Literature DB >> 18757948

Greater clinical benefit of more intensive oral antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel in patients with diabetes mellitus in the trial to assess improvement in therapeutic outcomes by optimizing platelet inhibition with prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38.

Stephen D Wiviott1, Eugene Braunwald, Dominick J Angiolillo, Simha Meisel, Anthony J Dalby, Freek W A Verheugt, Shaun G Goodman, Ramon Corbalan, Drew A Purdy, Sabina A Murphy, Carolyn H McCabe, Elliott M Antman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at high risk for recurrent cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndromes, in part because of increased platelet reactivity. The Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38 (TRITON-TIMI 38) showed an overall reduction in ischemic events with more intensive antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel than with clopidogrel but with more bleeding. We compared prasugrel with clopidogrel among subjects with DM in TRITON-TIMI 38. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We classified 13 608 subjects on the basis of preexisting history of DM and further according to insulin use. Prespecified analyses of the primary (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) and key secondary end points, including net clinical benefit (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and nonfatal TIMI major bleeding) were compared by use of the log-rank test. We found that 3146 subjects had a preexisting history of DM, including 776 receiving insulin. The primary end point was reduced significantly with prasugrel among subjects without DM (9.2% versus 10.6%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; P=0.02) and with DM (12.2% versus 17.0%; HR, 0.70; P<0.001, P(interaction)=0.09). A benefit for prasugrel was observed among DM subjects on insulin (14.3% versus 22.2%; HR, 0.63; P=0.009) and those not on insulin (11.5% versus 15.3%; HR, 0.74; P=0.009). Myocardial infarction was reduced with prasugrel by 18% among subjects without DM (7.2% versus 8.7%; HR, 0.82; P=0.006) and by 40% among subjects with DM (8.2% versus 13.2%; HR, 0.60; P<0.001, P(interaction)=0.02). Although TIMI major hemorrhage was increased among subjects without DM on prasugrel (1.6% versus 2.4%; HR, 1.43; P=0.02), the rates were similar among subjects with DM for clopidogrel and prasugrel (2.6% versus 2.5%; HR, 1.06; P=0.81, P(interaction)=0.29). Net clinical benefit with prasugrel was greater for subjects with DM (14.6% versus 19.2%; HR, 0.74; P=0.001) than for subjects without DM (11.5% versus 12.3%; HR, 0.92; P=0.16, P(interaction)=0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with DM tended to have a greater reduction in ischemic events without an observed increase in TIMI major bleeding and therefore a greater net treatment benefit with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel. These data demonstrate that the more intensive oral antiplatelet therapy provided with prasugrel is of particular benefit to patients with DM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18757948     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.791061

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  139 in total

1.  Antiplatelet effect of once- or twice-daily aspirin dosage in stable coronary artery disease patients with diabetes.

Authors:  Faouzi Addad; Tahar Chakroun; Ismail Elalamy; Fatma Abderazek; Saoussen Chouchene; Zohra Dridi; Gregoris T Gerotziafas; Mohamed Hatmi; Mohsen Hassine; Habib Gamra
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 2.490

Review 2.  The impact of switching P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy during index hospitalization: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jaya Chandrasekhar; Benjamin Hibbert; Michael Froeschl; Derek So; Roxana Mehran; Michel Le May
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 3.  Which antiplatelet agent for whom? Which patient populations benefit most from novel antiplatelet agents (ticagrelor, prasugrel)?

Authors:  Christoph Varenhorst; Stefan James
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  The evolution of antiplatelet therapy in cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Omair Yousuf; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  The Italian Horizon Scanning Project.

Authors:  Roberta Joppi; Luca Demattè; Anna Michela Menti; Daniela Pase; Chiara Poggiani; Luigi Mezzalira
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Recognition of incident diabetes mellitus during an acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Suzanne V Arnold; Joshua M Stolker; Kasia J Lipska; Philip G Jones; John A Spertus; Darren K McGuire; Silvio E Inzucchi; Abhinav Goyal; Thomas M Maddox; Marcus Lind; Divya Gumber; Supriya Shore; Mikhail Kosiborod
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2015-04-21

7.  Switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel in patients having coronary stent implantation.

Authors:  Guido Parodi; Giuseppe De Luca; Benedetta Bellandi; Vincenzo Comito; Renato Valenti; Rossella Marcucci; Nazario Carrabba; Angela Migliorini; R N Erica Ramazzotti; Gian Franco Gensini; Rosanna Abbate; David Antoniucci
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 8.  Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and clinical profile of novel antiplatelet drugs targeting vascular diseases.

Authors:  Jolanta M Siller-Matula; Julia Krumphuber; Bernd Jilma
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 8.739

Review 9.  Thienopyridine therapy and risk for cardiovascular events in secondary prevention.

Authors:  Peter P Toth; Annemarie Armani
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 5.113

Review 10.  Coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Doron Aronson; Elazer R Edelman
Journal:  Cardiol Clin       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 2.213

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.