Rafael Gomes: Can Prasugrel Replace Ticagrelor in ACS Treatment?
Rafael Gomes, Cardiologist, Echocardiographer, Ergometrist at Real Hospital Português, shared a post on LinkedIn about a recent article by Elmir Omerovic et al., published in NEJM, adding:
“European Society of Cardiology Munich 2026 – Switch-Swedeheart: prasugrel or ticagrelor after ACS PCI?
The Switch-Swedeheart trial, presented by Prof. Dr. Elmir Omerovic, evaluated a pragmatic real-world question: should prasugrel replace ticagrelor as the default P2Y12 strategy in ACS patients undergoing PCI?
Rather than randomizing individual patients, Swedish regions were randomized to switch their default policy from ticagrelor to prasugrel.
- 17,095 ACS patients undergoing PCI.
- Mean age approximately 70 years.
- 37% equal to or more than 75 years.
- Previous stroke and oral anticoagulation were included.
- Complete 1-year follow-up.
Primary endpoint: death, MI or stroke at 1 year
Ticagrelor policy: 11.8%
Prasugrel policy: 11.1%
Adjusted OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.77-1.06; P is equal to 0.22
A prasugrel-default strategy did not significantly reduce ischemic events compared with ticagrelor.
Individual outcomes were also similar, including death, MI, stroke and stent thrombosis.
Major bleeding was lower with the prasugrel policy by registry-based ICD-10 definitions, but these analyses were not adjusted for multiplicity and should be interpreted cautiously.
A crucial point highlighted by Prof Dr. Roxana Mehran, who discussed the trial, is that this was a comparison of policies, not pure pharmacological equivalence.
Only 75.8% of patients in the ticagrelor-policy group actually received ticagrelor, and only 60.6% in the prasugrel-policy group received prasugrel.
Her key message:
‘A neutral policy comparison is not a demonstration of pharmacological equivalence.’
This is important when interpreting the trial alongside ISAR-React 5, which remains the main basis for the ESC preference for prasugrel in ACS patients proceeding to PCI.
Take-home message
Switch-Swedeheart does not show that prasugrel and ticagrelor are equivalent.
It shows that, in broad real-world ACS care, making prasugrel the default strategy did not significantly improve 1-year ischemic outcomes compared with ticagrelor.
The study refines, rather than overturns, ISAR-React 5 – and reinforces the importance of individualized P2Y12 selection.”
Title: Prasugrel versus Ticagrelor in Acute Coronary Syndromes
Authors: Elmir Omerovic, Sasha Koul, Jonas Andersson, Johan Pontén, Fredrik Björklund, Robert Kastberg, Mila Sun, Charlotta Ljungman, Ole Fröbert, Kristian Bolin, Kristofer Skoglund, Carl-David Dolata, Mats Birgander, Helena Wikström, Truls Råmunddal, Oskar Angerås, Petur Petursson, David Erlinge, Björn Redfors

Stay updated with Hemostasis Today.
-
Aug 31, 2026, 15:13Nahid A. Qushmaq: MicroRNAs as Prognostic Biomarkers in Septic Patients
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:32Mahir Khalil Ibrahim Jallo: Hot Topic From The ESC 2026 Munich
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:28Ruben Mesa: FDA Approves Ropeginterferon Alfa-2b for Essential Thrombocythemia
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:28Francisco Chacón-Lozsán: Should We Anticoagulate AF Patients With Only One Non-Sex Stroke Risk Factor?
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:24Akl Fahed: Do Lifelong Differences in LDL Cholesterol Influence the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism?
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:23Accelerating CAR-T Access Through Policy and System Reform – American Society of Hematology
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:21Shirya Rashid: Does Bempedoic Acid Influence Venous Thromboembolism Risk?
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:14Jason Andrade: SINGLE-AF Trial Validates Early Anticoagulation in AF
-
Aug 31, 2026, 14:12Leonardo Roever: Diagnosis and Management of Natural Anticoagulant Deficiencies