<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>9(5)</volume><submitter>Valgimigli M</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Importance&lt;/h4>Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it remains unclear whether the treatment efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) depends on the type of P2Y12 inhibitor.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To assess the risks and benefits of ticagrelor monotherapy or clopidogrel monotherapy compared with standard DAPT after PCI.&lt;h4>Data sources&lt;/h4>MEDLINE, Embase, TCTMD, and the European Society of Cardiology website were searched from inception to September 10, 2023, without language restriction.&lt;h4>Study selection&lt;/h4>Included studies were randomized clinical trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with DAPT on adjudicated end points in patients without indication to oral anticoagulation undergoing PCI.&lt;h4>Data extraction and synthesis&lt;/h4>Patient-level data provided by each trial were synthesized into a pooled dataset and analyzed using a 1-step mixed-effects model. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data.&lt;h4>Main outcomes and measures&lt;/h4>The primary objective was to determine noninferiority of ticagrelor or clopidogrel monotherapy vs DAPT on the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the per-protocol analysis with a 1.15 margin for the hazard ratio (HR). Key secondary end points were major bleeding and net adverse clinical events (NACE), including the primary end point and major bleeding.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Analyses included 6 randomized trials including 25 960 patients undergoing PCI, of whom 24 394 patients (12 403 patients receiving DAPT; 8292 patients receiving ticagrelor monotherapy; 3654 patients receiving clopidogrel monotherapy; 45 patients receiving prasugrel monotherapy) were retained in the per-protocol analysis. Trials of ticagrelor monotherapy were conducted in Asia, Europe, and North America; trials of clopidogrel monotherapy were all conducted in Asia. Ticagrelor was noninferior to DAPT for the primary end point (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.06; P for noninferiority = .004), but clopidogrel was not noninferior (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.01-1.87; P for noninferiority > .99), with this finding driven by noncardiovascular death. The risk of major bleeding was lower with both ticagrelor (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.62; P &lt; .001) and clopidogrel monotherapy (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.81; P = .006; P for interaction = 0.88). NACE were lower with ticagrelor (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64-0.86, P &lt; .001) but not with clopidogrel monotherapy (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.28; P = .99; P for interaction = .04).&lt;h4>Conclusions and relevance&lt;/h4>This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ticagrelor monotherapy was noninferior to DAPT for all-cause death, MI, or stroke and superior for major bleeding and NACE. Clopidogrel monotherapy was similarly associated with reduced bleeding but was not noninferior to DAPT for all-cause death, MI, or stroke, largely because of risk observed in 1 trial that exclusively included East Asian patients and a hazard that was driven by an excess of noncardiovascular death.</pubmed_abstract><journal>JAMA cardiology</journal><pagination>437-448</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC10955340</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel Monotherapy vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Patient-Level Meta-Analysis.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC10955340</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Gragnano F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Calabro P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Single Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (Sidney-3) Collaboration</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hahn JY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kimura T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zhu Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Windecker S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Serruys PW</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Vranckx P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dangas GD</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zhao Q</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Watanabe H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jang Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Song YB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>da Costa BR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mehta S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gibson CM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mehran R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>McFadden EP</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Heg D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Franzone A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ando K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kim BK</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Baber U</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Angiolillo DJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Valgimigli M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gwon HC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Juni P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Branca M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hong SJ</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel Monotherapy vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Patient-Level Meta-Analysis.</name><description>&lt;h4>Importance&lt;/h4>Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it remains unclear whether the treatment efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) depends on the type of P2Y12 inhibitor.&lt;h4>Objective&lt;/h4>To assess the risks and benefits of ticagrelor monotherapy or clopidogrel monotherapy compared with standard DAPT after PCI.&lt;h4>Data sources&lt;/h4>MEDLINE, Embase, TCTMD, and the European Society of Cardiology website were searched from inception to September 10, 2023, without language restriction.&lt;h4>Study selection&lt;/h4>Included studies were randomized clinical trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with DAPT on adjudicated end points in patients without indication to oral anticoagulation undergoing PCI.&lt;h4>Data extraction and synthesis&lt;/h4>Patient-level data provided by each trial were synthesized into a pooled dataset and analyzed using a 1-step mixed-effects model. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data.&lt;h4>Main outcomes and measures&lt;/h4>The primary objective was to determine noninferiority of ticagrelor or clopidogrel monotherapy vs DAPT on the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the per-protocol analysis with a 1.15 margin for the hazard ratio (HR). Key secondary end points were major bleeding and net adverse clinical events (NACE), including the primary end point and major bleeding.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Analyses included 6 randomized trials including 25 960 patients undergoing PCI, of whom 24 394 patients (12 403 patients receiving DAPT; 8292 patients receiving ticagrelor monotherapy; 3654 patients receiving clopidogrel monotherapy; 45 patients receiving prasugrel monotherapy) were retained in the per-protocol analysis. Trials of ticagrelor monotherapy were conducted in Asia, Europe, and North America; trials of clopidogrel monotherapy were all conducted in Asia. Ticagrelor was noninferior to DAPT for the primary end point (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.06; P for noninferiority = .004), but clopidogrel was not noninferior (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.01-1.87; P for noninferiority > .99), with this finding driven by noncardiovascular death. The risk of major bleeding was lower with both ticagrelor (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.62; P &lt; .001) and clopidogrel monotherapy (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.81; P = .006; P for interaction = 0.88). NACE were lower with ticagrelor (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64-0.86, P &lt; .001) but not with clopidogrel monotherapy (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.28; P = .99; P for interaction = .04).&lt;h4>Conclusions and relevance&lt;/h4>This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ticagrelor monotherapy was noninferior to DAPT for all-cause death, MI, or stroke and superior for major bleeding and NACE. Clopidogrel monotherapy was similarly associated with reduced bleeding but was not noninferior to DAPT for all-cause death, MI, or stroke, largely because of risk observed in 1 trial that exclusively included East Asian patients and a hazard that was driven by an excess of noncardiovascular death.</description><dates><release>2024-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2024 May</publication><modification>2025-04-20T00:08:59.575Z</modification><creation>2025-04-20T00:08:59.575Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC10955340</accession><cross_references><pubmed>38506796</pubmed><doi>10.1001/jamacardio.2024.0133</doi></cross_references></HashMap>