Key result
Prasugrel showed a comparable risk of ischemic events (adjusted HR 1.07) but a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (adjusted HR 0.62) compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Why the study?
Prasugrel was recently introduced to clinical practice, but real-world clinical outcomes comparing prasugrel with clopidogrel in Japanese patients with AMI needed evaluation.
Does prasugrel reduce ischemic events compared to clopidogrel in Japanese patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Observational (n=3,069)
Yes
Does prasugrel reduce ischemic events compared to clopidogrel in Japanese patients with acute myocardial infarction?
In Japanese patients with AMI, adjusted-dose prasugrel was associated with a similar risk of ischemic events but a significantly lower risk of major bleeding compared to clopidogrel.
Prasugrel may reduce major bleeding versus clopidogrel in Japanese AMI patients; leaves open whether ischemic benefits hold in randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy is the corner stone of treatment following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Prasugrel, a new and potent antiplatelet agent, was recently introduced to clinical practice. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with AMI treated with prasugrel with those treated with clopidogrel in real-world clinical practice in Japan. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Japan AMI Registry (JAMIR) is a multicenter, nationwide, prospective registry enrolling patients with AMI from 50 institutes. Between December 2015 and May 2017, a total of 3,411 patients were enrolled. Among them, 3,069 patients were treated with either prasugrel (n=2,607) or clopidogrel (n=462) during hospitalization. Median follow-up period was 12 months. Prasugrel-treated patients were predominantly male, younger, more often showed ST-elevation AMI, and had fewer comorbidities. After adjustment using inverse probability of treatment weighting, the primary endpoint, defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI and non-fatal stroke, was comparable between the prasugrel and clopidogrel groups (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.72), whereas the risk of major bleeding (BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding) was significantly lower in the prasugrel group (adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The present real-world database of the JAMIR demonstrated that the potent P2Y12-inhibitor prasugrel showed comparable rates of 1-year ischemic events to clopidogrel, but the risk of bleeding was lower with prasugrel than with clopidogrel.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yasuda et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=3,069). Prasugrel vs. Clopidogrel was evaluated on Composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI, and non-fatal stroke (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.67-1.72, p=0.78). Prasugrel showed a comparable risk of ischemic events (adjusted HR 1.07) but a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (adjusted HR 0.62) compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: