Efficacy and Safety of Revacept, a Novel Lesion-Directed Competitive Antagonist to Platelet Glycoprotein VI, in Patients Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: The Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled ISAR-PLASTER Phase 2 Trial

Importance The assessment of new antithrombotic agents with a favorable safety profile is clinically relevant. Objective To test the efficacy and safety of revacept, a novel, lesion-directed antithrombotic drug, acting as a competitive antagonist to platelet glycoprotein VI. Design, Setting, and Participants A phase 2 randomized clinical trial; patients were enrolled from 9 centers in Germany from November 20, 2017, to February 27, 2020; follow-up ended on March 27, 2020. The study included patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Interventions Single intravenous infusion of revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, or placebo prior to the start of PCI on top of standard antithrombotic therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the composite of death or myocardial injury, defined as an increase in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin to at least 5 times the upper limit of normal within 48 hours from randomization. The safety end point was bleeding type 2 to 5 according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria at 30 days. Results Of 334 participants (median age, 67.4 years; interquartile range, 60-75.1 years; 253 men [75.7%]; and 330 White participants [98.8%]), 120 were allocated to receive the 160-mg dose of revacept, 121 were allocated to receive the 80-mg dose, and 93 received placebo. The primary end point showed no significant differences between the revacept and placebo groups: 24.4%, 25.0%, and 23.3% in the revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (P = .98). The high dose of revacept was associated with a small but significant reduction of high-concentration collagen-induced platelet aggregation, with a median 26.5 AU × min (interquartile range, 0.5-62.2 AU × min) in the revacept, 160 mg, group; 43.5 AU × min (interquartile range, 22.8-99.5 AU × min) in the revacept, 80 mg, group; and 41.0 AU × min (interquartile range, 31.2-101.0 AU × min) in the placebo group (P = .02), while adenosine 5'-diphosphate-induced aggregation was not affected. Revacept did not increase Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher bleeding at 30 days compared with placebo: 5.0%, 5.9%, and 8.6% in the revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (P = .36). Conclusions and Relevance Revacept did not reduce myocardial injury in patients with stable ischemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. There were few bleeding events and no significant differences between treatment arms. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03312855

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes

Background The relative merits of ticagrelor as compared with prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes for whom invasive evaluation is planned are uncertain. Methods In this multicenter, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes and for whom invasive evaluation was planned to receive either ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year. A major secondary end point (the safety end point) was bleeding. Results A total of 4018 patients underwent randomization. A primary end-point event occurred in 184 of 2012 patients (9.3%) in the ticagrelor group and in 137 of 2006 patients (6.9%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.70; P=0.006). The respective incidences of the individual components of the primary end point in the ticagrelor group and the prasugrel group were as follows: death, 4.5% and 3.7%; myocardial infarction, 4.8% and 3.0%; and stroke, 1.1% and 1.0%. Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in 1.3% of patients assigned to ticagrelor and 1.0% of patients assigned to prasugrel, and definite stent thrombosis occurred in 1.1% and 0.6%, respectively. Major bleeding (as defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale) was observed in 5.4% of patients in the ticagrelor group and in 4.8% of patients in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.51; P=0.46). Conclusions Among patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation, the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was significantly lower among those who received prasugrel than among those who received ticagrelor, and the incidence of major bleeding was not significantly different between the two groups