Falta de adherencia a ticagrelor frente a clopidogrel y riesgo de eventos en pacientes con SCA. Resultados del registro CREA-ARIAM / Nonadherence to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel and clinical outcomes in patients with ACS. Results from the CREA-ARIAM registry

Introduction and objectives Prior studies have not determined whether the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) cessation on the subsequent risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) varies by the choice of P2Y12-inhibitor after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods We performed a prespecified subanalysis of a multicenter, prospective registry of ACS patients discharged on ticagrelor or clopidogrel between 2015 and2019. Nonadherence to DAPT was categorized as physician-guided discontinuation and disruption due to adverse effects, nonadherence, or bleeding. The association between DAPT cessation and 1-year MACE was analyzed using multivariate time-updated Cox models with inverse probability of censoring weighted estimators. Results Out of 2180 patients, 174 (8.3%) prematurely discontinued DAPT (physician-guided, n=126; disruption, n=48). Nonadherent patients were older and had more comorbidities than those on DAPT. Compared with physician-guided discontinuation, disruption occurred earlier after discharge and was more frequent with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel. In time-varying analysis, DAPT cessation was associated with an increased risk of MACE (adjusted HR, 1.32, 95%CI, 1.10-1.76), largely driven by disruption (adjusted HR, 1.47, 95%CI, 1.22-1.73). There was an exponential increase in MACE risk after DAPT cessation within 90 days after ACS, especially after disruption of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel (Pinteraction<.001). After adjustment for DAPT duration, this interaction was not statistically significant on the additive scale (relative excess risk due to interaction 0.12, 95%CI,−0.99-1.24). Conclusions In this all-comers registry, 1 in 12 patients prematurely discontinued DAPT within 1 year after ACS. Compared with physician-recommended discontinuation, disruption resulted in a significantly higher risk of MACE. After adjustment for DAPT duration, this association was not moderated by the choice of P2Y12-inhibitor (AU)

Introducción y objetivos Una baja adherencia al tratamiento antiagregante plaquetario doble (TAPD) condiciona peor pronóstico tras un síndrome coronario agudo (SCA). Se analizó si el riesgo de eventos adversos cardiovasculares mayores (MACE) tras la interrupción prematura del TAPD varía según el inhibidor del P2Y12. Métodos Análisis preespecificado de pacientes con SCA tratados con ticagrelor o clopidogrel entre 2015 y 2019 dentro de un registro prospectivo multicéntrico. Se categorizó la suspensión prematura como indicada por el médico o como interrupción por hemorragia, efectos secundarios o incumplimiento del paciente. La asociación entre la suspensión del TAPD y los MACE se analizó mediante modelos multivariantes de Cox dependientes del tiempo, con estimadores robustos ponderados por probabilidad inversa de censura. Resultados De 2.180 pacientes, 174 (8,3%) suspendieron el TAPD precozmente (126 por indicación médica y 48 por disrupción). Los pacientes incumplidores tenían más edad y más comorbilidad que los adherentes. Frente a la suspensión indicada por el médico, la disrupción del TAPD fue más precoz y frecuente con el ticagrelor que con el clopidogrel. La suspensión del TAPD condicionó mayor riesgo de MACE (HRajustada=1,32; IC95%, 1,10-1,76), principalmente en caso de la disrupción (HRajustada=1,47; IC95%, 1,22-1,73). Este riesgo aumentó exponencialmente en los 90 días posteriores al SCA y fue más evidente con ticagrelor (pinteracción<0,001). Tras considerar la duración del TAPD, esta interacción no resultó significativa en la escala aditiva (exceso de riesgo debido a interacción=0,12; IC95%, –0,99 a 1,24)(AU)

Nonadherence to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel and clinical outcomes in patients with ACS. Results from the CREA-ARIAM registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Prior studies have not determined whether the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) cessation on the subsequent risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) varies by the choice of P2Y12-inhibitor after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: We performed a prespecified subanalysis of a multicenter, prospective registry of ACS patients discharged on ticagrelor or clopidogrel between 2015 and2019. Nonadherence to DAPT was categorized as physician-guided discontinuation and disruption due to adverse effects, nonadherence, or bleeding. The association between DAPT cessation and 1-year MACE was analyzed using multivariate time-updated Cox models with inverse probability of censoring weighted estimators. RESULTS: Out of 2180 patients, 174 (8.3%) prematurely discontinued DAPT (physician-guided, n=126; disruption, n=48). Nonadherent patients were older and had more comorbidities than those on DAPT. Compared with physician-guided discontinuation, disruption occurred earlier after discharge and was more frequent with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel. In time-varying analysis, DAPT cessation was associated with an increased risk of MACE (adjusted HR, 1.32, 95%CI, 1.10-1.76), largely driven by disruption (adjusted HR, 1.47, 95%CI, 1.22-1.73). There was an exponential increase in MACE risk after DAPT cessation within 90 days after ACS, especially after disruption of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel (Pinteraction<.001). After adjustment for DAPT duration, this interaction was not statistically significant on the additive scale (relative excess risk due to interaction 0.12, 95%CI,-0.99-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: In this all-comers registry, 1 in 12 patients prematurely discontinued DAPT within 1 year after ACS. Compared with physician-recommended discontinuation, disruption resulted in a significantly higher risk of MACE. After adjustment for DAPT duration, this association was not moderated by the choice of P2Y12-inhibitor. Clinical trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02500290).

Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: An On-Treatment Analysis From a Multicenter Registry.

Background: The net clinical benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has recently been questioned by observational studies which did not account for time-dependent confounders. We aimed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel accounting for non-adherence in a real-life setting. Methods: This is a prospective, multicenter cohort study of patients with ACS discharged on ticagrelor or clopidogrel between 2015 and 2019. Major exclusions were previous intracranial bleeding, and the use of prasugrel or oral anticoagulation. Association of P2Y12 inhibitor therapy with 1-year risk of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium Type 3 or 5 bleeding; major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite endpoint of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, or urgent target lesion revascularization; definite/probable stent thrombosis; vascular death; and net adverse clinical event (a composite endpoint of major bleeding and MACE) were analyzed according to the "on-treatment" principle, using fully adjusted Cox and Fine-Gray regression models with doubly robust inverse probability of censoring weighted estimators. Results: Among 2,070 patients (mean age 63 years, 27% women, 62.5% ST-elevation MI), 1,035 were discharged on ticagrelor and clopidogrel, respectively. Ticagrelor-treated patients were younger and had few comorbidities, but high rates of medication non-compliance, compared with clopidogrel users. After comprehensive multivariate adjustments, ticagrelor did not increase the risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel [subhazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-2.05], while proved superior in reducing MACE (hazard ratio 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.90), vascular death (subhazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97) and definite/probable stent thrombosis (subhazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79); thereby resulting in a favorable net clinical benefit (hazard ratio 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-0.98) compared with clopidogrel. Results from sensitivity analyses were consistent with those from the primary analysis, whereas those from the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis went in the opposite direction. Conclusion: Among all-comers with ACS, ticagrelor did not significantly increase the risk of major bleeding, while resulting in a net clinical benefit compared with clopidogrel. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in high bleeding risk populations. CREA-ARIAM Andalucía: (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02500290); Current pre-specified analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04630288).

Fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in the contemporary management of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. Insights from a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Fondaparinux is thought to have the most favorable risk-benefit profile among all anticoagulants in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). However, conflicting findings exist whether this holds true in current clinical practice. We aimed to assess the net clinical benefit of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in the contemporary management of NSTE-ACS. METHODS: Analysis of prospective multicenter registry data of NSTE-ACS patients who received fondaparinux or enoxaparin from February 2015, through December 2017. Survival models within a competing risks framework including site-specific random effects, were used to assess the composite of clinically relevant bleedings and major adverse cardiovascular events at 30 days. RESULTS: Of 2094 patients, 1724 (82%) received enoxaparin and 370 (18%) fondaparinux. Both groups were comparable except for a lower prevalence of diabetes and renal impairment, and greater use of transradial approach in the fondaparinux group. Multivariate analysis revealed a net clinical benefit in favour of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin (Subhazard Ratio [SHR] 0.59; 95%CI 0.37-0.92), mainly driven by a reduction in bleeding (SHR 0.57; 95%CI 0.37-0.89). Exploratory analysis suggested greater reductions in bleeding with fondaparinux among patients undergoing transradial approach, revealing a significant interaction between treatment and vascular access on the multiplicative scale (Pinteraction = 0.0056), but not on an additive scale (P = 0.457). Propensity-score-matching analysis yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary management of NSTE-ACS, fondaparinux seems to provide a favorable net clinical benefit compared with enoxaparin, primarily driven by a bleeding reduction. Effect modification on the safety profile of fondaparinux by the vascular access approach warrants further investigation.