Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in East-Asian Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Large Cohort Study

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs Pub Date : 2023-08-23 DOI:10.1007/s40256-023-00603-7
Wei-Chieh Lee, Chih-Yuan Fang, Yi-Hsuan Tsai, Yun-Yu Hsieh, Tien-Yu Chen, Yen-Nan Fang, Huang-Chung Chen, Po-Jui Wu, Hsiu-Yu Fang
{"title":"Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in East-Asian Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Large Cohort Study","authors":"Wei-Chieh Lee,&nbsp;Chih-Yuan Fang,&nbsp;Yi-Hsuan Tsai,&nbsp;Yun-Yu Hsieh,&nbsp;Tien-Yu Chen,&nbsp;Yen-Nan Fang,&nbsp;Huang-Chung Chen,&nbsp;Po-Jui Wu,&nbsp;Hsiu-Yu Fang","doi":"10.1007/s40256-023-00603-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>A high risk of bleeding is observed in East Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Therefore, the choice between two antiplatelet therapy drugs, ticagrelor and clopidogrel, remains controversial in this population with ACS. This study aimed to use a large cohort database to assess the clinical outcomes of ticagrelor and clopidogrel therapy, including major bleeding, recurrent ACS, and mortality, in this population.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Between January 2009 and December 2019, 43,696 patients were diagnosed with ACS based on the medical history (International Classification of Diseases [ICD] code) of the Chang Gung Research Database. After excluding patients without percutaneous coronary intervention, with concurrent medical problems, and on non-standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or a single antiplatelet agent, 18,046 patients were recruited for analysis. Ticagrelor- and clopidogrel-based DAPT were administered to 3666 patients and 14,380 patients, respectively. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. A total of 4225 patients were defined as a high-bleeding-risk subgroup according to Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) score (met one major or two minor criteria), of which 466 and 3759 patients received ticagrelor- and clopidogrel-based DAPT, respectively.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Before propensity score matching (PSM), younger age, higher prevalence of male sex, and higher body mass index were noted in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group in the whole cohort and high-bleeding-risk subgroup. After PSM, no difference in baseline characteristics and comorbidities between ticagrelor-based and clopidogrel-based DAPT groups in the whole cohort and high-bleeding-risk subgroup was noted. The Kaplan–Meier curves of recurrent ACS and major bleeding were significantly lower in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group than in the clopidogrel-based DAPT group, and that of cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality showed no significant differences. After PSM, in the high-bleeding-risk subgroup, the Kaplan–Meier curve of recurrent ACS was significantly lower in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group than in the clopidogrel-based DAPT group, and that of major bleeding, CV, and all-cause mortality showed no significant differences.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this large cohort study, patients receiving ticagrelor-based DAPT were at lower risk of recurrent ACS compared to those receiving clopidogrel-based DAPT, especially in the patients with myocardial infarction. Ticagrelor-based DAPT did not result in a higher risk of major bleeding in the whole ACS population and high-bleeding-risk subgroup. The rate of CV and all-cause mortality were similar between both the groups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7652,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs","volume":"23 5","pages":"573 - 581"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40256-023-00603-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

A high risk of bleeding is observed in East Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Therefore, the choice between two antiplatelet therapy drugs, ticagrelor and clopidogrel, remains controversial in this population with ACS. This study aimed to use a large cohort database to assess the clinical outcomes of ticagrelor and clopidogrel therapy, including major bleeding, recurrent ACS, and mortality, in this population.

Methods

Between January 2009 and December 2019, 43,696 patients were diagnosed with ACS based on the medical history (International Classification of Diseases [ICD] code) of the Chang Gung Research Database. After excluding patients without percutaneous coronary intervention, with concurrent medical problems, and on non-standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or a single antiplatelet agent, 18,046 patients were recruited for analysis. Ticagrelor- and clopidogrel-based DAPT were administered to 3666 patients and 14,380 patients, respectively. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. A total of 4225 patients were defined as a high-bleeding-risk subgroup according to Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) score (met one major or two minor criteria), of which 466 and 3759 patients received ticagrelor- and clopidogrel-based DAPT, respectively.

Results

Before propensity score matching (PSM), younger age, higher prevalence of male sex, and higher body mass index were noted in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group in the whole cohort and high-bleeding-risk subgroup. After PSM, no difference in baseline characteristics and comorbidities between ticagrelor-based and clopidogrel-based DAPT groups in the whole cohort and high-bleeding-risk subgroup was noted. The Kaplan–Meier curves of recurrent ACS and major bleeding were significantly lower in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group than in the clopidogrel-based DAPT group, and that of cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality showed no significant differences. After PSM, in the high-bleeding-risk subgroup, the Kaplan–Meier curve of recurrent ACS was significantly lower in the ticagrelor-based DAPT group than in the clopidogrel-based DAPT group, and that of major bleeding, CV, and all-cause mortality showed no significant differences.

Conclusion

In this large cohort study, patients receiving ticagrelor-based DAPT were at lower risk of recurrent ACS compared to those receiving clopidogrel-based DAPT, especially in the patients with myocardial infarction. Ticagrelor-based DAPT did not result in a higher risk of major bleeding in the whole ACS population and high-bleeding-risk subgroup. The rate of CV and all-cause mortality were similar between both the groups.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
替卡格雷和氯吡格雷在东亚急性冠状动脉综合征患者中的临床疗效比较:大型队列研究
东亚急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者出血风险较高。因此,在ACS患者中,选择两种抗血小板治疗药物替卡格雷和氯吡格雷仍然存在争议。本研究旨在使用大型队列数据库来评估该人群中替卡格雷和氯吡格雷治疗的临床结果,包括大出血、复发性ACS和死亡率。方法根据长庚研究数据库的病史(国际疾病分类代码),2009年1月至2019年12月,43696名患者被诊断为ACS。在排除未经皮冠状动脉介入治疗、同时存在医疗问题、使用非标准双抗血小板治疗(DAPT)或单一抗血小板药物的患者后,招募18046名患者进行分析。3666名患者和14380名患者分别接受了以替卡格雷和氯吡格雷为基础的DAPT治疗。比较两组患者的基线特征和临床结果。根据高出血风险学术研究联合会(ARC-HBR)评分(符合一个主要或两个次要标准),共有4225名患者被定义为高出血风险亚组,其中466名和3759名患者分别接受了基于替卡格雷和氯吡格雷的DAPT。结果在倾向评分匹配(PSM)之前,在整个队列和高出血风险亚组中,以替卡格雷为基础的DAPT组年龄更小,男性患病率更高,体重指数更高。PSM后,在整个队列和高出血风险亚组中,基于替卡格雷和基于氯吡格雷的DAPT组的基线特征和合并症没有差异。替卡格雷DAPT组复发性ACS和大出血的Kaplan-Meier曲线显著低于氯吡格雷DAPT组,心血管(CV)和全因死亡率的Kaplan-Meier曲线无显著差异。PSM后,在高出血风险亚组中,替卡格雷DAPT组复发性ACS的Kaplan–Meier曲线显著低于氯吡格雷DAPT组,大出血、CV和全因死亡率的Kaplan-Meier曲线无显著差异。结论在这项大型队列研究中,与接受氯吡格雷DAPT的患者相比,接受替卡格雷DAPT治疗的患者复发ACS的风险较低,尤其是在心肌梗死患者中。在整个ACS人群和高出血风险亚组中,基于替卡格雷的DAPT没有导致更高的大出血风险。两组患者的CV和全因死亡率相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
38
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting rational therapy within the discipline of cardiology, the American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs covers all aspects of the treatment of cardiovascular disorders, particularly the place in therapy of newer and established agents. Via a program of reviews and original clinical research articles, the journal addresses major issues relating to treatment of these disorders, including the pharmacology, efficacy and adverse effects of the major classes of drugs; information on newly developed drugs and drug classes; the therapeutic implications of latest research into the aetiology of cardiovascular disorders; and the practical management of specific clinical situations. The American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs offers a range of additional enhanced features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist patients, caregivers and others in understanding important medical advances. The journal also provides the option to include various other types of enhanced features including slide sets, videos and animations. All enhanced features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. Peer review is conducted using Editorial Manager®, supported by a database of international experts. This database is shared with other Adis journals.
期刊最新文献
Cost Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Pharmacokinetic Drug-Drug Interaction between Cilostazol and Rosuvastatin in Healthy Participants. Use of Direct Anticoagulants in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Review of the Current Evidence and Emerging Perspectives. Impact of Antibacterials on the Quality of Anticoagulation Control in Patients Initiating Warfarin Therapy. Sacubitril-Valsartan Lowers Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence and Left Atrial Volume Post-catheter Ablation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1