ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial, cangrelor reduced the primary composite end point of death, myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48 hours. This study aimed to explore the impact of event adjudication and the prognostic importance of MI reported by a clinical events committee (CEC) or site investigators (SIs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial of patients undergoing elective or nonelective percutaneous coronary intervention were analyzed. A CEC systematically identified and adjudicated MI using predefined criteria, a computer algorithm to identify suspected events, and semilogarithmic plots to review biomarker changes. Thirty-day death was modeled using baseline characteristics. Of 10 942 patients, 462 (4.2%) patients had at least 1 MI by 48 hours identified by the CEC (207 [3.8%] cangrelor; 255 [4.7%] clopidogrel; odds ratio [OR] 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.97; P=0.022), and 143 patients had at least 1 MI by 48 hours reported by the SI (60 [1.1%] cangrelor; 83 [1.5%] clopidogrel; OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.01; P=0.053). Of the 462 MIs identified by the CEC, 92 (20%) were reported by SI, and 370 (80%) were not. Of the 143 MI reported by the SI, 51 (36%) were not confirmed by CEC. All categories were associated with an increased adjusted risk for 30-day death (CEC: OR, 5.35; 95% CI, 2.56-11.2; P<0.001; SI: 9.08 [4.01-20.5]; P<0.001; CEC and SI: 10.9 [3.23-36.6]; P<0.001; CEC but not SI: 4.69 [1.94-11.3]; P<0.001; SI but not CEC: 15.4 [5.26-44.9]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, CEC procedures identified 3 times as many MIs as the SI reported. Compared with clopidogrel, cangrelor significantly reduced MIs identified by the CEC with a qualitatively similar relative risk reduction in MIs reported by the SI. MIs identified by CEC or reported by SI were independently associated with worse 30-day death. Central adjudication identified additional, prognostically important events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01156571.
Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Coronary Thrombosis/prevention & control , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Research Design , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Coronary Artery Disease/complications , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Coronary Artery Disease/mortality , Coronary Thrombosis/diagnosis , Coronary Thrombosis/etiology , Coronary Thrombosis/mortality , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to test whether different results between Cangrelor versus standard therapy to acHieve optimal Management of Platelet InhibitiON (CHAMPION) PCI/PLATFORM and PHOENIX trials are due in part to different definitions of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the definition of MI was identical in CHAMPION PCI and PLATFORM and did not require an assessment of baseline cardiac biomarker status, while in PHOENIX specific MI criteria were associated with different patient presentations. The same MI criteria were used in PCI, PLATFORM, and PHOENIX for patients with stable angina. Logistic regression assessed the effect of cangrelor on MI (PCI- and non-PCI related) in the combined PCI/PLATFORM population and in PHOENIX. Consistency of cangrelor's effect in PCI/PLATFORM and in PHOENIX in patients with stable angina and in those with an ACS (with or without ST elevation) was evaluated. Overall, the incidence of PCI-related MI at 48 h was 6.3% in PCI/PLATFORM and 4.0% in PHOENIX. In patients with ACS, MI incidence was 6.4% in PCI/PLATFORM and 1.7% in PHOENIX, and 6.3% and 5.6%, respectively in stable angina patients. Cangrelor's effect on PCI-related MI differed between PCI/PLATFORM (odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.17) and PHOENIX (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.98) with pINT=0.04. This difference was mostly evident in patients with ACS ( pINT= 0.06) while the effect was consistent in patients with stable angina ( pINT=0.81). Results were similar when all MIs were analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of PCI-related MI has important implications for event rates, treatment effect, and study results. This illustrates the importance of a rigorous assessment of PCI-related MI in clinical trials of patients with an ACS.
