TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of hemorrhagic risk between prasugrel and clopidogrel
T2 - A retrospective study using adverse drug event reporting databases
AU - Hagiwara, Hiromi
AU - Fukuta, Hidekatsu
AU - Niimura, Takahiro
AU - Zamami, Yoshito
AU - Ishizawa, Keisuke
AU - Kimura, Kazunori
AU - Kamiya, Takeshi
AU - Ohte, Nobuyuki
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number, 18K14954.
Funding Information:
Dr. Ohte has received lecture fees from Daiichi Sankyo Co. and grant support from Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd, and Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Dr. Kamiya received lecture fees from Astellas Pharma Inc. and Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Dr. Kimura received grant supports from Nippon Kayaku Co., Ltd. and Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Dr. Ishizawa received scholarship funds from Taiho pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and received a joint research grant from Toa Eiyo Ltd. Dr. Zamami received a joint research grant from Taiho pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
Publisher Copyright:
© The author(s).
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Background: Prasugrel inhibits platelet aggregation more potently and exerts therapeutic action faster than clopidogrel. In the global phase III trial conducted in Western and South American countries that excluded Asian countries, prasugrel reduced ischemic events but increased hemorrhagic risk compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome scheduled for percutaneous coronary intervention. In the Japanese phase III trial for similar patients, the efficacy of prasugrel compared with clopidogrel was comparable to the global trial, but the safety could not be confirmed because of an insufficient number of patients. Furthermore, given the strict enrollment criteria, the results of these trials may not be applicable to routine clinical practice. Accordingly, we compared the hemorrhagic risk of prasugrel and clopidogrel in real-world settings by analyzing adverse drug event reports in post-marketing stages provided by the Japanese regulatory authorities and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods: We analyzed a total of 3,970 reports for prasugrel (n = 518) or clopidogrel (n = 3,452) between 2014 and 2017 in the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) and a total of 91,914 reports for either prasugrel (n = 5,992) or clopidogrel (n = 85,922) between 2009 and 2019 in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Results: In JADER and FAERS, prasugrel was more frequently and significantly associated with hemorrhagic event reports than clopidogrel. After adjustment for known confounders including age, sex, and concomitant medications (aspirin, anticoagulants, and proton pump inhibitors), the hemorrhagic risk of prasugrel compared with clopidogrel remained significant (adjusted reporting odds ratios [95% CI] for total, intracranial, and gastrointestinal hemorrhagic events = 2.42 [1.97–2.96], 2.45 [1.85–3.24], and 2.27 [1.73–2.97] in JADER, and 2.21 [2.09–2.34], 1.21 [1.09–1.33], and 1.41 [1.29–1.54] in FAERS). Conclusions: The hemorrhagic risk was found to be greater with prasugrel than clopidogrel in real-world patients, including Japanese patients.
AB - Background: Prasugrel inhibits platelet aggregation more potently and exerts therapeutic action faster than clopidogrel. In the global phase III trial conducted in Western and South American countries that excluded Asian countries, prasugrel reduced ischemic events but increased hemorrhagic risk compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome scheduled for percutaneous coronary intervention. In the Japanese phase III trial for similar patients, the efficacy of prasugrel compared with clopidogrel was comparable to the global trial, but the safety could not be confirmed because of an insufficient number of patients. Furthermore, given the strict enrollment criteria, the results of these trials may not be applicable to routine clinical practice. Accordingly, we compared the hemorrhagic risk of prasugrel and clopidogrel in real-world settings by analyzing adverse drug event reports in post-marketing stages provided by the Japanese regulatory authorities and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods: We analyzed a total of 3,970 reports for prasugrel (n = 518) or clopidogrel (n = 3,452) between 2014 and 2017 in the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) and a total of 91,914 reports for either prasugrel (n = 5,992) or clopidogrel (n = 85,922) between 2009 and 2019 in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Results: In JADER and FAERS, prasugrel was more frequently and significantly associated with hemorrhagic event reports than clopidogrel. After adjustment for known confounders including age, sex, and concomitant medications (aspirin, anticoagulants, and proton pump inhibitors), the hemorrhagic risk of prasugrel compared with clopidogrel remained significant (adjusted reporting odds ratios [95% CI] for total, intracranial, and gastrointestinal hemorrhagic events = 2.42 [1.97–2.96], 2.45 [1.85–3.24], and 2.27 [1.73–2.97] in JADER, and 2.21 [2.09–2.34], 1.21 [1.09–1.33], and 1.41 [1.29–1.54] in FAERS). Conclusions: The hemorrhagic risk was found to be greater with prasugrel than clopidogrel in real-world patients, including Japanese patients.
KW - Clopidogrel
KW - FDA Adverse Event Reporting System
KW - Hemorrhagic risk
KW - Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report
KW - Prasugrel
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081614223&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85081614223&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.7150/ijms.43168
DO - 10.7150/ijms.43168
M3 - Article
C2 - 32218694
AN - SCOPUS:85081614223
SN - 1449-1907
VL - 17
SP - 728
EP - 733
JO - International Journal of Medical Sciences
JF - International Journal of Medical Sciences
IS - 6
ER -