elinogrel has been researched along with Stroke* in 2 studies
1 review(s) available for elinogrel and Stroke
Article | Year |
---|---|
Impact of new oral or intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors and clopidogrel on major ischemic and bleeding events in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.
New P2Y12 inhibitors can be classified as oral (prasugrel and ticagrelor) and intravenous drugs (cangrelor and elinogrel). These P2Y12 inhibitors might be superior to clopidogrel for reducing ischemic events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials that compared new oral or intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors with clopidogrel to determine their efficacy and safety in patients.. Twelve randomized, placebo-controlled studies and two subgroup analyses of included studies on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were included. The database consisted of 82,784 patients, with 43,875 (53%) on new oral P2Y12 inhibitors and 38909 (47%) on intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors compared with clopidogrel. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). The primary safety endpoint was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding. New oral P2Y12 inhibitors significantly decreased MACEs (odds ratio: 0.85, p<0.0001 for the whole cohort; OR: 0.77, p=0.04 for STEMI) and all-cause death (OR: 0.88, p=0.04 for the whole cohort; OR: 0.77, p=0.01 for STEMI). Among new intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors, only cangrelor significantly decreased the risk of MACEs. An increase in TIMI major bleeding was observed only by prasugrel among the new P2Y12 inhibitors.. New oral P2Y12 inhibitors reduce ischemic events, but there is no obvious increase in major bleeding in patients with CAD, and the risk/benefit ratio is particularly favorable for STEMI patients. Moreover, only cangrelor is beneficial for ischemic events in patients on new intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors. Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Adenosine; Adenosine Monophosphate; Administration, Oral; Clopidogrel; Coronary Artery Disease; Coronary Restenosis; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Humans; Injections, Intravenous; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Myocardial Infarction; Piperazines; Prasugrel Hydrochloride; Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists; Quinazolinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stents; Stroke; Sulfonamides; Thiophenes; Thrombolytic Therapy; Ticagrelor; Ticlopidine | 2014 |
1 trial(s) available for elinogrel and Stroke
Article | Year |
---|---|
A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled phase 2 trial to evaluate a novel selective and reversible intravenous and oral P2Y12 inhibitor elinogrel versus clopidogrel in patients undergoing nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention: the INNOVATE-PC
We evaluated the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of elinogrel, a competitive, reversible intravenous and oral P2Y(12) inhibitor that does not require metabolic activation, in patients undergoing nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention.. In a randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging phase 2b trial, 652 patients received either 300 or 600 mg of clopidogrel pre-percutaneous coronary intervention followed by 75 mg daily or 80 or 120 mg of IV elinogrel followed by 50, 100, or 150 mg oral elinogrel twice daily. Numerous exploratory safety and efficacy end points were assessed and, as such, had no prespecified primary end point, and the study was not powered to conclusively evaluate its objectives. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction combined bleeding was increased with elinogrel (hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% confidence interval, 1.10 to 3.57), related largely to increased bleeding requiring medical attention (elinogrel 47/408 [11.5%] versus clopidogrel 13/208 [6.3%]) and occurring primarily at the percutaneous coronary intervention access site. Efficacy end points and postprocedure cardiac enzyme were similar, but there was a nonsignificant higher frequency of periprocedural myocardial infarctions in the elinogrel arms (OR, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 3.48). There was an increased incidence of dyspnea (elinogrel 50/408 [12.3%] versus clopidogrel 8/208 [3.8%]) and transaminase elevation (alanine transferase/aspartate transferase >3× the upper limit of normal; elinogrel 18/408 [4.4%] versus clopidogrel 2/208 [1.0%]) in the elinogrel arms, but there were no cases of heart block, bradycardia, hypotension, or liver failure.. In patients undergoing nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention and in comparison with clopidogrel, intravenous and oral elinogrel therapy did not significantly increase thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major or minor bleeding, although bleeding requiring medical attention was more common. The significance of these findings will need to be more definitively determined in future Phase 3 studies.. URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00751231. Topics: Administration, Oral; Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary; Canada; Clopidogrel; Disease-Free Survival; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Europe; Female; Heart Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; Injections, Intravenous; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Logistic Models; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Odds Ratio; Platelet Aggregation; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Proportional Hazards Models; Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists; Quinazolinones; Receptors, Purinergic P2Y12; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Stroke; Sulfonamides; Thrombosis; Ticlopidine; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; United States | 2012 |