RESUMO
Purpose: Dual antiplatelet therapy is standard for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stents. Traditionally, patients swallow the loading dose of a P2Y12 inhibitor before or during PCI. Time to achieve adequate platelet inhibition after swallowing the loading dose varies significantly. Chewed tablets may allow more rapid inhibition of platelet aggregation. However, data for this strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are less robust. Methods: In this single-center prospective trial, 112 P2Y12-naïve patients with stable ischemic heart disease or NSTE-ACS on aspirin therapy and who received ticagrelor after coronary angiography but before PCI were randomized to chewing (n=55) or swallowing (n=57) the ticagrelor loading dose (180 mg). Baseline variables were compared using 2-sample t-test and chi-squared/Fisher's exact tests as appropriate, with alpha set at 0.05. P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) were compared at baseline, 1 hour, and 4 hours using Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Patients then received standard ticagrelor dosing. Results: After exclusions, P2Y12 PRU in the chewed and swallowed groups at baseline, 1 hour, and 4 hours after ticagrelor loading dose were 243 vs 256 (P=0.75), 143 vs 210 (P=0.09), and 28 vs 25 (P=0.89), respectively. No differences were found in major adverse cardiac events (MACE) or major bleeding at 30 days and 1 year. Conclusions: In patients with stable ischemic heart disease or NSTE-ACS, chewing rather than swallowing ticagrelor may lead to slightly faster inhibition of platelet aggregation at 1 hour with no increase in MACE or major bleeding.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: As hypoxia can mediate resistance to immunotherapy, we investigated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of combining evofosfamide, a prodrug that alleviates hypoxia, with ipilimumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, in immunologically "cold" cancers, which are intrinsically insensitive to immunotherapy, as well as in "hot/warm" metastatic cancers that are, atypical of such cancers, resistant to immunotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase I, 3+3 dose-escalation trial (NCT03098160), evofosfamide (400-640 mg/m2) and ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) were administered in four 3-week cycles. The former was administered on days 1 and 8 of cycles 1-2, while the latter was administered on day 8 of cycles 1-4. Response was assessed using immune-related RECIST and retreatment was allowed, if deemed beneficial, after completion of cycle 4 or at progression. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled, of whom 21 were evaluable, encompassing castration-resistant prostate cancer (n = 11), pancreatic cancer (n = 7), immunotherapy-resistant melanoma (n = 2), and human papillomavirus-negative head and neck cancer (n = 1). Drug-related hematologic toxicities, rash, fever, nausea, vomiting, and elevation of liver enzymes were observed in > 10% of patients. The most common drug-related grade 3 adverse event was alanine aminotransferase elevation (33.3%). Two patients discontinued ipilimumab and 4 required evofosfamide deescalation due to toxicity. Of 18 patients with measurable disease at baseline, 3 (16.7%) achieved partial response and 12 (66.7%) achieved stable disease. The best responses were observed at 560 mg/m2 evofosfamide. Preexisting immune gene signatures predicted response to therapy, while hypermetabolic tumors predicted progression. Responders also showed improved peripheral T-cell proliferation and increased intratumoral T-cell infiltration into hypoxia. CONCLUSIONS: No new or unexpected safety signals were observed from combining evofosfamide and ipilimumab, and evidence of therapeutic activity was noted.
