Use and outcomes of dual antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndrome in patients with chronic kidney disease: insights from the Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study (COAPT).

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of adverse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The optimal regimen of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in CKD poses a challenge due to the increased bleeding and clotting tendencies, particularly since patients with CKD were underrepresented in randomized controlled trials. We examined the practice patterns of DAPT prescription stratified by the presence of CKD. The multicentre prospective Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study (COAPT) enrolled patients with ACS between December 2011 and May 2013. The present study is a subgroup analysis comparing type and duration of DAPT and associated outcomes among patients with and without CKD (eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m, calculated by CKD-EPI). Patients with CKD (275/1921, 14.3%) were prescribed prasugrel/ticagrelor less (18.5% vs 25.8%, p = 0.01) and had a shorter duration of DAPT therapy versus patients without CKD (median 382 vs 402 days, p = 0.003). CKD was associated with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 12 months (p < 0.001) but not bleeding when compared to patients without CKD. CKD was associated with MACE in both patients on prasugrel/ticagrelor (p = 0.017) and those on clopidogrel (p < 0.001) (p for heterogeneity = 0.70). CKD was associated with increased bleeding only among patients receiving prasugrel/ticagrelor (p = 0.007), but not among those receiving clopidogrel (p = 0.64) (p for heterogeneity = 0.036). Patients with CKD had a shorter DAPT duration and were less frequently prescribed potent P2Y inhibitors than patients without CKD. Overall, compared with patients without CKD, patients with CKD had higher rates of MACE and similar bleeding rates. However, among those prescribed more potent P2Y inhibitors, CKD was associated with more bleeding than those without CKD. Further studies are needed to better define the benefit/risk evaluation, and establish a more tailored and evidence-based DAPT regimen for this high-risk patient group.