Why the study?
Underuse and premature discontinuation of DAPT with aspirin and ticagrelor are common in clinical practice after ACS.
Does a dedicated in-person follow-up strategy reduce DAPT disruption in patients after acute coronary syndrome treated with ticagrelor?
Does a dedicated in-person follow-up strategy reduce DAPT disruption in patients after acute coronary syndrome treated with ticagrelor?
A dedicated in-person outpatient follow-up strategy significantly reduces premature discontinuation of ticagrelor in patients after acute coronary syndrome compared to telephone follow-up alone.
Dedicated follow-up may boost ticagrelor adherence post-ACS; leaves open whether it improves clinical outcomes in routine practice.
BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor is recommended for at least 12 months in patients after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, its underuse and premature discontinuation are common in clinical practice. We aimed to investigate the impact of a dedicated follow-up strategy with clinical visits and counselling on adherence levels to ticagrelor in patients after ACS. METHODS: PROGRESS (PROmotinG dual antiplatelet therapy adheREnce in the setting of acute coronary Syndromes) is a prospective, randomized trial enrolling 400 ACS patients treated with ticagrelor. Patients were randomized to be followed-up in a dedicated outpatient clinic (In-person follow-up group, [IN-FU], n=200), or with scheduled for phone interviews only (Telephone follow-up group [TEL-FU], n=200), to assess ticagrelor adherence and related complications. DAPT disruption was defined as an interruption of the administration of the drug due to complications or other reasons of non-adherence, and divided according to the duration into short (1-5 days), temporary (6-30 days) and permanent (≥30 days) disruption. The primary endpoint was the rate of DAPT disruption at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: The rate of ticagrelor disruption at 1 year follow-up was higher in the TEL-FU group than in the IN-FU group (19.6 vs 5.5%; p<0.0001). The IN-FU group reported a significantly lower rate of short (3.0 vs 8.5%; p=0.012) and permanent (2.0 vs 9.6%; p=0.012) disruption than TEL-FU group. The rate of major bleeding did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (p=0.450). CONCLUSION: The PROGRESS trial showed a net reduction in DAPT disruption in patients followed-up with clinical (in-person) follow-up visits in a dedicated outpatient clinic compared with those scheduled for phone interviews only.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crisci et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: