Search

Aims: Clinical guidelines recommend de-escalation antiplatelet strategies to reduce bleeding risk in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, albeit with a weak recommendation. This substudy of the TROPICAL-ACS trial aimed to determine the impact of body mass on the efficacy of a platelet function testing-guided de-escalation regimen in ACS patients after percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods and Results: Patients were randomized to prasugrel (control group) or a platelet function testing-guided regimen with clopidogrel or prasugrel defined after 1-week clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was the net clinical benefit [cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2-5 bleeding] for 12 months. Overweight was defined as a body mass index >25 kg/m2.Patients without overweight showed a significant net clinical benefit from the de-escalation strategy, while in overweight cases de-escalation was comparable to prasugrel treatment [hazard ratio (HR): 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.31-0.88; P = 0.013 and HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.69-1.31, P = 0.717, P-non-inferiority = 0.03, respectively, P-interaction = 0.053]. The benefit of de-escalation in terms of the risk of bleeding or of the ischaemic events did not reach statistical significance. Bleeding events with de-escalation were less frequent in non-overweight patients but comparable in overweight patients (HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.30-1.03; P = 0.057 and HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.64-1.41, respectively, P-interaction = 0.147). Non-overweight patients had lower ischaemic event rates with de-escalation, while overweight cases had slightly less (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.18-1.25; P = 0.128 and HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.53-1.50, respectively, P-interaction = 0.261)., Conclusion: The strategy of guided dual antiplatelet therapy de-escalation was associated with a significant net clinical benefit in non-overweight patients, while the two strategies were equivalent in overweight patients., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

This comprehensive literature review assessed the effectiveness of precision medicine approaches in individualizing P2Y12 de-escalation strategies, such as platelet function testing guidance, genetic testing guidance, and uniform de-escalation, for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Analyzing six trials with a total of 13,729 patients, the cumulative analyses demonstrated a significant reduction in major adverse cardiac events (MACE), net adverse clinical events (NACE), and major and minor bleeding events with P2Y12 de-escalation. Specifically, the analysis found a 24% reduction of MACE and a 22% reduction of adverse event risk (relative risk (RR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-0.82, and RR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.92, respectively). Reductions in bleeding events were highest with uniform unguided de-escalation, followed by guided de-escalations, while ischemic event rates were similarly lower across all three strategies. Although the review highlights the potential of individualized P2Y12 de-escalation strategies to offer a safer alternative to the long-term potent P2Y12 inhibitor-based dual antiplatelet therapy, it also indicates that laboratory-guided precision medicine approaches may not yet offer the expected benefits, necessitating further research to optimize individualized strategies and evaluate the potential of precision medicine approaches in this context.

Background: Clinical evidence has been controversial regarding the influence of low platelet reactivity (LPR), ischemic and bleeding outcomes among patients receiving coronary stent implantation. Hence, the present study performed a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the significance of LPR on adverse cardiovascular events., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched up to November 2020 for relevant studies including patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. LPR was the exposed arm while the non-LPR group represented the control. The primary outcome of interest was bleeding risk including major and minor bleeding events. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, repeated revascularization, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Study-level outcomes were evaluated in random-effect models., Results: A total of 20 studies with 19,064 patients were included. Pooled analysis showed that LPR was associated with an increased bleeding risk (relative risk [RR] 2.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.95-4.02, p < 0.01). Patients with LPR had a lower risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.91, p < 0.05) and of serious vascular events (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30-0.84, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Low platelet reactivity is associated with an increased bleeding risk of patients who underwent coronary stent implantation. The results suggest possible benefits of this marker in risk stratification, with potential improvement in risk prediction. There are potential advantages using combinations with other factors in prediction models, however, they require further study. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019136393).

Background: Despite the developments of single or dual antiplatelet therapy consisting of aspirin and/or clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor, post-acute coronary syndrome a room for potential improvement towards optimal prevention persist. The addition of a direct oral anticoagulant to the antiplatelet treatment of patients with the acute coronary syndrome is clinically practiced in cases where anticoagulation is indicated by high thromboembolic risk., Objective: The main objective of this review was to explore the role of supplementation with a direct oral anticoagulant to antiplatelet (aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor) in patients with the acute coronary syndrome., Methods: We have searched the Medline for studies involving direct oral anticoagulant use in acute coronary syndrome. We have reviewed specific relevant 9 meta-analyses between the years 2012 to 2019., Results: Our review of nine meta-analyses has revealed that the addition of direct oral anticoagulant to antiplatelet therapy compared with antiplatelet alone was beneficial about the composite endpoints of major ischemic events in patients with the acute coronary syndrome. Furthermore, the combined regimen of single antiplatelet plus direct oral anticoagulant is as effective as the triple regimen of dual antiplatelet plus direct oral anticoagulant and results in less bleeding., Conclusion: Cardiologists should balance the efficacy with a higher risk of bleeding with more intensified DOAC therapy. Better risk characterization and timely adaptation of the regime to the patient's need should be tested. Recurrent ischemic events and bleeding event risk scoring should guide individualized treatment., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

Aims: The value of platelet function testing (PFT) in predicting clinical outcomes and guiding P2Y12-inhibitor treatment is uncertain. In a pre-specified sub-study of the TROPICAL-ACS trial, we assessed ischaemic and bleeding risks according to high platelet reactivity (HPR) and low platelet reactivity (LPR) to ADP in patients receiving uniform prasugrel vs. PFT-guided clopidogrel or prasugrel., Methods and Results: Acute coronary syndrome patients with PFT done 14 days after hospital discharge were included with prior randomization to uniform prasugrel for 12 months (control group, no treatment modification) vs. early de-escalation from prasugrel to clopidogrel and PFT-guided maintenance treatment (HPR: switch-back to prasugrel, non-HPR: clopidogrel). The composite ischaemic endpoint included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, while key safety outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2-5 bleeding, from PFT until 12 months. We identified 2527 patients with PFT results available: 1266 were randomized to the guided and 1261 to the control group. Before treatment adjustment, HPR was more prevalent in the guided group (40% vs. 15%), while LPR was more common in control patients (27% vs. 11%). Compared to control patients without HPR on prasugrel (n = 1073), similar outcomes were observed in guided patients kept on clopidogrel [n = 755, hazard ratio (HR): 1.06 (0.57-1.95), P = 0.86] and also in patients with HPR on clopidogrel switched to prasugrel [n = 511, HR: 0.96 (0.47-1.96), P = 0.91]. In contrast, HPR on prasugrel was associated with a higher risk for ischaemic events in control patients [n = 188, HR: 2.16 (1.01-4.65), P = 0.049]. Low platelet reactivity was an independent predictor of bleeding [HR: 1.74 (1.18-2.56), P = 0.005], without interaction (Pint = 0.76) between study groups., Conclusion: Based on this substudy of a randomized trial, selecting prasugrel or clopidogrel based on PFT resulted in similar ischaemic outcomes as uniform prasugrel therapy without HPR. Although infrequent, HPR on prasugrel was associated with increased risk of ischaemic events. Low platelet reactivity was a strong and independent predictor of bleeding both on prasugrel and clopidogrel., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Guided de-escalation of P2Y12-inhibitor treatment was recently identified as an effective alternative treatment strategy in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Safety and efficacy of this strategy may differ in relation to patient's age. This pre-specified analysis of the TROPICAL-ACS trial aimed to assess the impact of age on clinical outcomes following guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in ACS patients., Methods and Results: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 fashion to either standard treatment with prasugrel for 12 months (control group) or to a guided de-escalation regimen (1 week prasugrel followed by 1 week clopidogrel and platelet function testing guided maintenance therapy with clopidogrel or prasugrel from day 14 after hospital discharge; guided de-escalation group). We used Cox regression models to assess the associations of age on clinical endpoints and interactions. In younger patients (age ≤70, n = 2240), the 1 year incidence of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or bleeding ≥ grade 2 according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria) was significantly lower in guided de-escalation vs. control group [5.9% vs. 8.3%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.96; P = 0.03, number needed to treat = 42]. In elderly patients (age >70, n = 370), the absolute risk of events was higher without significant differences between guided de-escalation vs. control group (15.5% vs. 13.6%; HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.69-2.01; P = 0.56). When the impact of age, as a continuous variable, was analysed on outcomes after guided de-escalation vs. control treatment, an increasing relative risk reduction was observed in the primary endpoint by decreasing age (Pint = 0.02), due to significant reductions in bleeding., Conclusion: Treatment effects of guided de-escalation for P2Y12 inhibitors depend on patient's age with younger patients deriving a significant net clinical benefit. Although the safety and efficacy of guided de-escalation in the elderly was similar to uniform prasugrel therapy, this should be further investigated due to the limited sample size of this group.

Background: Current guidelines recommend potent platelet inhibition with prasugrel or ticagrelor for 12 months after an acute coronary syndrome managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the greatest anti-ischaemic benefit of potent antiplatelet drugs over the less potent clopidogrel occurs early, while most excess bleeding events arise during chronic treatment. Hence, a stage-adapted treatment with potent platelet inhibition in the acute phase and de-escalation to clopidogrel in the maintenance phase could be an alternative approach. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of early de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment from prasugrel to clopidogrel guided by platelet function testing (PFT)., Methods: In this investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, assessor-blinded, multicentre trial (TROPICAL-ACS) done at 33 sites in Europe, patients were enrolled if they had biomarker-positive acute coronary syndrome with successful PCI and a planned duration of dual antiplatelet treatment of 12 months. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an internet-based randomisation procedure with a computer-generated block randomisation with stratification across study sites to either standard treatment with prasugrel for 12 months (control group) or a step-down regimen (1 week prasugrel followed by 1 week clopidogrel and PFT-guided maintenance therapy with clopidogrel or prasugrel from day 14 after hospital discharge; guided de-escalation group). The assessors were masked to the treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was net clinical benefit (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke or bleeding grade 2 or higher according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC]) criteria) 1 year after randomisation (non-inferiority hypothesis; margin of 30%). Analysis was intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01959451, and EudraCT, 2013-001636-22., Findings: Between Dec 2, 2013, and May 20, 2016, 2610 patients were assigned to study groups; 1304 to the guided de-escalation group and 1306 to the control group. The primary endpoint occurred in 95 patients (7%) in the guided de-escalation group and in 118 patients (9%) in the control group (p non-inferiority =0·0004; hazard ratio [HR] 0·81 [95% CI 0·62-1·06], p superiority =0·12). Despite early de-escalation, there was no increase in the combined risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke in the de-escalation group (32 patients [3%]) versus in the control group (42 patients [3%]; p non-inferiority =0·0115). There were 64 BARC 2 or higher bleeding events (5%) in the de-escalation group versus 79 events (6%) in the control group (HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·59-1·13]; p=0·23)., Interpretation: Guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment was non-inferior to standard treatment with prasugrel at 1 year after PCI in terms of net clinical benefit. Our trial shows that early de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment can be considered as an alternative approach in patients with acute coronary syndrome managed with PCI., Funding: Klinikum der Universität München, Roche Diagnostics, Eli Lilly, and Daiichi Sankyo., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Outcomes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have been significantly improved with the use of potent P2Y 12 receptor inhibitors like prasugrel. While most of the ischaemic risk reduction for prasugrel versus clopidogrel was demonstrated in the early treatment period, the risk of bleeding became particularly prominent during the chronic course of therapy. It may therefore be a valid approach to substitute prasugrel for clopidogrel in the early phase of chronic antiplatelet treatment after PCI. In the Testing Responsiveness To Platelet Inhibition On Chronic Antiplatelet Treatment For Acute Coronary Syndromes (TROPICAL-ACS) trial, we aim to compare standard prasugrel therapy with a de-escalating antiplatelet treatment approach guided by platelet function testing (PFT). The study is an investigator-initiated European multicentre, randomised clinical trial in biomarker-positive ACS patients after successful PCI. Two thousand six hundred patients will be randomised prior to hospital discharge in a 1:1 fashion to either receive standard prasugrel therapy (control group) or de-escalating therapy (one-week prasugrel followed by one-week clopidogrel and PFT-guided maintenance therapy from day 14 after hospital discharge, monitoring group). Patients of the monitoring group with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity (HPR) based on Multiplate analyzer testing (HPR: ≥ 46U per consensus definition) will be switched back to prasugrel, whereas those without HPR (<46 U) will continue clopidogrel treatment. The overall study treatment duration will be one year in both groups. The primary endpoint of the study is net clinical benefit (combined incidence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke and bleeding ≥ grade 2 according to BARC criteria) one-year after randomisation. TROPICAL-ACS is the first large-scale, randomised controlled trial assessing the clinical value of a PFT-guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in biomarker positive ACS patients undergoing PCI.

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the impact of treatment with prasugrel and high-dose clopidogrel on the basis of platelet function testing in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Background: The clinical impact of treatment with prasugrel in patients with ACS who have high platelet reactivity (HPR) is unknown., Methods: Patients with ACS who were pre-treated with clopidogrel and undergoing successful PCI were enrolled in a single-center, prospective registry. Platelet function was measured 12 to 36 h after PCI with the Multiplate device (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany). Patients with HPR (>46 U) were switched to prasugrel or treated with high-dose clopidogrel, and those without HPR continued treatment with 75 mg of clopidogrel., Results: A total of 741 consecutive patients were enrolled in the study between September 2011 and August 2012, and 219 of these patients (29.5%) had HPR. Although platelet reactivity decreased after treatment adjustments in those with HPR, prasugrel provided significantly more potent platelet inhibition compared with high-dose clopidogrel (p < 0.0001). Compared with patients without HPR, the risk of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke at 1 year was significantly higher in the high-dose clopidogrel group (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.45 to 3.55; p < 0.0001), and patients who were switched to prasugrel had similar outcomes (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.81; p = 0.76). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3/5 bleeding was also more frequent in patients treated with high-dose clopidogrel (HR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.05 to 4.17; p = 0.04) than in patients switched to prasugrel (HR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.11 to 1.91; p = 0.28). In a multivariate model, HPR with high-dose clopidogrel, but not with prasugrel, was an independent predictor of the composite ischemic endpoint (HR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.17 to 3.08; p = 0.01)., Conclusions: Switching patients with ACS who have HPR to treatment with prasugrel reduces thrombotic and bleeding events to a level similar to that of those without HPR; however, there is a higher risk of both thrombotic and bleeding complications with high-dose clopidogrel., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Administration of a P2Y 12 -receptor antagonist in addition to aspirin is mandatory in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to reduce the occurrence of thrombotic events; however, their impact on mortality and stroke is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the influence of moderate (clopidogrel) or potent (prasugrel/ticagrelor) P2Y 12 -receptor inhibition on major cardiovascular outcomes among patients with ACS or undergoing PCI. Systematic literature search was performed to find randomised, controlled clinical trials comparing the clinical impact of clopidogrel with placebo or prasugrel/ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. Outcome measures included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), total stroke and intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). Random-effects model with Mantel-Heanszel weighting was used to pool outcomes into a meta-analysis. Four studies comparing clopidogrel with placebo and five trials comparing clopidogrel with new P2Y 12 -receptor inhibitors were identified including a total of 107,473 patients. Compared to placebo, clopidogrel reduced the risk of cardiovascular death (odds ratio [OR]: 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-0.99, p=0.02), MI (OR 0.80; 95%CI 0.74-0.88, p<0.00001) and stroke (OR 0.84; 95%CI 0.72-0.97, p=0.02), without influencing risk for ICH (OR 0.96; 95%CI 0.69-1.33, p=0.79). Treatment with prasugrel/ticagrelor provided additional benefit over clopidogrel regarding cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.86; 95%CI 0.78-0.94, p=0.002) and MI (OR: 0.83; 95%CI 0.74-0.93, p<0.001), but no advantage in stroke (OR: 1.06; 95%CI 0.88-1.26, p=0.55) and in ICH (OR: 1.16; 95%CI 0.75-1.81; p=0.49) was observed. Increased potency of P2Y 12 -receptor inhibition is associated with decreased risk in cardiovascular death and MI; however, this association is not true in case of stroke, where potent P2Y 12 -receptor antagonists have no incremental benefit over clopidogrel.

Background: Despite receipt of dual antiplatelet therapy, patients after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remain at significant risk for thrombotic events. The role of orally activated Xa antagonist (anti-Xa) and direct thrombin inhibitors is debated in this setting. Our study objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new-generation oral anticoagulant agents compared with placebo in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy after an ACS., Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify prospective randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials that evaluated the effects of anti-Xa or direct thrombin inhibitors in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy after an ACS. Efficacy measures included stent thrombosis, overall mortality, and a composite end point of major ischemic events, while thrombolysis in myocardial infarction-defined major bleeding events were used as a safety end point. The net clinical benefit was calculated as the sum of composite ischemic events and major bleeding events., Results: For the period January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2011, we identified 7 prospective randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials that met the study criteria, involving 31 286 patients. Based on the pooled results, the use of new-generation oral anticoagulant agents in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy after an ACS was associated with a dramatic increase in major bleeding events (odds ratio, 3.03; 95% CI, 2.20-4.16; P < .001). Significant but moderate reductions in the risk for stent thrombosis or composite ischemic events were observed, without a significant effect on overall mortality. For the net clinical benefit, treatment with new-generation oral anticoagulant agents provided no advantage over placebo (odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.90-1.06; P = .57)., Conclusion: The use of anti-Xa or direct thrombin inhibitors is associated with a dramatic increase in major bleeding events, which might offset all ischemic benefits in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy after an ACS.

Combined inhibition of platelet aggregation is essential to prevent recurrent ischemic episodes in patients with acute coronary syndromes and after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). In combination with aspirin, the ADP receptor antagonist clopidogrel is used widespread for this purpose; however, platelet reactivity after clopidogrel differs substantially between patients and high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) persists in a substantial proportion of cases. Since more than 20 prior observational studies linked HTPR to higher risk of ischemic events, including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, monitoring post-clopidogrel platelet reactivity after PCI might be beneficial for risk assessment and to tailor the antiplatelet therapy to the patients' needs. However, there is no consensus on the role of routine platelet function monitoring in clinical guidelines. This article aims to review the available evidence regarding the clinical relevance of platelet function monitoring, highlighting possible reasons for the controversy between guidelines and observational studies.

We assessed the cardiovascular safety of long-term direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) treatment. A search of the medical literature was performed from inception until May 31, 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) randomized trial that assessed the clinical efficacy and/or safety of 1 or more DOAC, (2) control group including oral anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet and/or placebo treatment, and (3) the incidence of acute coronary syndrome during follow-up was reported. Fixed-effect and random-effects models were applied. The analyzed outcomes were myocardial infarction (MI), major bleeding, and mortality. Twenty-eight randomized clinical trials (196 761 patients) were included. Rivaroxaban was associated with a 21% reduction in the relative risk of MI when compared to placebo (relative risk [RR]: 0.79 [95% credible interval, CrI: 0.65-0.94]) and a 31% reduction (RR: 0.70 [95% CrI: 0.53-0.89]) when compared to dabigatran. Apixaban resulted in 24% (RR: 0.76 [95% CrI: 0.58-0.99]) and vitamin K antagonists anticoagulation resulted in 19% (RR: 0.81 [95% CrI: 0.65-0.98]) risk reduction compared to dabigatran. The computed probability of being the first best choice of treatment was 61.8% for rivaroxaban. Cardiovascular safety shows considerable heterogeneity among oral anticoagulants. Treatment with rivaroxaban is associated with reduced rate of MI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the impact of treatment with prasugrel and high-dose clopidogrel on the basis of platelet function testing in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background: The clinical impact of treatment with prasugrel in patients with ACS who have high platelet reactivity (HPR) is unknown. Methods: Patients with ACS who were pre-treated with clopidogrel and undergoing successful PCI were enrolled in a single-center, prospective registry. Platelet function was measured 12 to 36 h after PCI with the Multiplate device (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany). Patients with HPR (>46 U) were switched to prasugrel or treated with high-dose clopidogrel, and those without HPR continued treatment with 75 mg of clopidogrel. Results: A total of 741 consecutive patients were enrolled in the study between September 2011 and August 2012, and 219 of these patients (29.5%) had HPR. Although platelet reactivity decreased after treatment adjustments in those with HPR, prasugrel provided significantly more potent platelet inhibition compared with high-dose clopidogrel (p < 0.0001). Compared with patients without HPR, the risk of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke at 1 year was significantly higher in the high-dose clopidogrel group (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.45 to 3.55; p < 0.0001), and patients who were switched to prasugrel had similar outcomes (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.81; p = 0.76). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3/5 bleeding was also more frequent in patients treated with high-dose clopidogrel (HR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.05 to 4.17; p = 0.04) than in patients switched to prasugrel (HR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.11 to 1.91; p = 0.28). In a multivariate model, HPR with high-dose clopidogrel, but not with prasugrel, was an independent predictor of the composite ischemic endpoint (HR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.17 to 3.08; p = 0.01). Conclusions: Switching patients with ACS who have HPR to treatment with prasugrel reduces thrombotic and bleeding events to a level similar to that of those without HPR; however, there is a higher risk of both thrombotic and bleeding complications with high-dose clopidogrel. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]