https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4630-9815
Figures
Abstract
Aims
The Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium (NARC) has recently developed a consensus-based standardized classification for medication non-adherence in cardiovascular clinical trials. We aimed to assess the prevalence of NARC-defined self-reported non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors and its impact on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Methods and results
Using a standardized questionnaire administered at 1 year after PCI, we assessed the 4 NARC-defined non-adherence levels including type, decision-maker, reasons, and timing within the Bern PCI registry. The primary endpoint was the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and any revascularization at 1 year. The recommended P2Y12 inhibitor duration was 12 months. Among 3,896 patients, P2Y12 inhibitor non-adherence was observed in 647 (17%) patients. Discontinuation was permanent in the majority of patients (84%). The decision was mainly driven by a physician (94%), and rarely by patients (6%). The most frequent reason was risk profile change (43%), followed by unlisted reasons (25%), surgery (17%), and adverse events (14%). Non-adherence occurred early (<30 days) in 21%, late (30–180 days) in 45%, and very late (>180 days) in 33%. The majority of POCE events (n = 421/502, 84%) occurred during adherence to the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor. Permanent discontinuation, doctor-driven non-adherence, and risk profile change emerged as independent predictors for POCE.
Citation: Ueki Y, Zanchin T, Losdat S, Karagiannis A, Otsuka T, Siontis GCM, et al. (2022) Self-reported non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Application of the medication non-adherence academic research consortium classification. PLoS ONE 17(2): e0263180. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180
Editor: Carmine Pizzi, University of Bologna, ITALY
Received: May 31, 2021; Accepted: January 4, 2022; Published: February 16, 2022
Copyright: © 2022 Ueki et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The BERN PCI registry does not allow individual data sharing to third parties. Access to data might be granted following review by the Bern PCI registry steering committee. Such requests can be submitted to the Bern PCI registry steering committee for consideration. Requests may be sent to Andre.Frenk@insel.ch (Mr. André Frenk).
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this study.
Competing interests: The authors have read the journal’s policy and have the following competing interests to declare: YU reports personal fees from Infraredex, outside the submitted work. GCMS reports personal fees from Abbott Vascular, outside the submitted work. JH reports personal fees from Bayer, outside the submitted work. SS reports grants from Edwards Lifesciences, grants from Medtronic, grants from Abbott Vascular, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from BTG, outside the submitted work. TP reports grants and personal fees from Biotronik, grants and personal fees from Symetis/Boston Scientific, grants from Edwards Lifesciences, and personal fees from HighLife SAS outside the submitted work. MV reports grants and personal fees from Terumo, grants from Medicure, grants and personal fees from Abbott, grants and personal fees from Astrazeneca, personal fees from Chisei, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Alvimedica, personal fees from Biosensors, outside the submitted work. SW reports research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, BMS, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Johnson&Johnson, Medtronic, Querbet, Polares, Sanofi, Terumo, Sinomed. SW serves as unpaid advisory board member and/or unpaid member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, BMS, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Sinomed, V-Wave and Xeltis, but has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers. He is also member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigated-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration. SW is an unpaid member of the Pfizer Research Award selection committee in Switzerland. LR reports grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, grants and personal fees from Biotronik, grants and personal fees from Sanofi, grants from Heartflow, personal fees from Canon, personal fees from Occlutech, outside the submitted work. The other authors have nothing to disclose. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare.
Abbreviations: BARC, bleeding academic research consortium; CAD, coronary artery disease; CKD, chronic kidney disease; DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; DES, drug eluting stent; DOCE, device oriented composite endpoint; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular endpoint; MI, myocardial infarction; NARC, non-adherence academic research consortium; PCI, percutaneous coronary interventions; POCE, patient-oriented composite endpoint; ST, stent thrombosis; TLR, target lesion revascularization
Introduction
Pharmacotherapy assumes a pivotal role to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular diseases. However, its benefits are attenuated by non-adherence to prescribed therapies [1–3]. While non-adherence provides important insights on drug tolerability, it is recognized as a common problem that significantly affects clinical outcomes and health care cost in daily clinical practice [4]. Medication adherence is not optimal even in well-controlled settings of clinical trials and approaches to collect and incorporate data on non-adherence have been heterogeneous across randomized clinical trials. Recently, the Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium (NARC) developed a consensus-based standardized classification and framework for medication non-adherence in cardiovascular clinical trials in 2018 [5]. In this consensus document, 4 level classifications of non-adherence have been proposed: the degree of over- or under-exposure to study medication; the decision process and circumstances; the clinical scenario; and timing relative to treatment initiationThe use of a P2Y12 inhibitor combined with aspirin (dual antiplatelet therapy [DAPT]) represents the standard of care for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), i.e. one of the most frequently performed invasive medical treatments worldwide [6]. Non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors may be associated with an increased risk of ischemic adverse events. The PARIS registry demonstrated that cardiac events depend on the reasons, timing and circumstances of unplanned DAPT cessation [7]. To date, the prevalence and potential clinical impact of non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors defined by the NARC classification have not been investigated. Therefore, we aimed to assess 1) the prevalence of NARC-defined non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors and 2) its impact on clinical outcomes using prospectively collected data from a large cohort of unselected, consecutive patients undergoing PCI.
Method
Study population and follow-up
The following patients were excluded from the Bern PCI registry (NCT02241291) for this analysis: treatment by balloon angioplasty alone, not discharged with a P2Y12 inhibitor or DAPT, oral anticoagulant at discharge, in-hospital death, and no information on P2Y12 inhibitor adherence.
Drug-adherence patterns were investigated as part of a pre-specified substudy of the prospective Bern PCI Registry conducted between 2011 and 2015. Patients were systematically and prospectively followed throughout 1 year to assess death, MI, stroke, revascularization, stent thrombosis (ST), bleeding complications, rehospitalization, and status of medical treatment. A questionnaire on the adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors was sent to patients at 1 year after index PCI (S1 File). These questionnaires were the basis to subsequently classify non-adherence events according to the NARC classification [5]. General practitioners, referring cardiologists, and patients were contacted as necessary for additional information on any non-adherence events. For patients with cardiovascular events or change in P2Y12 inhibitors, external medical records, discharge letters, and coronary angiography documentation were systematically collected and reviewed.
All patients provided written informed consent as part of a standard procedure. This prospective registry was approved by the institutional ethics committee (the Cantonal Ethics Committee [KEK] of the Canton of Bern), and all patients provided written informed consent.
Procedures
PCI was performed in accordance with clinical practice guidelines [8]. DAPT consisting of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor was initiated before, at the time, or immediately after the PCI procedure. Prasugrel was routinely used in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) as of September 2009, and ticagrelor was routinely used in patients with Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome as of November 2011. Aspirin at a dose of 100 mg once daily was continued indefinitely and the recommended duration of DAPT was 12 months [8]. The choice of a P2Y12 inhibitor was at the discretion of the treating physician.
Clinical end points and definitions
Clinical end points.
A clinical event committee consisting of 2 cardiologists (and a third referee in case of disagreement) adjudicated all events using original source documents. The primary endpoint of the study was the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, any stroke, any MI, or any revascularization at 12 months [9]. Secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular endpoints (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, MI, and stroke, the device oriented composite endpoints (DOCE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel (TV) MI, and target lesion revascularization (TLR); all-cause death; cardiac death; any MI; TV-MI; any repeat revascularization; TLR; definite stent thrombosis (ST); stroke; any bleeding; Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding, and BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. Cardiac death was defined as any death caused by an immediate cardiac cause, procedure-related mortality, and death of unknown cause. Myocardial infarction (MI) was defined according to the modified historical definition [10]. Stent thrombosis was classified according to the Academic Research Consortium criteria [11]. Stroke was defined as rapid development of clinical signs of focal or global disturbance of cerebral function lasting >24 hours with imaging evidence of acute, clinically relevant brain lesion. Bleeding events were categorized according to the BARC classification [12].
Non-adherence definitions according to NARC.
The NARC classification assesses four levels of non-adherence [5]; Level 1 (type of non-adherence): Type 0 (adherence to prescribed regimen) was defined as adherence to a P2Y12 inhibitor at discharge for 1 year and not fulfilling type 2 and 3 definitions. Type 1 (deviation from prescribed regimen) was not obtained within this registry. Type 2 (temporary discontinuation) was defined as temporary discontinuation of the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor whereby the pharmacological half-life was taken into account (clopidogrel: 5 days; prasugrel: 7 days; ticagrelor: 3 days). Type 3 (permanent discontinuation) was defined as a permanent discontinuation of the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor. We further differentiated Type 3 according to the current antiplatelet guideline [6]: “Switch” was defined as any change between prasugrel and ticagrelor. “De-escalation” was defined as any change from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel. “Escalation” was defined as any change from clopidogrel to either prasugrel or ticagrelor. “Discontinuation” was defined as any definite permanent discontinuation without P2Y12 inhibitor replacement. Level 2 (decision-maker responsible for non-adherence): Investigator driven was not applicable in this registry study. Medical doctor driven was defined as change following the initiative of any physician. Patient driven was defined as change following the initiative of the patient. Level 3 (reasons underlying non-adherence): Risk profile change was defined as newly diagnosed/recognized medical condition, newly introduced/withdrawn concomitant medication, new information related to the study drug, or perception that medication not needed. Event was defined as adverse events or side effects related to a P2Y12 inhibitor. Surgery was defined as cardiac or non-cardiac surgery, or invasive procedures such as percutaneous coronary intervention and endoscopy. Unlisted was defined as reason not captured by the other categories. Logistic was defined as issues related to prescription, or complexity of the pharmacotherapy. Trauma was defined as temporary or permanent discontinuation as a direct result of trauma. Level 4 (timing of non-adherence): The original NARC classification leaves the timing of non-adherence open and we applied the following definition; Early was defined as any discontinuation within the first 30 days. Late was defined as any discontinuation between days 31–180 days. Very late was defined as any discontinuation after 180 days since baseline until one year. In case of more than one non-adherence categories were fulfilled, a hierarchical approach was applied, i.e. the more serious non-adherence event (e.g. permanent had priority over temporary discontinuation) was considered representative in the individual patient. We further classified patients with non-adherence into 3 groups according to the PARIS registry classification: (1) patient- or event-driven, (2) surgery-driven not fulfilling (1), (3) doctor driven not fulfilling (1) and (2) [7].
Statistical analysis
Variables were summarized as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or as counts (percentages), and were compared between groups using Student’s t tests, Chi-square tests or Fischer’s exact tests, as appropriate. Kaplan-Meier cumulative event curves were constructed for time-to-event variables and compared using the log-rank test. Cox regression analysis was performed to test the prognostic significance of non-adherence. Non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors was entered to the model as a time-updated variable in order to consider a time-dependent manner of non-adherence during follow-up period (e.g. permanent discontinuation at 1 month: adherence between 0–1 month and non-adherence between 1–12 months) and adjusted by clinically important variables reported by previous studies including age, female sex, diabetes mellitus, estimated glomerular filtration rate, peripheral artery disease, myocardial infarction at presentation, cardiogenic shock, chronic obstructive lung disease, and history of cancer, history of PCI, and use of new generation drug eluting stents (DES). We calculated the estimated percentage of all POCE attributed to non-adherence as follows: the expected number of POCE was the observed number divided by hazard ratio (HR) [13]. The absolute attributable risk was the observed minus expected number of POCE. The percentage attributable risk was calculated as the absolute attributable risk expressed as a percentage of all POCE. P-values were two-tailed and considered under statistically significant at 0.05 threshold in all analyses. Statistical analyses were performed in STATA 15.
Results
Patient population
Of 4,837 consecutive patients prospectively enrolled into the Bern PCI Registry between 2011 and 2015, 3,896 patients were analyzed for the present study with complete follow-up available in 3667 (94.1%) patients at 1 year. Patients were excluded in case of balloon angioplasty without stent implantation (n = 184), absence of P2Y12 inhibitor at time of discharge (n = 195), any oral anticoagulant at time of discharge (n = 389), death before discharge (n = 110), enrolment in different trials before 1 year follow-up (n = 20), or no information on P2Y12 inhibitor adherence (n = 43) throughout one year (Fig 1).
DAPT = dual antiplatelet therapy, PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention.
NARC-defined non-adherence
Fig 2 shows the prevalence of non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors according to the NARC classification (detailed breakdown in S1 Table). Level 1: A total of 647 (17%) patients fulfilled non-adherence criteria within 1-year of follow-up. Among those, the majority of patients (n = 546, 84%) were categorized as permanent discontinuation (discontinuation [n = 296, 54%], de-escalation [n = 168, 31%], escalation [n = 44, 8%] and switch [n = 38, 7%]), while temporary discontinuation occurred in the minority (n = 101, 16%). Level 2: Non-adherence was most frequently driven by the treating physician (n = 610, 94%), while only few were patient-driven (n = 37, 6%). Level 3: The most frequent reason for non-adherence was a change in risk profile (n = 278, 43%), followed by unlisted reasons (n = 163, 25%), surgical interventions (n = 112, 17%), adverse events (n = 91, 14%), logistic issues (n = 2, 0%), or trauma (n = 1, 0%). Level 4: non-adherence occurred early in 136 (21%), late in 294 (45%), and very late in 213 (33%). Median (25th and 75th percentile) days until P2Y12 non-adherence occurrence was 94 (30, 210) days (S1 Fig). Multiple non-adherence episodes occurred in 106 (16.3%) patients.
NARC = non-adherence academic research consortium.
Baseline characteristics
Clinical and procedural characteristics and medication status are summarized in Table 1. Patients with non-adherence were older, more likely to suffer from renal failure and anemia, and had a higher PRECISE-DAPT score compared to adherent patients. There were no significant differences related to procedural characteristics including stent length, stent diameter, and PCI complexity. In patients with non-adherence, prasugrel was less frequently and ticagrelor more frequently used.
Clinical outcomes
Clinical outcomes throughout 1-year are summarized in Table 2. Compared to patients with adherence, those with non-adherence had an increased risk of POCE (20.9% vs. 11.3%, P<0.001) (Fig 3), mainly driven by higher rates of MI (6.0% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.002), revascularization (12.5% vs. 6.2%, P<0.001), and stroke (3.1% vs. 0.7%, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in rates of definite stent thrombosis (1.2% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.356) between groups. Patients with non-adherence had a 4-fold higher risk of BARC 3 or 5 bleeding compared with those without (9.3% vs. 1.9%, P<0.001). Clinical outcomes occurred during adherence and non-adherence among patients with non-adherence (n = 647) are summarized in S2 Table. We confirmed that, among patients with non-adherence, adverse events indeed occurred more frequently during non-adherence.
POCE = patient-oriented composite endpoints.
The majority of POCE events (421; 84%) occurred during adherence to the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor. During P2Y12 inhibitor non-adherence, 81 (16%) events were observed compared with an expected 54.6 events (81 events / HR 1.48) if a patient’s risk had been the same as adherence, which corresponds to an excess of 26.4 events (i.e. absolute attributable risk: the observed [81 events] minus expected number [54.6 events]). Among the overall incidence of POCE, 5.3% (26.4/502 events) can be statistically attributed to non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors. Fig 4 summarizes results of the multivariable Cox analysis for POCE according to the level of non-adherence and considering whether POCE occurred during non-adherence or not. Permanent discontinuation (HR 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15–1.96, P = 0.002) mainly driven by escalation (HR 6.75, 95% CI 3.91–11.67, P<0.01) and de-escalation (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.09–2.42, P = 0.017) (Level 1), medical doctor-driven non-adherence (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.17–1.98, P = 0.002) (Level 2), non-adherence due to risk profile change (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.44–2.72, P<0.001) (Level 3), and non-adherence occurring during the early phase (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.14–2.70, P = 0.011) (Level 4) emerged as independent predictors of POCE. Results remained consistent with use of a more restrictive endpoint (MACE: a composite of cardiac death, MI, and stroke) (S2 Fig). As an explanatory analysis, we further classified patients according to clinical indication for PCI (acute coronary syndrome [ACS] or chronic coronary syndrome [CCS]). Consistent results were observed in ACS patients, while non-adherence did not emerge as an independent predictor for POCE in patients with CCS (S3 and S4 Figs).
Of the study patients, 90.4% (3525 of 3896 patients) were included in the multivariable models. The following covariates were entered in the models: age, female sex, diabetes mellitus, eGFR, peripheral artery disease, myocardial infarction at presentation, cardiogenic shock, chronic obstructive lung disease, history of cancer, history of PCI, and use of new generation DES. CI = confidence interval, DAPT = dual antiplatelet therapy, DES = drug eluting stent, eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate, HR = hazard ratio, PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention.
PARIS category
Baseline characteristics and event rates according to PARIS category are summarized in S3–S5 Tables and S5 and S6 Figs. Multivariate Cox analysis according to PARIS category demonstrated that medical-doctor driven non-adherence was associated with an increased risk of POCE (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.17–2.08, P = 0.003), while patient- or event-driven non-adherence (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.52–1.94, P = 0.985) and surgery-driven non-adherence (HR 1.78, 95% CI 0.91–3.47, P = 0.090) were not (S7 Fig).
Discussion
The present study is the first to apply the NARC classification for quantification of P2Y12 inhibitor non-adherence using a prospective questionnaire-based assessment of non-adherence patterns obtained from a large cohort of unselected, consecutive patients undergoing PCI treated with 1-year DAPT as standard of care. The main findings can be summarized as follows:
- Non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors according to the NARC classification were observed among 17% of patients within the first year after PCI.
- Non-adherence was most frequently permanent, driven by physicians in the majority of cases owing to changes in risk profile change of affected patients.
- Most POCE events (84%) occurred while patients were adherent to the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor.
- Although the overall impact was modest, non-adherence was associated with impaired clinical outcomes and the risk varied according to type of non-adherence, decision makers, reasons, and timing.
There has been substantial variation in the definition of medication non-adherence. The NARC classification was established to categorize the complex nature of medication non-adherence in a standardized fashion. The current study demonstrated that this multilayered system to provide detailed information on non-adherence was applicable to P2Y12 inhibitors in the real-world PCI population with the exception of deviations from the prescribed regimen (Level 1, type 1), which would requires a highly reliable method to capture adherence pattern such as electronic medication monitors.
While a previous meta-analysis synthesizing data on 376,162 patients from 20 observational studies assessing adherence to cardiovascular drugs reported that a summary estimate of the prevalence of poor adherence on multiple cardiovascular drugs was 43% as assessed by pharmacy refill data [14], NARC-defined non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors occurred in 17% of patients undergoing PCI in the current study. This high adherence appears to be related to the proper implementation of recommended therapies by general practitioners, the precise understanding of the rationale for DAPT by patients, and the good tolerability of antiplatelet drugs. In the PARIS registry, any DAPT cessation was confirmed in 53% of patients undergoing PCI with stent implantation, although this was within a timeframe of 2-year follow-up [7].
In line with previous finding of the PARIS registry, most of POCE (84%) occurred while patients were adherent to the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor, including the majority of stent thrombosis events (30 out of 35 events, 86%). Consequently, the risk attributable to POCE in relation to non-adherence was modest (estimated 5%), which may be at least partly due to improved efficacy and safety of new generation DES. In this regard, our data are fully in line with the safety of short-term (1–3 months) DAPT after PCI with new generation DES [15–19].
In the current study, escalation and de-escalation (Level 1), medical doctor-driven (Level 2), and risk-profile change (Level 3) emerged as an independent predictor for POCE. There were significant overlaps among these types of non-adherence (S1 Table). Almost all de-escalation/escalation were initiated by physicians (n = 210/212, 99%) and mainly due to a change in risk profile (n = 134/212, 63%). De-escalation/escalation and risk profile change accounted for 34% (n = 210/610) and 45% (n = 276/610) of medical doctor-driven non-adherence, respectively. Among non-adherence due to risk profile change, 48% (n = 134/278) were de-escalation/escalation and 99% (n = 276/278) were initiated by medical doctors. In routine clinical practice, it is common that physicians change the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor (i.e. de-escalation/escalation) due to newly recognized medical conditions (e.g. cancer) or newly introduced medications (e.g. introduction of oral anticoagulation) during the course after index PCI. Although multivariable adjustment was performed using relevant clinical factors available at baseline, this cannot correct for confounding factors that newly arise after the index PCI and subsequently lead to non-adherence. This may be exemplified considering an increased hazard of escalation and de-escalation, which in itself may not impact the risk, but rather represents a surrogate marker of risk (e.g. recurrent ischemic event or bleeding). Collectively, our findings suggest that the clinical context underlying non-adherence represents the key driver of the risk hazards rather than doctor’s decision itself.
In variance to our study, the PARIS registry has reported that medical doctor-driven non-adherence was associated with a lower risk of 2-year MACE [7]. In the PARIS registry in which 35% of patients were treated with bare metal stent or 1st generation DES, the reference standard was adherence to DAPT for 2 years. Majority of physician-guided discontinuations occurred around 1 year (the mean duration of sustained DAPT in patients with physician-guided discontinuation: 382±169 days), which appears to be more appropriate management rather than 2-year DAPT [6], thereby accounting for lower adverse events after discontinuation. With regard to non-adherence driven by patient or events, no significant association with clinical outcomes was observed in the current study, while the PARIS registry showed that the disruption driven by patients or bleeding was associated with a substantially increased risk of MACE. This difference may be partly attributable to the limited number of patients in this category (patient-driven: n = 37, event-driven: n = 91) in the current study.
There was a clear signal that early non-adherence (<30 days) was associated with the highest risk of POCE with an attenuation over time, especially among patients with ACS. Similarly, previous studies have demonstrated that the risk of non-adherence to DAPT was highest within the first 6 months after stent implantation and was attenuated beyond this time point [7, 20]. In the current study, however, this trend was not observed in CCS patients. Although the results obtained from sub-group analysis need careful interpretation, clinical presentation (i.e. ACS vs. CCS) may be an important determinant when considering the time-related risk of non-adherence.
Limitations
First, the single-center design of this study may limit the generalizability of our findings. Second, some of the NARC classification levels were not applicable or modified according to data availability in our database. Third, data on adherence to aspirin was not available in the current study. Fourth, the reference standard in the current study was adherence to the prescribed P2Y12 inhibitor for 12 months, which is different from the latest guideline recommendation (i.e. 6 months) [6]. Fifth, adherence pattern were collected based on questionnaires at 1 year after PCI, which may leads to underreporting by recall bias and particularly render information on patient-driven adherence less reliable [21]. Although we were able to assess and characterise in detail non-aherence events in 17% of patients, if non-adherence was captured with more sophisticated methods (e.g. electronic medication monitors), the prevalence and patterns may have been different from that in the current study. Further investigations are required in this regard.
Conclusion
In real-world PCI population treated with 1-year DAPT as a standard care, non-adherence was observed in nearly one-fifth of patients and most of clinical events occurred during adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors. Non-adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors was associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing PCI, while the risk was related to underlying contexts and timing.
Supporting information
S1 Fig. Cumulative frequency curve for non-adherence.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s001
(DOCX)
S2 Fig. Multivariate Cox analysis for a composite of cardiac death, MI, and stroke according to non-adherence level.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s002
(DOCX)
S3 Fig. Multivariable Cox analysis for POCE at 1 year according to non-adherence levels among ACS patients.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s003
(DOCX)
S4 Fig. Multivariable Cox analysis for POCE at 1 year according to non-adherence levels among CCS patients.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s004
(DOCX)
S5 Fig. Cumulative frequency curve for P2Y12 non-adherence according to PARIS category.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s005
(DOCX)
S6 Fig. Kaplan-Meier cumulative event curve for POCE according to PARIS category.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s006
(DOCX)
S7 Fig. Multivariate Cox analysis according to PARIS category.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s007
(DOCX)
S1 Table. Prevalence of non-adherence according to NARC classification.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s008
(DOCX)
S2 Table. Clinical outcomes occurred during adherence and non-adherence among patients with non-adherence.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s009
(DOCX)
S3 Table. Baseline characteristics according to PARIS category.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s010
(DOCX)
S4 Table. Non-adherence according to PARIS category.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s011
(DOCX)
S5 Table. Event rate at 1 year according to PARIS category.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s012
(DOCX)
S1 File. Questionnaire on the adherence to P2Y12 inhibitors.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263180.s013
(DOCX)
References
- 1. Benner JS, Glynn RJ, Mogun H, Neumann PJ, Weinstein MC, Avorn J. Long-term persistence in use of statin therapy in elderly patients. JAMA 2002;288:455–461. pmid:12132975
- 2. Vrijens B, Vincze G, Kristanto P, Urquhart J, Burnier M. Adherence to prescribed antihypertensive drug treatments: longitudinal study of electronically compiled dosing histories. BMJ 2008;336:1114–1117. pmid:18480115
- 3. Bonaca MP, Bhatt DL, Oude Ophuis T, Steg PG, Storey R, Cohen M, et al. Long-term Tolerability of Ticagrelor for the Secondary Prevention of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Secondary Analysis of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 Trial. JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:425–432. pmid:27438319
- 4. Ferdinand KC, Senatore FF, Clayton-Jeter H, Cryer DR, Lewin JC, Nasser SA, et al. Improving Medication Adherence in Cardiometabolic Disease: Practical and Regulatory Implications. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:437–451. pmid:28126162
- 5. Valgimigli M, Garcia-Garcia HM, Vrijens B, Vranckx P, McFadden EP, Costa F, et al. Standardized classification and framework for reporting, interpreting, and analysing medication non-adherence in cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium (NARC). Eur Heart J 2019;40:2070–2085. pmid:29992264
- 6. Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, Collet JP, Costa F, Jeppsson A, et al. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS: The Task Force for dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2018;39:213–254. pmid:28886622
- 7. Mehran R, Baber U, Steg PG, Ariti C, Weisz G, Witzenbichler B, et al. Cessation of dual antiplatelet treatment and cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PARIS): 2 year results from a prospective observational study. The Lancet 2013;382:1714–1722. pmid:24004642
- 8. Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, Di Mario C, Falk V, Folliguet T, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2010;31:2501–2555. pmid:20802248
- 9. Garcia-Garcia HM, McFadden EP, Farb A, Mehran R, Stone GW, Spertus J, et al. Standardized End Point Definitions for Coronary Intervention Trials: The Academic Research Consortium-2 Consensus Document. Circulation 2018;137:2635–2650. pmid:29891620
- 10. Vranckx P, Cutlip DE, Mehran R, Kint PP, Silber S, Windecker S, et al. Myocardial infarction adjudication in contemporary all-comer stent trials: balancing sensitivity and specificity. Addendum to the historical MI definitions used in stent studies. EuroIntervention 2010;5;871–874. pmid:20142206
- 11. Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R, Boam A, Cohen DJ, van Es GA, et al. Clinical endpoints in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation 2007;115:2344–51. pmid:17470709
- 12. Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, Gibson CM, Caixeta A, Eikelboom J, et al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation 2011;123:2736–47. pmid:21670242
- 13. Pocock SJ, Mehran R, Clayton TC, Nikolsky E, Parise H, Fahy M, et al. Prognostic modeling of individual patient risk and mortality impact of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications: assessment from the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy trial. Circulation 2010;121:43–51. pmid:20026777
- 14. Naderi SH, Bestwick JP, Wald DS. Adherence to drugs that prevent cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis on 376,162 patients. Am J Med 2012;125:882–887 e881. pmid:22748400
- 15. Mehran R, Baber U, Sharma SK, Cohen DJ, Angiolillo DJ, Briguori C, et al. Ticagrelor with or without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients after PCI. N Engl J Med 2019;381:2032–2042. pmid:31556978
- 16. Vranckx P, Valgimigli M, Jüni P, Hamm C, Steg PG, Heg D, et al. Ticagrelor plus aspirin for 1 month, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months vs aspirin plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 12 months, followed by aspirin monotherapy for 12 months after implantation of a drug-eluting stent: a multicentre, open-label, randomised superiority trial. Lancet 2018;392:940–949. pmid:30166073
- 17. Watanabe H, Domei T, Morimoto T, Natsuaki M, Shiomi H, Toyota T, et al. Effect of 1-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Followed by Clopidogrel vs 12-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy on Cardiovascular and Bleeding Events in Patients Receiving PCI: The STOPDAPT-2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2019;321:2414–2427. pmid:31237644
- 18. Hahn JY, Song YB, Oh JH, Chun WJ, Park YH, Jang WJ, et al. Effect of P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy on Cardiovascular Events in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The SMART-CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2019;321:2428–2437. pmid:31237645
- 19. Kim BK, Hong SJ, Cho YH, Yun KH, Kim YH, Suh Y, et al. Effect of Ticagrelor Monotherapy vs Ticagrelor With Aspirin on Major Bleeding and Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: The TICO Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2020;323:2407–2416. pmid:32543684
- 20. Schulz S, Schuster T, Mehilli J, Byrne RA, Ellert J, Massberg S, et al. Stent thrombosis after drug-eluting stent implantation: incidence, timing, and relation to discontinuation of clopidogrel therapy over a 4-year period. Eur Heart J 2009;30:2714–2721. pmid:19596658
- 21. Blaschke TF, Osterberg L, Vrijens B, Urquhart J. Adherence to medications: insights arising from studies on the unreliable link between prescribed and actual drug dosing histories. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2012;52:275–301. pmid:21942628