We have located links that may give you full text access.
Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for recurrent myocardial infarction: An outcomes-based agreement.
Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm 2023 December
BACKGROUND: Outcomes-based agreements (OBA) are performance-based risk-sharing agreements between manufacturers and payers which provide the opportunity for collection and evaluation of real-world outcomes to supplement clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES: To describe an OBA comparing ticagrelor to clopidogrel in patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and proportion of recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) in a real-world setting.
METHODS: Commercial (CM) and Medicare (MC) insurance patients of a large regional health plan, who presented with ACS and were prescribed either ticagrelor or clopidogrel were prospectively analyzed. The cohort consisted of adults (18-85 years) discharged between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, who were adherent to the study medications, within the confines of the OBA. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of recurrent MI hospitalizations within one year of discharge.
RESULTS: There were 500 patients who met inclusion criteria in the ticagrelor cohort and 648 in the clopidogrel cohort. The mean age of patients in the ticagrelor cohort was 61.5 ± 10.5 years old and 66.5 ± 10.2 years in the clopidogrel cohort. The proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, or a history of congestive heart failure at baseline in the ticagrelor cohort was 31%, 85%, 14% respectively, and 43%, 90%, and 32% respectively in the clopidogrel cohort. The overall proportion of hospitalization for recurrent MI was 1.00% in the ticagrelor and 3.13% in the clopidogrel cohorts. In the follow-up propensity-matched analysis, although recurrent MI hospitalization was higher in the clopidogrel cohort (1.69% vs 1.21%) it was not statistically significant ( p -value 0.5242).
CONCLUSION: Patients presenting with ACS and treated with ticagrelor had a lower rate of hospitalization for recurrent MI compared to patients treated with clopidogrel cohort within the confines of an OBA in a real-world setting.
OBJECTIVES: To describe an OBA comparing ticagrelor to clopidogrel in patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and proportion of recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) in a real-world setting.
METHODS: Commercial (CM) and Medicare (MC) insurance patients of a large regional health plan, who presented with ACS and were prescribed either ticagrelor or clopidogrel were prospectively analyzed. The cohort consisted of adults (18-85 years) discharged between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, who were adherent to the study medications, within the confines of the OBA. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of recurrent MI hospitalizations within one year of discharge.
RESULTS: There were 500 patients who met inclusion criteria in the ticagrelor cohort and 648 in the clopidogrel cohort. The mean age of patients in the ticagrelor cohort was 61.5 ± 10.5 years old and 66.5 ± 10.2 years in the clopidogrel cohort. The proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, or a history of congestive heart failure at baseline in the ticagrelor cohort was 31%, 85%, 14% respectively, and 43%, 90%, and 32% respectively in the clopidogrel cohort. The overall proportion of hospitalization for recurrent MI was 1.00% in the ticagrelor and 3.13% in the clopidogrel cohorts. In the follow-up propensity-matched analysis, although recurrent MI hospitalization was higher in the clopidogrel cohort (1.69% vs 1.21%) it was not statistically significant ( p -value 0.5242).
CONCLUSION: Patients presenting with ACS and treated with ticagrelor had a lower rate of hospitalization for recurrent MI compared to patients treated with clopidogrel cohort within the confines of an OBA in a real-world setting.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app