DrugLib.com — Drug Information Portal

Rx drug information, pharmaceutical research, clinical trials, news, and more

Usefulness and safety of vorapaxar in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (from the TRACER Trial).

Author(s): Valgimigli M(1), Tricoci P(2), Huang Z(2), Aylward PE(3), Armstrong PW(4), Van de Werf F(5), Leonardi S(6), White HD(7), Widimsky P(8), Harrington RA(9), Cequier A(10), Chen E(11), Lokhnygina Y(2), Wallentin L(12), Strony J(13), Mahaffey KW(9), Moliterno DJ(14).

Affiliation(s): Author information: (1)Thoraxcenter, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.valgimigli@erasmusmc.nl. (2)Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina. (3)Flinders University and Medical Centre, Bedford Park, Adelaide, Australia. (4)Division of Cardiology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. (5)Department of Cardiology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. (6)Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy. (7)Green Lane Cardiovascular Service, Auckland, New Zealand. (8)University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. (9)Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. (10)Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. (11)Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., Whippany, New Jersey. (12)Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala, Sweden. (13)Merck & Co., Whitehouse Station, New Jersey. (14)Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.

Publication date & source: 2014, Am J Cardiol. , 114(5):665-73

The therapeutic potential of vorapaxar in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown. This prespecified analysis of a postrandomization subgroup evaluated the effects of vorapaxar compared with placebo among Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRACER) participants undergoing PCI, focusing on the implanted stent type (drug-eluting stent [DES] vs bare-metal stent [BMS]). Among 12,944 recruited patients, 7,479 (57.8%) underwent PCI during index hospitalization, and 3,060 (40.9%) of those patients received exclusively BMS, whereas 4,015 (53.7%) received DES. The median (twenty-fifth, seventy-fifth percentiles) duration of thienopyridine therapy was 133 days (47, 246) with BMS and 221 days (88, 341) with DES. At 2 years among patients undergoing PCI, the primary (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization) and secondary (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) end points did not differ between vorapaxar and placebo groups, which was consistent with the treatment effect observed in the overall study population (p value for interaction = 0.540). However, the treatment effect trended greater (p value for interaction = 0.069) and the risk for bleeding in patients taking vorapaxar versus placebo appeared attenuated in BMS-only recipients. After adjustment for confounders, the interaction was no longer significant (p value = 0.301). The covariate that mostly explained the stent-type-by-treatment interaction was the duration of clopidogrel therapy. In conclusion, among patients with PCI, the effect of vorapaxar is consistent with the overall TRACER results. Patients who received a BMS underwent shorter courses of clopidogrel therapy and displayed trends toward greater ischemic benefit from vorapaxar and lesser bleeding risk, compared with patients who received a DES.

Page last updated: 2014-11-30

-- advertisement -- The American Red Cross
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Site usage policy | Privacy policy

All Rights reserved - Copyright DrugLib.com, 2006-2017