ライフサイエンスコーパス: cangrelor

1 uding prasugrel, ticagrelor, and intravenous cangrelor.

2 eeding episodes were numerically higher with cangrelor.

3 e similar in both women and men treated with cangrelor (0.3% versus 0.2%, P=0.30 [women]; 0.1% versus

4 clopidogrel group (adjusted odds ratio with cangrelor, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0

5 9, 100 micromol/L) and especially P(2)Y(12) (Cangrelor, 10 micromol/L) blunted CXCL16-triggered plate

6 t occurred in 185 of 2654 patients receiving cangrelor (7.0%) and in 210 of 2641 patients receiving p

7 rivative (a specific P2X(1) antagonist), and cangrelor (a specific P2Y(12) antagonist) mitigated the

8 on Triage Strategy criteria) was higher with cangrelor, a difference that approached statistical sign

9 Cangrelor, a nonthienopyridine adenosine triphosphate an

10 Intravenous cangrelor, a rapid-acting, reversible adenosine diphosph

11 ee trials that assessed the effectiveness of cangrelor against either clopidogrel or placebo in PCI.

12 significantly lower in patients treated with cangrelor alone (0.7% vs 2.4%; OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.

13 were not significantly different between the cangrelor alone and clopidogrel-GPI groups (2.6% vs 3.3%

14 efined severe/life-threatening bleeding with cangrelor alone compared with clopidogrel-GPI (0.3% vs 0

15 analysis from the 3 phase 3 CHAMPION trials, cangrelor alone was associated with similar ischemic ris

16 ssigned to cangrelor but not receiving GPIs (cangrelor alone) and 1211 patients assigned to clopidogr

17 Cangrelor, an intravenous, reversible P2Y12 antagonist,

18 event >1 year old, including 650 assigned to cangrelor and 620 assigned to clopidogrel.

19 P2Y12 and alphaIIbbeta3 receptor inhibitors cangrelor and abciximab, respectively, both in vitro--by

20 aracteristics were well balanced between the cangrelor and clopidogrel arms in subsets receiving and

21 0.6%) and 54 of 5,469 (1.0%) patients in the cangrelor and clopidogrel arms, respectively (odds ratio

22 11.8% (12 of 102) vs 10.4% (10 of 96) in the cangrelor and placebo groups, respectively (RR, 1.1 [95%

23 of GPR17 by the marketed antiplatelet drugs cangrelor and ticagrelor, previously suggested to antago

24 el P2Y12 antagonists (prasugrel, ticagrelor, cangrelor, and elinogrel) that have advantages over clop

25 triethylammonium salt hydrate (2MeSAMP) and Cangrelor (AR-C69931MX) have been widely used to demonst

26 icipants included 10929 patients assigned to cangrelor but not receiving GPIs (cangrelor alone) and 1

27 ation showed a trend toward a reduction with cangrelor, but it was not significant (0.6% vs. 0.9%; od

28 linical Trial to Demonstrate the Efficacy of Cangrelor), CHAMPION PLATFORM (Cangrelor Versus Standard

29 e primary composite endpoint were lower with cangrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients who did

30 ought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cangrelor compared with clopidogrel in subgroups that di

31 Cangrelor compared with clopidogrel significantly reduce

32 ention, the efficacy and bleeding profile of cangrelor compared with clopidogrel was similar to that

33 therapy prior to cardiac surgery, the use of cangrelor compared with placebo resulted in a higher rat

34 large global cardiovascular clinical trial, cangrelor consistently reduced rates of ischemic end poi

35 nduces food intake, whereas Gpr17 antagonist cangrelor curtails it.

36 The dose of cangrelor determined in 10 patients in the open-label st

37 Cangrelor did not increase the primary safety endpoint,

38 The use of periprocedural cangrelor during PCI was not superior to placebo in redu

39 forskolin) of the cAMP pathway, 2MeSAMP and Cangrelor failed to inhibit Ca(2+) mobilization, Akt pho

40 roduction of an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor (cangrelor) further adds to the multitude of modalities a

41 he primary safety end point was 0.16% in the cangrelor group and 0.11% in the clopidogrel group (odds

42 n the rate of blood transfusion (1.0% in the cangrelor group and 0.6% in the placebo group, P=0.13),

43 e primary efficacy end point was 4.7% in the cangrelor group and 5.9% in the clopidogrel group (adjus

44 t, which occurred in 7.5% of patients in the cangrelor group and 7.1% of patients in the clopidogrel

45 sis developed in 0.8% of the patients in the cangrelor group and in 1.4% in the clopidogrel group (od

46 e primary efficacy end point was 4.3% in the cangrelor group versus 5.3% in the clopidogrel group (od

47 receiving placebo (8.0%) (odds ratio in the cangrelor group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7

48 In the cangrelor group, as compared with the placebo group, two

49 r bleeding on one scale was increased in the cangrelor group, from 3.5% to 5.5% (P<0.001), because of

50 stent thrombosis and death were lower in the cangrelor group, with no significant increase in the rat

51 greater proportion of patients treated with cangrelor had low levels of platelet reactivity througho

52 end point, stent thrombosis, were reduced by cangrelor in both regions.

53 imary efficacy and safety end point) favored cangrelor in both women (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.92) an

54 were low and not significantly increased by cangrelor in either region.

55 N) PHOENIX trial demonstrated superiority of cangrelor in reducing ischemic events at 48 hours in pat

56 s GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding, the OR for cangrelor in those >/=75 years old was 0.75 (6.4% versus

57 bitors (GPIs) and a potent P2Y12 antagonist, cangrelor, in patients undergoing PCI.

58 0.4%), or in transfusion (0.7% vs 0.6%), but cangrelor increased GUSTO mild bleeding (16.8% vs 13.0%,

59 Cangrelor increased the odds of moderate bleeding in wom

60 evealed that neither 2MeSAMP nor ARC69931MX (cangrelor) increased cAMP through activation of A2a, IP,

61 lucidate the mechanisms by which 2MeSAMP and Cangrelor inhibit platelet activation and thrombosis.

62 e data together demonstrate that 2MeSAMP and Cangrelor inhibit platelet function through the P2Y(12)-

63 2MeSAMP and Cangrelor inhibited aggregation and ATP release of wild-

64 Importantly, while injection of Cangrelor inhibited thrombus formation in a FeCl(3)-indu

65 Cangrelor is a potent intravenous adenosine diphosphate

66 Cangrelor is a potent intravenous adenosine diphosphate-

67 Cangrelor is a potent, rapid-acting, reversible intraven

68 Cangrelor is an intravenous ADP receptor antagonist that

69 Cangrelor is an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor approved to

70 Cangrelor is being evaluated in clinical trials of throm

71 rther study of intravenous ADP blockade with cangrelor may be warranted.

72 2MeSAMP and Cangrelor neither raised intracellular cAMP concentratio

73 The effect of cangrelor on ischemic events and bleeding was analyzed i

74 r total MIs (n=134); however, the effects of cangrelor on MI remained significant (OR, 0.65; 95% CI,

75 ere seen in the evaluation of the effects of cangrelor on MIs with peak creatinine kinase-MB >/=10 ti

76 We explored the effects of cangrelor on myocardial infarction (MI) using different

77 total of 11 145 patients were randomized to cangrelor or clopidogrel in the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial (

78 ition) PHOENIX randomized 11 145 patients to cangrelor or clopidogrel.

79 urgent percutaneous coronary intervention to cangrelor or clopidogrel.

80 ng rates, regardless of the randomization to cangrelor or clopidogrel.

81 dine awaiting CABG surgery to receive either cangrelor or placebo after an initial open-label, dose-f

82 n treated with clopidogrel to receive either cangrelor or placebo at the time of PCI, followed by 600

83 were stopped and patients were administered cangrelor or placebo for at least 48 hours, which was di

84 d therapy to receive a bolus and infusion of cangrelor or to receive a loading dose of 600 mg or 300

85 linical Trial to Demonstrate the Efficacy of Cangrelor [PCI]: NCT00305162; Cangrelor Versus Standard

86 recent study reported that both 2MeSAMP and Cangrelor raise intra-platelet cAMP levels and inhibit p

87 pared with control (clopidogrel or placebo), cangrelor reduced PCI periprocedural thrombotic complica

88 Cangrelor reduced rates of the primary composite end poi

89 Treatment with cangrelor reduced the composite end point of death, MI (

90 Treatment with cangrelor reduced the incidence of MI at 48 hours (3.8%

91 In CHAMPION PHOENIX, cangrelor reduced the odds of major adverse cardiovascul

92 Cangrelor reduced the odds of stent thrombosis by 61% in

93 Cangrelor reduced the odds of the primary end point by 3

94 Cangrelor reduced the odds of the primary outcome by 19%

95 Cangrelor reduced the odds of the secondary triple compo

96 Cangrelor resulted in directionally consistent effects o

97 Cangrelor's efficacy in reducing ischemic complications

98 e Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, cangrelor significantly reduced periprocedural and 30-da

99 Cangrelor significantly reduced the rate of ischemic eve

100 intravenous adenosine diphosphate antagonist cangrelor substantially reduced IPST, contributing to it

101 occurred significantly more frequently with cangrelor than with clopidogrel (1.2% vs. 0.3%).

102 d CHAMPION PHOENIX (Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard of Care Therapy in Sub

103 (Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard of Care Therapy in Sub

104 RM]: NCT00385138; A Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Wh

105 CHAMPION PHOENIX (A Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Wh

106 rence in GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding with cangrelor versus clopidogrel (1.1% versus 1.0%; OR, 1.07

107 he Efficacy of Cangrelor [PCI]: NCT00305162; Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Man

108 METHODS AND CHAMPION (cangrelor versus standard therapy to achieve optimal man

109 e Efficacy of Cangrelor), CHAMPION PLATFORM (Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Man

110 r clopidogrel in the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Man

111 The Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Man

112 The Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Man

113 d, patient-level analysis of the 3 CHAMPION (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Man

114 odds of the primary outcome by 19% (3.8% for cangrelor vs 4.7% for control; odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95%

115 pooled patient-level data from the 3 phase 3 Cangrelor vs Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Managem

116 , double-blind, double-dummy trials in which cangrelor was compared with clopidogrel during percutane

117 Likewise, cangrelor was not superior at 30 days.

118 At 48 hours, cangrelor was not superior to clopidogrel with respect t

119 Cangrelor, when administered intravenously 30 minutes be

120 Cangrelor, when compared with clopidogrel, provides simi

121 a large-scale international trial comparing cangrelor with 600 mg of oral clopidogrel administered b

122 ION-PLATFORM, and CHAMPION-PHOENIX) compared cangrelor with control (clopidogrel or placebo) for prev

123 The benefit from cangrelor with respect to the primary end point was cons

124 t P2Y12 inhibitor (ticagrelor, prasugrel, or cangrelor) without the planned use of glycoprotein IIb/I