Does eptifibatide confer a greater benefit to patients with unstable angina than with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction? Insights from the PURSUIT Trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the differential effects of eptifibatide therapy on unstable angina vs non-ST elevation myocardial infarction at enrollment, since the separate impact on these two major diagnostic subsets of acute coronary syndrome patients has not been fully investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined the 9461 patients in the PURSUIT trial (conducted between 1995 and 1997) to compare the effects of eptifibatide on unstable angina and myocardial infarction. The study showed greater and more consistent effects of eptifibatide therapy on unstable angina than non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in reducing 30-day death/(re)infarction (from the unadjusted rate of 13.0% to 11.2%, P=0.059 for unstable angina; and 18.9% to 17.9%, P=0.387 for myocardial infarction), especially among patients who underwent early percutaneous coronary intervention (odds ratios=0.49 and 0.86, 95% confidence intervals=0.30-0.80 and 0.53-1.42, respectively, for unstable angina and myocardial infarction). The only subgroup for whom the benefit of eptifibatide was not evident was female myocardial infarction patients who did not undergo early percutaneous coronary intervention. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that eptifibatide benefited unstable angina patients more than myocardial infarction patients, especially among those who underwent early percutaneous coronary intervention, and support its use as concomitant therapy with early percutaneous coronary intervention especially in female myocardial infarction patients.

Duke Scholars

Author Paul Wayne Armstrong Medicine, Cardiology