Evaluation of Ischemic and Bleeding Risks Associated With 2 Parenteral Antiplatelet Strategies Comparing Cangrelor With Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors

Abstract

In the context of contemporary pharmacotherapy, optimal antiplatelet management with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been well established. To compare the ischemic and bleeding risks associated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) and a potent P2Y12 antagonist, cangrelor, in patients undergoing PCI. An exploratory analysis of pooled patient-level data from the 3 phase 3 Cangrelor vs Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platelet Inhibition (CHAMPION PCI, CHAMPION PLATFORM, and CHAMPION PHOENIX) trials of patients undergoing elective or nonelective PCI. The participants included 10 929 patients assigned to cangrelor but not receiving GPIs (cangrelor alone) and 1211 patients assigned to clopidogrel (or placebo) and receiving routine GPIs (clopidogrel-GPI). Patients requiring bailout or rescue GPI therapy were excluded. To account for risk imbalances, 1:1 propensity score matching based on 16 baseline clinical variables yielded 1021 unique matched pairs. The present study's data analysis was conducted from October 28, 2015, to August 6, 2016. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48 hours. Safety was assessed by 3 validated bleeding scales (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries [GUSTO], Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction [TIMI], and Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage) and requirement for blood transfusions. Of the 12 140 patients included in the analysis, 8779 were men (72.3%), and the mean (SD) age was 63.2 (11.3) years. Patients in the clopidogrel-GPI group were more likely to be male (75.6% vs 71.9%), younger (median, 60 [range, 23-91] years vs 64 [range, 26-95] years), enrolled from the United States (77.9% vs 40.0%), and present with an acute coronary syndrome, but they had lower comorbid disease burden and were less likely to receive bivalirudin (8.8% vs 27.3%). In the matched cohorts, the rates of the primary efficacy end point were not significantly different between the cangrelor alone and clopidogrel-GPI groups (2.6% vs 3.3%; odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48-1.32). There was a nonsignificant trend toward lower rates of GUSTO-defined severe/life-threatening bleeding with cangrelor alone compared with clopidogrel-GPI (0.3% vs 0.7%; OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.11-1.66). Rates of TIMI-defined major or minor bleeding were significantly lower in patients treated with cangrelor alone (0.7% vs 2.4%; OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.68). Based on a pooled analysis from the 3 phase 3 CHAMPION trials, cangrelor alone was associated with similar ischemic risk and lower risk-adjusted bleeding risk compared with clopidogrel-GPIs. clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00305162, NCT00385138, and NCT01156571.