Bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

https://doi.org/10.1177/2048872618805663

European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care 1 –10

© The European Society of Cardiology 2018 Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/2048872618805663 journals.sagepub.com/home/acc

Bivalirudin versus heparin

monotherapy in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

David Erlinge ¹ , Sasha Koul ¹ , Elmir Omerovic ² , Ole Fröbert ³ , Rikard Linder ⁴ , Mikael Danielewicz ⁵ , Mehmet Hamid ⁶ ,

Dimitrios Venetsanos ⁷ , Loghman Henareh ⁷ , Björn Pettersson ⁸ , Henrik Wagner ⁹ , Per Grimfjärd ¹⁰ , Jens Jensen ¹¹ ,

Robin Hofmann ¹² , Anders Ulvenstam ¹³ , Sebastian Völz ² , Petur Petursson ² , Ollie Östlund ¹⁴ , Giovanna Sarno ¹⁴ , Lars Wallentin ¹⁴ , Fredrik Scherstén ¹ ,

Peter Eriksson ⁸ and Stefan James ¹⁴

Abstract

Background: The optimal anti-coagulation strategy for patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention is unclear in contemporary clinical practice of radial access and potent P2Y12- inhibitors. The aim of this study was to investigate whether bivalirudin was superior to heparin monotherapy in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction without routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use.

Methods: In a large pre-specified subgroup of the multicentre, prospective, randomised, registry-based, open-label clinical VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial we randomised patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel, to bivalirudin or heparin monotherapy with no planned use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was the rate of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding within 180 days.

Results: A total of 3001 patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, were enrolled. The primary endpoint occurred in 12.1% (182 of 1503) and 12.5% (187 of 1498) of patients in the bivalirudin and heparin groups, respectively (hazard ratio of bivalirudin compared to heparin treatment 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.78–1.18, p=0.69). The results were consistent in all major subgroups. All-cause death occurred in 2.0% versus 1.7% (hazard ratio 1.15, 0.68–1.94, p=0.61), myocardial infarction in 2.3% versus 2.5% (hazard ratio 0.91, 0.58–1.45, p=0.70), major bleeding in 8.9% versus 9.1% (hazard ratio 0.97, 0.77–1.24, p=0.82) and definite stent thrombosis in 0.3% versus 0.2% (hazard ratio 1.33, 0.30–

5.93, p=0.82).

Conclusion: Bivalirudin as compared to heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction did not reduce the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding in non- ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients receiving current recommended treatments with modern P2Y12-inhibitors and predominantly radial access.

1

Department of Cardiology, Lund University, Sweden

2

Department of Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden

3

Department of Cardiology, Örebro University, Sweden

4

Department of Cardiology, Danderyd Hospital, Sweden

5

PCI-Unit, Karlstad Hospital, Sweden

6

Department of Cardiology, Mälarsjukhuset, Sweden

7

Department of Cardiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden

8

Department of Cardiology, Umeå University, Sweden

9

Department of Cardiology, Helsingborg Lasarett, Sweden

10

Department of Internal Medicine, Västmanlands Sjukhus, Sweden

Original Article

11

Department of Cardiology, Capio S:t Görans Hospital AB, Sweden

12

Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Sweden

13

Department of Cardiology, Östersund Hospital, Sweden

14

Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden

Corresponding author:

David Erlinge, Department of Cardiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, S-221 85, Sweden.

Email: david.erlinge@med.lu.se

Keywords

Bivalirudin, heparin, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Date received: 31 January 2018; accepted: 15 September 2018

Introduction

Anti-coagulation therapy with heparin, fondaparinux, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or bivalirudin is typi- cally used in conjunction with anti-platelet agents such as aspirin, P2Y12-inhibitors, or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibi- tors (GPIs), in order to improve angiographic and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACSs).

The use of more potent P2Y12-inhibitors has further improved clinical out- comes in patients treated with PCI for ACS.

Balancing the risk of thrombotic complications such as re-infarction and stent thrombosis against bleeding complications is important for long-term survival. In several trials bivaliru- din has demonstrated lowered risk of bleeding compared to heparin with provisional GPIs in patients with ACS.

However, these trials were performed prior to the routine use of radial access, potent P2Y12-inhibitors, or without assessing heparin monotherapy (without GPIs) as an alter- native to bivalirudin during PCI in patients with ACS.

Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) has poor long-term prognosis, is more com- mon than ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the patients are older, more frail and with more concomi- tant disease. No dedicated major trial comparing bivaliru- din and heparin monotherapy, without planned GPIs, has included a large number of patients with NSTEMI under- going PCI. In patients without elevated cardiac biomark- ers, bivalirudin compared to heparin monotherapy in a relatively high dose (140 U/kg) was documented with a reduction in bleeding events, but no difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs)

Several studies have compared bivalirudin to heparin combined with GPIs in patients without STEMI undergoing PCI.

In general, these studies demonstrated reduced bleeding complications with bivalirudin but no reduction in MACEs. In one of the largest bivalirudin trials on ACS, almost half of the patients had NSTEMI.

This large subgroup had a similar reduction in bleeding events with bivalirudin as the total study population, but with no reduction in mortality or MACEs. However, more than one-quarter of the patients in the heparin group also received GPIs, which may have led to increased bleeding complications. In the recent ‘Bivalirudin versus heparin in NSTEMI and STEMI patients on modern antiplatelet therapy in the Swedish web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease eval- uated according to recommended therapies registry’ trial (VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial), in patients with

STEMI or NSTEMI treated with potent P2Y12 inhibitors, we found no difference in MACEs or bleeding complica- tions between bivalirudin and heparin monotherapy.

The aim of this pre-planned substudy was to investigate whether bivalirudin compared to heparin monotherapy without routine GPI use during PCI reduces the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction and major bleed- ing events in patients with NSTEMI in the VALIDATE- SWEDEHEART trial, treated with potent P2Y12-inhibitors and predominantly undergoing radial artery PCI.

Methods Study design

The VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial was a multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, clinical open-label trial. This registry-based randomised clinical trial (RRCT) utilised the platform of pre-existing high-quality health- care registries as case-report forms, for randomization, and for follow-up.

The trial was coordinated by Uppsala Clinical Research Centre (Uppsala, Sweden), where we managed the data- base and performed statistical analyses. An executive committee, with assistance from all investigators, was responsible for the design, conduct and reporting of the study. The funding agencies had no access to the study data and no role in design, implementation, or reporting.

The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the ethical review board of Lund University, Sweden (2012/796) and by the Swedish Medical Products Agency (2012/120382). The trial is registered as www.clinicaltrialsregistry.eu: 2012- 005260-10 and clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02311231. The authors vouch for the accuracy and completeness of the data and of all analyses, and for the fidelity of this report to the trial protocol.

Patients

Patients admitted to a participating hospital with a diagno- sis of NSTEMI and planned for in-hospital PCI were eligi- ble for inclusion according to previously defined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Treatment with an oral loading dose of ticagrelor or prasugrel before PCI was mandatory.

Pre-planned GPI use or GPI use before catheterization were

contraindicated, however bail-out use of GPIs was allowed

and recorded.

Study procedures

Patients with NSTEMI received guideline-recommended treatment with unfractionated heparin, LMWH or fonda- parinux as per local practice while waiting for PCI. In the catheterization laboratory before angiography, an intra- arterial bolus of up to 3000 U heparin was allowed in order to prevent radial artery thrombosis.

After angiography, but prior to PCI, patients were ran- domised online through the Swedish angiography and angi- oplasty registry (SCAAR) to receive intravenous administration of bivalirudin (Angiox, The Medicines Company, USA) or intra-arterial administration of unfrac- tionated heparin (Leo Pharma, Sweden) in an open-label fashion. Randomization followed a computer-generated list with 1:1 permuted block randomization stratified for STEMI/NSTEMI and hospital.

Bivalirudin was administered as an intravenous bolus of 0.75 mg/kg followed by an infusion of 1.75 mg/kg×h.

Treatment was started as soon as PCI of the culprit lesion was intended. It was strongly recommended to continue bivalirudin infusion after PCI until the last opened vial had been administered. In patients randomised to receive hepa- rin, a total dose of 70–100 U/kg was recommended.

Activated clotting time (ACT) measurement 10 min after initiation of heparin or bivalirudin treatment was strongly recommended. A bolus dose of the respective randomised treatment was recommended if ACT was

<250 s (0.3 mg/kg bivalirudin or heparin dose at the phy- sician’s discretion). P2Y12-inhibitor treatment was rec- ommended for one year post-PCI in addition to aspirin 75–160 mg daily.

Written consent was obtained before angiography.

Endpoints and definitions

On endpoints and definitions see the main study publica- tion.

The 180 day endpoint was chosen to demonstrate a possible separation of mortality events beyond 30 days.

Statistics

We hypothesised that bivalirudin would be superior to hep- arin in reducing the composite of all-cause death, MI or major bleeding events at 180 days. We anticipated a pri- mary endpoint rate of 15.8% at 180 days in the heparin group for patients with NSTEMI. The trial was powered to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75 with 80% power in the NSTEMI group leading to planned recruitment of 3000 patients including compensation for deviations from treat- ment and attrition. Time-to-event endpoints are presented using Kaplan-Meier plots and treatment differences were assessed using the log-rank test and Cox regression. Time in hospital was compared using the Mann Whitney U-test and the Hodges-Lehmann estimator. Loss to follow-up was

treated as censoring in event time analyses. A two-tailed p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

The primary pre-planned subgroup analysis examined the primary endpoint and its components in the NSTEMI population. Subgroup analyses for the primary end point were pre-specified in the statistical analysis plan and in the previously published study design article.

Subgroup anal- yses were performed using a proportional hazards model with factors treatment, subgroup, and treatment-subgroup interaction.

Following inclusion of the first 1500 patients and again after 3000 patients in the entire VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART cohort, a data safety monitoring committee (DSMC) evalu- ated the trial progress as well as unblinded events for risk for trial subjects and recommended continuation of the study.

Results

Study population

Twenty-five out of Sweden’s 29 PCI centres participated in the trial. The trial enrolled 6006 patients, 3005 patients with STEMI and 3001 patients with NSTEMI, undergoing PCI between June 2014–September 2016.

All randomised NSTEMI patients, 1503 allocated to bivalirudin and 1498 allocated to heparin treatment, were followed according to the intention-to-treat principle.

Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treat- ment groups (Table 1). Follow-up was complete in 99% of patients. Follow-up of mortality was 100%.

Among all patients, 7.8% received heparin (maximum 5000 U) in the bivalirudin arm before arriving in the cath- eterization laboratory versus 10.3% in the heparin arm. In the catheterization laboratory, 72.4% in the bivalirudin arm versus 99.7% in the heparin arm received heparin with a mean first heparin dose of 30.0 U/kg and 90.2 U/kg, respec- tively. The mean maximum ACT during PCI was 390 s and 311 s for the bivalirudin and heparin groups. In the bivaliru- din group, 52.4% received prolonged study drug infusion for a mean of 53 min and none received an extra bolus because of low ACT. GPI-bailout was used in 1.3% and 0.7% in patients treated with bivalirudin and heparin, respectively (Table 1). The radial approach was used in 90.7% in the bivalirudin group and 89.7% in the heparin group.

Clinical outcomes

The primary endpoint at 180 days occurred in 12.1% (182

of 1502) and 12.5% (187 of 1498) of patients in the bivali-

rudin and heparin groups, respectively (HR of bivalirudin

compared to heparin treatment 0.96, 95% confidence inter-

val (CI) 0.78–1.18, p=0.69, Figure 1, Table 2). All cause

death occurred in 2.0% versus 1.7% (HR 1.15, 0.68–1.94,

p=0.61). Myocardial infarction occurred in 2.3% versus

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of treatment groups.

Heparin Bivalirudin Screened not

randomised

n 1498 1503 4237

Male sex 1091 (72.8%) 1139 (75.8%) 2986 (70.5%)

Age (median) 68.0 68.0 72

Q1–Q3 60.0–76.0 60.0–75.0 63.0–79.0

Age ⩾65 years 930 (62.1%) 952 (63.3%) 71.7%

BMI (kg/m

) 27.3 26.9 27.1

Q1–Q3 24.6–30.0 24.6–29.8 24.4–30.4

Weight<60 kg 73 (4.9%) 64 (4.3%) 262 (6.2%)

Previous smoker 592 (39.5%) 581 (38.7%) 1694 (40.0%)

Current smoker 291 (19.4%) 299 (19.9%) 759 (17.9%)

Renal failure 270 (18.0%) 236 (15.7%) 1079 (25.5%)

Diabetes 293 (19.6%) 289 (19.2%) 1187 (28.0%)

Hypertension 846 (56.5%) 868 (57.8%) 2883 (68%)

Hyperlipidaemia 594 (39.7%) 613 (40.8%) 2211 (52.2)

Previous MI 306 (20.4%) 300 (20.0%) 1377 (32.5%)

Previous PCI 268 (17.9%) 275 (18.3%) 1097 (25.9%)

Previous CABG 107 (7.1%) 108 (7.2%) 558 (13.2)

Previous stroke 77 (5.1%) 71 (4.7%) 308 (7.3%)

Symptom to PCI (median h) 30 33 37

Q1–Q3 18–55 19–62 21–68

Treatment before index event, TIMI flow and thrombus

Heparin Bivalirudin

Aspirin 419 (28.0%) 472 (31.4%) 1599 (37.7%)

Clopidogrel (Plavix) 49 (3.3%) 47 (3.1%) 247 (5.8%)

Prasugrel (Efient) 1 (0.1%) 0 3 (0.1%)

Ticagrelor (Brilique) 27 (1.8%) 26 (1.7%) 108 (2.5%)

Beta blockers 431 (28.8%) 446 (29.7%) 1761 (41.6)

Statin 399 (26.6%) 450 (29.9%) 1549 (36.6%)

ACE/ARB 555 (37.0%) 539 (35.9%) 1832 (43.2%)

Calcium blockers 284 (19.0%) 281 (18.7%) 953 (22.5%)

OAC or NOAC 59 (3.9%) 56 (3.7%) 466 (11.0%)

Fondaparinux 885 (59.1%) 861 (57.3%) 1880 (44.4%)

LMWH 7 (0.5%) 7 (0.5%) 37 (0.9%)

TIMI-0 246 (16.4%) 278 (18.5) ND

TIMI-1 89 (5.9%) 86 (5.7%) ND

TIMI-2 264 (17.6%) 267 (17.8%) ND

TIMI-3 897 (59.9%) 867 (57.7%) ND

Thrombus estimation

Small (0–3) 1404 (93.7%) 1406 (93.5%) ND

Large (4–5) 90 (6.0%) 88 (5.9%) ND

Time from administration of ticagrelor/prasugrel to PCI

0<1 h 247 (16.5%) 244 (16.2%) ND

1–2 h 79 (5.3%) 83 (5.5%) ND

>2 h 1166 (77.8%) 1165 (77.5%) ND

Treatment during procedure

Heparin Bivalirudin

Bailout GpIIb/IIIa 11 (0.7%) 20 (1.3%) ND

Heparin before lab % 81 (5.4%) 100 (6.7%) ND

Heparin before lab U (SD) 386.6 (1168.9) 314.8 (1109.4) ND

Heparin during procedure 1450 (96.8%) 1153 (76.7%) ND

First dose hep in lab U (SD) 7449.1 (2376.5) 2418.9 (1401.4) ND

First dose U/kg (SD) 90.2 (27.64) 30.0 (18.92) ND

Figure 1. (a) Kaplan-Meier curves showing cumulative probability of primary endpoint (death, myocardial infarction (MI) or major bleeding) during 180 days follow-up in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients. (b) Kaplan-Meier curves showing cumulative probability of death during 180 days follow-up. (c) Kaplan-Meier curves showing cumulative probability of MI during 180 days follow-up. (d) Kaplan-Meier curves showing cumulative probability of major bleeding during 180 days follow-up.

Heparin Bivalirudin Screened not

randomised

Max ACT (SD) 311.7 (79.7) 390.0 (69.7) ND

Prolonged bivalirudininf NA 787 (52.4%) ND

Time prolonged, min NA 52.9 (38.0) ND

Radial approach 1362 (90.9%) 1381 (91.9%) ND

Prasugrel (Efient) 6 (0.4%) 6 (0.4%) ND

Ticagrelor (Brilique) 1438 (96.0%) 1432 (95.3%) ND

ACE: Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ACT: activated clotting time; ARB: angiotensin receptor blocker; BMI: body mass index; CABG:

coronary artery bypass grafting; GpIIb/IIIa: glycoprotein IIb/IIIa; LMWH: low molecular weight heparin; MI: myocardial infarction; NOAC: Novel Oral anticoagulant therapy; OAC: Oral anticoagulant therapy; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; SD: standard deviation; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.

Table 1. (Continued)

2.5% (HR 0.91, 0.58–1.45, p=0.70). Major bleeding occurred in 8.9% versus 9.1% (HR 0.97, 0.77–1.24, p=0.82), definite stent thrombosis in 0.3% versus 0.2%

(HR 1.33, 0.30–5.93, p=0.82). Stroke did not differ between groups (Table 2).

The results in patients with NSTEMI were consistent across all pre-specified subgroups, including risk groups

such as old age, chronic renal failure, diabetes mellitus and smokers (Figure 2).

There were no significant differences in any outcomes between the groups at 30 days post-PCI (Table 3).

Patients with NSTEMI treated with PCI at the enrolling

hospital during the study period that were screened but not

randomised were older, were more likely to have diabetes

mellitus, previous MI, previous coronary artery bypass grafting, previous stroke and more baseline medications (p<0.1 for all parameters in Table 1 except body mass index (BMI) and current smoker, when comparing screened not randomised patients with all randomised patients).

Mortality after 180 days was lower in randomised patients (84/3001; 2.8%) compared to not randomised patients (210/4237; 5.0%).

Discussion

In this investigator-initiated RRCT substudy from the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial, of the large subgroup of patients with NSTEMI treated with acute PCI, aspirin and potent P2Y12-inhibitors, anticoagulation with bivalirudin was not superior to heparin regarding the composite end- point of all-cause death, MI or major bleeding at 180 days.

There were no significant differences in any of the pre- specified secondary endpoints including the individual components of the primary outcome or stent thrombosis.

The results were consistent in patients in all major patient subgroups, regardless of baseline clinical or angiographic characteristics.

The VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial was designed to investigate the clinical effect of a bivalirudin vs heparin monotherapy strategy without planned GPIs and optimis- ing both treatment alternatives. To our knowledge this is the largest randomised trial comparing these strategies of anticoagulation without planned GPIs in patients with NSTEMI. In this trial, all patients were required to receive

platelet inhibition with potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitors prior to randomization and PCI. Prolonged bivalirudin infusion was strongly recommended. A limited bolus of heparin (usually 3000 U), was given in the radial sheet at the start of PCI before randomization also in the bivalirudin group to avoid radial thrombosis.

The rationale for the early potent P2Y12-inhibitor strategy emanated from stud- ies indicating faster onset of platelet inhibition

and lower risks of stent thrombosis and early re-infarction with early or intravenous administration of P2Y12-inhibitors.

Finally, previous post-hoc analyses indicated that a pro- longed infusion of high-dose bivalirudin might prevent early stent thrombosis.

In our study, 77% of patients received treatment with a small bolus dose of heparin dur- ing the procedure before randomization in the bivalirudin group, 78% received potent P2Y12-inhibitors more than two hours before PCI, and 52% of patients received pro- longed high-dose bivalirudin for an average of 53 min, fac- tors that might have contributed to the overall low event rates and the lack of significant differences between the randomised anticoagulation strategies concerning ischae- mic events. Similarly, 30 day and 180 days rates of stent thrombosis were also low (0.1 vs 0.2% and 0.3 vs 0.2% for bivalirudin vs heparin groups).

The main component of the primary composite out- come in the trial was bleeding, which constituted a domi- nant part of the composite outcome. Two-thirds of all bleedings were of moderate severity according to the Bleeding Academy Research Consortium (BARC) classi- fication (BARC=2), and one-third were severe (BARC⩾3).

Table 2. Outcomes at 180 days in patients assigned to bivalirudin as compared with heparin.

Results presented as no. (%)

n Heparin Bivalirudin HR p-Value

1498 1503

Primary endpoint (death, MI or major bleeding) 187 (12.5%) 182 (12.1%) HR 0.96 (0.78–1.18) 0.69

Death from any cause 26 (1.7%) 30 (2.0%) HR 1.15 (0.68–1.94) 0.61

CV death 19 (1.3%) 23 (1.5%) HR 1.20 (0.66–2.21) 0.55

MI 38 (2.5%) 35 (2.3%) HR 0.91 (0.58–1.45) 0.70

Major bleeding (BARC type 2, 3, 5) 136 (9.1%) 134 (8.9%) HR 0.97 (0.77–1.24) 0.82

- BARC Type 2 97 (6.5%) 95 (6.3%)

- BARC Type 3 45 (3.0%) 44 (2.9%)

- BARC Type 5 0 3 (0.2%)

ST

- Definite ST 3 (0.2%) 4 (0.3%) HR 1.33 (0.30–5.93) 0.71

- Probable ST

7 (0.5%) 6 (0.4%) HR 0.85 (0.29–2.54) 0.78

- Possible ST

9 (0.6%) 7 (0.5%) HR 0.77 (0.29–2.08) 0.61

Stroke 8 (0.5%) 16 (1.1%) HR 1.99 (0.85–4.66) 0.11

- Primary haemorrhagic stroke 0 4 (0.3%) 0.12

Death, MI, major bleeding or stroke 191 (12.8%) 189 (12.6%) HR 0.98 (0.80–1.19) 0.81 BARC: Bleeding Academy Research Consortium; CV: cardiovascular; HR: hazard ratio; LAD: Left anterior descending artery; Lcx: Left Circumflex artery; MI: myocardial infarction; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; RCA: Right Coronary Artery; ST: stent thrombosis.

a

Including definitive ST.

b

Including definitive ST and probable ST.

Severe bleedings events thereby amounted to as many events in the trial as MIs and deaths combined. As only severe bleedings, defined as BARC⩾3, have the same consequences on mortality as MI,

the possibility of

detecting any effect on mortality by the previously observed lower bleeding rate with bivalirudin was small.

The low and similar mortality in both arms was therefore probably due to low rates of both MI and bleeding.

Figure 2. Forest plot of risk ratios for the primary endpoint (death, myocardial infarction (MI) or major bleeding) during 180

days follow-up according to pre-specified subgroups in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients. Hazard ratios

(HRs; black diamonds) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs; horizontal lines) are shown. ACT: activated clotting time; MI: myocardial

infarction; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; TA: thrombus aspiration; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.

Although both non-fatal events (MI and bleedings) were numerically lower in the bivalirudin arm of the trial at 30 days, the absolute risk reduction was low and did not achieve statistical significance. Furthermore, the trends were largely nullified at 180 days and all-cause mortality showed no trend whatsoever for any advantage of bivaliru- din over heparin at either 30 or 180 days. These findings are in contrast with most previous trials showing a reduc- tion in bleeding events with bivalirudin.

The use of the recommended radial approach in 90% of patients and the low use of GPIs in the heparin arm may have contributed to the very low rate of severe bleeding complications in both arms despite an average age of 68 years which is among the highest of recent major ACS trials.

The primary composite endpoint results were similar without any significant interactions within any predefined subgroup. In the main trial including patients with STEMI and NSTEMI, there was a trend towards a better effect of bivalirudin compared to heparin in females.

However, this was not seen in this study of patients with NSTEMI.

We utilised national quality registries as online plat- forms for randomization, as case-report forms for collec- tion of baseline and procedural data, and for mortality follow-up. The registry-based approach was combined with event-tracking by telephone calls and adjudication of sus- pected events by a blinded independent clinical endpoint committee, resulting in a hybrid RRCT.

This design facil- itated the identification and randomization of a large

proportion of all eligible patients, which in turn reduced the number of sites necessary for enrolment and costs com- pared to a conventional randomised clinical trial.

Furthermore, this design allowed follow-up of all eligible patients that were not enrolled in the study.

The simpli- fied registry-based randomization process and broad inclu- sion criteria resulted in a trial population that may better represent a real-world population than many conventional randomised trials. The RRCT design most likely also explains why we, in this trial, managed to include an older population, 68 years, 3–6 years older than previous bivali- rudin trials. Still, the not-randomised population was even older, 72 years, with more concomitant disease.

Limitations of the VALIDATE NSTEMI trial should be noted. First, the treating physician was aware of the group to which each patient had been assigned, and that physician entered the angiographic variables into the registry; there- fore, these variables were susceptible to bias. Second, a comparison of the clinical characteristics and outcomes between the patients who underwent randomization and those who did not indicates that the two cohorts differed significantly in a number of respects, such as age, comor- bidities and, most notably, in mortality. In many cases, these differences reflect the exclusion from the trial of patients who were ineligible because they were unable to provide oral consent. Even when a trial uses a population- based registry for enrolment, the trial participants cannot be fully representative of the complete range of patients.

Table 3. Outcomes at 30 days in patients assigned to bivalirudin as compared with heparin.

n Heparin Bivalirudin HR p-Value

1498 1503

Primary endpoint (death, MI or major bleeding) 113 (7.5%) 99 (6.6%) HR 0.87 (0.66–1.13) 0.30

Death from any cause 12 (0.8%) 14 (0.9%) HR 1.16 (0.54–2.51) 0.70

CV death 11 (0.7%) 14 (0.9%) HR 1.27 (0.58–2.79) 0.56

MI 14 (0.9%) 8 (0.5%) HR 0.57 (0.24–1.35) 0.20

Major bleeding (BARC type 2, 3, 5) 92 (6.1%) 80 (5.3%) HR 0.86 (0.64–1.16) 0.33

- BARC Type 2 65 (4.3%) 58 (3.9%)

- BARC Type 3 28 (1.9%) 23 (1.5%)

- BARC Type 5 0 2 (0.1%)

ST

- Definite ST 3 (0.2%) 2 (0.1%) HR 0.66 (0.11–3.97) 0.65

- Probable ST

7 (0.5%) 4 (0.3%) HR 0.57 (0.17–1.94) 0.37

Stroke 5 (0.3%) 11 (0.7%) HR 2.19 (0.76–6.31) 0.15

Primary haemorrhagic stroke 0 4 (0.3%) 0.12

Death, MI, major bleeding or stroke 117 (7.8%) 106 (7.1%) HR 0.90 (0.69–1.17) 0.41 TIMI flow after PCI

TIMI 0 30 (2.0%) 35 (2.3%)

TIMI 1 18 (1.2%) 12 (0.8%)

TIMI 2 70 (4.7%) 69 (4.6%)

TIMI 3 1371 (91.5%) 1380 (91.8%)

BARC: Bleeding Academy Research Consortium; CV: cardiovascular; HR: hazard ratio; MI: myocardial infarction; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ST: stent thrombosis; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.

a

Including definitive ST.

In conclusion, in the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART RRCT trial comparing bivalirudin with heparin in the large subgroup of patients presenting with NSTEMI and treated with PCI using a radial approach and high-intensity platelet inhibition, there were no significant differences between bivalirudin and heparin treatment with respect to mortality, re-infarction or major bleeding events during 180 days of follow-up.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the patients and the staff at all centres participating in the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART collaboration for their commitment to this study. They thank Ylva Lindman, Anna Stendahl, Frida Kåver and Solveig Wennerholm for excel- lent study management. The DSMC consisted of Gorm B Jensen, Lars Köber and Gunnar Gislason. Editorial assistance was pro- vided by Vendela Roos, Uppsala Clinical Research Centre, Uppsala, Sweden.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

The study was supported by the Swedish Heart and Lung Foundation, by the Swedish Research Council, by unrestricted grants from AstraZeneca and the Medicines Company, and by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (as part of the TOTAL- AMI project). The design and conduct of this study, all study analyses, and the final contents, drafting and editing of all emanat- ing scientific publications are the sole responsibilities of the authors.

References

1. Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Guagliumi G, et al.; Investigators H-AT. Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 2218–2230.

2. Lincoff AM, Bittl JA, Harrington RA, et al. Bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary intervention: REPLACE-2 rand- omized trial. JAMA 2003; 289: 853–863.

3. Montalescot G, Barragan P, Wittenberg O, et al. Platelet gly- coprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition with coronary stenting for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 1895–1903.

4. Montalescot G, Zeymer U, Silvain J, et al.; Investigators A.

Intravenous enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin in primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myo- cardial infarction: The international randomised open-label ATOLL trial. Lancet 2011; 378: 693–703.

5. Shahzad A, Kemp I, Mars C, et al.; Investigators H-Pt.

Unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin in primary percu- taneous coronary intervention (HEAT-PPCI): An open-label, single centre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2014; 384:

1849–1858.

6. Stone GW, McLaurin BT, Cox DA, et al.; Investigators A.

Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2203–2216.

7. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al.; Investigators T-T. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coro- nary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2001–2015.

8. Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1045–1057.

9. Kastrati A, Neumann FJ, Schulz S, et al.; Investigators I-RT.

Abciximab and heparin versus bivalirudin for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1980–1989.

10. Kastrati A, Neumann FJ, Mehilli J, et al.; Investigators I-RT.

Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during percutane- ous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 688–696.

11. Valgimigli M, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, et al.; Investigators M.

Bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin in acute coronary syn- dromes. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 997–1009.

12. Leonardi S, Frigoli E, Rothenbuhler M, et al.; Investigators M. Bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes managed invasively with and without ST elevation (MATRIX): Randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2016; 354: i4935.

13. Erlinge D, Omerovic E, Frobert O, et al. Bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1132–1142.

14. Erlinge D, Koul S, Eriksson P, et al. Bivalirudin versus heparin in non-ST and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction–a registry-based randomized clinical trial in the SWEDEHEART registry (the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial). Am Heart J 2016; 175: 36–46.

15. Bossard M, Mehta SR, Welsh RC, et al. Utility of unfrac- tionated heparin in transradial cardiac catheterization: A sys- tematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol 2017; 33:

1245–1253.

16. Authors/Task Force m, Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al.

2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revasculariza- tion: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS).

Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J 2014; 35: 2541–2619.

17. Koul S, Andell P, Martinsson A, et al. A pharmacodynamic comparison of 5 anti-platelet protocols in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI.

BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2014; 14: 189.

18. Pollack CV Jr, Davoudi F, Diercks DB, et al.; Investigators P.

Relative efficacy and safety of ticagelor vs clopidogrel as a function of time to invasive management in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome in the PLATO trial. Clin Cardiol 2017; 40: 390–398.

19. Montalescot G, van ’t Hof AW, Lapostolle F, et al.; Investigators A. Prehospital ticagrelor in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 1016–1027.

20. Bhatt DL, Stone GW, Mahaffey KW, et al.; Investigators CP.

Effect of platelet inhibition with cangrelor during PCI on ischemic events. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1303–1313.

21. Clemmensen P, Wiberg S, Van’t Hof A, et al. Acute stent thrombosis after primary percutaneous coronary intervention:

Insights from the EUROMAX Trial (European Ambulance

Acute Coronary Syndrome Angiography). JACC Cardiovasc

Interv 2015; 8: B214–B220.

22. Eikelboom JW, Mehta SR, Anand SS, et al. Adverse impact of bleeding on prognosis in patients with acute coronary syn- dromes. Circulation 2006; 114: 774–782.

23. James S, Rao SV and Granger CB. Registry-based rand- omized clinical trials–a new clinical trial paradigm. Nat Rev Cardiol 2015; 12: 312–316.

24. Lauer MS and D’Agostino RB Sr. The randomized registry trial–the next disruptive technology in clinical research? N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1579–1581.

25. Frobert O, Lagerqvist B, Olivecrona GK, et al. Thrombus

aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarc-

tion. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1587–1597.