Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between low-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel as part of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients requiring oral anticoagulant therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Triple antithrombotic therapy, including dual antiplatelet therapy and oral anticoagulant (OAC), is recommended for a short-term period after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients requiring anticoagulation therapy. The purpose of this study was to compare in-hospital clinical outcomes between low-dose prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) and clopidogrel, as part of triple antithrombotic therapy, using a large database in Japan.
METHODS: Patients with ischemic heart disease who underwent PCI between January 2015 and December 2019, and were prescribed triple therapy with aspirin, a P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or low-dose prasugrel), and OAC (direct oral anticoagulant: DOAC or vitamin K antagonist: VKA), were selected from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, bleeding stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, and blood transfusion.
RESULTS: Overall, 5,777 patients were eligible in this analysis. The patients were divided into 4 subgroups according to the type of P2Y12 inhibitor and OAC: clopidogrel/DOAC (n = 1,628), clopidogrel/VKA (n = 1,334), prasugrel/DOAC (n = 1,607), and prasugrel/VKA (n = 1,208). There was no significant difference in the incidence of death and gastrointestinal bleeding among the 4 subgroups. The prasugrel/DOAC group had significantly lower incidence of MI (OR 0.566, 95% CI 0.348-0.921). The incidence of ischemic stroke was significantly lower in the prasugrel/DOAC group (OR 0.701, 95% CI 0.502-0.979), and significantly higher in the clopidogrel/VKA group (OR 1.680, 95% CI 1.273-2.216). Need for blood transfusion was less frequent in the prasugrel/DOAC group (OR 0.729, 95% CI 0.598-0.890), and more frequent in both the clopidogrel/VKA group (OR 1.424, 95% CI 1.187-1.708) and the prasugrel/VKA group (OR 1.633, 95% CI 1.367-1.950).
CONCLUSIONS: Combination of low-dose prasugrel and DOAC was associated with lower incidence of MI, ischemic stroke, and blood transfusion. Low-dose prasugrel may be feasible as part of triple therapy in patients undergoing PCI.

Introduction

Although triple antithrombotic therapy, which includes oral anticoagulant (OAC) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), in patients requiring anticoagulation therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ischemic heart disease has become obsolete because of its high bleeding risk [1], it is still used for a short-term period after PCI with a certain frequency. In recent guidelines and expert consensus documents for antithrombotic therapy after PCI, the recommended duration of triple therapy is up to 1 week to 1 month, followed by dual antithrombotic therapy with OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor [2-7]. It is well established that direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) is more preferable to prevent bleeding events in combination with antiplatelet therapy compared with vitamin K antagonist (VKA) [8, 9]. However, VKA is essential to patients with mechanical heart valves or severe renal impairment with some frequency. In terms of P2Y12 inhibitor, use of standard-dose prasugrel (loading/maintenance dose: 60/10 mg/day) or ticagrelor should be avoided as part of triple therapy in the Western guidelines, because previous studies have reported greater risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel [10-12].

In Japan and some other Asian countries [13], on the other hand, the approved dose of prasugrel is about one-third (loading/maintenance dose: 20/3.75 mg/day) of that in Western countries. Therefore, this low-dose prasugrel may be available as part of triple therapy, since its efficacy and safety in patients undergoing PCI for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) have been documented in previous studies [14, 15]. A registry-based study previously reported that triple antithrombotic therapy with low-dose prasugrel did not increase the risk of bleeding compared with clopidogrel [16]. However, there is still not enough information regarding the impact of low-dose prasugrel on clinical outcomes in patients requiring triple antithrombotic therapy based on results from large-scale analysis. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare in-hospital clinical outcomes between low-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel, as part of triple antithrombotic therapy, using a large database in Japan.

Materials and methods

Data source

This study used the database of Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) system, which contains administrative information acquired during hospitalization and is used to calculate reimbursements to hospitals in Japan. Data were regularly collected from voluntarily participating hospitals that operate under the DPC system. The database includes summarized inpatient information, such as age, sex, height, weight, the most resource-consuming disease, other major diagnoses and comorbidities, secondary disease, prescribed medications, treatment procedures, transfusion, in-hospital death, and other hospital-related information. This study was approved by the ethics committee of Chiba University Hospital (unique identifier: 3309). The requirement for informed consent was waived because of the anonymous nature of the data.

Study population

The study flowchart of patient enrollment and final study sample is shown in Fig 1. In this retrospective study, a total of 96,396 patients aged ≥20 years who underwent PCI at 165 hospitals between January 2015 and December 2019 were screened. The patients in whom the most resource-consuming disease during hospitalization was not identified as ischemic heart disease (ICD-10 codes: I20, I21, I22, I23, I24, and I25) based on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) coding, and those with no record that antithrombotic agents were prescribed, were excluded. From 79,023 patients receiving antithrombotic therapy, any antithrombotic therapy other than triple therapy with DAPT and OAC were excluded from the present analysis. Furthermore, as a part of triple therapy, DAPT with any antiplatelet agent other than clopidogrel or prasugrel were also excluded. After the patients with duplicate prescription of the same class antithrombotic agents (e.g. both DOAC and VKA were prescribed in the same hospital stay) were excluded, 5,777 patients were finally eligible for analysis in the present study. The patients were divided into 4 subgroups according to the type of P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or prasugrel) and OAC (DOAC or VKA).

Fig 1

Flowchart for patient selection in the present study.

DOAC: direct oral anticoagulant, IHD: ischemic heart disease, OAC: oral anticoagulant, PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention, SAPT: single antiplatelet therapy, VKA: vitamin K antagonist.

Clinical outcomes

The primary outcome in the present study was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were in-hospital cardiovascular and bleeding adverse events, such as myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, bleeding stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, and blood transfusion as a surrogate marker of bleeding events.

Baseline variables

We included the following baseline characteristics as baseline variables: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, chronic kidney disease [CKD]), the presentation of myocardial infarction, and the total duration of hospitalization. We also evaluated medications, including antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants, aspirin, statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor blocker (ACE-I/ARB), β-blockers, proton pump inhibitor (PPI), steroid, and non-steroidal inti-inflammatory drugs. Potassium-competitive acid blockers were included in PPI.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using JMP® 14.0 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) and SAS statistical software package, v9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Categorical variables are presented as percentages and compared among the 4 subgroups using Pearson’s chi-squared test. Continuous variables are presented as mean ± SD. Comparisons of continuous variables among the 4 subgroups were conducted with Analysis of variance (ANOVA). Multivariate analysis was also performed for incidence of in-hospital adverse events among the 4 subgroups. Furthermore, we compared the incidence of in-hospital adverse events between the 2 specific regimens in comparison with the clopidogrel/DOAC group as reference, and estimated odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) of the treatment effects of the 2 regimens using the Firth’s logistic regression analysis. These multivariate analyses were performed with adjustment for age, sex, BMI, hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, CKD, statins, ACE-I/ARB, β-blocker, PPI, steroid, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, uniformly in each analysis for all patients, AMI patients, and non-AMI patients. The specific factors included for adjustment were AMI in the analysis for all patients, anterior AMI and Killip classification in the analysis for AMI patients, and unstable angina in the analysis for non-AMI patients. In terms of myocardial infarction in non-AMI patients, we adjusted for age, male, BMI, hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, CKD, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and unstable angina, because of the relatively small number of the events. Since the incidence of bleeding stroke was too low, multivariate analyses were not performed for this event in the present study. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Out of 5,777 patients enrolled in this study, 2,962 (51.3%) patients were prescribed clopidogrel and 2,815 (48.7%) patients were low-dose prasugrel as a P2Y12 inhibitor. Out of 2,815 patients with prasugrel, only 4 patients (0.1%) had much lower dose of prasugrel (2.5 mg/day), which is considered for patients with low body weight. As OAC, 3,235 (56.0%) patients were prescribed DOAC, and 2,542 (44.0%) patients were VKA. Consequently, patients were divided into 4 subgroups: clopidogrel/DOAC (n = 1,628), clopidogrel/VKA (n = 1,334), prasugrel/DOAC (n = 1,607), and prasugrel/VKA (n = 1,208). Comparison of baseline characteristics among the 4 subgroups are summarized in Table 1. Almost all variables, except for BMI and steroid use, were significantly different among the 4 subgroups. Briefly, the prasugrel/VKA group had the youngest patient age compared with other 3 groups. There were more males, CKD, and prescription of NSA in the VKA groups, regardless of the type of P2Y12 inhibitor. While the prasugrel groups had more dyslipidemia, AMI presentation, and prescription of statins, ACE-I/ARB, and PPI, the clopidogrel groups showed a higher prevalence of diabetes, regardless of the type of OAC. Hospital stay was the longest in the prasugrel/VKA group compared with the other 3 groups.

Table 1

Baseline clinical characteristics.

	Clopidogrel /DOAC	Clopidogrel /VKA	Prasugrel /DOAC	Prasugrel /VKA	p value
	(n = 1,628)	(n = 1,334)	(n = 1,607)	(n = 1,208)
Age (years)	74.2±8.8	72.0±10.8	73.0±10.8	69.9±11.8	<0.001
Male (%)	77.5	80.8	77.5	81.1	0.016
Body weight (kg)	63.2±12.7	63.0±12.5	64.0±13.6	63.8±13.4	0.118
BMI (kg/m2)	24.1±3.8	24.0±3.9	24.1±3.7	23.9±3.7	0.246
Hypertension (%)	63.5	59.8	69.4	62.3	<0.001
Dyslipidemia (%)	59.6	58.5	65.8	64.2	<0.001
Diabetes (%)	38.8	39.4	31.6	36.3	<0.001
Chronic kidney disease (%)	1.0	5.0	1.2	3.8	<0.001
AMI (%)	23.0	30.9	47.9	58.0	<0.001
Medication
Aspirin (%)	100	100	100	100	na
Statins (%)	75.6	75.8	81.6	82.4	<0.001
ACE-I/ARB (%)	55.0	51.2	59.4	61.8	<0.001
β-blocker (%)	67.3	70.4	69.9	74.1	0.001
PPI (%)	79.7	79.4	85.8	86.0	<0.001
Steroid (%)	3.0	4.1	3.0	3.5	0.346
NSA (%)	12.4	17.0	13.4	17.7	<0.001
Hospitalization day (days)	9.9±11.6	14.4±18.5	13.1±13.7	19.0±21.4	<0.001

ACE-I: angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, AMI: acute myocardial infarction, ARB: angiotensin II receptor blocker, BMI: body mass index, DOAC: direct oral anticoagulant, NSA: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, PPI: proton pump inhibitor, VKA: vitamin K-antagonist.

The incidence of in-hospital clinical events and the results of univariate and multivariate analyses were shown in Tables 2–4. The multivariate analyses demonstrated that the incidence of ischemic stroke and blood transfusion were significantly different among the 4 subgroups in all patients (p = 0.001 and p<0.001, respectively), that the incidence of death and blood transfusion were significantly different among the 4 subgroups in non-AMI patients (p = 0.013 and p<0.001, respectively), and that the incidence of ischemic stroke and blood transfusion were significantly different among the 4 subgroups in AMI patients (p = 0.039 and p<0.001, respectively).

Table 2

Total clinical events: All patients.

	Clopidogrel /DOAC	Clopidogrel /VKA	Prasugrel /DOAC	Prasugrel /VKA	Univariate p value	Multivariate p value
	(n = 1,628)	(n = 1,334)	(n = 1,607)	(n = 1,208)
Death	14 (0.86%)	23 (1.72%)	33 (2.05%)	30 (2.48%)	0.007	0.175
Myocardial infarction	17 (1.04%)	15 (1.12%)	10 (0.62%)	19 (1.57%)	0.110	0.145
Ischemic stroke	40 (2.46%)	47 (3.52%)	24 (1.49%)	21 (1.74%)	0.001	0.001
Bleeding stroke	4 (0.25%)	0 (0%)	4 (0.25%)	4 (0.33%)	0.272	-
Gastrointestinal bleeding	8 (0.49%)	13 (0.97%)	23 (1.43%)	18 (1.49%)	0.026	0.068
Blood transfusion	63 (3.87%)	129 (9.67%)	87 (5.41%)	148 (12.25%)	<0.001	<0.001

DOAC: direct oral anticoagulant, VKA: vitamin K-antagonist.

Table 4

Clinical events in AMI patients.

	Clopidogrel /DOAC	Clopidogrel /VKA	Prasugrel /DOAC	Prasugrel /VKA	Univariate p value	Multivariate p value
	(n = 373)	(n = 406)	(n = 770)	(n = 700)
Death	11 (2.95%)	21 (5.17%)	31 (4.03%)	25 (3.57%)	0.411	0.226
Myocardial infarction	13 (3.49%)	10 (2.46%)	7 (0.91%)	15 (2.14%)	0.025	0.114
Ischemic stroke	11 (2.95%)	17 (4.19%)	11 (1.43%)	13 (1.86%)	0.016	0.039
Bleeding stroke	3 (0.80%)	0 (0%)	4 (0.52%)	2 (0.29%)	0.300	-
Gastrointestinal bleeding	2 (0.54%)	7 (1.72%)	14 (1.82%)	14 (2.00%)	0.316	0.113
Blood transfusion	34 (9.12%)	68 (16.75%)	67 (8.70%)	109 (15.57%)	<0.001	<0.001

DOAC: direct oral anticoagulant, VKA: vitamin K-antagonist.

The results of multivariate analyses to compare the incidence of in-hospital adverse events between the 2 specific regimens with the clopidogrel/DOAC group as reference are described in Fig 2. Regarding the incidence of death, there was no significant difference, except for the significantly higher incidence in the prasugrel/VKA group (OR 3.586, 95% CI 1658–7.756) in non-AMI patients. In terms of myocardial infarction, the prasugrel/DOAC group had the significantly lowest incidence in all patients (OR 0.566, 95% CI 0.348–0.921) and in AMI patients (OR 0.520, 95% CI 0.296–0.913), but not in non-AMI patients, in comparison with the clopidogrel/DOAC group as reference. The incidence of ischemic stroke was significantly lower in the prasugrel/DOAC group only in all patients (OR 0.701, 95% CI 0.502–0.979), and significantly higher in the clopidogrel/VKA group in all patients (OR 1.680, 95% CI 1.273–2.216), in non-AMI patients (OR 1.556, 95% CI 1.097–2.207), and in AMI patients (OR 1.637, 95% CI 1.064–2.519), compared with the clopidogrel/DOAC group. The incidence of GI bleeding was not significantly different between the 2 specific regimens in comparison with the clopidogrel/DOAC group as reference. Need for blood transfusion was less frequent in the prasugrel/DOAC group in all patients (OR 0.729, 95% CI 0.598–0.890) and in non-AMI patients (OR 0.548, 95% CI 0.372–0.805). In addition, it was more frequently performed in the clopidogrel/VKA groups in all patients (OR 1.424, 95% CI 1.187–1.708) and in non-AMI patients (OR 1.652, 95% CI 1.250–2.183), and in the prasugrel/VKA group in all patients (OR 1.633, 95% CI 1.367–1.950), in non-AMI patients (OR 1.943, 95% CI 1.411–2.676), and in AMI patients (OR 1.549, 95% CI 1.239–1.937).

Fig 2

Impact of the combination of P2Y12 inhibitor and OAC on in-hospital adverse events.

The incidence of in-hospital adverse events, including death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, and blood transfusion, was compared between the 2 specific regimens with the clopidogrel/DOAC group as reference in all patients, AMI patients, and non-AMI patients. AMI: acute myocardial infarction, DOAC: direct oral anticoagulant, VKA: vitamin K antagonist.

Discussion

This large-scale cohort study investigated the impact of combination of triple antithrombotic therapy on in-hospital clinical outcomes in ischemic heart disease patients undergoing PCI. Overall, the primary outcome of in-hospital death was similarly observed among the 4 subgroups stratified by the combination of a P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel and prasugrel) and OAC (DOAC and VKA). The prasugrel/DOAC group demonstrated a lower rate of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and blood transfusion in comparison with the clopidogrel/DOAC group as reference. The VKA groups showed a consistently higher rate of blood transfusion compared with the DOAC groups. Low-dose prasugrel and DOAC may be a balanced combination as part of triple therapy in patients requiring PCI and anticoagulation therapy.

In recent guidelines and expert consensus documents of antithrombotic therapy for patients with ischemic heart disease, dual antithrombotic therapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor plus OAC is commonly recommended in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients after PCI [2-7]. However, there are no guidelines to recommend complete dual antithrombotic therapy at the time of or immediately after PCI for every AF patient, and triple antithrombotic therapy is still basically recommended for a short-term period after PCI. In a sub-analysis of AUGUSTUS trial, a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety of apixaban vs. VKA and aspirin vs. placebo in AF patients after acute coronary syndrome or PCI, it was reported that adding aspirin to dual antithrombotic therapy (i.e. triple therapy) for up to 30 days led to a decrease in severe ischemic events, although the trade-off relation for an increase in severe bleeding was observed [17]. Therefore, triple antithrombotic therapy may be still needed, especially in patients with low bleeding risk and high thrombotic risk for a certain period after PCI.

It has been established that DOAC is more preferable to prevent bleeding events in combination with antiplatelet therapy compared with VKA, if patients are eligible for DOAC [8, 9]. In terms of P2Y12 inhibitor, use of standard-dose prasugrel or ticagrelor should be avoided as part of triple therapy in the western guidelines, because previous studies have reported the greater risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel [10–12, 18]. In Japan and some other Asian countries [13], on the other hand, the approved loading/maintenance dose of prasugrel (20/3.75 mg/day) is about one-third of that in other countries (60/10 mg/day). When considering clinical introduction of prasugrel in Japan, special emphasis was placed on determining the dose to reduce the risk of bleeding events, because Japanese patients were considered to be older and have lower weight compared with Western patients. Dose-finding studies were carefully conducted [19], and randomized controlled trials confirmed the efficacy and safety of prasugrel 20/3.75 mg/day versus clopidogrel 300/75 mg/day in ACS patients as well as stable CAD patients undergoing PCI [14, 15]. Thus, this low-dose prasugrel has been substantially used in Japan, even in patients requiring triple therapy. Although a previous study, TWMU-AF PCI Registry, reported that the incidence of ischemic and bleeding events were not significantly different between AF patients undergoing PCI who were prescribed low-dose prasugrel or clopidogrel as part of their triple therapy [16], there was not sufficient information regarding the actual distribution and the efficacy of low-dose prasugrel as part of triple therapy in clinical settings. In this large-scale cohort study, 48.7% of patients received low-dose prasugrel as part of triple antithrombotic therapy, and the feasibility of low-dose prasugrel was shown, especially in combination with DOAC.

It has been reported that standard-dose prasugrel reduces ischemic events and increases bleeding events compared with clopidogrel [20, 21]. Thus, in western countries, prasugrel is mainly used for ACS patients at high thrombotic risk who are scheduled for PCI. Regarding low-dose prasugrel, better clinical outcomes without significant increase in bleeding events in patients undergoing PCI for both ACS and stable CAD compared with clopidogrel have been reported in previous studies [14, 15]. It is well known that the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel is attenuated in patients with poor metabolizing phenotype of CYP2C19 [22, 23], and clopidogrel is less effective on preventing cardiovascular events after PCI in such patients compared with other phenotypes [24]. Of note, 13–23% of Asian patients are CYP2C19 poor metabolizers, which is much more frequent than other races [25, 26]. On the other hand, the effect of prasugrel is less influenced by the CYP2C19 polymorphisms, and even low-dose prasugrel reportedly achieves stronger platelet inhibition than clopidogrel in CAD patients [27-29]. Even in cases of triple antithrombotic therapy, the interindividual variability in response to clopidogrel and more consistent effect of prasugrel might affect clinical outcomes. In the present study, ischemic events (myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) were reduced without increase in bleeding events in patients prescribed low-dose prasugrel and DOAC, although further study is warranted to address the reason why blood transfusion was reduced in this subgroup compared with other 3 subgroups. In terms of gastrointestinal bleeding, the incidence was quite low, and no significant difference was observed among the 4 subgroups. In this study population, PPI was administered in around 80–85% of patients. This high frequency of PPI administration might be associated with the reduced incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding.

In the clopidogrel/VKA group, there was a higher incidence of ischemic stroke compared with other 3 groups. In general, considering high bleeding risk, patients with VKA and antiplatelet agents more frequently have poor anticoagulation control compared with DOAC, and such poor control of VKA is associated with more adverse events, including ischemic stroke [30]. It might be one of the mechanisms of the higher incidence of ischemic stroke in the clopidogrel/VKA group, although it is unclear why the lower incidence in the prasugrel/VKA group was seen in the present study.

There were several differences in the results between AMI and non-AMI patients in the present study. In terms of mortality, the prasugrel/VKA group in non-AMI patients showed a significantly higher incidence of death compared with the clopidogrel/DOAC group. Although the mechanism of this finding is unclear, the combination of prasugrel and VKA should probably be avoided in non-AMI patients at low thrombotic risk. The incidence of myocardial infarction was decreased in the prasugrel/DOAC group in all patients and in AMI patients, but not in non-AMI patients. In AMI patients at high thrombotic risk, the forementioned strong and consistent antiplatelet inhibition with prasugrel may be useful to prevent recurrent myocardial infarction. Thus, low-dose prasugrel should probably be selected in AMI patients requiring triple therapy after PCI. A similar trend was also observed in the incidence of ischemic stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, and blood transfusion between AMI and non-AMI patients.

In the present study, the frequency of patients receiving VKA as part of triple therapy was relatively high (44%). Previously, the ANAFIE registry, with more than 30,000 Japanese patients, reported that 28% of AF patients on anticoagulant therapy received VKA [31]. The present study included every patient on anticoagulant therapy. Therefore, some patients with specific conditions requiring VKA (e.g. mechanical valve, some types of thrombosis like left ventricular thrombosis, autoimmune disease, such as antiphospholipid syndrome) must have been included. This might be able to explain the high prevalence of VKA, although the database used in the present study did not have the information about actual indication for VKA or DOAC. Of note, VKA was consistently associated with a significantly higher rate of blood transfusion regardless of the type of P2Y12 inhibitor. Early switch from triple to dual antithrombotic therapy, i.e. early cessation of aspirin, should be considered in patients requiring VKA.

Limitations

There were several limitations in the present study. First, this retrospective study used the DPC administrative database, which did not have detailed clinical information including past medical history, laboratory data, and PCI strategies. Thus, residual confounding factors affecting clinical outcomes cannot be ruled out. Second, sample size calculation was not conducted for the primary outcome of in-hospital death because of the retrospective nature of this study. Third, clinical outcomes after discharge were not evaluated in this analysis. Fourth, there was no information detailing reasons for prescription of OAC (e.g. AF, deep vein thrombosis, or mechanical valve, etc.), which might influence the results in this study. Fifth, it is unclear whether all blood transfusions were needed due to bleeding events that occurred during the study period. Therefore, this outcome might not accurately represent bleeding events. Sixth, unstable angina was included in non-AMI patients in this study. Thus, some patients at high thrombotic/ischemic risk might be included in non-AMI patients. Seventh, the effect of another P2Y12 inhibitor, ticagrelor, could not be evaluated in this analysis, since ticagrelor is rarely used in Japan because of increased bleeding events reported in previous studies [32]. Finally, the database used in the present study did not include the time in therapeutic range in patients treated with VKA, which might be associated with clinical outcomes.

Conclusions

Combination of low-dose prasugrel and DOAC was associated with lower incidence of MI, ischemic stroke, and blood transfusion compared with other regimens. Low-dose prasugrel may be feasible as part of triple therapy in patients requiring PCI and anticoagulation therapy.

17 Jun 2022

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

R. Jay Widmer

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

[The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.]

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: In the ESC guideline, the combination of clopidgrel and DOAC as a part of triple antithrombotic therapy has been recommended to treat patients who need both OAC therapy and PCI procedure. However, in the guideline, the combination therapy of prasgrel and DOAC has not been indicated in such patients because of higher rates of adverse events including bleeding ones.

On the contrast, Japanese GL recommends 3.75mg/day doses of prasgrel in addition to ASA+DOAC to treat Japanese patients with same conditions. However, until now, there has been limited data to show the efficacies of the regimen.

The authors clearly showed safety and efficacy of combination of low-dose prasugrel and DOAC as a part of triple antithrombotic therapy, and the regimen was associated with lower incidence of events compared to combination of clopidgrel and DOAC.

The study included a large number of patients and the results are reasonable and promising and are of significance in the clinical practice.

The reviewer has some queries as shown below.

Specific comments

1. TTR was not evaluated in patients treated with VKA. This seems a limitation.

2. Please specify the dose of ‘standard-dose’ of prasugrel. But this may mean the dose for Western countries. Please add some explanation.

In addition, in Japan, much lower doses of prasugrel (2,5mg/day) may be used in patients with some specific conditions.

3. Did the authors include potassium-competitive acid blockers into PPI as the criteria? Please clarify.

PPI might be much more highly prescribed compared to Western countries. This may be one of the reason why such a low rate of GI bleeding was seen in the study. Please add some comments.

Reviewer #2: The study aims to look at low dose prasugrel as part of triple therapy.

1) What is the rational for the low dose prasugrel in Japan? You provide BMI but not weight. If this population weight less compared to western population, perhaps the low dose prasugrel is not low? Further, there is 5 mg available / used elsewhere

2) What is the reason for the high use of VKA? I understand you don’t have details, but this is quite high, as you mention in introduction that only certain patients such as mechanical valve require VKA

3) The study is likely not powered for primary outcome of death

4) What about outcome post discharge

5) The Figure 2 is hard to read due to poor resolution

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Hideki ISHII

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

7 Jul 2022

Reviewer #1:

We would like to thank you for your careful review of our manuscript. We have revised our manuscript to incorporate your recommendations as fully as possible. Responses to the specific points are given below.

Comment #1:

TTR was not evaluated in patients treated with VKA. This seems a limitation.

Authors’ Response to Comment #1:

Thank you very much for this important comment. In the revised manuscript, we have added the sentence “the database used in the present study did not include the time in therapeutic range in patients treated with VKA, which might be associated with clinical outcomes.” in the Limitation section (Page 14, Line 2-4).

Comment #2:

Please specify the dose of ‘standard-dose’ of prasugrel. But this may mean the dose for Western countries. Please add some explanation.

In addition, in Japan, much lower doses of prasugrel (2,5mg/day) may be used in patients with some specific conditions.

Authors’ Response to Comment #2:

According to the reviewer’s suggestions, we have added the sentences explaining ‘standard-dose’ of prasugrel in Western countries, and ‘low-dose’ of prasugrel in Japan and some Asian countries in the Introduction section (Page 4, Line 12-13 and Line 17).

In addition, much lower dose of prasugrel (2.5 mg/day) was used in 0.1% of patients (4/2,815 patients) in this study. This result was described in the Results section (Page 7, Line 20-22).

Comment #3:

Did the authors include potassium-competitive acid blockers into PPI as the criteria? Please clarify.

PPI might be much more highly prescribed compared to Western countries. This may be one of the reason why such a low rate of GI bleeding was seen in the study. Please add some comments.

Authors’ Response to Comment #3:

We appreciate this meaningful comment. In the present study, potassium-competitive acid blockers were included in PPI. The criteria were described in the Methods section in the revised manuscript (Page 6, Line 19).

In addition, the sentences regarding the low rate of GI bleeding were added in the Discussion section, as shown below.

“In terms of gastrointestinal bleeding, the incidence was quite low, and no significant difference was observed among the 4 subgroups. In this study population, PPI was administered in around 80-85% of patients. This high frequency of PPI administration might be associated with the reduced incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding.” (Page 11, Line 25 – Page 12, Line 4)

Thank you very much again for the time you have taken with our manuscript. We believe that incorporation of your suggestions significantly strengthened this manuscript.

Reviewer #2:

We would like to thank you for your careful review of our manuscript. We have revised our manuscript to incorporate your recommendations as fully as possible. Responses to the specific points are given below.

Comment #1:

What is the rational for the low dose prasugrel in Japan? You provide BMI but not weight. If this population weight less compared to western population, perhaps the low dose prasugrel is not low? Further, there is 5 mg available / used elsewhere

Authors’ Response to Comment #1:

Thank you very much for the meaningful comments. Body weight in this population was approximately 63kg, which seems to be much lower than that in Western countries (Table 1).

When considering clinical introduction of prasugrel in Japan, special emphasis was placed on determining the dose to reduce the risk of bleeding events, because Japanese patients were considered to be older and have lower weight compared with Western patients. Dose-finding studies were carefully conducted, and randomized controlled trials confirmed the efficacy and safety of prasugrel 20/3.75 mg/day versus clopidogrel 300/75 mg/day in ACS patients as well as stable CAD patients undergoing PCI. These sentences were added in the Discussion section (Page 10, Line 18-23).

Comment #2:

What is the reason for the high use of VKA? I understand you don’t have details, but this is quite high, as you mention in introduction that only certain patients such as mechanical valve require VKA

Authors’ Response to Comment #2:

We appreciate this important comment. In the present study, the frequency of patients receiving VKA as part of triple therapy was relatively high (44%). Previously, the ANAFIE registry, with more than 30,000 Japanese patients, reported that 28% of AF patients on anticoagulant therapy received VKA (Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2022;8:202-13). The present study included every patient on anticoagulant therapy. Therefore, some patients with specific conditions requiring VKA (e.g. mechanical valve, some types of thrombosis like left ventricular thrombosis, autoimmune disease, such as antiphospholipid syndrome) must have been included. This might be able to explain the high prevalence of VKA, although the database used in the present study did not have the information about actual indication for VKA or DOAC. These sentences were added in the Discussion section (Page 12, Line 24 – Page 13, Line 7).

Comment #3:

The study is likely not powered for primary outcome of death

Authors’ Response to Comment #3:

We appreciate this important comment. In response, we have mentioned about this issue in the Limitation section: “sample size calculation was not conducted for the primary outcome of in-hospital death because of the retrospective nature of this study”. (Page 13, Line 16-18).

Comment #4:

What about outcome post discharge

Authors’ Response to Comment #4:

Clinical outcomes post discharge were not evaluated in this analysis. Thus, we clearly mentioned about this issue in the Limitation section (Page 13, Line 18-19).

Comment #5:

The Figure 2 is hard to read due to poor resolution

Authors’ Response to Comment #5:

Thank you for the comment. The resolution of Figure 2 was increased in the revised manuscript.

Thank you very much again for the time you have taken with our manuscript. We believe that incorporation of your suggestions strengthened this manuscript.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers_20220707.docx

Click here for additional data file.

14 Jul 2022

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between low-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel as part of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients requiring oral anticoagulant therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention

PONE-D-22-12588R1

Dear Dr. Kitahara,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

R. Jay Widmer

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you for changings. The manuscript has been significantly improved. The reviewer has no criticism.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Hideki Ishii

Reviewer #2: No

**********

18 Jul 2022

PONE-D-22-12588R1

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between low-dose prasugrel and clopidogrel as part of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients requiring oral anticoagulant therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention

Dear Dr. Kitahara:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. R. Jay Widmer

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Table 3

Clinical events in non-AMI patients.

	Clopidogrel /DOAC	Clopidogrel/ VKA	Prasugrel /DOAC	Prasugrel /VKA	Univariate p value	Multivariate p value
	(n = 1,255)	(n = 928)	(n = 837)	(n = 508)
Death	3 (0.24%)	2 (0.22%)	2 (0.24%)	5 (0.98%)	0.064	0.013
Myocardial infarction	4 (0.32%)	5 (0.54%)	3 (0.36%)	4 (0.79%)	0.557	0.936
Ischemic stroke	29 (2.31%)	30 (3.23%)	13 (1.55%)	8 (1.57%)	0.074	0.070
Bleeding stroke	1 (0.08%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	2 (0.39%)	0.066	-
Gastrointestinal bleeding	6 (0.48%)	6 (0.65%)	9 (1.08%)	4 (0.79%)	0.450	0.369
Blood transfusion	29 (2.31%)	61 (6.57%)	20 (2.39%)	39 (7.68%)	<0.001	<0.001

DOAC: direct oral anticoagulant, VKA: vitamin K-antagonist.