Search

Introduction: Simultaneous administration of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and clopidogrel has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of acute coronary syndrome. Clopidogrel + ASA in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) provides a pharmaceutical option to enhance adherence to the coadministration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Herein, we evaluate the bioequivalence of enteric ASA and clopidogrel in an FDC compared with simultaneous administration of the individual formulations., Methods: This study is a randomized, single-center, open-label, three-sequence, three-period, two-treatment, crossover study conducted in healthy Chinese male and female subjects under fed conditions. Subjects were randomized to receive, in each period, a single dose of (1) a combination tablet containing 75-mg clopidogrel and 100-mg enteric ASA (test formulation) or (2) coadministration of one 75-mg clopidogrel tablet and one 100-mg enteric-coated ASA tablet (reference formulations) under fed conditions. Plasma samples were analyzed for ASA, salicylic acid, clopidogrel, and the clopidogrel metabolite SR26334. For ASA, the reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSABE) analysis was conducted for C max of ASA because within-subject standard deviation (SD W ) was ≥ 0.294 for log-transformed C max ., Results: The point estimate (test/reference geometric mean ratio) was between 0.80 and 1.25, and the upper one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the scaled average bioequivalence metric was ≤ 0 (-0.08). AUC of ASA as SD W was < 0.294 for log-transformed AUC last and AUC. Estimates of 90% CIs for log-transformed AUC last and AUC ratios were within the bioequivalence range of 0.80 to 1.25 (0.98-1.08 and 1.00-1.10, respectively). For clopidogrel, the 90% CIs for the ratios comparing log-transformed C max , AUC last , and AUC ratios of clopidogrel following administration of test versus reference formulation were calculated using the ABE method and were well within the acceptable range of 0.80 to 1.25 (1.02-1.12, 0.92-0.99, and 0.92-0.98, respectively)., Conclusion: FDC of ASA and clopidogrel was bioequivalent to the simultaneous administration of the individual formulations in healthy Chinese subjects under fed conditions., Trial Registration: CTR20190376.

Background The evidence for the comparative effectiveness and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in older patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is limited, especially in the acute phase of ACS. This study aimed to compare the in-hospital outcomes of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in older patients with ACS. Methods Hospitalised ACS patients aged ≥75 years who were recruited to the Improving Care for Cardiovascular Disease in China-ACS project between November 2014 and December 2019 and received aspirin and P2Y12 receptor inhibitors within 24 h after first medical contact were included. The primary outcomes were in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding. Multivariable Cox regression was performed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of ticagrelor and clopidogrel. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the results. Results Of 18,244 ACS patients, 18.5% received ticagrelor. Multivariable-adjusted analysis revealed comparable risks of in-hospital MACE between patients receiving ticagrelor and clopidogrel (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92–1.35). However, ticagrelor use was associated with 45% higher risk of in-hospital major bleeding compared with clopidogrel use (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.09–1.91). Similar results were found in the IPTW analysis. Conclusions ACS patients aged ≥75 years receiving ticagrelor during the acute phase had similar risk of in-hospital MACE, but higher risk of in-hospital major bleeding compared with those receiving clopidogrel. More evidence is needed to guide the use of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors during hospitalisation in older patients with ACS. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02306616. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optimal P2Y 12 inhibitor in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains unclear. We compared the in-hospital efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in ACS patients at HBR. We identified 22,120 hospitalized ACS patients with HBR treated with aspirin combined with either clopidogrel (n = 17,420) or ticagrelor (n = 4700) in the Improving Care for Cardiovascular Disease in China-ACS (CCC-ACS) project between November 2014 and December 2019. The median length of hospital stay was 10 days (interquartile range, 7–14 days). Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital TIMI major or minor bleeding (4.8% vs 3.8%; adjusted OR 1.20; 95% CI 1.03–1.41; P = 0.022). The incidence of TIMI major bleeding (1.7% vs 1.1%, P = 0.005) and intracranial bleeding (0.8% vs 0.5%, P = 0.005) were also higher in the ticagrelor group than in the clopidogrel group. There was no significant difference in the rate of in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or ischemic stroke) with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel therapy (4.2% vs 4.3%; adjusted OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.90–1.28; P = 0.411). Outcomes in the propensity-matched cohorts and in sensitivity analyses were consistent with the those of the main analysis. Among ACS patients with HBR, ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital major bleeding without a significant reduction in in-hospital MACCE. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02306616. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]