Suppr超能文献

替格瑞洛与普拉格雷用于常规治疗急性冠状动脉综合征的比较

Ticagrelor vs Prasugrel for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Routine Care.

作者信息

Krüger Nils, Krefting Johannes, Kessler Thorsten, Schmieder Raphael, Starnecker Fabian, Dutsch Alexander, Graesser Christian, Meyer-Lindemann Ulrike, Storz Theresa, Pugach Irina, Frieß Christian, Chen Zhifen, Bongiovanni Dario, Manea Iulian, Dreischulte Tobias, Offenborn Frank, Krase Peter, Sager Hendrik B, Wiebe Jens, Kufner Sebastian, Xhepa Erion, Joner Michael, Trenkwalder Teresa, Gueldener Ulrich, Kastrati Adnan, Cassese Salvatore, Schunkert Heribert, von Scheidt Moritz

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

Deutsches Zentrum für Herz-Kreislauf-Forschung, Partner Site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Dec 2;7(12):e2448389. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48389.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive treatment, ticagrelor and prasugrel are guideline-recommended P2Y12 receptor inhibitors. The ISAR-REACT5 randomized clinical trial demonstrated superiority for prasugrel, although concerns were raised about the generalizability of some underpowered subgroup analyses.

OBJECTIVES

To emulate a randomized clinical trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of ticagrelor vs prasugrel under the conditions of routine care in individuals with ACS planned to undergo an invasive treatment strategy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This new-user cohort study included secondary data from a German statutory health insurance claims database between January 2012 and December 2021, using 1:1 propensity score nearest-neighbor matching to emulate ISAR-REACT5. Individuals with ACS receiving either ticagrelor or prasugrel treatment after hospital discharge were followed up for 1 year. Eligibility criteria closely emulated those of ISAR-REACT5 and included age of 18 years or older and cardiovascular risk factors. Data were analyzed from May 2023 to May 2024.

EXPOSURE

Outpatient prescription of ticagrelor or prasugrel.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke within 1 year of outpatient treatment initiation. Secondary end points included individual components of the primary end point and stent thrombosis. The safety end point was major bleeding. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was fitted to the overall cohort.

RESULTS

Of 17 642 propensity score-matched individuals (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [10.9] years; 73.9% male), 8821 received ticagrelor and 8821 received prasugrel. Agreement was met in 11 of 12 predefined agreement metrics when comparing the results with ISAR-REACT5. The primary composite end point of all-cause mortality, MI, or stroke occurred in 815 individuals (9.2%) receiving ticagrelor and 663 (7.5%) receiving prasugrel (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.12-1.37). Myocardial infarction (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36) and stroke (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.02-1.74) each occurred significantly more often in the ticagrelor group. Analysis of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.99-1.64), stent thrombosis (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.30), and major bleeding (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.96-1.32) revealed no significant differences between treatment groups. Subgroup analysis showed that prasugrel was associated with the primary composite end point in fewer individuals with ST-segment elevation MI (338 of 4941 [6.8%] vs 451 of 4852 [9.3%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that prasugrel was associated with lower rates of all-cause mortality, MI, or stroke compared with ticagrelor in individuals with ACS undergoing an invasive treatment strategy in routine care, particularly in individuals with ST-segment elevation MI. The findings suggest that carefully designed database studies can complement and extend findings from randomized clinical trials, informing guidelines and clinical decision-making.

摘要

重要性

在接受侵入性治疗的急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者中,替格瑞洛和普拉格雷是指南推荐的P2Y12受体抑制剂。ISAR-REACT5随机临床试验证明了普拉格雷的优越性,尽管有人对一些功效不足的亚组分析的普遍性提出了担忧。

目的

在计划接受侵入性治疗策略的ACS患者的常规护理条件下,模拟一项评估替格瑞洛与普拉格雷安全性和有效性的随机临床试验。

设计、设置和参与者:这项新用户队列研究纳入了2012年1月至2021年12月德国法定医疗保险理赔数据库的二级数据,使用1:1倾向评分最近邻匹配来模拟ISAR-REACT5。对出院后接受替格瑞洛或普拉格雷治疗的ACS患者进行了1年的随访。纳入标准严格模拟ISAR-REACT5的标准,包括年龄在18岁及以上以及心血管危险因素。数据于2023年5月至2024年5月进行分析。

暴露

替格瑞洛或普拉格雷的门诊处方。

主要结局和测量指标

主要终点是门诊治疗开始后1年内全因死亡、心肌梗死(MI)或中风的复合终点。次要终点包括主要终点的各个组成部分以及支架血栓形成。安全终点是大出血。对整个队列拟合了Cox比例风险回归模型。

结果

在17642名倾向评分匹配的个体中(平均[标准差]年龄,63.1[10.9]岁;73.9%为男性),8821人接受了替格瑞洛治疗,8821人接受了普拉格雷治疗。将结果与ISAR-REACT5进行比较时,12个预定义一致性指标中的11个达成了一致。接受替格瑞洛治疗的815名个体(9.2%)和接受普拉格雷治疗的663名个体(7.5%)发生了全因死亡、MI或中风的主要复合终点(风险比[HR],1.24;95%置信区间,1.12-1.37)。替格瑞洛组中心肌梗死(HR,1.20;95%置信区间,1.06-1.36)和中风(HR,1.33;95%置信区间,1.02-1.74)的发生率均显著更高。对全因死亡(HR,1.27;95%置信区间,0.99-1.64)、支架血栓形成(HR,1.11;95%置信区间,0.89-1.30)和大出血(HR,1.12;95%置信区间,0.96-1.32)的分析显示,治疗组之间无显著差异。亚组分析表明,在ST段抬高型MI患者中,接受普拉格雷治疗与主要复合终点相关的个体较少(4941人中的338人[6.8%] vs 4852人中的451人[9.3%])。

结论和相关性

这项队列研究发现,在常规护理中接受侵入性治疗策略的ACS患者中,与替格瑞洛相比,普拉格雷与全因死亡、MI或中风的发生率较低相关,尤其是在ST段抬高型MI患者中。研究结果表明,精心设计的数据库研究可以补充和扩展随机临床试验的结果,为指南制定和临床决策提供信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a659/11612834/3c126b9fdd36/jamanetwopen-e2448389-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验