The effect of different treatment durations of clopidogrel in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and value of information analysis

Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Neuherberg.
Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) 07/2009; 13(31):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-77. DOI: 10.3310/hta13310
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To update the previous systematic review of the use of clopidogrel in combination with aspirin for patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), investigating the optimal duration of treatment and effects of withdrawal from treatment.
Ten electronic databases and internet resources were searched from 2003 to February 2007, including MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, BIOSIS, CENTRAL and CINAHL.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of clopidogrel plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone were used to evaluate clinical effectiveness and safety. Inclusion criteria included any comparator trial for duration of treatment studies, and any study design conducted in patients with NSTE-ACS, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), stroke, peripheral artery disease (PAD) or ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) for evidence of rebound on withdrawal of treatment. The existing model was updated to provide a more robust approach to evaluating the cost-effectiveness of alternative durations of clopidogrel and to assess the potential value of further research using value of information approaches.
Two RCTs were included for the review of clinical effectiveness and safety. The only RCTs identified that evaluated different durations of clopidogrel treatments were conducted in patients with stroke, PAD, STEMI or PCI. Two small RCTs and one uncontrolled retrospective cohort study were identified for the review of rebound after thienopyridine withdrawal in patients with medically-treated NSTE-ACS. On broadening the criteria, five RCTs, two observational cohorts, nine case series and 33 case reports were identified in patients post-PCI, and two case series and two case reports were identified in patients with stroke, PAD or STEMI. The CURE trial reported that the proportion of patients experiencing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke was lower in the clopidogrel group at 30 days [relative risk (RR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.92] and from 30 days to 12 months (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.95). Clopidogrel seems to be effective in reducing adverse cardiovascular events in patients with NSTE-ACS at intermediate and high risk of ischaemic events, and appears to increase the risk of bleeding when compared with aspirin in patients with intermediate risk of ischaemic events. In terms of the cost-effectiveness of alternative durations of clopidogrel, the updated model reinforced the conclusions from the earlier analysis, i.e. a policy of 12 months of clopidogrel for patients with NSTE-ACS appears to be cost-effective in both 'average' patients and higher-risk patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) of 12 months' duration ranged from 13,380 pounds to 20,661 pounds per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) across the different scenarios. For lower-risk patients, treatment beyond 3 months does not appear to be cost-effective. The ICER of 12 months' treatment with clopidogrel varied between 49,436 pounds and 58,691 pounds per QALY. Estimates of expected value of perfect information (EVPI) were higher for the combined analysis and for analysis of high-risk patients alone (between 48.69 million pounds and 108.4 million pounds at a threshold of 30,000 pounds per QALY). At a threshold of 20,000 pounds-30,000 pounds per QALY, total EVPI ranged between 3.27 million pounds and 20.38 million pounds in the lower-risk group.
The review was limited by the lack of available data. There is considerable variation in the costs of uncertainty surrounding the different scenarios and populations considered. The validity of these may also be less reliable in the higher-risk groups owing to changes in clinical practice. An adequately powered, well-conducted RCT that directly compares different durations of clopidogrel treatment in patients with NSTE-ACS would ideally be required to provide more robust evidence in relation to the impact of clopidogrel withdrawal.

Download full-text


Available from: Jane Burch, Jul 14, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Because of the prevalence of diabetes, the treatment of diabetic foot is still challenging. Even an exactly proved effective and practical method can't be listed except vascular surgery which is not a long-term way for it. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a very promising option in the treatment algorithm of inoperable chronic critical leg ischemia (CLI).
    01/2011; 2(4). DOI:10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2011.04.003
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is routinely indicated in patients with acute coronary syndromes and following percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality and ischaemic events. Although clinical guidelines recommend aspirin lifelong and clopidogrel for between one and 12 months, depending upon the indication, the optimal duration of clopidogrel therapy actually remains contentious. Premature cessation of clopidogrel in patients receiving drug-eluting stents is a clear risk factor for stent thrombosis, but recent clinical studies have also demonstrated a link between "appropriate" cessation of clopidogrel and clustering of adverse clinical events. It has been suggested that this may be due to a "rebound" prothrombotic and/ or proinflammatory response associated with clopidogrel withdrawal. This review will examine the definition and concept of a "rebound" phenomenon associated with clopidogrel cessation as well as the likely mechanisms behind this effect. Within the context of clinical event clustering after clopidogrel cessation, we will also discuss (i) the clinical importance of clopidogrel and the increasing uncertainty surrounding optimal duration of therapy, (ii) the antiplatelet and anti-inflammatory properties of clopidogrel and, in particular, its influence on arachidonic acid pathways traditionally thought to be mediated predominantly by aspirin and (iii) the role of newer, more potent antiplatelet agents and potential changes to antiplatelet therapy prescribing guidelines in the future.
    Thrombosis and Haemostasis 02/2011; 105(2-2):211-20. DOI:10.1160/TH10-08-0554 · 5.76 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been demonstrated to be associated with adverse clinical outcomes for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, data on relation of CKD and stent thrombosis (ST) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation are limited. This study was designed to examine whether CKD is associated with higher incidence of ST after elective coronary DES implantation compared with patients with normal renal function. We consecutively enrolled 2,862 patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES. Demographic and clinical data were collected preoperatively. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 ml/min, calculated using the modified MDRD equation. The primary outcome was 1-year definite or probable ST. Four hundred and forty-five participants (15.5%) had CKD before procedure. The incidence of 1-year definite or probable ST was significantly higher in CKD patients compared with patients with normal renal function (1.8% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.014). After adjustment for multiple clinical and biochemical covariates, CKD was an independent predictor of 1-year definite or probable ST (hazard rate [HR] 0.396, 95% CI 0.165-0.951, P = 0.038). CKD is significantly associated with increased incidence of 1-year definite or probable ST in patients undergoing PCI with DES.
    Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 09/2012; 80(3):361-7. DOI:10.1002/ccd.23464 · 2.40 Impact Factor
Show more