Prasugrel and ticagrelor are similarly effective during the first year after MI. Economically motivated early post-discharge switches to clopidogrel were not associated with an increased risk of ischemic events. (Comparison of Prasugrel and Ticagrelor in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction [PRAGUE-18]; NCT02808767).

BACKGROUND:No randomized head-to-head comparison of the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel has been published in the 7 years since the higher efficacy of these newer P2Y 12 inhibitors were first demonstrated relative to clopidogrel. METHODS:This academic study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor in acute myocardial infarction treated with primary or immediate percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 1230 patients were randomly assigned across 14 sites to either prasugrel or ticagrelor, which was initiated before percutaneous coronary intervention. Nearly 4% were in cardiogenic shock, and 5.2% were on mechanical ventilation. The primary end point was defined as death, reinfarction, urgent target vessel revascularization, stroke, or serious bleeding requiring transfusion or prolonging hospitalization at 7 days (to reflect primarily the in-hospital phase). This analysis presents data from the first 30 days (key secondary end point). The total followup will be 1 year for all patients and will be completed in 2017. RESULTS:The study was prematurely terminated for futility. The occurrence of the primary end point did not differ between groups receiving prasugrel and ticagrelor (4.0% and 4.1%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0. 55-1.73; P=0.939). No significant difference was found in any of the components of the primary end point. The occurrence of key secondary end point within 30 days, composed of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke, did not show any significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor (2.7% and 2.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-2.15; P=0.864). CONCLUSIONS:This head-to-head comparison of prasugrel and ticagrelor does not support the hypothesis that one is more effective or safer than the other in preventing ischemic and bleeding events in the acute phase of myocardial infarction treated with a primary percutaneous coronary intervention strategy. The observed rates of major outcomes were similar but with broad confidence intervals around the estimates. These interesting observations need to be confirmed in a larger trial. 1604 F low restoration through an infarct-related artery via implantation of intracoronary stents during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is, if possible, the preferred reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with ST-segment elevation (STEMI). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:1 The highest thrombotic risk associated with this condition requires intensive antithrombotic treatment.2 In addition to aspirin, guidelines recommend the use of ticagrelor or prasugrel over clopidogrel. 1,3 Except for patients after an ischemic stroke, in whom prasugrel is contraindicated, class and level of guideline recommendations are identical for both agents. Physicians are increasingly being confronted with the need to select a P2Y 12 antagonist as part of the daily care of patients with AMI. For all practical pu...

AimsTo compare two different clopidogrel regimens on the outcomes of patients undergoing elective coronary angiography (CAG)±ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods and resultsOpen-trial randomized 1028 patients with stable angina to group A (‘non-selective’—clopidogrel 600 mg >6 h before CAG; n = 513) or group B (‘selective’—clopidogrel 600 mg in the cath-lab after CAG, only in case of PCI; n = 515). Combined primary endpoint was death/periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI)/stroke/re-intervention within 7 days. Secondary endpoints were troponin elevation and bleeding complications. Primary endpoint occurred in 0.8% group A patients vs. 1% group B (P = 0.749; 90% CI for the percentage difference −1.2–0.8). Periprocedural troponin elevation (>3× ULN) was detected in 2.6% group A vs. 3.3% group B (P = 0.475; 90% CI −2.5–1.0). Bleeding complications occurred in 3.5% group A patients vs. 1.4% group B (P = 0.025). After adjustment for covariates and factors that may influence the bleeding risk, patients in group A were shown to have more likely bleeding complications when compared with group B (OR = 3.03; 95% CI 1.14–8.10; P = 0.027).ConclusionHigh (600 mg) loading dose of clopidogrel before elective CAG increased the risk of minor bleeding complications, while the benefit on periprocedural infarction was not significant. Clopidogrel can be given safely in the catheterization laboratory between CAG and PCI in chronic stable angina patients.

In stable coronary artery disease, no correlation exists between baseline PRI and the severity and extent of coronary atherosclerosis. A high loading dose of clopidogrel does not satisfactorily suppress enhanced PRI in patients with diabetes. Cigarette smoking is independently associated with a prompt antiplatelet response to clopidogrel. Ongoing statin therapy is an independent determinant of more effective clopidogrel-mediated inhibition of platelet reactivity.

No abstract

No abstract

The study aimed to assess the impact of nine polymorphisms of genes encoding platelet receptors, enzymes, and hemostatic factors on clopidogrel efficacy to inhibit platelet reactivity in patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing elective coronary angiography either with or without ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention. The study was performed as a genetic substudy of the PRAGUE-8 trial. Ninety-five patients pretreated with 600 mg clopidogrel at least 6 h prior to coronary angiography were tested. Baseline platelet reactivity to ADP was assessed before the drug was administered. Clopidogrel efficacy was tested again at 12 and 28 h after administration. Polymorphisms of platelet receptors, glycoprotein (GP) Ia (807C/T), GPVI (13254C/T), GPIIIa (PlA1/PlA2), PAR-1 (IVSn-14A/T), P2Y12 (32C/T), P2Y12 (H1/H2) haplotype, gene variations of cyclooxygenase-1, Leiden, and factor II mutations were studied. Flow cytometric tests of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation states were used as a measure of drug efficacy. None of the gene polymorphisms influenced baseline ADP-induced platelet reactivity significantly. Twenty-eight hours after drug administration, differences in suppression of ADP-induced platelet reactivity were observed between polymorphism-positive and polymorphism-negative patients. Inhibition of platelet reactivity, after 600 mg of clopidogrel, was significantly less in carriers of PlA2 (P=0.009) for mean decrease in platelet reactivity index. The proportion of clopidogrel nonresponders (platelet reactivity index >50%) was apparently higher in PlA2 carriers in comparison with PlA1/PlA1 patients (54 vs. 24%, P=0.082). A 600 mg loading dose of clopidogrel failed to acceptably inhibit platelet reactivity in patients who were positive for the PlA2 polymorphism.

Purpose: To investigate the prognostic significance of diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients with high risk acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in the era of potent antithrombotics. Methods: Data from 1230 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients enrolled in the PRAGUE-18 (prasugrel vs. ticagrelor in pPCI) study were analyzed. Ischemic and bleeding event rates were calculated for patients with and without diabetes. The independent impact of diabetes on outcomes was evaluated after adjustment for outcome predictors. Results: The prevalence of DM was 20% (N = 250). Diabetics were older and more often female. They were more likely to have hypertension, hyperlipoproteinemia, multivessel coronary disease and left main disease, and be obese. The primary net-clinical endpoint (EP) containing death, spontaneous nonfatal MI, stroke, severe bleeding, and revascularization at day 7 occurred in 6.1% of patients with, and in 3.5% of patients without DM (HR 1.8; 95% CI 0.978–3.315; P = 0.055). At one year, the key secondary endpoint defined as cardiovascular death, spontaneous MI, or stroke occurred in 8.8% with, and 5.5% without DM (HR 1.621; 95% CI 0.987–2.661; P = 0.054). In those with DM the risk of total one-year mortality (6.8% vs. 3.9% (HR 1.773; 95% CI 1.001–3.141; P = 0.047)) and the risk of nonfatal reinfarction (4.8% vs. 2.2% (HR 2.177; 95% CI 1.077–4.398; P = 0.026)) were significantly higher compared to in those without DM. There was no risk of major bleeding associated with DM (HR 0.861; 95% CI 0.554–1.339; P = 0.506). In the multivariate analysis, diabetes was independently associated with the one-year risk of reinfarction (HR 2.176; 95% Confidence Interval, 1.055–4.489; p = 0.035). Conclusion: Despite best practices STEMI treatment, diabetes is still associated with significantly worse prognoses, which highlights the importance of further improvements in the management of this high-risk population.