Prasugrel is not as effective as Ticagrelor in acute myocardial infarction. 

Original title: Comparison of Prasugrel and Ticagrelor loading doses in STEMI patients: The Rapid Activity of Platelet Inhibitor Drugs (RAPID) primary PCI Study. Reference: Guido Parodi et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013. Article in press.

Current guidelines recommend the use of prasugrel or ticagrelor in patients with ST elevation acute coronary syndromes who are due to receive primary angioplasty. 

A quick start for both prasugrel and ticagrelor could maximize the effect of bivalirudin and potentially reduce the risk of acute stent thrombosis. However, because the loading dose in both drugs has only been measured in healthy volunteers or in stable coronary patients, pharmacodynamics give this as the reason why this study was designed to compare the action of prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients having a myocardial infarction after primary angioplasty and bivalirudin as mono-therapy.

The RAPID study randomized 50 patients with a 60 mg loading dose of prasugrel or 180 mg of ticagrelor. The load was administered as soon as possible in the emergency department or in the catheterization room concomitantly with aspirin and bivalirudin. The use of heparin was discouraged and the glycoprotein inhibitors IIBIIIA were prohibited. Platelet reactivity was measured at the time of load reception and then at two, four, eight and twelve hours with VerifyNow®. We defined high residual platelet reactivity as a value of ≥ 240 PRU, (platelet reactivity units). The primary end point was the residual platelet reactivity after two hours of charging. 

36% of patients received the loading dose in the emergency department and 64% in the catheterization room. At two hours of load, platelet reactivity was 242 PRU, half without differences between prasugrel and ticagrelor, (217 PRU versus 275 PRU respectively, p = 0.207). Prasugrel was not inferior to ticagrelor to inhibit platelet activity at two hours of charging. The median time to reach a residual platelet reactivity

Conclusion: 

In patients having ST-segment elevation with acute coronary syndrome and who received primary angioplasty with bolus and bivalirudin infusion, prasugrel was not inferior to ticagrelor in terms of residual platelet reactivity after two hours of charging. Both drugs provided effective platelet inhibition to two hours in only half of the patients; most of them required at least four hours.

Commentary: 

While we have to confirm that these results will translate into clinical events, both drugs, in terms of residual platelet reactivity after two hours, still only ensured results within an acceptable range in only half of the patients. With this delay in action, the charge should be administered immediately after diagnosis to avoid the waiting time while the patient is going to the catheterization room. Perhaps the oral route is the Achilles heel of these drugs and cangrelor can fix the problem but it will take time to know the answer because the effectiveness of cangrelor has not yet been tested against prasugrel or ticagrelor. Moreover, the striking delay in the effect for those who received morphine could be explained because the decrease in motility caused by gastro-intestinal opioid is associated with a slower absorption of antiplatelet. 

SOLACI.ORG

More articles by this author

ACC 2025 | FAME 3: FFR Guided PCI vs CABG 5 Year Outcomes.

Earlier studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) have shown fewer events at long term for the surgical strategy.  However,...

ACC 2025 | API-CAT: Reduced vs. Full Dose Extended Anticoagulation in Patients with Cancer Related VTE

The risk of cancer related recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) will drop over time, while bleeding risk will persist. At present, it is recommended we...

Andromeda Trial: Meta-Analysis of Drug Coated Balloon vs. DES in Small Vessel DeNovo Lesions

The use of coronary stents vs plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), has allowed to reduce recoil and limiting flow dissection which were major limitation...

QFR vs. FFR: Is Coronary Revascularization Deferral Safe? Results from a FAVOR III Sub-Analysis

In cases of intermediate coronary lesions, functional assessment is recommended to aid the decision-making process regarding revascularization. There are several tools currently used to...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

ACC 2025 | BHF PROTECT-TAVI: Are Cerebral Protection Systems Necessary in TAVI?

TAVI has seen a steady increase in use, though stroke continues to be one of its unwanted complications, mostly ischemic and, less frequently, hemorrhagic. The...

ACC-2025 Congress Second Day Key Studies

BHF PROTECT-TAVI (Kharbanda RK, Kennedy J, Dodd M, et al.)The largest randomized  trial carried out across 33 UK centers between 2020 and 2024, assessing...

ACC 2025 | FAME 3: FFR Guided PCI vs CABG 5 Year Outcomes.

Earlier studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) have shown fewer events at long term for the surgical strategy.  However,...