Reliable anticoagulation with enoxaparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: The pharmacokinetics of enoxaparin in PCI (PEPCI) study.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic response to intravenous (IV) enoxaparin given 8-12 hr after subcutaneous (SC) dosing in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Fifty-five patients received SC enoxaparin (1 mg/kg every 12 hr) followed by an IV bolus (0.3 mg/kg) 8-12 hr after the last SC dose, at the start of PCI or during catheterization. Anti-Xa levels were within the target range in 98% of patients 2-8 hr after the last SC dose, in 96% of patients following the IV bolus, and in 91% of patients for a further 2 hr. Subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg every 12 hr) provides sufficient anti-Xa levels for PCI 2-8 hr after the last dose. An additional 0.3 mg/kg enoxaparin dose given IV 8-12 hr after the last SC dose reliably maintains anti-Xa levels within the target for at least 2 additional hr.

The safety and efficacy of subcutaneous enoxaparin versus intravenous unfractionated heparin and tirofiban versus placebo in the treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients ineligible for reperfusion (TETAMI): a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Enoxaparin Versus Intravenous Unfractionated Heparin and Tirofiban Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Ineligible for Reperfusion (TETAMI) study were to demonstrate that enoxaparin was superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH) and that tirofiban was better than placebo in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who do not receive timely reperfusion. BACKGROUND: An optimal treatment strategy has not been identified for the many STEMI patients ineligible for acute reperfusion. METHODS: A total of 1224 patients were enrolled in 91 centers in 14 countries between July 1999 and July 2002. Patients with STEMI ineligible for reperfusion were randomized to enoxaparin, enoxaparin plus tirofiban, UFH, or UFH plus tirofiban. All patients received oral aspirin. The primary efficacy end point was the 30-day combined incidence of death, reinfarction, or recurrent angina; the primary analysis was the comparison of the pooled enoxaparin and UFH groups. RESULTS: The incidence of the primary efficacy end point was 15.7% enoxaparin versus 17.3% for UFH (odds ratio 0.89 [95% confidence interval CI = 0.66 to 1.21]) and 16.6% for tirofiban versus 16.4% for placebo (odds ratio 1.02 [95% CI 0.75 to 1.38]). The Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major hemorrhage rate was 1.5% for enoxaparin versus 1.3% for UFH (odds ratio 1.16 [95% CI 0.44 to 3.02]) and 1.8% versus 1% for tirofiban versus placebo (odds ratio 1.82 [95% CI 0.67 to 4.95]). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not show that enoxaparin significantly reduced the 30-day incidence of death, reinfarction, and recurrent angina compared with UFH in non-reperfused STEMI patients. However, enoxaparin appears to have a similar safety and efficacy profile to UFH and may be an alternative treatment. Additional therapy with tirofiban did not appear beneficial.

Comparison of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with unstable angina pectoris/non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction having subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention.

Patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) may undergo invasive revascularization procedures shortly after admission to hospital or after a brief period of stabilization. In the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 11B trial and Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Enoxaparin in Non-Q-Wave Coronary Events (ESSENCE) trial 1,326 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 924 patients underwent PCI during the initial hospitalization period, and of these, 445 patients did so while receiving treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or the low-molecular-weight heparin, enoxaparin. This analysis compared efficacy and clinical events in the enoxaparin and UFH groups in patients who: (1) underwent PCI while on treatment versus those who did not, and (2) underwent PCI in hospital. We also compared those who did not undergo PCI. Treatment with enoxaparin (1 mg/kg given as twice daily subcutaneous injections) was beneficial and well tolerated in patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation MI who underwent PCI. Compared with UFH, enoxaparin significantly reduced the likelihood of clinical events (death and nonfatal MI after PCI) in patients who underwent PCI after 1 year (p = 0.003 for in-hospital PCI; p = 0.005 for on-treatment PCI), with a trend toward a reduced event rate at 43 days. In addition, patients treated with enoxaparin who did not undergo PCI also showed a reduction in the risk of death, nonfatal MI, and urgent revascularization when compared with those treated with UFH (significant at 43 days, with a trend persisting at 1 year). Study limitations were that PCI was nonrandomized, the analysis was post hoc, and the sample size was relatively small. Nevertheless, in the absence of large clinical trials, this study suggests that treatment with enoxaparin was well tolerated, and exhibited a similar risk of major hemorrhage to UFH in patients who underwent PCI.

Randomized double-blind safety study of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes treated with tirofiban and aspirin: the ACUTE II study. The Antithrombotic Combination Using Tirofiban and Enoxaparin.

BACKGROUND: In comparison with treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) and aspirin (ASA), both tirofiban administered with UFH and ASA, and enoxaparin plus ASA have shown superiority in reducing cardiac ischemic events in patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Replacing UFH with enoxaparin when tirofiban is administered to patients may offer further therapeutic benefit, but could also increase bleeding. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to provide estimates of the frequency of bleeding complications, as defined by means of the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction(TIMI) group, and collect data on clinical efficacy of the combination of tirofiban with enoxaparin plus ASA. METHODS: Five hundred twenty-five patients with UA/NSTEMI were treated with tirofiban coadministered with ASA and randomized to receive either UFH (n = 210) or enoxaparin (n = 315). Therapy was administered for 24 to 96 hours. Bleeding incidences were assessed until 24 hours after trial therapy was discontinued; other clinical outcomes were assessed for as long as 30 days. RESULTS: The total bleeding rate (TIMI major + minor + loss-no-site) for the UFH group versus the enoxaparin group was 4.8% vs 3.5% (odds ratio [OR] 1.4, CI 0.6-3.4). The TIMI major and minor bleeding rates for the UFH versus the enoxaparin groups were 1.0% versus 0.3% (OR 3.0, CI 0.3-33.8) and 4.3% versus 2.5% (OR 1.7, CI 0.7-4.6). There was an increase in nuisance cutaneous and oral bleeds (<50 mL of blood loss) in the enoxaparin group. Death or myocardial infarction occurred with similar frequency in the 2 groups (9.0% vs 9.2%). However, refractory ischemia requiring urgent revascularization and rehospitalization because of unstable angina occurred more frequently in the UFH group (4.3% vs 0.6% and 7.1% vs 1.6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with tirofiban plus enoxaparin appears safe, relative to therapy with tirofiban plus UFH.

Enoxaparin as adjunctive antithrombin therapy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: results of the ENTIRE-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 23 Trial.

BACKGROUND: ENTIRE-TIMI 23 evaluated enoxaparin with full-dose tenecteplase (TNK) and half-dose TNK plus abciximab. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=483) with ST-elevation MI presenting <6 hours from symptom onset were randomized to full-dose TNK and either unfractionated heparin (UFH) (bolus 60 U/kg; infusion 12 U/kg per hour) or enoxaparin (1.0 mg/kg subcutaneously every 12 hours+/-initial 30 mg intravenous bolus), or half-dose TNK plus abciximab and either UFH (bolus 40 U/kg; infusion 7 U/kg per hour) or enoxaparin (0.3 to 0.75 mg/kg subcutaneously every 12 hours+/-initial intravenous bolus of 30 mg). With full-dose TNK and UFH, the rate of TIMI 3 flow at 60 minutes was 52% and was 48% to 51% with enoxaparin. Using combination therapy, the rate of TIMI 3 flow was 48% with UFH and 47% to 58% with enoxaparin. The rate of TIMI 3 flow among all UFH patients was 50% and was 51% among enoxaparin patients. Through 30 days, death/recurrent MI occurred in the full-dose TNK group in 15.9% of patients with UFH and 4.4% with enoxaparin (P=0.005). In the combination therapy group, the rates were 6.5% with UFH and 5.5% with enoxaparin. The rate of major hemorrhage with full-dose TNK was 2.4% with UFH and 1.9% with enoxaparin; with combination therapy, it was 5.2% using UFH and 8.5% with enoxaparin. CONCLUSIONS: Enoxaparin is associated with similar TIMI 3 flow rates as UFH at an early time point while exhibiting advantages over UFH with respect to ischemic events through 30 days. These findings with enoxaparin are achieved with a similar risk of major hemorrhage.

The safety and efficacy of subcutaneous enoxaparin versus intravenous unfractionated heparin and tirofiban versus placebo in the treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Patients ineligible for reperfusion (TETAMI): a randomized trial

The aims of the Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Enoxaparin Versus Intravenous Unfractionated Heparin and Tirofiban Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Ineligible for Reperfusion (TETAMI) study were to demonstrate that enoxaparin was superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH) and that tirofiban was better than placebo in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who do not receive timely reperfusion. BACKGROUND: An optimal treatment strategy has not been identified for the many STEMI patients ineligible for acute reperfusion. METHODS: A total of 1224 patients were enrolled in 91 centers in 14 countries between July 1999 and July 2002. Patients with STEMI ineligible for reperfusion were randomized to enoxaparin, enoxaparin plus tirofiban, UFH, or UFH plus tirofiban. All patients received oral aspirin. The primary efficacy end point was the 30-day combined incidence of death, reinfarction, or recurrent angina; the primary analysis was the comparison of the pooled enoxaparin and UFH groups. REULTS: The incidence of the primary efficacy end point was 15.7% enoxaparin versus 17.3% for UFH (odds ratio 0.89 [95% confidence interval CI = 0.66 to 1.21]) and 16.6% for tirofiban versus 16.4% for placebo (odds ratio 1.02 [95% CI 0.75 to 1.38]). The Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major hemorrhage rate was 1.5% for enoxaparin versus 1.3% for UFH (odds ratio 1.16 [95% CI 0.44 to 3.02]) and 1.8% versus 1% for tirofiban versus Placebo (odds ratio 1.82 ([95% CI 0.67 to 4.95])...