Schüpke, Stefanie; Neumann, Franz-Josef; Menichelli, Maurizio; Mayer, Katharina; Bernlochner, Isabell; Wöhrle, Jochen; Richardt, Gert; Liebetrau, Christoph; Witzenbichler, Bernhard; Antoniucci, David; Akin, Ibrahim; Bott-Flugel, Lorenz; Fischer, Marcus; Landmesser, Ulf; Katus, Hugo A; Sibbing, Dirk; Seyfarth, Melchior; Janisch, Marion; Boncompagni, Duino; Hilz, Raphaela; Rottbauer, Wolfgang; Okrojek, Rainer; Möllmann, Helge; Hochholzer, Willibald; Migliorini, Angela; Cassese, Salvatore; Mollo, Pasquale; Xhepa, Erion; Kufner, Sebastian; Strehle, Axel; Leggewie, Stefan; Allali, Abdelhakim; Ndrepepa, Gjin; Schühlen, Helmut; Angiolillo, Dominick J; Hamm, Christian W; Hapfelmeier, Alexander; Tölg, Ralph; Trenk, Dietmar; Schunkert, Heribert; Laugwitz, Karl-Ludwig; Kastrati, Adnan     «

Schüpke, Stefanie; Neumann, Franz-Josef; Menichelli, Maurizio; Mayer, Katharina; Bernlochner, Isabell; Wöhrle, Jochen; Richardt, Gert; Liebetrau, Christoph; Witzenbichler, Bernhard; Antoniucci, David; Akin, Ibrahim; Bott-Flugel, Lorenz; Fischer, Marcus; Landmesser, Ulf; Katus, Hugo A; Sibbing, Dirk; Seyfarth, Melchior; Janisch, Marion; Boncompagni, Duino; Hilz, Raphaela; Rottbauer, Wolfgang; Okrojek, Rainer; Möllmann, Helge; Hochholzer, Willibald; Migliorini, Angela; Cassese, Salvatore; Mollo, P...     »

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. (Funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research and Deutsches Herzzentrum München; ISAR-REACT 5 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01944800.).      «

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 second...     »