Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MLNM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Icebrg who wrote (1716)	7/19/2003 2:47:27 PM
From: Icebrg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3044

Comparison of Two Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors, Eptifibatide and Abciximab: Outcomes, Complications and Thrombocytopenia During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [A new article at Medscape comparing Reopro and Integrillin. The latter comes out slightly better due to some cases of thrombocytopenia in the Reopro group.] from Journal of Invasive Cardiology Posted 07/18/2003 Mahmoud Suleiman, MD, Luis Gruberg, MD, Haim Hammerman, MD, Doron Aronson, MD, Majdi Halabi, MD, Alexander Goldberg, MD, Ehud Grenadier, MD, Monther Boulus, MD, Walter Markiewicz, MD, Rafael Beyar, MD, DSc Abstract and Introduction Abstract Background: Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors have significantly reduced the incidence of 30-day ischemic events during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However, each of the three currently available agents has different pharmacological characteristics, safety, efficacy and costs. There has not been a direct comparison between eptifibatide and abciximab in the rates of major adverse cardiac events, major complications and thrombocytopenia. Methods: A total of 642 consecutive patients underwent PCI at our institution between January 2000 and December 2001 and were treated with either eptifibatide (n = 342) or abciximab (n = 300) during the procedure. The selection of the IIb/IIIa inhibitor was arbitrary and left to the discretion of the operator. Complete blood counts were performed by routine protocol on all patients 2 and 4 hours after initiation of the drug. We analyzed the in-hospital clinical outcomes and the incidence of thrombocytopenia in this cohort. Results: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics and concomitant drug treatment were similar between the 2 groups, except for a higher incidence of diabetes in the eptifibatide group. The rates of in-hospital death (1.2% eptifibatide group versus 1.0% abciximab group; p = 0.7), stroke (0% for both groups), target vessel revascularization (1.2% eptifibatide group versus 1.0% abciximab group; p = 0.8) and major bleeding complications (1.7% eptifibatide group versus 0.7% abciximab group; p = 0.2) were similar between the 2 groups. Thrombocytopenia was more frequent in the abciximab-treated patients (6%, versus 0% in the eptifibatide group; p < 0.001), including 5 patients who developed profound thrombocytopenia (< 20,000 cells/mm3). Conclusion: Both agents, eptifibatide and abciximab, proved to have the same rates of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events, bleeding and vascular complications. Abciximab therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of thrombocytopenia within 4 hours of drug initiation, which prompted immediate drug discontinuation, but was not associated with increased risk of bleeding, vascular or other complications. [The full article is available at Medscape medscape.com ]