Clopidogrel: a review of its use in the prevention of atherothrombosis

Clopidogrel is an ADP receptor antagonist that is indicated for the reduction of atherosclerotic events including myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke and vascular death in patients with atherosclerosis manifested by recent stroke, myocardial infarction or established peripheral vascular disease. In the 19 185 patients enrolled in the multicentre, randomised double-blind CAPRIE study, the annual risk of the combined end-point of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction and death from vascular disease (vascular death) was significantly lower during treatment with clopidogrel 75 mg/day than aspirin 325 mg/day [5.3 vs 5.8%/year, respectively; relative risk reduction (RRR) 8.7%, p = 0.043] after a mean follow-up of 1.9 years. Clopidogrel provided even greater reductions in the risk of recurrent ischaemic events than aspirin in patients with a history of coronary artery bypass surgery, diabetes mellitus and in those receiving concomitant lipid-lowering therapy. Moreover there was a significant reduction in the incidence of hospitalisation in patients treated with clopidogrel. In a patient population (Saskatchewan, Canada) with a greater risk of ischaemic events than the CAPRIE study population, the number of patients needed to be treated with clopidogrel to prevent 1 ischaemic event was estimated to be 70 (vs 200 in the CAPRIE study). In randomised trials and registry surveys, clopidogrel 75 mg/day plus aspirin had similar efficacy (as measured by adverse cardiac outcomes) to ticlopidine 250mg twice daily plus aspirin during the 30 days after placement of intracoronary stents. Tolerability of clopidogrel was significantly better than ticlopidine in the randomised, double-blind CLASSICS study. Among patients treated with clopidogrel or aspirin in the CAPRIE study, the overall gastrointestinal tolerability of clopidogrel was generally better than that of aspirin; the frequency of gastrointestinal haemorrhage was significantly lower among patients treated with clopidogrel than aspirin. Diarrhoea, rash and pruritis were significantly more common with clopidogrel than aspirin. CONCLUSION: Clopidogrel was significantly more effective than aspirin in the prevention of vascular events (ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death) [corrected] in patients with atherothrombotic disease manifested by recent myocardial infarction, recent ischaemic stroke or symptomatic peripheral arterial occlusive disease [corrected] in the CAPRIE study. The overall tolerability profile of the drug was similar to that of aspirin, although gastrointestinal haemorrhage occurred significantly less often in clopidogrel recipients. The drug is widely used in combination with aspirin for the prevention of atherothrombosis after placement of intravascular stents, and available data suggest that this combination is as effective as ticlopidine plus aspirin for this indication.     

Clopidogrel and [symbol: see text] ticlopidine--improvements on aspirin?

Clopidogrel (Plavix-Sanofi Winthrop/Bristol-Myers Squibb) and [symbol: see text] ticlopidine (Ticlid-Sanofi Winthrop) are inhibitors of platelet function and are promoted as potential alternatives to aspirin. Clopidogrel is licensed for the secondary prevention of vascular events in patients with established atherosclerotic disease. The manufacturer claims that clopidogrel is "significantly more effective at reducing myocardial infarction, stroke and vascular death" compared to aspirin. Ticlopidine is licensed as an alternative to aspirin for secondary prevention of stroke and coronary complications in patients with intermittent claudication. However, in the UK, ticlopidine is more commonly used with aspirin to prevent complications following insertion of coronary stents during angioplasty. We consider whether the claims for clopidogrel and the current use of ticlopidine are justified.     

Ticlopidine: a second look. No further use in routine practice

(1) The clinical file on ticlopidine is based mainly on a placebo-controlled trial involving patients with lower-limb arterial disease, and two large double-blind trials in the post-stroke period, in which the comparator was a placebo in one and aspirin in the other. (2) Ticlopidine proved more effective than the placebo in both indications. In secondary prevention of ischaemic stroke, ticlopidine has a moderate advantage over aspirin in terms of efficacy but carries a risk of serious adverse effects, especially haematological. (3) An indirect comparison suggests that clopidogrel, another antiplatelet drug chemically close to ticlopidine, has comparable efficacy in cardiovascular prevention and no severe adverse effects to date.     

Adverse effects and drug interactions of antithrombotic agents used in prevention of ischaemic stroke

Stroke is the third most common cause of death in the US. Primary prevention of stroke can be achieved by control of risk factors including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, elevated cholesterol levels and smoking. Approximately one-third of all ischaemic strokes occur in patients with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). The mainstay of secondary prevention of ischaemic stroke is the addition of medical therapy with antithrombotic agents to control the risk factors for stroke. Antithrombotic therapy is associated with significant medical complications, particularly bleeding.Low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) has been shown to be as effective as high-dose aspirin in the prevention of stroke, with fewer adverse bleeding events. Aspirin has been shown to be as effective as warfarin in the prevention of noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke, with significantly fewer bleeding complications. Ticlopidine may be more effective in preventing stroke than aspirin, but is associated with unacceptable haematological complications. Clopidogrel may have some benefit over aspirin in preventing myocardial infarction, but has not been shown to be superior to aspirin in the prevention of stroke. The combination of clopidogrel and aspirin may be more effective than aspirin alone in acute coronary syndromes, but the incidence of adverse bleeding is significantly higher. Furthermore, the combination of aspirin with clopidogrel has not been shown to be more effective for prevention of recurrent stroke than clopidogrel alone, while the rate of bleeding complications was significantly higher with combination therapy. The combination of aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole has been demonstrated to be more effective than aspirin alone, with the same rate of adverse bleeding complications as low-dose aspirin. When selecting the appropriate antithrombotic agent for secondary prevention of stroke, the adverse event profile of the drug must be taken into account when assessing the overall efficacy of the treatment plan.     

Clopidogrel for the secondary prevention of stroke

Patients suffering a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or ischaemic stroke (IS) have a high risk of recurrence. The inhibition of platelet function is effective in the reduction of secondary vascular events in patients with TIA or stroke. This is true for acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), clopidogrel, ticlopidine and the combination of ASA plus slow-release dipyridamole. This overview analyses the results of recent trials and presents ongoing or future trials with clopidogrel as well as the combination of clopidogrel plus ASA. Clopidogrel is superior to ASA in the prevention of vascular events in patients with IS, myocardial infarction (MI) or peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The difference is highest for high-risk patients such as diabetics, patients who underwent coronary bypass surgery and patients with a remote prior history of ischaemic events. A prediction model is presented which allows the identification of patients in whom clopidogrel is superior to ASA for the secondary prevention of stroke. The combination of clopidogrel and ASA is better than ASA alone in patients undergoing coronary stent implantations and patients with unstable angina or non-Q-wave MI. In high-risk patients with TIA or stroke, the addition of ASA to clopidogrel is not superior to ASA monotherapy but results in a higher rate of bleeding complications. The long-term combination therapy is currently investigated in several large trials in > 30,000 patients, with a large number of stroke patients.     

Clinical pharmacokinetics of antiplatelet agents used in the secondary prevention of stroke

Stroke is one of the leading causes of death and debilitation. Several million stroke survivors are alive throughout the world today. Prevention of recurrent stroke is of major importance to stroke survivors. Several pharmacological agents are currently available for use in secondary stroke prevention.Clopidogrel, the combination of immediate-release aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole and aspirin alone are the most widely recommended agents for use in the secondary prevention of strokes. Clopidogrel has shown superiority over aspirin in the combined endpoints of stroke, death and myocardial infarction. The immediate-release aspirin/extended-release dipyridamole combination has shown superiority to aspirin alone in the secondary prevention of stroke.Dipyridamole has been studied as an antiplatelet agent for several decades. Early trials to prove its efficacy compared with aspirin were not favourable, and patients often experienced many adverse effects. Researchers began developing an extended-release formulation in an effort to maintain therapeutic blood concentrations with less frequent daily administration and better adverse effect profile. Pharmacokinetic analysis of this new product showed it to have a more consistent and reproducible absorption compared with immediate-release dipyridamole. The rate of absorption of extended-release dipyridamole is considerably slower than that of immediate-release dipyridamole, while similar plasma concentrations are maintained to optimise antiplatelet efficacy. This allows extended-release dipyridamole to be administered twice daily rather than four times daily.A large-scale randomised trial was conducted with extended-release dipyridamole 200mg in combination with immediate-release aspirin 25mg given twice daily. The combination product showed a greater efficacy at preventing a recurring stroke then either agent administered alone. Indirect comparisons with clopidogrel show that the combination of immediate-release aspirin/extended-release dipyridamole may be more effective than clopidogrel at preventing a recurring stroke.     

The value of clopidogrel versus aspirin in reducing atherothrombotic events: the CAPRIE study

Atherothrombotic disease is a growing health problem, and is increasingly more costly to manage. Clopidogrel is an advanced, specific adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonist, which has been shown to be a highly potent antiplatelet agent. Data from the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischaemic Events (CAPRIE) study have demonstrated the significantly superior clinical benefit of clopidogrel over aspirin for secondary prevention of atherothrombotic disease, with a relative risk reduction in myocardial infarction, stroke or vascular death of 8.7% (95% confidence interval 0.3, 16.5; P = 0.043). Moreover, clopidogrel demonstrated an amplified clinical benefit versus aspirin in patients at high risk of atherothrombotic events, such as those with a previous history of symptomatic atherothrombotic disease or with major risk factors such as diabetes mellitus or hypercholesterolaemia. On the basis of commonly accepted threshold criteria (Euros 20000 per life-year gained; LYG), clopidogrel in comparison with aspirin is cost-effective for the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic disease (cost per LYG ranging from Euros 19462 to Euros 3256). Economic analyses have demonstrated consistent cost-effectiveness results with clopidogrel in different countries. Moreover, in high-risk patient subgroups the cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel in comparison with aspirin was evenbetter (cost per LYG ranging from Euros 5900 to Euros 6310). Compared with other treatment strategies used for the prevention of ischaemic or atherothrombotic events, the cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel in comparison with aspirin based on CAPRIE is favourable, with most analyses in the intermediate range of cost-effectiveness. The available data thus support the use of clopidogrel as a clinically efficient and cost-effective option for secondary prevention of atherothrombotic disease, particularly in high-risk patients.     

Editorial Commentary

Thrombotic events of the arterial circulation continue to be the major cause of cardiovascular death in spite of great efforts to prevent and treat thrombosis. Current antithrombotic strategies in clinical use are primarily based on aspirin (antiplatelet), heparin (anticoagulant) and coumadins (chronic anticoagulants). Recently, ReoPro®, an antibody blocking the platelet fibrinogen receptor, GpIIb/IIIa, has been introduced for limited acute use for prevention of ischaemic complications of coronary balloon angioplasty. Clopidogrel is a novel antiplatelet agent that has demonstrated antithrombotic efficacy beyond aspirin in preclinical studies and is now in clinical (Phase II) development for secondary prevention of broad ischaemic cardiovascular events including death. Clopidogrel is an ADP receptor antagonist with additional properties that produce effective and long-lasting antithrombotic actions. Clopidogrel seems to be free of the adverse side-effects that flawed ticlopidine, a closely related thieno-derivative, and is at least six-fold more potent. It is expected that clopidogrel will add significantly to the antichrombotic arsenal and reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality above and beyond currently available therapy.     

Clopidogrel Bisulfate

Clopidogrel bisulfate (hereafter, clopidogrel), a selective inhibitor of ADP-induced platelet aggregation, is approved for the reduction of atherothrombotic events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In COMMIT/CCS-2, a well designed trial in 45,852 adult patients with STEMI, relative to aspirin alone, clopidogrel 75 mg/day plus aspirin treatment significantly reduced the risk of both coprimary endpoints: the composite endpoint of reinfarction, stroke, or death from any cause and the risk of death from any cause. Based on the findings of this trial, treating 1000 patients for approximately 2 weeks with clopidogrel is associated with nine fewer patient deaths, reinfarctions, or strokes during treatment. In CLARITY-TIMI 28, a well designed supportive study in 3491 adult patients with STEMI, clopidogrel plus aspirin reduced the odds that a composite primary endpoint event of an occluded infarct-related artery, recurrent myocardial infarction, or death from any cause would occur versus aspirin plus placebo. Clopidogrel treatment was generally well tolerated in these clinical trials, with no significant between-group difference in the rate of major bleeding in either trial. Experience in other patient populations (e.g. those with recent myocardial infarction, recent ischemic stroke, or established peripheral arterial disease) has shown that longer-term (< or =3 years) clopidogrel monotherapy is generally well tolerated.     

Clopidogrel: a review of its use in the prevention of thrombosis

Clopidogrel (Plavix), Iscover) selectively and irreversibly inhibits adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation. Long-term administration of clopidogrel was associated with a modest but statistically significant advantage over aspirin in reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with established cardiovascular disease in the CAPRIE trial. In other large well designed multicentre trials, such as CURE, COMMIT and CLARITY-TIMI 28, the addition of clopidogrel to aspirin therapy improved outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, some issues regarding the use of clopidogrel remain unresolved, such as the optimal loading dose in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and the optimal treatment duration following drug-eluting intracoronary stent placement. Results of several large randomised trials, therefore, have established clopidogrel as an effective and well tolerated antiplatelet agent for the secondary prevention of ischaemic events in patients with various cardiovascular conditions, including those with ischaemic stroke or acute coronary syndromes. In addition, treatment guidelines from the US and Europe acknowledge the importance of clopidogrel in contemporary cardiovascular medicine.     

Secondary stroke prevention: inside the vessels and beyond

Cerebral ischaemic stroke is frequently a relapsing, if not chronic, disease. Its incidence is age-dependent, and with the ageing of society the need for effective therapies increases.This review considers current and alternative hypotheses underlying secondary prevention of stroke. Currently, secondary stroke prevention is widely practiced with aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), a drug that has been in use for more than 100 years. Newer drugs such as ticlopidine and clopidogrel have subsequently been developed, but their efficacy barely surpasses that of aspirin. Other drugs used in secondary stroke prevention include HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors and antihypertensive agents.The endovascular paradigm has shaped the thinking of secondary stroke prevention, and aspirin, ticlopidine and clopidogrel are known as 'platelet inhibitors'; however, their pharmacological and clinical effects are not fully explained within the platelet paradigm. Moreover, in recent years, reduction of stroke incidence has also been observed with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, regardless of their lipid-lowering effects. Hence, current understanding needs to be supplemented by considering mechanisms beyond platelet inhibition. Evidence has shown that aspirin, ticlopidine and clopidogrel share neuroprotective properties not explained by the platelet paradigm and that are reminiscent of a preconditioning effect. This neuroprotective mechanism is also shared with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors.     

Clopidogrel: a CURE in acute coronary syndromes?

The standard approach to preventing acute coronary syndromes (ACSs)has been to inhibit platelet aggregation with aspirin and to inhibit blood coagulation with low molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Even with this combination there is still a substantial short and long-term cardiovascular risk. The Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial [1] compared clopidogrel plus aspirin against aspirin alone in patients with ACSs. The clopidogrel regimen was a loading dose of 300 mg p.o. followed by 75 mg/day and the recommended dose of aspirin was 75 - 325 mg/day. The first primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke and this occurred significantly less often in the clopidogrel than the placebo group (9.3 vs. 11.4%). Although there were more clopidogrel patients with life-threatening bleeding (clopidogrel 2.2%, placebo 1.8%), this represented GI haemorrhages and bleeding at sites of arterial puncture rather than fatal bleeding. This trial suggests a role for clopidogrel in the long-term treatment of ACSs.     

Ticlopidine. An updated review of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in platelet-dependent disorders

Ticlopidine inhibits platelet aggregation induced by adenosine diphosphate (ADP) and most other platelet agonists in ex vivo studies of human platelets. The drug also improves other abnormalities of platelet function seen in patients with cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, ischaemic heart disease or other conditions involving platelet hyperaggregation. Abnormal platelet activity has been implicated in a variety of clinical conditions in which patients are at high risk of thromboembolic events, and thus the effectiveness of ticlopidine has been investigated in such patients. Since the initial review of the drug appeared in the Journal, data from several large multicentre studies have shown that ticlopidine has a substantial benefit to offer patients who have experienced transient ischaemic attacks or stroke, and in those with peripheral arterial disease or ischaemic heart disease. Ticlopidine reduces the incidence of further stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death, and is superior to placebo and aspirin in this regard in studies of patients with recent stroke or transient ischaemic attacks, or intermittent claudication. Ticlopidine is equally effective in both men and women and also improves symptoms of claudication in patients with peripheral arterial disease, and appears to reduce anginal pain. Patients with subarachnoid haemorrhage and sickle cell disease have shown some improvement with ticlopidine administration. The drug reduces thromboembolic events and re-stenosis in patients undergoing haemodialysis and cardiac surgery, and appears to prevent the progression of nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ticlopidine in large clinical trials is associated with a higher incidence of adverse effects than placebo and an overall incidence similar to aspirin. Most adverse effects do not require withdrawal of treatment. Gastrointestinal symptoms (particularly diarrhoea) are most common, occurring almost twice as frequently with ticlopidine as with aspirin. Other adverse effects associated with ticlopidine include skin rash, haemorrhagic disorders, and haematological effects; these latter effects require careful monitoring of patients during the initial weeks of therapy. In conclusion, ticlopidine is a valuable addition to the prophylactic treatments available for the management of patients with cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease or ischaemic heart disease, who present a high risk of thromboembolic events. Although tolerability may be a problem for some patients, the overall benefit conferred by the drug would appear to outweigh this potential disadvantage. Because of its antiplatelet activity, ticlopidine has a promising role in other disorders mediated by platelet dysfunction. However, the precise role of the drug in these additional therapeutic indications awaits clarification with wider clinical experience.     

Antiplatelet therapy in peripheral arterial disease

Antiplatelet therapy significantly reduces the incidence of vascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and intermittent claudication, in patients undergoing peripheral grafting, in patients undergoing peripheral angioplasty, and in patients with carotid disease. Aspirin, aspirin plus dipyridamole, ticlodipine, and clopidogrel have been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of PAD. Data from the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk for Ischaemic Events (CAPRIE) trial demonstrated in 11,592 patients with PAD that patients randomized to clopidogrel 75 mg daily had a 24% significant (p=0.0028) reduction in vascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke than patients randomized to aspirin 325 mg daily. These data favor the use of clopidogrel in patients with PAD.     

Prevention of coronary heart disease with aspirin and clopidogrel: efficacy, safety, costs and cost-effectiveness

Atherothrombotic coronary artery disease is the single most common cause of death worldwide and a growing public health problem. Platelets play a central role in the pathogenesis of atherothrombosis and are therefore commonly targeted by one or more antiplatelet drugs as part of primary and secondary atherothrombosis prevention strategies. Aspirin reduces the risk of serious vascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death) by approximately 20% in a broad range of high-risk patients and remains the first-line antiplatelet drug because of its relative safety, low cost and cost-effectiveness. Compared with aspirin alone, clopidogrel reduces the risk of serious vascular events by approximately 10% and the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel reduces the risk by approximately 20% in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. Clopidogrel has a similar safety profile to aspirin but clopidogrel tablets are substantially more expensive. However, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of clopidogrel compared with aspirin is favourable, particularly in high-risk patients and is intermediate compared with a range of other effective therapeutic strategies for the treatment of coronary heart disease. Clopidogrel should be considered as a replacement for aspirin in patients who are allergic to aspirin, cannot tolerate aspirin, have experienced a recurrent atherothrombotic vascular event whilst taking aspirin and are at very high absolute risk of a serious vascular event (e.g., > 20%/year). The combination of clopidogrel and aspirin should be considered in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.     

Comparative safety and tolerability of clopidogrel and aspirin: results from CAPRIE. CAPRIE Steering Committee and Investigators. Clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive comparison of the long term safety and tolerability of clopidogrel, a new adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor antagonist that inhibits platelet activation induced by ADP, and aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised 19,185 patients with symptomatic atherosclerosis manifested as recent ischaemic stroke, recent myocardial infarction or symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Patients were randomised to receive clopidogrel 75 mg/day or aspirin 325 mg/day for a minimum of 1 year and a maximum of 3 years. RESULTS: Compared with aspirin, clopidogrel reduced the combined risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death by 8.7% (p = 0.043). The incidence of early permanent discontinuations of the study drug due to adverse events was almost identical in both treatment groups (11.94% for clopidogrel vs 11.92% for aspirin). Reported neutropenia was similar in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups (0.10 vs 0.17%, respectively) with corresponding rates (0.05 vs 0.04%, respectively) for severe neutropenia. Thrombocytopenia was identical in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups (0.26%), with the rates of severe thrombocytopenia being 0.19 vs 0.10%, respectively. None of these observed differences was statistically significant. The overall incidence of haemorrhagic events did not differ statistically significantly between treatment groups (9.27% for clopidogrel vs 9.28% for aspirin; p = 0.98). There was a trend towards a lower incidence of intracranial haemorrhage in the clopidogrel group (0.31%) compared with the aspirin group (0.42%). Any reported gastrointestinal haemorrhage was significantly less frequent with clopidogrel (1.99%) than with aspirin (2.66%) [p < 0.002]. The corresponding data for severe gastrointestinal bleeding were 0.49 vs 0.71%; p < 0.05. Overall, there were significantly fewer gastrointestinal adverse events with clopidogrel than with aspirin (27.1 vs 29.8%; p < 0.001), with less abdominal pain, dyspepsia, constipation, or peptic, gastric, or duodenal ulceration with clopidogrel. Diarrhoea was significantly more common in the clopidogrel group (4.46 vs 3.36%; p < 0.001), although the incidence of severe diarrhoea (0.23 vs 0.11%) was low and was not significantly different between groups. There were significantly more patients with rash in the clopidogrel group (6.0%) compared with the aspirin group (4.6%) [p < 0.001]. However, these events were generally mild and transient in nature. CONCLUSION: Given the favourable benefit/risk ratio, clopidogrel represents a clinically important advance in the treatment of patients with manifest atherosclerotic disease.     

Antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of recurrent stroke and other serious vascular events: a review of the clinical trial data and guidelines

ABSTRACT

Background: One strategy of reducing the burden of stroke is the prevention of recurrent stroke, following an initial ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) of arterial origin, by means of antiplatelet therapy.

Scope: This review article surveys and discusses the current clinical trial data and guidelines for the use of antiplatelet therapy in the prevention of recurrent stroke/TIA of arterial origin (not stroke due to atrial fibrillation). Based on the latest available evidence, a new antiplatelet treatment algorithm for the long-term treatment of patients following atherothromboembolic ischaemic stroke or TIA is proposed.

Findings: Meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials in patients with TIA and ischaemic stroke of arterial origin indicate that, compared with control, the relative risk reduction (RRR) for recurrent stroke and other serious vascular events is 13% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6% to 19%) with aspirin, 13% (4% to 21%; p = 0.046) with dipyridamole and 34% (24% to 43%) with the combination of aspirin and dipyridamole. Compared with aspirin, the relative risk of recurrent stroke and other serious vascular events is reduced by 7.3% (95% CI –5.7% to 18.7%) with clopidogrel and 18% (9% to 26%; p = 0.0003) with the combination of aspirin and dipyridamole. The combination of aspirin and clopidogrel is not significantly more effective in preventing serious vascular events than clopidogrel alone (RRR 6.4%; –4.6% to 16.3%) in the long-term treatment of patients with previous ischaemic stroke and TIA, mainly because of a cumulative excess of bleeding complications. The relative risks and benefits of long-term treatment with clopidogrel and the combination of aspirin and dipyridamole are being compared in an ongoing large clinical trial (PRoFESS). Current Australian therapeutic guidelines for antiplatelet therapy among patients with TIA and ischaemic stroke of arterial origin have incorporated important new findings from recently published clinical trials and recommend aspirin or the combination of dipyridamole plus aspirin as the preferred long-term antiplatelet therapy.

Conclusion: Whilst awaiting the results of the PRoFESS trial, the combination of dipyridamole plus aspirin is the preferred antiplatelet regimen to reduce the risk of recurrent vascular events among patients with TIA and ischaemic stroke of arterial origin.     

Contemporary issues in clopidogrel therapy: new evidence shaping clinical practice

Antiplatelet therapy is a cornerstone in the management of acute coronary syndromes. Clopidogrel produces irreversible inhibition of the platelet adenosine diphosphate receptor, thereby attenuating activation and aggregation of platelets. Clopidogrel has been shown to prevent stent thrombosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and reduces major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI). Recent studies have left clinicians with many questions regarding the role and dosing regimens of clopidogrel in STEMI, PCI, and primary or secondary prevention. Based on an analysis of the data, clopidogrel should be given in addition to aspirin and fibrinolytic therapy to patients with STEMI. In patients undergoing PCI, a loading dose of clopidogrel 600 mg should be given if the procedure needs to be performed within 15 hours of initial presentation. If PCI can be delayed for 15 hours or more, a loading dose of 300 mg can be used. Evidence also suggests that clopidogrel should not be prescribed for primary prevention in high-risk patients.     

Safety of clopidogrel and aspirin for stroke prevention: implications of the CHARISMA trial.

Antiplatelet therapy is universally recommended for the prevention of recurrent events in patients with noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), acute and chronic coronary artery disease, or peripheral arterial disease. However, choosing which antiplatelet agents to use in these situations remains controversial. The use of aspirin, aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole, or clopidogrel is recommended as initial therapy in patients with noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke or TIA to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular events. Based on the results of the MATCH trial, combination therapy with aspirin plus clopidogrel is not recommended for patients with ischaemic stroke or TIA due to the increased risk of haemorrhage.The results of the CHARISMA trial support this recommendation; despite previous data demonstrating a favourable benefit-risk profile of aspirin plus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome, this combination should not be used in patients at high risk for atherothrombosis and those with previous stroke or TIA. In these patients, the CHARISMA trial demonstrated a lack of significant clinical efficacy and an increased risk of bleeding with clopidogrel plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone.Further research is needed to assess the benefit-risk ratio of clopidogrel plus aspirin in specific subpopulations of patients at high risk for atherothrombotic events, and to determine the role of clopidogrel plus aspirin in preventing cardioembolic stroke or early recurrent stroke after symptomatic large-vessel atherostenosis. Recent and ongoing studies are seeking to better define the roles of different antiplatelet regimens in preventing recurrent stroke.     

Clopidogrel and acute coronary syndrome

Clopidogrel (Plavix-Sanofi-Synthelabo & Bristol-Myers Squibb) blocks platelet aggregation through an action distinct from that of aspirin. In the UK, it is licensed for the secondary prevention of atherosclerotic events and for this, we concluded 3 years ago that clopidogrel "appears to offer no worthwhile advantage over aspirin". After publication of the CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events) trial, which assessed adjunctive use of clopidogrel with aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation (unstable angina or non-Q wave infarction), clopidogrel was hailed in the lay media as "the biggest breakthrough in 20 years". Do the CURE study results warrant the use of clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation (currently an unlicensed indication)?