Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel in Clopidogrel-Naive Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Whether ticagrelor may reduce periprocedural myocardial necrosis after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with and without chronic clopidogrel therapy is unclear. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in patients with and without chronic clopidogrel therapy before undergoing elective PCI. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading With the P2Y12 Inhibitor Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel to Halt Ischemic Events in Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Stenting) trial, patients were defined as clopidogrel(+) and clopidogrel(-) according to the presence and absence of clopidogrel treatment for ≥7 days before PCI, respectively. The primary endpoint was the composite of PCI-related myocardial infarction and major injury as defined by the third and fourth universal definition 48 hours after PCI. RESULTS: A total of 1,882 patients were included, 805 (42.7%) of whom were clopidogrel(+). These patients were older, had more comorbidities, and had more frequent features of complex PCI. The primary endpoint was less frequently present in clopidogrel(-) compared to clopidogrel(+) patients (32.8% vs 40.0%; OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.60-0.88), but no significant differences were reported for the risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient ischemic attack at 48 hours or 30 days. Ticagrelor did not reduce periprocedural myocardial necrosis or the risk of adverse outcomes, and there was no significant interaction regarding the presence of chronic clopidogrel treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Clopidogrel-naive patients presented less periprocedural complications compared to clopidogrel(+) patients, a difference related to a lower risk profile and less complex PCI. The absence of clopidogrel at baseline did not affect the absence of a difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in terms of PCI-related complications supporting the use of clopidogrel as the standard of care in elective PCI in patients with or without chronic clopidogrel treatment.

Review of the Ticagrelor Trials Evidence Base.

Ticagrelor is a platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitor approved for use in patients with acute coronary syndromes, coronary artery disease, and low-moderate risk acute ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack. Clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor on ischemic and bleeding outcomes for different indications and with varying treatment approaches. As a result, there is a large body of clinical evidence demonstrating different degrees of net clinical benefit compared with other platelet inhibitor drugs based on indication, patient characteristics, clinical presentation, treatment duration, and other factors. We provide a review of the major trials of ticagrelor in the context of other randomized trials of clopidogrel and prasugrel to organize the volume of available information, elevate corroborating and conflicting data, and identify potential gaps as areas for further exploration of optimal antiplatelet treatment.

Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacodynamics of AZD3366 (Optimized Human CD39L3 Apyrase) Alone and in Combination With Ticagrelor and Acetylsalicylic Acid: A Phase 1, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: ADP and ATP are importantly involved in vascular and thrombotic homeostasis, via multiple receptor pathways. Blockade of ADP P2Y12 receptors inhibits platelet aggregation and represents an effective cardiovascular disease prevention strategy. AZD3366 (APT102), a long-acting recombinant form of an optimized CD39L3 human apyrase, has effectively reduced ATP, ADP, and platelet aggregation and provided tissue protection in preclinical models, features that could be very beneficial in treating patients with cardiovascular disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted this phase 1, first-in-human study of single ascending doses of intravenous AZD3366 or placebo, including doses added to dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor and acetylsalicylic acid. The primary objective was safety and tolerability; secondary and exploratory objectives included pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (measured as inhibition of platelet aggregation), adenosine diphosphatase (ADPase) activity, and ATP/ADP metabolism. In total, 104 participants were randomized. AZD3366 was generally well tolerated, with no major safety concerns observed. ADPase activity increased in a dose-dependent manner with a strong correlation to AZD3366 exposure. Inhibition of ADP-stimulated platelet aggregation was immediate, substantial, and durable. In addition, there was a prompt decrease in systemic ATP concentration and an increase in adenosine monophosphate concentrations, whereas ADP concentration appeared generally unaltered. At higher doses, there was a prolongation of capillary bleeding time without detectable changes in the ex vivo thromboelastometric parameters. CONCLUSIONS: AZD3366 was well tolerated in healthy participants and demonstrated substantial and durable inhibition of platelet aggregation after single dosing. Higher doses prolonged capillary bleeding time without detectable changes in ex vivo thromboelastometric parameters. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT04588727.

New Score Models for Predicting Bleeding and Ischemic of Ticagrelor Therapy in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus.

PURPOSE: Ticagrelor is an antiplatelet drug, and its use increases the risk of bleeding. Coronary artery disease is significantly influenced by the widespread occurrence of diabetes mellitus. In order to decrease the incidence of clinical adverse events, a novel bleeding and thrombosis score is developed in this research. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patient data from two medical centers who were diagnosed with diabetes mellitus and treated with ticagrelor. We gathered information on every patient from the electronic database of the hospital and follow-up. The collected data were statistically analyzed to obtain risk factors for bleeding and ischemic events. RESULTS: A total of 851 patients with diabetes mellitus who have been administered ticagrelor are included in our investigation. A total of 76 patients have bleeding events and 80 patients have ischemic events. The analysis of multiple variables indicates that characteristics like the age of >65, having a previous occurrence of bleeding, experiencing anemia, using aspirin, and taking atorvastatin are linked to a higher likelihood of bleeding. Additionally, the age of >65, smoking, having a history of blood clots, and having a BMI ≥ 30 are found to increase the risk of ischemia. CONCLUSION: The A4B score established in this study was better than the HAS-BLED score，and the same is true for the ABST score to the CHA2DS-VASc score. This new risk assessment model can potentially detect patients who are at high risk for bleeding and ischemic events. For high-risk patients, the dose of ticagrelor can be adjusted appropriately or the medication can be adjusted.(2023-09-11, ChiCTR2300075627).

P2Y12 Inhibition in Patients Requiring Oral Anticoagulation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The SWAP-AC-2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Among patients treated with a novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), combination therapy with clopidogrel (ie, known as dual antithrombotic therapy [DAT]) is the treatment of choice. However, there are concerns for individuals with impaired response to clopidogrel. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to assess the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of clopidogrel vs low-dose ticagrelor in patients with impaired clopidogrel response assessed by the ABCD-GENE score. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized PD study of NOAC-treated patients undergoing PCI. Patients with an ABCD-GENE score ≥10 (n = 39), defined as having impaired clopidogrel response, were randomized to low-dose ticagrelor (n = 20; 60 mg twice a day) or clopidogrel (n = 19; 75 mg once a day). Patients with an ABCD-GENE score <10 (n = 42) were treated with clopidogrel (75 mg once a day; control cohort). PD assessments at baseline and 30 days post-randomization (trough and peak) were performed to assess P2Y12 signaling (VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction units [PRU], light transmittance aggregometry, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein); makers of thrombosis not specific to P2Y12 signaling were also assessed. The primary endpoint was PRU (trough levels) at 30 days. RESULTS: At 30 days, PRU levels were reduced with ticagrelor-based DAT compared with clopidogrel-based DAT at trough (23.0 [Q1-Q3: 3.0-46.0] vs 154.5 [Q1-Q3: 77.5-183.0]; P < 0.001) and peak (6.0 [Q1-Q3: 4.0-14.0] vs 129.0 [Q1-Q3: 66.0-171.0]; P < 0.001). Trough PRU levels in the control arm (104.0 [Q1-Q3: 35.0-167.0]) were higher than ticagrelor-based DAT (P = 0.005) and numerically lower than clopidogrel-based DAT (P = 0.234). Results were consistent by light transmittance aggregometry and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein. Markers measuring other pathways leading to thrombus formation were largely unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: In NOAC-treated patients undergoing PCI with an ABCD-GENE score ≥10, ticagrelor-based DAT using a 60-mg, twice-a-day regimen reduced platelet P2Y12 reactivity compared with clopidogrel-based DAT. (Tailoring P2Y12 Inhibiting Therapy in Patients Requiring Oral Anticoagulation After PCI [SWAP-AC-2]; NCT04483583).

Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Regimens for High-Bleeding Risk Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Adverse Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Patients of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) at a high-bleeding risk (HBR) often require dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. Clopidogrel and ticagrelor are the most commonly used antiplatelet agents in DAPT regimens. However, the safety profiles of these drugs in ACS patients at HBR remain a subject of ongoing debate. AIM: To investigate any difference between the safety of clopidogrel and ticagrelor used as a part of DAPT regimen in ACS patients at HBR. METHODS: A systematic search on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify experimental and observational studies published up to the knowledge cutoff date in September 2023. Studies comparing the safety of clopidogrel and ticagrelor in ACS patients at HBR were included for analysis. The primary outcomes assessed were major bleeding events, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI), while secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and net adverse clinical and cerebral events (NACCE). RESULTS: We included a total of 8 observational studies in our meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in the risk of MI (pooled RR = 1.43; 95% CI 1.12-1.83; P = 0.005) in the patients using clopidogrel. There were no statistically significant differences in major bleeding events (pooled RR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.82-1.09; P = 0.44), stroke (pooled RR = 1.36; 95% CI 0.86-2.14; P = 0.18), all-cause mortality (pooled RR = 1.17; 95% CI 0.97-1.41; P = 0.10), MACCE (pooled RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.76-1.50; P = 0.69) and NACCE (pooled RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.66-1.37; P = 0.78) between the two groups. Subgroup analyses based on region were performed. CONCLUSION: Both drugs are generally safe for treating ACS patients with HBR at baseline, although a higher risk of MI was observed with the use of clopidogrel. Nevertheless, drug choice should factor in regional variations, patient-specific characteristics, cost, accessibility, and potential drug interactions.

The efficacy and safety of aspirin-ticagrelor vs. aspirin-clopidogrel in ischemic stroke patients with cerebral artery stenting.

OBJECTIVE: First, the efficacy and safety of aspirin-ticagrelor after cerebral artery stenting in ischemic stroke patients is controversial. Second, there is a gap in the research on guiding two antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after stenting based on the CYP2C19 genotype. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who underwent cerebral artery stenting at the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from January 2019 to February 2023. We divided them into the aspirin-clopidogrel group and aspirin-ticagrelor group and carefully collected baseline information laboratory data and imaging results from the patients. The efficacy outcomes were 30 days recurrent stroke, 90 days recurrent stroke, and 180 days recurrent stroke, and the safety outcome was intracranial hemorrhage. T-tests or Fisher's tests were performed for study outcomes in both groups of patients. OUTCOME: A total of 372 patients were included. For efficacy outcomes, aspirin-ticagrelor was associated with a reduced risk of 180 days recurrent stroke, in patients with CYP2C19 LOF allele (OR = 0.426, CI = 0.184-0.986, P = 0.042) and CYP2C19 intermediate metabolic genotype (OR = 0.237, CI = 0.026-1.034, P = 0.044), compared with aspirin-clopidogrel. There was no significant difference in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) between patients with aspirin-clopidogrel and aspirin-ticagrelor, regardless of overall (OR = 1.221, CI = 0.115-7.245, P = 0.683), CYP2C19 LOF allele carriers (OR = 1.226, CI = 0.411-3.658, P = 0.715), or CYP2C19 intermediate metabolizer (OR = 1.221, CI = 0.115-7.245, P = 0.683). No significant differences were found between the two DAPTs on other efficacy and safety outcomes. CONCLUSION: A cohort study found that aspirin-ticagrelor was significantly superior to aspirin-clopidogrel in reducing 180 days recurrent stroke in CYP2C19 LOF allele carriers and CYP2C19 intermediate metabolizers. There was no significant difference between aspirin-ticagrelor and aspirin-clopidogrel in the risk of intracranial hemorrhage in terms of ICH rates.

Ticagrelor Induced Cheyne-Stokes Respiration and Asystolic Ventricular Standstill: A Case Report.

Ticagrelor is a potent, direct-acting, and reversible P2Y12­adenosine diphosphate receptor blocker. It has a rapid onset of action and an intense and consistent platelet reactivity inhibition that has been demonstrated to be superior to clopidogrel in decreasing major adverse events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Although ticagrelor is well tolerated in ACS patients, it has side effects, such as dyspnea and bradyarrhythmia, as reported in the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) study. Furthermore, it was reported that ticagrelor's bradyarrhythmic potential was transient and not clinically significant beyond the acute initiation phase. Nor was there a difference in rates of syncope or need for pacemaker insertion during 30 days of follow-up. Here we report a case of ticagrelor associated with Cheyne-Stokes respiration and asystolic ventricular standstill in a patient with ACS who required resuscitation and insertion of a temporary pacemaker.

Key considerations in navigating ticagrelor's reported effect on heparin-induced thrombocytopenia functional assays in a landscape of limited data.

PURPOSE: This article discusses key considerations regarding ticagrelor's reported effect on heparin-induced thrombocytopenia functional assays, such as literature gaps and possible management strategies. SUMMARY: Limited data indicate that ticagrelor may induce false-negative results in functional assays used in the diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. False-negative functional assays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia could have catastrophic consequences. The manufacturer labeling of ticagrelor now includes a warning for this potential drug-laboratory interaction. This article suggests areas that would benefit from further research and strategies in navigating this possible interaction. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should exercise caution when evaluating functional assays for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients receiving ticagrelor. This article offers suggestions for future areas of research and potential management strategies.

Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chronic Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Whether ticagrelor in chronic coronary syndrome patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can prevent cardiovascular events is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate outcomes of complex PCI and the efficacy of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in stable patients randomized in the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading with the P2Y12 inhibitor ticagrelor or clopidogrel to Halt ischemic Events in patients Undergoing elective coronary Stenting) trial. METHODS: All PCI procedures were blindly reviewed and classified as complex if they had at least 1 of the following criteria: stent length >60 mm, 2-stent bifurcation, left main, bypass graft, chronic total occlusion, use of atherectomy or guiding catheter extensions, multiwire technique, multiple stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of type 4a or b myocardial infarction (MI) and major myocardial injury during the 48 hours after PCI. We compared the event rates according to the presence or not of complex PCI criteria and evaluated the interaction with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. RESULTS: Among the 1,866 patients randomized, 910 PCI (48.3%) were classified as complex PCI. The primary endpoint was more frequent in complex PCI (45.6% vs 26.6%; P < 0.001) driven by higher rates of type 4 MI and angiographic complications (12.2% vs 4.8 %; P < 0.001 and 19.3% vs 8.6%; P < 0.05, respectively). The composite of death, MI, and stroke at 48 hours (12.7% vs 5.1 %; P < 0.05) and at 30 days (13.4% vs 5.3%; P < 0.05) was more frequent in complex PCI. No interaction was found between PCI complexity and the randomized treatment for the primary endpoint (Pinteraction = 0.47) nor the secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: In chronic coronary syndrome, patients undergoing a complex PCI have higher rates of periprocedural and cardiovascular events that are not reduced by ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel.

Comparison of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in anemic patients with acute coronary syndrome: efficacy and safety outcomes over one year.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study aimed to investigate the potential impact of ticagrelor and clopidogrel treatment on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with anemia and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to provide insights into the optimal therapeutic approach for this vulnerable patient population. METHODS: A retrospective research design was employed, involving patients diagnosed with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) between 2014 and 2021. Inclusion criteria required a hemoglobin level below 12 mg/dL and a minimum 12-month P2Y12 inhibitor treatment. Comprehensive clinical, biochemical, and echocardiographic data were collected from the hospital's electronic repository. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), encompassing total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, reinfarction, ischemic stroke, and hemorrhagic stroke. Major hemorrhage was the primary safety endpoint. Secondary outcomes included total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, reinfarction, ischemic stroke, and hemorrhagic stroke, individually. RESULTS: Patients treated with ticagrelor (n = 118) and clopidogrel (n = 538) were compared. No significant difference was observed in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding between ticagrelor and clopidogrel treatment groups (MACE: clopidogrel 10.0% vs. ticagrelor 11.0%, p = 0.75; major bleeding: clopidogrel 2.8%, ticagrelor 2.5%, p = 0.88). Patients with hemoglobin levels ≤ 8 mg/dL demonstrated significantly higher MACE and major bleeding rates in the ticagrelor group (p = 0.008 and p = 0.002, respectively). Among patients aged ≥ 75 years, ticagrelor treatment was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Ticagrelor and clopidogrel exhibited comparable efficacy and safety outcomes in anemic ACS patients over a one-year period. Although ticagrelor demonstrated superiority in reducing ischemic events, it is crucial to recognize the limitations of retrospective studies in informing clinical practice. This study offers valuable insights into tailoring antiplatelet therapy for anemic ACS patients and provides guidance for personalized treatment strategies, acknowledging the hypothesis-generating nature of retrospective analyses.