Search

Background: Oral activated factor XI (FXIa) inhibitors may modulate coagulation to prevent thromboembolic events without substantially increasing bleeding. We explored the pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of the oral FXIa inhibitor asundexian for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction (MI). Methods: We randomized 1601 patients with recent acute MI to oral asundexian 10, 20, or 50 mg or placebo once daily for 6 to 12 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2, dose-ranging trial. Patients were randomized within 5 days of their qualifying MI and received dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor. The effect of asundexian on FXIa inhibition was assessed at 4 weeks. The prespecified main safety outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding comparing all pooled asundexian doses with placebo. The prespecified efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or stent thrombosis comparing pooled asundexian 20 and 50 mg doses with placebo. Results: The median age was 68 years, 23% of participants were women, 51% had ST-segment–elevation MI, 80% were treated with aspirin plus ticagrelor or prasugrel, and 99% underwent percutaneous coronary intervention before randomization. Asundexian caused dose-related inhibition of FXIa activity, with 50 mg resulting in >90% inhibition. Over a median follow-up of 368 days, the main safety outcome occurred in 30 (7.6%), 32 (8.1%), 42 (10.5%), and 36 (9.0%) patients receiving asundexian 10 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg, or placebo, respectively (pooled asundexian versus placebo: hazard ratio, 0.98 [90% CI, 0.71–1.35]). The efficacy outcome occurred in 27 (6.8%), 24 (6.0%), 22 (5.5%), and 22 (5.5%) patients assigned asundexian 10 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg, or placebo, respectively (pooled asundexian 20 and 50 mg versus placebo: hazard ratio, 1.05 [90% CI, 0.69–1.61]). Conclusions: In patients with recent acute MI, 3 doses of asundexian, when added to aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, resulted in dose-dependent, near-complete inhibition of FXIa activity without a significant increase in bleeding and a low rate of ischemic events. These data support the investigation of asundexian at a dose of 50 mg daily in an adequately powered clinical trial of patients who experienced acute MI. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT04304534; URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search ; Unique identifier: 2019-003244-79.

AIMS Clinical management of patients more than 1 year after acute myocardial infarction (MI) is challenging. Patient risk stratification may help to establish therapeutic priorities. We aimed to describe the comprehensive risk profile and management of patients with prior MI. METHODS We analyzed data from the EYESHOT Post-MI study, which evaluated the management of patients 1-3 years after MI. The risk profile of participants was defined according to the qualifying high-risk features of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial (history of diabetes, history of recurrent MI, angiographic evidence of multivessel coronary disease, chronic kidney disease with estimated glomerular filtration rate

Background: Elderly patients are at elevated risk of both ischemic and bleeding complications after an acute coronary syndrome and display higher on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity compared with younger patients. Prasugrel 5 mg provides more predictable platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel in the elderly, suggesting the possibility of reducing ischemic events without increasing bleeding. Methods: In a multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded end point trial, we compared a once-daily maintenance dose of prasugrel 5 mg with the standard clopidogrel 75 mg in patients >74 years of age with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary end point was the composite of mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, and rehospitalization for cardiovascular causes or bleeding within 1 year. The study was designed to demonstrate superiority of prasugrel 5 mg over clopidogrel 75 mg. Results: Enrollment was interrupted, according to prespecified criteria, after a planned interim analysis, when 1443 patients (40% women; mean age, 80 years) had been enrolled with a median follow-up of 12 months, because of futility for efficacy. The primary end point occurred in 121 patients (17%) with prasugrel and 121 (16.6%) with clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.007; 95% confidence interval, 0.78–1.30; P =0.955). Definite/probable stent thrombosis rates were 0.7% with prasugrel versus 1.9% with clopidogrel (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.13–1.00; P =0.06). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 2 and greater rates were 4.1% with prasugrel versus 2.7% with clopidogrel (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.85–3.16; P =0.18). Conclusions: The present study in elderly patients with acute coronary syndromes showed no difference in the primary end point between reduced-dose prasugrel and standard-dose clopidogrel. However, the study should be interpreted in light of the premature termination of the trial. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01777503.

Background Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and acute coronary syndromes have a greater level of platelet aggregation and a poor response to oral antiplatelet drugs. Clopidogrel is still widely used in clinical practice, despite the current evidence favoring ticagrelor and prasugrel. Aim The aim of this study was to investigate the determinants of clopidogrel use in the population of the multicenter prospective 'Acute Coronary Syndrome and Diabetes Registry' carried out during a 9-week period between March and May 2015 at 29 Hospitals. Patients and methods A total of 559 consecutive acute coronary syndrome patients [mean age: 68.7±11.3 years, 50% ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)], with 'known DM' (56%) or 'hyperglycemia' at admission, were included in the registry; 460 (85%) patients received a myocardial revascularization. Results At hospital discharge, dual antiplatelet therapy was prescribed to 88% of the patients (clopidogrel ticagrelor and prasugrel to 39, 38, and 23%, respectively). Differences in P2Y12 inhibitor administration were recorded on the basis of history of diabetes, age, and clinical presentation (unstable angina/non-STEMI vs. non-STEMI). On univariate analysis, age older than 75 years or more, known DM, peripheral artery disease, previous myocardial infarction, previous revascularization, complete revascularization, previous cerebrovascular event, creatinine clearance, unstable angina/non-STEMI at presentation, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Score, EuroSCORE, CRUSADE Bleeding Score, and oral anticoagulant therapy were significantly associated with clopidogrel choice at discharge. On multivariate analysis, only oral anticoagulant therapy and the CRUSADE Bleeding Score remained independent predictors of clopidogrel prescription. Conclusion In the present registry of a high-risk population, clopidogrel was the most used P2Y12 inhibitor at hospital discharge, confirming the 'paradox' to treat sicker patients with the less effective drug. Diabetic status, a marker of higher thrombotic risk, did not influence this choice; however, bleeding risk was taken into account.

BACKGROUND Patients with diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) present an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. An Italian Consensus Document indicated 'three specific must' to obtain in this subgroup of patients: optimal oral antiplatelet therapy, early invasive approach and a tailored strategy of revascularization for unstable angina/non-ST-elevation-myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI); furthermore, glycemia at admission should be managed with dedicated protocols. AIM To investigate if previous recommendations are followed, the present multicenter prospective observational registry was carried out in Lombardia during a 9-week period between March and May 2015. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 559 consecutive ACS patients (mean age 68.7 ± 11.3 years, 35% ≥75 years, 50% STEMI), with 'known DM' (56%) or 'hyperglycemia', this last defined as blood glucose value ≥ 126 mg/dl at admission, were included in the registry at 29 hospitals with an on-site 24/7 catheterization laboratory. Patients with known diabetes mellitus received clopidogrel in 51% of the cases, whereas most patients with hyperglycemia (72%) received a new P2Y12 inhibitor: according to clinical presentation in case STEMI prasugrel/ticagrelor were more prescribed than clopidogrel (70 vs. 30%, P

A pharmacodynamic interaction between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has been suggested, leading to reduced clopidogrel-induced platelet inhibitory effects. However, data from clinical studies are conflicting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of long-term clopidogrel and PPI therapy.A total of 1328 consecutive patients (age 63±11 years; 81% male) undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation and 1-year follow-up were included. All patients were treated with a standard aspirin and clopidogrel treatment regimen for 12 months. The concomitant PPI therapy for the same duration was at the discretion of the clinical cardiologist. PPI therapy included lansoprazole (30 mg/day), pantoprazole (20 mg/day), or omeprazole (20 mg/day). At 1-year follow-up, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), acute coronary syndrome leading to hospitalization and nonfatal stroke, were recorded. All cause death, any stent thrombosis (ST), and bleeding (Thrombolysis in MI major and minor) were also assessed.Lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and omeprazole were administered to 855, 178, and 125 patients, whereas 170 were not prescribed any PPI therapy. Among patients treated with PPIs, those on pantoprazole had more often prior MI, multivessel coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease, whereas earlier peptic ulcer was more frequent among patients treated with omeprazole. The incidence of 1-year MACE was not statistically different between patients in the PPI and no-PPI groups (7.5 vs. 5.0%; P=0.26). Similarly, 1-year rates of all cause death, ST, and Thrombolysis in MI major and minor bleedings did not significantly differ. After statistical adjustment for potential confounders, the concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPIs was not associated with the risk of 1-year MACE [odds ratio (OR) 1.54, P=0.38], death (OR: 0.97, P=0.961), and ST (OR: 1.01, P=0.998). No differences across the three PPI types were found.The association of clopidogrel and PPIs after drug-eluting stent implantation, prescribed on clinical judgement, seems safe.

The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) allowed the reduction in the need for repeat revascularization. At the culprit site in acute myocardial infarction patients treated with first-generation DES, the interaction between the eluted drug and the underlying necrotic core may generate different patterns of pathologic vessel response and delayed healing. A new generation DES intrepide elutes trapidil. Its modes of action are neither cytotoxic nor cytostatic, and may promote normal re-endothelialization. Due to its high resolution, optical coherence tomography (OCT) allows accurate detection of thrombus deposition and stent strut coverage at follow-up. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has enhanced tissue penetration and provides information on vessel remodeling. Using OCT and IVUS, we evaluated the intravascular morphology of the culprit vessel, the acute and intermediate result of novel DES implanted to treat an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

The Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology is aware of the existence of significant local and individual disparities and discordant prescriptions in antiplatelet therapy administered with coronary stents, a critical issue due to the large use of drug-eluting stents (DES), the increasing complexity of percutaneous coronary interventions and the more stringent requirement to avoid stent thrombosis. Current percutaneous coronary intervention is attempting more aggressively to treat difficult lesions and patient cohorts with a high procedural success rate. Double antiplatelet therapy with aspirin (ASA) and thienopyridine is the best current treatment to reduce the risk of coronary stent thrombosis. Due to the lower incidence of side-effects compared to ticlopidine, clopidogrel should be the thienopyridine of choice in association with ASA in the double antiplatelet regimen. However, the combination of delayed healing with DES and the increasing complexity of the stent implantation raises more demanding safety concerns about the dosage and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy.