Índice de masa corporal y eficacia y seguridad del ticagrelor frente al prasugrel en pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo / Body mass index and efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes

Introducción y objetivos Siguen sin estudio la eficacia y la seguridad del ticagrelor frente al prasugrel en pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo (SCA) según el índice de masa corporal (IMC). Se evaluaron la eficacia y la seguridad del ticagrelor frente a prasugrel en pacientes con SCA según el IMC. Métodos Se agrupó a los pacientes (n=3.987) en 3 categorías: con peso normal (IMC <25; n=1.084), sobrepeso (IMC ≥ 25 <30; n=1.890) y obesidad (IMC ≥ 30; n=1.013). El objetivo primario de eficacia fue la incidencia de muerte por cualquier causa, infarto de miocardio o accidente cerebrovascular a 1 año. El objetivo secundario de seguridad fue la incidencia de hemorragias de tipo 3-5 de la Bleeding Academic Research Consortium a 1 año. Resultados El objetivo primario se produjo en 63 pacientes asignados a ticagrelor y 39 asignados a prasugrel en el grupo de peso normal (el 11,7 frente al 7,5%; HR=1,62; IC95%, 1,09-2,42; p=0,018), 78 pacientes asignados a ticagrelor y 58 asignados a prasugrel en el grupo de sobrepeso (el 8,3 frente al 6,2%; HR=1,36; IC95%, 0,97-1,91; p=0,076) y 43 pacientes asignados a ticagrelor y 37 asignados a prasugrel en el grupo de obesidad (el 8,6 frente al 7,3%; HR=1,18; IC95%, 0,76-1,84; p=0,451). La incidencia de eventos hemorrágicos a 1 año en los pacientes con peso normal (el 6,5 frente al 6,6%; p=0,990), sobrepeso (el 5,6 frente al 5,0%; p=0,566) u obesidad (el 4,4 frente al 2,8%; p=0,219) no difirió entre el ticagrelor y el prasugrel. No hubo una interacción significativa entre el brazo de tratamiento y el IMC en relación con el objetivo primario (pinteracción=0,578) o el secundario (pinteracción=0,596). Conclusiones En pacientes con SCA, el IMC no influyó significativamente en el efecto del tratamiento con ticagrelor en términos de eficacia o seguridad frente al prasugrel (AU)

Introduction and objectives The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) according to body mass index (BMI) remain unstudied. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with ACS according to BMI. Methods Patients (n=3987) were grouped into 3 categories: normal weight (BMI <25kg/m2; n=1084), overweight (BMI ≥ 25 to <30kg/m2; n=1890), and obesity (BMI ≥ 30kg/m2; n=1013). The primary efficacy endpoint was the 1 year incidence of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary safety endpoint was the 1 year incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding. Results The primary endpoint occurred in 63 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 39 patients assigned to prasugrel in the normal weight group (11.7% vs 7.5%; HR, 1.62; 95%CI, 1.09-2.42; P=.018), 78 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 58 patients assigned to prasugrel in the overweight group (8.3% vs 6.2%; HR, 1.36; 95%CI, 0.97-1.91; P=.076), and 43 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 37 patients assigned to prasugrel in the obesity group (8.6% vs 7.3%; HR, 1.18; 95%CI, 0.76-1.84; P=.451). The 1-year incidence of bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with normal weight (6.5% vs 6.6%; P=.990), overweight (5.6% vs 5.0%; P=.566) or obesity (4.4% vs 2.8%; P=.219). There was no significant treatment arm-by-BMI interaction regarding the primary endpoint (Pint=.578) or secondary endpoint (Pint=.596). Conclusions In patients with ACS, BMI did not significantly impact the treatment effect of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in terms of efficacy or safety (AU)

Influence of antiretroviral therapy and cardiovascular disease on the immature platelet fraction in patients living with HIV.

Cardiovascular disease is an important contributor to morbidity and mortality in people living with HIV . The immature platelet fraction (IPF) is increased in HIV-negative patients with cardiovascular disease and evidence suggests that an enlarged IPF is associated with adverse cardiovascular events. In this multi-center observational study, we aimed to investigate how the IPF in people living with HIV is influenced by antiretroviral therapy and cardiovascular disease. Subjects without cardiovascular disease that received antiretroviral therapy showed a smaller IPF accompanied by lower D-dimer and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels compared to therapy-naïve subjects (mean IPF: 2.9% vs. 3.9%, p = .016; median D-dimer: 252 µg/L vs. 623 µg/L, p < .001; median CRP: 0.2 mg/dL vs. 0.5 mg/dL, p = .004). No significant differences for the IPF, D-dimer or CRP were found between subjects on antiretroviral therapy with documented cardiovascular disease and therapy-naïve subjects. In conclusion, we observed a reduction in the IPF among subjects on therapy only in the absence of cardiovascular disease. In contrast, subjects receiving therapy that had documented cardiovascular disease showed an IPF comparable to therapy-naïve subjects. Future studies are needed to investigate if an enlarged IPF may serve as a biomarker in predicting adverse cardiovascular events in people living with HIV.

Angiographic and clinical outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stents in routine clinical practice: Results of the ISAR-ABSORB registry.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to analyze angiographic and clinical results of patients undergoing BRS implantation in a real-world setting. BACKGROUND: Angiographic and clinical outcome data from patients undergoing implantation of drug-eluting bioresorbable stents (BRS) in routine clinical practice is scant. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing implantation of everolimus-eluting BRS at two high-volume centers in Munich, Germany were enrolled. Data were collected prospectively. All patients were scheduled for angiographic surveillance 6-8 months after stent implantation. Quantitative coronary angiographic analysis was performed in a core laboratory. Clinical follow-up was performed to 12 months and events were adjudicated by independent assessors. RESULTS: A total of 419 patients were studied. Mean age was 66.6 ± 10.9 years, 31.5% had diabetes mellitus, 76.1% had multivessel disease, and 39.0% presented with acute coronary syndrome; 49.0% of lesions were AHA/ACC type B2/C, 13.1% had treatment of bifurcation lesions. Mean reference vessel diameter was 2.89 ± 0.46 mm. At angiographic follow-up in-stent late loss was 0.26 ± 0.51 mm, in-segment diameter stenosis was 27.5 ± 16.1, and binary angiographic restenosis was 7.5%. At 12 months, the rate of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization was 13.1%. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 2.6%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of everolimus-eluting BRS in routine clinical practice is associated with high antirestenotic efficacy in patients undergoing angiographic surveillance. Overall clinical outcomes at 12 months are satisfactory though stent thrombosis rates are not insignificant. Further study with longer term follow-up and larger numbers of treated patients is required before we can be sure of the role of these devices in clinical practice.

Prasugrel vs clopidogrel in cardiogenic shock patients undergoing primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction. Results of the ISAR-SHOCK registry.

There is limited clinical data comparing different P2Y12-receptor inhibitors in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock. The aim of the ISAR-SHOCK registry was to compare the clinical outcome of patients treated with clopidogrel vs prasugrel in this setting. Patients (n=145) with AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock and undergoing primary PCI in two centres (Deutsches Herzzentrum München and Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich) between January 2009 and May 2012 were included in this registry. The use of prasugrel for patients within this registry reflected co-morbidities and platelet function testing results during the acute AMI phase. Early outcome at 30-days was reported with regard to all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST) and bleeding events. With regard to antiplatelet treatment in the 145 cardiogenic shock patients, 50 patients were initially treated or immediately switched to prasugrel while 95 patients were treated with clopidogrel. All-cause mortality was lower in prasugrel- vs clopidogrel-treated patients (30 % vs 50.5%, HR: 0.51, 95% CI [0.29-0.92], p=0.025). No significant differences in prasugrel- vs clopidogrel-treated patients were observed for the occurrence of MI (p=0.233), ST (p=0.306) or TIMI major bleedings (p=0.571). Results of the ISAR-SHOCK registry suggest that the use of prasugrel in AMI patients complicated by cardiogenic shock might be associated with a lower mortality risk as compared to clopidogrel therapy without increasing the risk of bleeding. These findings, however, need confirmation from specifically designed randomised studies in this high-risk cohort of patients.

A comparative cohort study on personalised antiplatelet therapy in PCI-treated patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity. Results of the ISAR-HPR registry.

In clopidogrel-treated patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), high platelet reactivity (HPR) is associated with a higher risk for thrombotic events including stent thrombosis (ST). A personalised therapy with selective intensification of treatment may improve HPR patients´ outcome in this setting although recent randomised trials are against this hypothesis. The aim of the ISAR-HPR registry was to assess whether clopidogrel-treated HPR patients benefit from selective intensification of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. For the registry, outcomes were compared between two cohorts. We identified 428 clopidogrel treated HPR patients (AU x min ≥468 on the Multiplate analyser) between 2007-2008 (historical control cohort) without a change of treatment based on platelet function (PF) testing results. Between 2009-2011, we identified 571 HPR patients (guided therapy cohort) and used this information for guidance and selective intensification of P2Y12 receptor directed treatment (reloading with clopidogrel, switch to prasugrel, re-testing) in a setting of routine PF testing. The primary outcome was the composite of death from any cause or ST after 30 days. Major bleeding according to TIMI criteria was also monitored. The incidence of the primary outcome was significantly lower in the guided vs the control cohort (7 [1.2%] vs 16 [3.7%] events; HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.79; p=0.009). The incidence of major bleeding was numerically but not statistically higher in the guided vs the control cohort (1.9 vs 0.7%; p=0.10). In conclusion, present findings are in support for a PF testing guided antiplatelet therapy with selective intensification of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. The issue of personalised antiplatelet treatment warrants further investigation in randomized and well-controlled clinical trials.