PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
November 21, 2012Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions395 citations

Randomized Assessment of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel Antiplatelet Effects in Patients with ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction

View Full Paper
DADimitrios AlexopoulosIXIoanna XanthopoulouVGVassilios Gkizas

Structured PICO

Does ticagrelor reduce platelet reactivity compared to prasugrel in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI?

P
Population
55 consecutive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention
I
Intervention
Ticagrelor 180 mg loading dose followed by 90 mg oral twice daily for 5 days
C
Comparator
Prasugrel 60 mg loading dose followed by 10 mg oral once daily for 5 days
O
Outcome
Platelet reactivity (PR) assessed with the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay at hour 1surrogate

Ticagrelor did not appear superior to prasugrel in reducing platelet reactivity during the first 24 hours in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, with both agents exhibiting an initial delay in onset of action.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor and prasugrel provide stronger platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel. Direct pharmacodynamic comparison between them has not yet been reported in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a prospective, single-center, single-blind study, 55 out of 117 (47%) screened consecutive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to either ticagrelor 180 mg loading followed by 90 mg bid, or prasugrel 60 mg loading followed by 10 mg od for 5 days. Platelet reactivity (PR) was assessed with the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay and the Multiplate Analyzer at 0, 1, 2, 6, 24 hours, and 5 days postrandomization. The primary end point, PR with VerifyNow at hour 1, did not differ significantly between patients randomized to ticagrelor versus prasugrel (257.3 P2Y12 reaction unit PRU, 95% CI 230.8-283.8 versus 231.3 PRU, 95% CI 205.3-257.4; P=0.2). PR did not differ at 2, 6, and 24 hours, although at day 5 it was lower with ticagrelor than prasugrel (25.6 PRU, 95% CI 12.3-38.9 versus 50.3 PRU, 95% CI 36.4-64.1; P=0.01). At hour 2, high on-treatment PR rates (cutoff 208 PRU) were 46.2% and 34.6% for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively, decreased significantly thereafter, whereas did not differ significantly between the 2 agents at all the time points of the study. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, both ticagrelor and prasugrel exhibit an initial delay in the onset of their antiplatelet action. Ticagrelor did not appear superior to prasugrel in reducing PR during the first 24 hours of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01463163.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Alexopoulos et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a029d57db924cefa9fad174https://doi.org/10.1161/circinterventions.112.972323
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper