Abstract
BACKGROUND: De-escalation from potent platelet P2Y12 inhibitors to clopidogrel is common. Despite having a clinical rationale, non-bleeding-related de-escalation when a lateral change between potent agents is an option may put patients at increased ischemic risk. We set out to define the scope of P2Y12 inhibitor de-escalation in a large clinical registry and evaluate the potential impact of non-bleeding-related de-escalation on clinical outcomes. METHODS: : A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients in the Cardiovascular Percutaneous Intervention Trial (CAPITAL) registry to identify those who underwent a switch in therapy within 1 year of percutaneous coronary intervention. The de-escalations were categorized as bleeding-related or non-bleeding-related. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Secondary outcomes included individual components of major adverse cardiovascular events and a safety endpoint of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction bleeding. RESULTS: Of 1854 patients, 209 (11.3%) underwent de-escalation: 24.9% of cases were bleeding-related, 37.8% were non-bleeding-related, and 37.3% were for unknown reasons. All patients with non-bleeding-related de-escalation were switched from ticagrelor to clopidogrel. The primary outcome occurred in 14 (6.7%) patients, of which 50% underwent non-bleeding-related de-escalation (P = 0.430). Among those with non-bleeding-related de-escalation, 7.6% were hospitalized for myocardial infarction, compared to 1.9% and 3.8% among those with a bleeding-related and unknown rationale, respectively (P = 0.293). CONCLUSIONS: De-escalation, particularly non-bleeding-related de-escalation, of P2Y12 inhibitors is common. A substantial proportion of such de-escalation may be avoidable. Given the potential risk of ischemic complications, strategies should be considered to encourage both the upfront use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors and alternative strategies to de-escalation.