Background—: Ticagrelor and prasugrel provide stronger platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel. Direct pharmacodynamic comparison between them has not yet been reported in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients. Methods and Results—: In a prospective, single-center, single-blind study, 55 out of 117 (47%) screened consecutive ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to either ticagrelor 180 mg loading followed by 90 mg bid, or prasugrel 60 mg loading followed by 10 mg od for 5 days. Platelet reactivity (PR) was assessed with the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay and the Multiplate Analyzer at 0, 1, 2, 6, 24 hours, and 5 days postrandomization. The primary end point, PR with VerifyNow at hour 1, did not differ significantly between patients randomized to ticagrelor versus prasugrel (257.3 P2Y12 reaction unit [PRU], 95% CI 230.8–283.8 versus 231.3 PRU, 95% CI 205.3–257.4; P =0.2). PR did not differ at 2, 6, and 24 hours, although at day 5 it was lower with ticagrelor than prasugrel (25.6 PRU, 95% CI 12.3–38.9 versus 50.3 PRU, 95% CI 36.4–64.1; P =0.01). At hour 2, high on-treatment PR rates (cutoff 208 PRU) were 46.2% and 34.6% for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively, decreased significantly thereafter, whereas did not differ significantly between the 2 agents at all the time points of the study. Conclusions—: In patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, both ticagrelor and prasugrel exhibit an initial delay in the onset of their antiplatelet action. Ticagrelor did not appear superior to prasugrel in reducing PR during the first 24 hours of ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01463163.

OBJECTIVE: It has been postulated that prasugrel might be the preferred treatment option in diabetes mellitus (DM) patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to compare the pharmacodynamic action of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a prospective, single-center, single-blind, crossover study, 30 consecutive ACS patients with DM who had been pretreated with clopidogrel were randomized to either 90 mg ticagrelor twice daily or 10 mg prasugrel once daily with a 15-day treatment period. Platelet reactivity (PR) was assessed with the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay, measured in P2Y12 reaction units (PRU). RESULTS: PR was significantly lower after ticagrelor (45.2 PRU [95% CI 27.4–63.1]) compared with prasugrel (80.8 PRU [63.0–98.7]), with a least squares mean difference of –35.6 PRU (−55.2 to −15.9, P = 0.001). High PR rate was 0% for ticagrelor and 3.3% for prasugrel (P = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: In DM patients with ACS who had been pretreated with clopidogrel and who undergo PCI, ticagrelor achieves a significantly higher platelet inhibition than prasugrel. Both antiplatelet agents effectively treat high PR. The relevance of these findings to the clinical efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in DM patients needs further elucidation.