Why the study?
Does vorapaxar affect stroke risk and intracranial bleeding in patients with cardiovascular disease?
Does vorapaxar affect stroke risk and intracranial bleeding in patients with cardiovascular disease?
Despite increased bleeding risks when used as part of aggressive triple antiplatelet therapy, vorapaxar's reduction of primary ischemic strokes suggests it should be tested as monotherapy for secondary stroke prevention.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Conflicting vorapaxar stroke data with excess intracranial bleeding; leaves open net benefit for secondary prevention and justifies dedicated trials.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Vorapaxar, a novel platelet thrombin protease-activated receptor 1 blocker, is currently approved for post-myocardial infarction and peripheral artery disease indications on top of clopidogrel or/and aspirin. We sought to summarize the conflicting stroke data after vorapaxar for justifying a secondary stroke prevention trial. METHODS: Analyses of the stroke data after vorapaxar yielded from thrombin-receptor antagonist vorapaxar in acute coronary syndromes (TRACER) and TRA2P clinical trials, and affiliated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews. RESULTS: The stroke data are mixed, with catastrophic 2.5 excess of intracranial bleeding risks (HR = 2.52; 95% CI = 1.46-4.36, p < 0.0001); trend to worsened second stroke rates (13.0% vs. 11.7%; HR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.85-1.25, p = NS), but a hint towards less primary ischemic strokes in vorapaxar indicated population (HR = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.75; p < 0.001). These conflicting data are not solely attributed to vorapaxar, but rather reflect unreasonably aggressive triple antiplatelet strategies utilized frequently in TRA2P and dominant in TRACER. Overall, the FDA-confirmed evidence advocates future vorapaxar secondary stroke prevention trial due to being first-in-class agent, unique pharmakynetics, and exhibiting very mild "comfort zone" antiplatelet profile. The three arm trial testing head-to-head monotherapy with vorapaxar (Zontivity®), versus clopidogrel (Plavix®), and versus extended-released dipyridamole with very low dose aspirin (Aggrenox®) is warranted. CONCLUSIONS: Vorapaxar may be superior to currently recommended antiplatelet strategies and should be tested as a monotherapy in a randomized outcome-driven secondary stroke prevention trial.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Serebruany et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: