Safety and Efficacy of Bivalirudin in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: From the REPLACE-2, ACUITY and HORIZONS-AMI Trials.

Optimal antithrombotic pharmacotherapy in patients affected by diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is unclear. We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of bivalirudin compared with heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) in patients with DM undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. We pooled patient-level data from the Randomized Evaluation of PCI Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events-2, Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage strategy, and Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction trials. The primary efficacy end point was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events, defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization at 30 days. The primary safety end point was the incidence of 30-day non-coronary artery bypass graft-related major bleeding. All-cause mortality was reported at 30 days and 1 year. Of the 14,737 patients included in the pooled database, 3,641 (24.7%) had DM. Patients with DM had higher rates of 30-day major bleeding and 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. There were no differences in 30-day major adverse cardiac events between bivalirudin versus heparin plus GPI in patients with DM (6.9% vs 7.8%; relative risk [RR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.12) or without DM (7.5% vs 6.7%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.27; pinteraction = 0.10). Bivalirudin treatment was associated with reduced risk of major bleeding in similar magnitude in patients with DM (4.3% vs 6.6% RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.89) or without DM (3.2% vs 6.1%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.61; pinteraction = 0.15). The hemorrhagic benefit of bivalirudin was noted for both access site- and non-access site-related bleeding. Overall, bivalirudin treatment was associated with a significant 1-year mortality benefit (2.7% vs 3.3%; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98; p = 0.03), which was consistent between patients with or without DM (pinteraction = 0.30). In conclusion, compared with heparin plus GPI, bivalirudin was associated with similar 30-day antithrombotic efficacy and better 30-day freedom from bleeding and 1-year mortality, irrespective of diabetic status.

Impact of intraprocedural stent thrombosis during percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the CHAMPION PHOENIX Trial (Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention).

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the clinical impact of intraprocedural stent thrombosis (IPST), a relatively new endpoint. BACKGROUND: In the prospective, double-blind, active-controlled CHAMPION PHOENIX (Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, cangrelor significantly reduced periprocedural and 30-day ischemic events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including IPST. METHODS: An independent core laboratory blinded to treatment assignment performed a frame-by-frame angiographic analysis in 10,939 patients for the development of IPST, defined as new or worsening thrombus related to stent deployment at any time during the procedure. Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent, blinded clinical events committee. RESULTS: IPST developed in 89 patients (0.8%), including 35 of 5,470 (0.6%) and 54 of 5,469 (1.0%) patients in the cangrelor and clopidogrel arms, respectively (odds ratio: 0.65; 95% confidence interval: 0.42 to 0.99; p = 0.04). Compared to patients without IPST, IPST was associated with a marked increase in composite ischemia (death, myocardial infarction [MI], ischemia-driven revascularization, or new-onset out-of-laboratory stent thrombosis [Academic Research Consortium]) at 48 h and at 30 days (29.2% vs. 4.5% and 31.5% vs. 5.7%, respectively; p < 0.0001 for both). After controlling for potential confounders, IPST remained a strong predictor of all adverse ischemic events at both time points. CONCLUSIONS: In the large-scale CHAMPION PHOENIX trial, the occurrence of IPST was strongly predictive of subsequent adverse cardiovascular events. The potent intravenous adenosine diphosphate antagonist cangrelor substantially reduced IPST, contributing to its beneficial effects at 48 h and 30 days. (Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] [CHAMPION PHOENIX]; NCT01156571).

Effect of cangrelor on periprocedural outcomes in percutaneous coronary interventions: a pooled analysis of patient-level data.

BACKGROUND: Cangrelor is a potent, rapid-acting, reversible intravenous platelet inhibitor that was tested for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in three large, double-blind, randomised trials. We did a pooled analysis of data from three trials that assessed the effectiveness of cangrelor against either clopidogrel or placebo in PCI. METHODS: This prespecified, pooled analysis of patient-level data from three trials (CHAMPION-PCI, CHAMPION-PLATFORM, and CHAMPION-PHOENIX) compared cangrelor with control (clopidogrel or placebo) for prevention of thrombotic complications during and after PCI. Trial participants were patients undergoing PCI for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (11.6%), non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (57.4%), and stable coronary artery disease (31.0%). Efficacy was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population of 24,910 patients, with a prespecified primary efficacy composite of death, myocardial infarction, ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or stent thrombosis at 48 h. The primary safety outcome was non-coronary artery bypass graft-related GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) severe or life-threatening bleeding at 48 h. FINDINGS: Cangrelor reduced the odds of the primary outcome by 19% (3.8% for cangrelor vs 4.7% for control; odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.91, p=0.0007), and stent thrombosis by 41% (0.5% vs 0.8%, OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.80, p=0.0008). Cangrelor reduced the odds of the secondary triple composite (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven revascularisation at 48 h) by 19% (3.6% vs 4.4%, OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.92, p=0.0014). Efficacy outcomes were consistent across the trials and main patient subsets. These benefits were maintained at 30 days. There was no difference in the primary safety outcome (0.2% in both groups), in GUSTO moderate bleeding (0.6% vs 0.4%), or in transfusion (0.7% vs 0.6%), but cangrelor increased GUSTO mild bleeding (16.8% vs 13.0%, p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION: Compared with control (clopidogrel or placebo), cangrelor reduced PCI periprocedural thrombotic complications, at the expense of increased bleeding. FUNDING: The Medicines Company.

Effect of platelet inhibition with cangrelor during PCI on ischemic events.

BACKGROUND: The intensity of antiplatelet therapy during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an important determinant of PCI-related ischemic complications. Cangrelor is a potent intravenous adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-receptor antagonist that acts rapidly and has quickly reversible effects. METHODS: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 11,145 patients who were undergoing either urgent or elective PCI and were receiving guideline-recommended therapy to receive a bolus and infusion of cangrelor or to receive a loading dose of 600 mg or 300 mg of clopidogrel. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48 hours after randomization; the key secondary end point was stent thrombosis at 48 hours. The primary safety end point was severe bleeding at 48 hours. RESULTS: The rate of the primary efficacy end point was 4.7% in the cangrelor group and 5.9% in the clopidogrel group (adjusted odds ratio with cangrelor, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.005). The rate of the primary safety end point was 0.16% in the cangrelor group and 0.11% in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.53 to 4.22; P=0.44). Stent thrombosis developed in 0.8% of the patients in the cangrelor group and in 1.4% in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.90; P=0.01). The rates of adverse events related to the study treatment were low in both groups, though transient dyspnea occurred significantly more frequently with cangrelor than with clopidogrel (1.2% vs. 0.3%). The benefit from cangrelor with respect to the primary end point was consistent across multiple prespecified subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Cangrelor significantly reduced the rate of ischemic events, including stent thrombosis, during PCI, with no significant increase in severe bleeding. (Funded by the Medicines Company; CHAMPION PHOENIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01156571.).

Rationale and design of the Cangrelor versus standard therapy to acHieve optimal Management of Platelet InhibitiON PHOENIX trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite robust efficacy in the reduction of ischemic events in patients who require percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), current P2Y(12) inhibitors have limitations. In particular, they require hours to be effective, and they can only be administered orally. Cangrelor is an intravenous, potent, and reversible P2Y(12) inhibitor with fast onset and offset of action. We designed CHAMPION PHOENIX to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cangrelor in patients with atherosclerosis undergoing PCI. TRIAL DESIGN: The CHAMPION PHOENIX is a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, superiority trial comparing cangrelor with clopidogrel standard of care in approximately 10,900 patients who have not previously received a P2Y(12) inhibitor and who require PCI, including patients with stable angina and with acute coronary syndromes (with or without ST-segment elevation). The primary objective of the study is to demonstrate that cangrelor will reduce the incidence of the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis in the 48 hours after randomization compared with clopidogrel without excessive periprocedural bleeding. The key secondary objective is to demonstrate that cangrelor will reduce the incidence of stent thrombosis. Myocardial infarction will be defined according to the universal MI definition, adapting the definition of PCI-related (type 4a) MI. Bleeding will be assessed according to the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, GUSTO, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) scales. CONCLUSION: The CHAMPION PHOENIX may establish the role of cangrelor in the care of patients who require PCI across the spectrum of stable and unstable coronary diseases in the setting of current treatment strategies.

Platelet inhibition with cangrelor in patients undergoing PCI.

BACKGROUND: Cangrelor, a nonthienopyridine adenosine triphosphate analogue, is an intravenous blocker of the adenosine diphosphate receptor P2Y(12). This agent might have a role in the treatment of patients who require rapid, predictable, and profound but reversible platelet inhibition. METHODS: We performed a large-scale international trial comparing cangrelor with 600 mg of oral clopidogrel administered before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute coronary syndromes. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization at 48 hours. RESULTS: We enrolled 8877 patients, and 8716 underwent PCI. At 48 hours, cangrelor was not superior to clopidogrel with respect to the primary composite end point, which occurred in 7.5% of patients in the cangrelor group and 7.1% of patients in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88 to 1.24; P=0.59). Likewise, cangrelor was not superior at 30 days. The rate of major bleeding (according to Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy criteria) was higher with cangrelor, a difference that approached statistical significance (3.6% vs. 2.9%; odds ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.60; P=0.06), but this was not the case with major bleeding (according to the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction criteria) or severe or life-threatening bleeding (according to Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries criteria). A secondary exploratory end point of death from any cause, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization showed a trend toward a reduction with cangrelor, but it was not significant (0.6% vs. 0.9%; odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.14; P=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Cangrelor, when administered intravenously 30 minutes before PCI and continued for 2 hours after PCI, was not superior to an oral loading dose of 600 mg of clopidogrel, administered 30 minutes before PCI, in reducing the composite end point of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization at 48 hours. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00305162.)

Intravenous platelet blockade with cangrelor during PCI.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous cangrelor, a rapid-acting, reversible adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor antagonist, might reduce ischemic events during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we randomly assigned 5362 patients who had not been treated with clopidogrel to receive either cangrelor or placebo at the time of PCI, followed by 600 mg of clopidogrel. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization at 48 hours. Enrollment was stopped when an interim analysis concluded that the trial would be unlikely to show superiority for the primary end point. RESULTS: The primary end point occurred in 185 of 2654 patients receiving cangrelor (7.0%) and in 210 of 2641 patients receiving placebo (8.0%) (odds ratio in the cangrelor group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.07; P=0.17) (modified intention-to-treat population adjusted for missing data). In the cangrelor group, as compared with the placebo group, two prespecified secondary end points were significantly reduced at 48 hours: the rate of stent thrombosis, from 0.6% to 0.2% (odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.85; P=0.02), and the rate of death from any cause, from 0.7% to 0.2% (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.83; P=0.02). There was no significant difference in the rate of blood transfusion (1.0% in the cangrelor group and 0.6% in the placebo group, P=0.13), though major bleeding on one scale was increased in the cangrelor group, from 3.5% to 5.5% (P<0.001), because of more groin hematomas. CONCLUSIONS: The use of periprocedural cangrelor during PCI was not superior to placebo in reducing the primary end point. The prespecified secondary end points of stent thrombosis and death were lower in the cangrelor group, with no significant increase in the rate of transfusion. Further study of intravenous ADP blockade with cangrelor may be warranted. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00385138.)

Efficacy and safety of LY315920Na/S-5920, a selective inhibitor of 14-kDa group IIA secretory phospholipase A2, in patients with suspected sepsis and organ failure.

OBJECTIVE: Concentrations of group IIA secretory phospholipase A, an inflammatory response mediator, are increased in the plasma of patients with sepsis and septic shock, and the extent of elevation is correlated with mortality. LY315920Na/S-5920 is a selective inhibitor of group IIA secretory phospholipase A that has been shown to inhibit serum group IIA secretory phospholipase A enzyme activity in patients with severe sepsis. The primary objectives of this study were to determine whether there was a dose-response relationship between two doses of LY315920Na/S-5920 compared with placebo in the reduction of 28-day all-cause mortality in patients with severe sepsis and to determine whether LY315920Na/S-5920 had an acceptable safety profile.(2) (2) (2) DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of two doses of LY315920Na/S-5920 in a parallel design. PATIENTS: A total of 586 patients with severe sepsis at 72 institutions in the United States. INTERVENTIONS Patients enrolled within 72 hrs from onset of first sepsis-induced organ failure were randomized (1:1:1) to low-dose LY315920Na/S-5920 (target plasma concentration of 200 ng/mL, n = 196), high-dose LY315920Na/S-5920 (800 ng/mL, n = 194), or placebo (n = 196). Study medication was administered as a constant-rate intravenous infusion for 168 hrs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The study was stopped prematurely because it was unlikely that a statistically significant difference in mortality between LY315920Na/S-5920 and placebo would be found. There was no effect of LY315920Na/S-5920 on the primary end point of 28-day all-cause mortality across the entire study population. The 28-day all-cause mortality was distributed as follows: placebo group, 33.2% (65/196 patients); low-dose LY315920Na/S-5920, 37.2% (73/196); and high-dose LY315920Na/S-5920, 36.1% (70/194); p = .525. However, in a prospectively planned analysis, there was a favorable overall dose-response effect on 28-day all-cause mortality in patients administered LY315920Na/S-5920 within 18 hrs of onset of the first sepsis-induced organ failure. Among these patients, 28-day all-cause mortality was distributed as follows: placebo group, 43.5% (20/46 patients); low-dose LY315920Na/S-5920, 31.4% (16/51); and high-dose LY315920Na/S-5920, 20.8% (10/48); p = .018. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of LY315920Na/S-5920 had an acceptable safety profile in patients with severe sepsis. There was no overall survival benefit associated with the use of LY315920Na/S-5920 in this study. However, prospectively planned secondary analyses suggested that treatment with LY315920Na/S-5920 was associated with an improvement in survival in patients treated within 18 hrs of the first sepsis-induced organ failure.