontinuation rates due to adverse effects compared to clopidogrel.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2012
The study aimed to compare the antiplatelet action of ticagrelor with prasugrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) while on clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background Newer P2Y12 inhibitors like prasugrel and ticagrelor provide stronger platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel. Both agents are efficacious in patients with HTPR while on clopidogrel, but direct comparison between them has not yet been reported. Methods In a prospective, single-center, single-blind study, 44 (of 139 screened, 31.7%) ACS patients with HTPR while on clopidogrel 24 h post-PCI were randomized to either ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily or prasugrel 10 mg once daily for 15 days with a crossover directly to the alternate treatment for another 15 days. HTPR was defined as platelet reactivity units (PRU) Ն235 as assessed by the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay. Results The primary endpoint of platelet reactivity at the end of the 2 treatment periods was lower for ticagrelor (32.9 PRU, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.7 to 47.2) compared with prasugrel (101.3 PRU, 95% CI: 86.8 to 115.7) with a least squares mean difference of-68.3 PRU (95% CI:-88.6 to-48.1; p Ͻ 0.001). The secondary endpoint of HTPR rate was 0% for ticagrelor and 2.4% for prasugrel (1 of 42, p ϭ 0.5). No patient exhibited a major bleeding event at either treatment group. Conclusions In patients with ACS exhibiting HTPR while on clopidogrel 24 h post-PCI, ticagrelor produces a significantly higher platelet inhibition compared with prasugrel.
Cardiology journal, 2021
The risk of ischemic events gradually decreases after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), reaching a stable level after 1 month, while the risk of bleeding remains steady during the whole period of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT). Several de-escalation strategies of antiplatelet treatment aiming to enhance safety of DAPT without depriving it of its efficacy have been evaluated so far. We hypothesized that reduction of the ticagrelor maintenance dose 1 month after ACS and its continuation until 12 months after ACS may improve adherence to antiplatelet treatment due to better tolerability compared with the standard dose of ticagrelor. Moreover, improved safety of treatment and preserved anti-ischemic benefit may also be expected with additional acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) withdrawal. To evaluate these hypotheses, we designed the Evaluating Safety and Efficacy of Two Ticagrelor-based De-escalation Antiplatelet Strategies in Acute Coronary Syndrome - a randomized clinical trial (ELECTRA-SI...