New perspectives in antiplatelet therapy

Platelet activation is a complex mechanism of response to vascular injury and atherothrombotic disease, leading to thrombus formation. A wide variety of surface receptors -integrins, leucine-rich family receptors, G protein coupled receptors, tyrosine kinase receptors- and intraplatelet molecules support and regulate platelet activation. They are potential targets of antiplatelet therapy for the prevention and treatment of arterial thrombosis. Despite the overall clinical benefit of established antiplatelet drugs targeting cyclooxigenase-1 (COX-1), glycoprotein integrin αIIbβ3, and the purinergic P2Y(12) receptor of adenosine diphosphate, a significant proportion of treated patients continue to experience recurrent ischaemic events. This may be in partly attributed to insufficient inhibition of platelet activation. In addition, it should not be underestimated that these drugs are not immune from bleeding complications. The substantial progress in understating the regulation of platelet activation has played a key role in the development of novel antiplatelet agents. Current examples of drug under development and evaluation include: novel P2Y(12) receptor inhibitors (prasugrel, ticagrelor, cangrelor, and elinogrel), thrombin receptor PAR-1 antagonists (vorapaxar, atopaxar), new integrin glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and inhibitors targeting the thromboxane receptor (TP), phosphodiesterases, the collagen receptor glycoprotein VI, and intraplatelet signalling molecules. This review summarizes the mechanisms of action and current clinical evaluation of these novel antiplatelet agents.     

Antiplatelet therapy: thrombin receptor antagonists

Activated platelets stimulate thrombus formation in response to rupture of an atherosclerotic plaque or endothelial cell erosion, promoting atherothrombotic disease. Multiple pathways contribute to platelet activation. Aspirin, an irreversible inhibitor of thromboxane A2 synthesis, in combination with clopidogrel, an inhibitor of P2Y(12) adenosine diphosphate platelet receptors, represent the current standard-of-care of antiplatelet therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome and for those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Although these agents have demonstrated significant clinical benefit, the increased risk of bleeding and the recurrence of thrombotic events represent substantial limitations. Thrombin is one of the most important platelet activators. The inhibition of protease-activated receptor 1 showed a good safety profile in preclinical studies. In fact, phase II studies with vorapaxar (SCH530348) and atopaxar (E5555) showed no increase of bleeding events in addition to the current standard-of-care of antiplatelet therapy. Although the results of phase III trials for both drugs are awaited, this family is a promising new addition to the current clinical practice for patients with atherothrombotic disease, not only as an alternative, but also as additional therapy.     

Ongoing clinical trials of anti-platelet agents in the management of acute ischaemic coronary syndromes

Acute ischaemic coronary syndromes, the clinical sequelae of thrombosis over a fissured atherosclerotic plaque within the coronary circulation, are the leading cause of death and hospitalisation in Western countries. Platelets are fundamental for the initiation and continuation of thrombosis, and currently available anti-platelet agents such as aspirin significantly improve the clinical outcome of patients with these syndromes. Therapeutic success with available therapy is however not universal, and adverse clinical event rates remain high. Several new classes of agents with a variety of anti-platelet actions are currently under development. Those which inhibit the final common pathway of platelet aggregation, the glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor, appear to show the most promise. Much clinical trial evidence already exists supporting the use of GP IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists in the management of acute ischaemic coronary syndromes. Several clinical studies are underway to further refine this knowledge base, and to assess their efficacy in a variety of novel applications.     

Cilostazol and primary-PCI: mirage or good alternative?

Oral anti-platelet agents targeting the platelet P2Y12 receptor are an integral component of treating patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. Advancements in the design of stents and catheters are pushing the technique towards treatment of high risk lesions whose failure would expose patients to catastrophic events. Success of these complex procedures largely lays on efficacy of anti-platelet drugs and the limitation of stent restenosis and/or thrombosis. Clopidogrel has been the most commonly used agent in this respect worldwide. However, there are certain shortcomings of clopidogrel, the most important of which is the wide response variability of platelet inhibition. Thus, clinicians are facing challenges in treating patients where high inhibition of platelets is necessary and the response to clopidogrel may be insufficient. In the last few years, cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase (PDE) 3 inhibitor, has been tested in the setting of acute coronary syndromes: it exerts not only anti-platelet actions, but also pleiotropic effects, including inhibition on neointimal hyperplasia, therefore preventing both stent restenosis and thrombosis. Therefore, cilostazol may be considered, on top of our current anti-platelet therapy, as a potential candidate to achieve optimal platelet inhibition especially in patients undergoing primary-PCI (p-PCI) or high risk procedures. This review will focus on the pharmacological characteristics of cilostazol and the initial evidences that support the use of this drug in the setting of p-PCI.     

Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Therapy for Atherothrombotic Disease: The Role of Current and Emerging Agents

Coronary atherothrombotic disease, including chronic stable angina and acute coronary syndromes (ACS), is associated with significant global burden. The acute clinical manifestations of atherothrombotic disease are mediated by occlusive arterial thrombi that impair tissue perfusion and are composed of a core of aggregated platelets, generated by platelet activation, and a superimposed fibrin mesh produced by the coagulation cascade. Long-term antithrombotic therapies, namely oral antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, have demonstrated variable clinical effects. Aspirin and P2Y₁₂ adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor antagonists have been shown to reduce the risk for thrombosis and ischaemic events by blocking the thromboxane (Tx) A₂ and platelet P2Y₁₂ activation pathways, respectively, whereas the benefits of oral anticoagulants have not been consistently documented. However, even in the presence of aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist, the risk for ischaemic events remains substantial because platelet activation continues via pathways independent of TxA₂ and ADP, most notably the protease-activated receptor (PAR)-1 platelet activation pathway stimulated by thrombin. Emerging antithrombotic therapies include those targeting the platelet, such as the new P2Y₁₂ antagonists and a novel class of oral PAR-1 antagonists, and those inhibiting the coagulation cascade, such as the new direct factor Xa antagonists, the direct thrombin inhibitors, and a novel class of factor IX inhibitors. The role of emerging antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants in the long-term management of patients with atherothrombotic disease will be determined by the balance of efficacy and safety in large ongoing clinical trials.     

Emerging drugs in the management of hypertension

Hypertension is a global health problem, affecting developing and developed countries alike. Most patients with hypertension are undiagnosed, and most diagnosed patients are either untreated or inadequately treated. Randomised controlled trial evidence suggests diuretic therapy for hypertension is as effective as newer drugs in reducing cardiovascular events. There is good evidence for the use of specific classes of drugs in hypertensive patients with a variety of associated clinical conditions, but for uncomplicated cases, the current emphasis in hypertension management is on blood pressure lowering rather than drug class. Individual patients vary in their responses to different drug classes, and optimal therapy for the individual is determined by trial and error. Pharmacogenomics may assist in tailoring therapy for individuals in the future. Emerging drugs include newer members of classes already established in clinical practice, for example, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, aldosterone receptor antagonists, calcium antagonists and centrally acting drugs; newer fixed-dose combination therapies; and more novel therapies, for example, endothelin (ET) receptor antagonists, activators of nitric oxide (NO)-sensitive guanylyl cyclase and vasopeptidase inhibitors.     

Emerging drugs in the management of hypertension

Hypertension is a global health problem, affecting developing and developed countries alike. Most patients with hypertension are undiagnosed, and most diagnosed patients are either untreated or inadequately treated. Randomised controlled trial evidence suggests diuretic therapy for hypertension is as effective as newer drugs in reducing cardiovascular events. There is good evidence for the use of specific classes of drugs in hypertensive patients with a variety of associated clinical conditions, but for uncomplicated cases, the current emphasis in hypertension management is on blood pressure lowering rather than drug class. Individual patients vary in their responses to different drug classes, and optimal therapy for the individual is determined by trial and error. Pharmacogenomics may assist in tailoring therapy for individuals in the future. Emerging drugs include newer members of classes already established in clinical practice, for example, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, aldosterone receptor antagonists, calcium antagonists and centrally acting drugs; newer fixed-dose combination therapies; and more novel therapies, for example, endothelin (ET) receptor antagonists, activators of nitric oxide (NO)-sensitive guanylyl cyclase and vasopeptidase inhibitors.     

α1-Adrenoceptors and muscarinic receptors in voiding function - binding characteristics of therapeutic agents in relation to the pharmacokinetics

In vivo and ex vivo binding of α(1)-adrenoceptor and muscarinic receptors involved in voiding function is reviewed with therapeutic agents (α(1)-adrenoceptor antagonists: prazosin, tamsulosin and silodosin; and muscarinic receptor antagonists: oxybutynin, tolterodine, solifenacin, propiverine, imiafenacin and darifenacin) in lower urinary tract symptoms. This approach allows estimation of the inhibition of a well-characterized selective (standard) radioligand by unlabelled potential drugs or direct measurement of the distribution and receptor binding of a standard radioligand or radiolabelled form of a novel drug. In fact, these studies could be conducted in various tissues from animals pretreated with radioligands and/or unlabelled novel drugs, by conventional radioligand binding assay, radioactivity measurement, autoradiography and positron emission tomography. In vivo and ex vivo receptor binding with α(1)-adrenoceptor antagonists and muscarinic receptor antagonists have been proved to be useful in predicting the potency, organ selectivity and duration of action of drugs in relation to their pharmacokinetics. Such evaluations of drug-receptor binding reveal that adverse effects could be avoided by the use of new α(1)-adrenoceptor antagonists and muscarinic receptor antagonists for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms. Thus, the comparative analysis of α(1)-adrenoceptor and muscarinic receptor binding characteristics in the lower urinary tract and other tissues after systemic administration of therapeutic agents allows the rationale for their pharmacological characteristics from the integrated viewpoint of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. The current review emphasizes the usefulness of in vivo and ex vivo receptor binding in the discovery and development of novel drugs for the treatment of not only urinary dysfunction but also other disorders.     

The role of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists in elderly patients with hypertension

Hypertension is a major risk factor for stroke and coronary events in elderly people and clinical trials have shown that treatment of hypertension with various drugs can result in a substantial reduction in cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events. The angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonists are the newest class of antihypertensive agents to be used widely in clinical practice. AT1 receptor antagonists can generally be given once-daily. They are also extremely well tolerated with minimal first-dose hypotension and an incidence of adverse effects similar to that seen with placebo. Adverse event rates are significantly lower than with other classes of antihypertensive drugs including ACE inhibitors. These factors result in improved compliance and increased rates of continuance on therapy. AT1 receptor antagonists show similar efficacy in lowering blood pressure to other classes of antihypertensive agents and their antihypertensive effect is potentiated when they are given concomitantly with low-dose thiazide diuretics. AT1 receptor antagonists are eliminated predominantly by the hepatic route but most are not subject to extensive metabolism and interactions with other drugs are uncommon. This is an advantage in the elderly, who are often receiving multiple medications which increases the risk for adverse drug interactions. Dose adjustments are not usually required in the elderly unless there is plasma volume depletion. Although plasma AT1 receptor antagonist concentrations are generally higher in the elderly than in younger subjects, this pharmacokinetic difference may be balanced by decreased activation of the circulating renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in the elderly. Recent clinical studies in high-risk hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy or in patients with diabetic nephropathy or heart failure have demonstrated that AT1 receptor antagonists can improve clinical outcomes to a similar or sometimes greater extent than other antihypertensive agents. Many of these studies have included large numbers of older patients and have confirmed the excellent tolerability profile of these drugs. Thus, AT1 receptor antagonists should be considered as a possible first-line treatment or as a component of combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and microalbuminuria or nephropathy and as an alternative or additional treatment to ACE inhibitors in patients with heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction. AT1 receptor antagonists also appear to reduce the onset of new diabetes compared with some other antihypertensive drugs. The benefits in terms of organ protection have mainly been seen in studies using higher doses of particular AT1 receptor antagonists and it is not certain at present whether these results can be extrapolated to other members of the class. As the elderly are more likely to have developed organ damage related to hypertension or to have heart failure or diabetes as concomitant conditions, AT1 receptor antagonists represent an appropriate option for many elderly patients. The main disadvantage of these drugs is the cost of the medication but this may be offset by their improved tolerability with fewer adverse reactions and thus increased compliance, resulting in better blood pressure control and fewer clinical events. Overall, AT1 receptor antagonists are well tolerated and efficacious for blood pressure-lowering when given as a single daily dose in elderly patients and have many potential benefits in high-risk hypertensive subjects.     

Dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists in the management of hypertension

Dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists have been maligned in recent years because of concerns regarding their cardiovascular and overall safety profile. Specifically, it was widely publicised in the mid-1990s that these agents might increase the risk of myocardial infarction, gastrointestinal bleeding and cancer. Data linking these agents with increased cardiovascular risk were based on nonrandomised studies and implicated short-acting, immediate-release agents. These results were inappropriately extrapolated to longer-acting compounds, extended-release products, and to the non-dihydropyridine class. Fortunately, recent studies have vindicated the class from safety allegations. These studies are reviewed herein. Compared with both diuretics and contemporary agents, amlodipine decreases cardiovascular events to a similar or greater extent without evidence for increased coronary heart disease, gastrointestinal bleeding or cancer. Despite these data, initial concerns have had lasting repercussions, as the use of dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists appears to lag behind what emerging data would support. Dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists have several noteworthy attributes that merit consideration in the management of hypertension. The blood pressure response to this class of drugs is less contingent on patient factors such as age and race compared with other antihypertensive agents (e.g. ACE inhibitors). Dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists may exert effects that protect against stroke that are independent of their blood pressure-lowering mechanism. Unlike diuretics and beta-adrenoceptor anatagonists (beta-blockers), dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists are lipid neutral and do not disturb glucose homeostasis. Dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists demonstrate a highly desirable profile when administered as part of combination therapy. Combinations of dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists and ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists display additive efficacy and an enviable adverse-effect profile. Collectively, the cardiovascular benefit, metabolic neutrality and homogeneous blood pressure response illuminated in recent studies, and reviewed here, represent a reaffirmation of the benefit of long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists and should serve to help reinforce the critical importance of these agents in the therapeutic armamentarium against cardiovascular disease.     

Targeting von Willebrand factor as a novel anti-platelet therapy; Application of ARC1779, an Anti-vWF aptamer, against thrombotic risk

Excessive activation of platelets is a causative factor for thrombotic diseases such as acute coronary syndrome or stroke, and various anti-platelet drugs were developed. Aspirin and clopidogrel have been used as gold standards for anti-platelet therapies, however, their clinical limitations including bleeding problem have increased the demand driving development of novel anti-platelet drugs with new targets. Among several activating pathways leading to platelet aggregation, the interaction between von Willebrand factor (vWF) and glycoprotein Ib, which mainly occurs under high shear stress in arterioles, is recently suggested to be a new promising target. The anti-thrombotic efficacy of anti-vWF agents, such as ARC1779, has been proved in several preclinical and clinical studies. Here, we will discuss the potential benefits of targeting vWF as a novel antiplatelet therapy, providing an insight into the role of vWF in increased thrombotic risk.     

Anti-platelet therapy and aspirin resistance - clinically and chemically relevant?

Platelets play a central role in the pathogenesis of the atherothrombosis which ultimately causes myocardial infarction, stroke and peripheral vascular disease. Commonly used oral anti-platelet drugs include aspirin (an irreversible inhibitor of cyclo-oxygenase), clopidogrel (an ADP receptor antagonist), other thienopyridines such as ticlopidine and prasgruel, and dipyridamole (an inhibitor of adenosine reuptake and platelet phosphodiesterase). Newer agents are in development and one, ticagrelor, a reversible ADP receptor antagonist has shown promise. Despite their proven benefit, recurrent vascular events still occur in those taking anti-platelet drugs. This has led to the concept of anti-platelet resistance, most commonly aspirin resistance as this drug is the cornerstone of most regimens. The causes of aspirin resistance are numerous but potential mechanisms include lack of patient adherence, non COX-1 mediated thromboxane A2 synthesis, increased activity of alternate platelet activation pathways, interference of aspirin action by other drugs and probably pharmacogenetic factors. Measurement of platelet response to aspirin is made possible using a number of in-vitro laboratory assays of platelet function which include measurement of thromboxane A2 metabolites as well as newer point-of-care assays of platelet aggregation. The phenomenon of aspirin resistance is important as it raises the possibility of developing strategies to identify those who respond best to a particular anti-platelet regimen, or to development of newer anti-platelet therapies to which more patients respond. This review discusses important aspects of aspirin resistance both in terms of clinical medicine, alternative anti-platelet strategies, and the potential to overcome its various causes.     

Calcium Channel Antagonists in the Treatment of Hypertension

Calcium channel antagonists are widely used antihypertensive agents. Their popularity among primary care physicians is not only due to their blood pressure-lowering effects, but also because they appear to be effective regardless of the age or ethnic background of the patients. The first available calcium channel antagonists utilized immediate-release formulations which, although effective in patients with angina pectoris, were not approved by the US FDA for use in hypertension. When long-acting once-daily formulations were approved in this indication, the short-acting preparations — which had by then become generic and inexpensive — retained some residual unapproved use for hypertension. An observational case-controlled trial, based on such usage, noted that these agents were associated with a greater risk of myocardial infarctions than conventional agents such as diuretics and β-adrenoceptor antagonists. Further case-controlled trials showed, in fact, that the dangers of calcium channel antagonists were confined to the short-acting agents and that approved long-acting agents were at least as well tolerated and effective as other antihypertensive drugs. Cardiovascular outcomes during treatment with calcium channel antagonists have been examined in randomized, controlled trials. Compared with placebo, the calcium channel antagonists clearly prevented strokes and other cardiovascular events and reduced mortality. The effects of these agents on survival and clinical outcomes were similar to those with other antihypertensive drugs. There is a slight tendency for the calcium channel antagonists to be more effective than other drug types in preventing stroke, but slightly less effective in preventing coronary events. These observations extend to high-risk patients with hypertension including those with diabetes mellitus. Even so, patients with evidence of nephropathy should not receive monotherapy with calcium channel antagonists. Such patients are optimally treated with angiotensin receptor antagonists or ACE inhibitors, although addition of other drugs, including calcium channel antagonists, is often required to achieve the tight blood pressure control necessary to provide adequate renal protection. Calcium channel antagonists have a highly acceptable tolerability profile and careful reviews of available data have shown that their use is not associated with increased bleeding or promotion of tumor formation. It is now recognized that reduction of blood pressure in patients with hypertension to levels often <130/85mm Hg should be undertaken in presence of other cardiovascular risk factors or evidence of end organ damage. Because of this important concept, calcium channel antagonists, like the other antihypertensive drug classes, are progressively being prescribed less often as monotherapy, but more typically as part of combination regimens.     

Corticosteroid resistance and novel anti-inflammatory therapies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: current evidence and future direction

Corticosteroids are widely used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, in contrast to their use in mild-to-moderate asthma, they are much less effective in enhancing lung function and have little or no effect on controlling the underlying chronic inflammation. In most clinical trials in COPD patients, corticosteroids have shown little benefit as monotherapy, but have shown a greater clinical effect in combination with long-acting bronchodilators. Several mechanisms of corticosteroid resistance have been postulated, including a reduction in histone deacetylase (HDAC)-2 activity and expression, impaired corticosteroid activation of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) and increased pro-inflammatory signalling pathways. Reversal of corticosteroid resistance in COPD patients by restoring HDAC2 levels has proved effective in a small study, and long-term studies are needed to determine whether novel HDAC2 activators or theophylline improve disease progression, exacerbations or mortality. Advances in the understanding of the cellular and molecular mechanisms of corticosteroid resistance in COPD pathophysiology have supported the development of new emerging classes of anti-inflammatory drugs in COPD treatment. These include treatments such as inhibitors of phosphoinositide-3-kinase-delta (PI3Kδ), phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4), p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB), and therapeutic agents such as chemokine receptor antagonists. Of these, PI3Kδ, PDE4, p38 MAPK inhibitors and chemokine receptor antagonists are in clinical patient trials. Of importance, patient adverse effects associated with oral administration of these novel agents needs to be addressed in order to optimize therapy and patient compliance. Combinations of these drugs with corticosteroids may have additional benefits.     

Pharmacology and therapeutics of bronchodilators

Bronchodilators are central in the treatment of of airways disorders. They are the mainstay of the current management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and are critical in the symptomatic management of asthma, although controversies around the use of these drugs remain. Bronchodilators work through their direct relaxation effect on airway smooth muscle cells. at present, three major classes of bronchodilators, β(2)-adrenoceptor (AR) agonists, muscarinic receptor antagonists, and xanthines are available and can be used individually or in combination. The use of the inhaled route is currently preferred to minimize systemic effects. Fast- and short-acting agents are best used for rescue of symptoms, whereas long-acting agents are best used for maintenance therapy. It has proven difficult to discover novel classes of bronchodilator drugs, although potential new targets are emerging. Consequently, the logical approach has been to improve the existing bronchodilators, although several novel broncholytic classes are under development. An important step in simplifying asthma and COPD management and improving adherence with prescribed therapy is to reduce the dose frequency to the minimum necessary to maintain disease control. Therefore, the incorporation of once-daily dose administration is an important strategy to improve adherence. Several once-daily β(2)-AR agonists or ultra-long-acting β(2)-AR-agonists (LABAs), such as indacaterol, olodaterol, and vilanterol, are already in the market or under development for the treatment of COPD and asthma, but current recommendations suggest the use of LABAs only in combination with an inhaled corticosteroid. In addition, some new potentially long-acting antimuscarinic agents, such as glycopyrronium bromide (NVA-237), aclidinium bromide, and umeclidinium bromide (GSK573719), are under development, as well as combinations of several classes of long-acting bronchodilator drugs, in an attempt to simplify treatment regimens as much as possible. This review will describe the pharmacology and therapeutics of old, new, and emerging classes of bronchodilator.     

New antithrombotic drugs on the horizon

Venous and arterial thromboembolism are a major cause for morbidity and mortality. The list of established drugs for the prevention of thrombus formation and embolisation includes heparins, hirudin and derivatives, aspirin, ADP and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, as well as vitamin K antagonists. Several limitations exist for these drugs that have stimulated the search for new and better anticoagulants. A series of selective clotting factor Xa inhibitors and direct factor IIa (thrombin) inhibitors are on the horizon, two of which are getting close to broad clinical application. Additional therapeutics that are still under preclinical and clinical investigation include inhibitors of the tissue factor pathway/factor VII complex, clotting factor VIII and XIII inhibitors and modulators of the protein C pathway or of endogenous fibrinolysis, as well as novel antiplatelet drugs. This review is focused on the current status of development of novel antithrombotics and their clinical potential. Even though only a few of a broad array of antithrombotic agents have reached clinical testing, some hold the potential for significant improvement in efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy.     

New antithrombotic drugs on the horizon

Venous and arterial thromboembolism are a major cause for morbidity and mortality. The list of established drugs for the prevention of thrombus formation and embolisation includes heparins, hirudin and derivatives, aspirin, ADP and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, as well as vitamin K antagonists. Several limitations exist for these drugs that have stimulated the search for new and better anticoagulants. A series of selective clotting factor Xa inhibitors and direct factor IIa (thrombin) inhibitors are on the horizon, two of which are getting close to broad clinical application. Additional therapeutics that are still under preclinical and clinical investigation include inhibitors of the tissue factor pathway/factor VII complex, clotting factor VIII and XIII inhibitors and modulators of the protein C pathway or of endogenous fibrinolysis, as well as novel antiplatelet drugs. This review is focused on the current status of development of novel antithrombotics and their clinical potential. Even though only a few of a broad array of antithrombotic agents have reached clinical testing, some hold the potential for significant improvement in efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy.     

Developments in antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndromes and considerations for long-term management

ABSTRACT

Objective: This article reviews the currently available antiplatelet therapies and emerging investigational drugs in the treatment of acutecoronary syndrome (ACS), and considerations for primary and secondary prevention in the long-term management of ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Research design and methods: Primary studies and reviews in the peer-reviewed, English-language literature were identified through searches of MEDLINE (1966–2008) using the terms ‘acute coronary syndrome’, ‘antiplatelet’, ‘aspirin’, ‘long-term management’, ‘P2Y₁₂ receptor’, and ‘thienopyridine’. Additional references were obtained by searching the reference lists of the identified articles. Articles were included if they were recently published and pertinent, patient-focused, and authors were recognized as leaders in the field. Current review is limited by literature search on single database.

Results: Platelets play a major role in atherogenesis and the formation of thrombi, the main events in the pathogenesis of ACS. Although aspirin is an effective antiplatelet agent, efficacy and safety data from a number of randomized clinical trials on atherothrombotic disease support the use of dual antiplatelet therapies such as aspirin and thienopyridines over single antiplatelet therapy for ACS and up to 1?year following ACS. Antiplatelet agents reduce, but do not eliminate, ischemic events after ACS due, in part, to variable individual response (or resistance) in antiplatelet agents, non-compliance, progression of atherosclerosis, modest inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) levels and other factors. Several antiplatelet agents, including novel P2Y₁₂-receptor antagonists and thrombin-receptor antagonists, are currently under investigation for ACS and primary and secondary prevention in the long-term management of patients undergoing PCI.

Conclusions: Current antiplatelet therapies have clinical benefits such as reducing immediate and long-term cardiovascular risk, but substantial residual risk remains indicating a need for new therapeutic agents. Additional large randomized trials are necessary to determine the most appropriate treatment regimens for ACS patients.     

Comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of platelet adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists and their clinical implications

Over the last two decades or more, anti-platelet therapy has become established as a cornerstone in the treatment of patients with ischaemic cardiovascular disease, since such drugs effectively reduce arterial thrombotic events. The original agent used in this context was aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) but, with the advent of adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor antagonists, the use of dual anti-platelet therapy has resulted in further improvement in cardiovascular outcomes when compared with aspirin alone. The first group of platelet ADP receptor antagonists to be developed was the thienopyridine class, which comprise inactive pro-drugs that require in vivo metabolism to their active metabolites before exerting their inhibitory effect on the P2Y(12) receptor. Clopidogrel has been the principal ADP receptor antagonist in use over the past decade, but is limited by variability in its in vivo inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA). The pharmacokinetics of clopidogrel are unpredictable due to their vulnerability to multiple independent factors including genetic polymorphisms. Expression of the 3435T/T genetic variant encoding the MDR1 gene for the P-glycoprotein efflux transporter results in a significantly reduced maximum drug concentration and area under the plasma concentration-time curve as intestinal absorption of clopidogrel is reduced; and the expression of the mutant *2 allele of CYP2C19 results in similar pharmacokinetic effects as the two cytochrome P450 (CYP)-mediated steps required for the production of the active metabolite of clopidogrel are impaired. These variable pharmacokinetics lead to erratic pharmacodynamics and cannot reliably be overcome with increased dosing. Both prasugrel, a third-generation thienopyridine, and ticagrelor, a cyto-pentyl-triazolo-pyrimidine, have more predictable pharmacokinetics and enhanced pharmacodynamics than clopidogrel. Neither appears to be affected by the same genetic polymorphisms as clopidogrel; prasugrel requires only a single CYP-mediated step to produce its active metabolite and ticagrelor is not a pro-drug. Enhanced IPA by both prasugrel and ticagrelor is achieved at the expense of increased major bleeding, although this is partially mitigated in the case of ticagrelor due to its reversible IPA. However, the reversible binding of ticagrelor to the P2Y(12) receptor requires a twice-daily dosing regimen. Due to limited data from clinical studies, the use of prasugrel is currently restricted to individuals undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention who are ≤75 years old and have a body weight ≥60 kg. The clinical data for ticagrelor are more comprehensive and this drug therefore has a place in the management of patients with acute coronary syndrome at moderate-to-high risk of ischaemic events, irrespective of treatment strategy. Here we review in detail the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor, and explore the implications of the differences in these parameters for their clinical use.