CYP2C19*2、*3基因多态性与氯吡格雷临床疗效相关性的系统评价

目的系统评价心血管疾病患者中植入支架后服用氯吡格雷抗血小板作用效果受CYP2C19*2、*3基因多态性的影响程度,以期为其安全使用提供证据。方法计算机检索EMbase、PubMed、e Cochrane Library、Clinical Trial、CBM以及CNKI数据库,查找有关心血管疾病患者携带CYP2C19*2、*3基因与氯吡格雷疗效关系的观察性研究和临床试验,检索时限均从建库截至2011年11月。对符合条件的研究,由2位研究者按照纳入和排除标准,独立筛选文献、提取资料、评价质量,并交叉核对后,采用RevMan 5.1软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入13篇文献,包含14个研究(n=36 855)。Meta分析结果显示:植入支架后服用氯吡格雷,CYP2C19*2、*3和CYP2C19*1基因携带者的心血管事件及出血事件发生率差异均无统计学意义,但CYP2C19*2、*3基因携带者植入支架后发生血栓的危险较CYP2C19*1基因携带者明显增加(P<0.000 1),其在1个月内发生支架植入后血栓的相对危险度较CYP2C19*1基因携带者增加了92%(P<0.000 1)。结论在植入支架后使用氯吡格雷的心血管疾病患者中,CYP2C19*2、*3基因携带者比CYP2C19*1基因携带者更易发生支架后血栓,但心血管事件和出血事件发生率相当。鉴于CYP2C19*2、*3基因携带者在植入支架后1个月内形成血栓的风险更大,因此,对拟行PCI手术并用氯吡格雷的患者,我们建议先测CYP2C19基因型,再考虑是否应用氯吡格雷抗血小板预防血栓。     

MALDI-TOFMS在氯吡格雷基因多态性检测中的应用

目的探讨基因多态性与氯吡格雷个体化用药的相关性及基质辅助激光解析电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF MS)在氯吡格雷基因多态性检测中的应用价值。方法选取2015-2017年武警重庆总队医院住院的急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)及拟进行经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)的患者160例,在氯吡格雷抗血小板治疗后第5天测定血小板聚集率;同时采用MALDI-TOF MS技术检测CYP2C19*2*、CYP2C19*3、CYP2C19*4、CYP2C19*5、CYP2C19*17和ABCBI、PON1、CES1基因多态性。结果根据血小板最大聚集率(MAR)将研究对象分为氯吡格雷抵抗(CR)组(n=75)和非氯吡格雷抵抗(NCR)组(n=85)。160份样本等位基因检出率为100%,两组均未发现CYP2C19*4、CYP2C19*5、CYP2C19*17突变;携带CYP2C19*2等位基因A及CYP2C19*1/*2、CYP2C19*1/*3、CYP2C19*2/*2、CYP2C19*2/*3代谢型发生氯吡格雷抵抗的风险较高,携带ABCB1等位基因A的GA、AA代谢型发生氯吡格雷抵抗风险较高,携带PON1等位基因T的CT、TT代谢型发生氯吡格雷抵抗的风险较高,携带CES1等位基因T的CT、TT代谢型发生氯吡格雷抵抗的风险较低,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05);携带CYP2C19*3等位基因A发生氯吡格雷抵抗风险较高,CYP2C19*3/*3型发生氯吡格雷的风险较低,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 CYP2C19*2、ABCBI、PON1基因突变增加氯吡格雷抵抗的风险,CES1基因突变降低氯吡格雷抵抗风险;MALDI-TOF MS具有准确性高、检测通量大、速度快、成本低等特点,适用于氯吡格雷基因多态性检测,指导临床个体化用药。     

冠心病合并高血压患者CYP2C19基因多态性与氯吡格雷抵抗的研究

目的研究冠心病合并高血压患者CYP2C19基因多态性及不同基因型与氯吡格雷抵抗(CR)的关系。方法纳入确诊冠心病患者104例,分为合并高血压组及不合并高血压组,入院治疗上均予以氯吡格雷75 mg联合阿司匹林100 mg抗血小板治疗,留取患者静脉血标本,通过基因芯片法测定CYP2C19基因型,检测入院后次日以及服药5 d血小板聚集率,观察合并高血压组及不合并高血压CYP2C19不同基因型分布及两组氯吡格雷抵抗情况。结果冠心病合并高血压与不合并高血压患者相比,氯吡格雷CYP2C19代谢基因型在两组中分布差异无统计学意义(P=0.135),且两组CR的发生率差异无统计学意义。对CYP2C19基因多态性进行分组,结果发现慢代谢型组及中等代谢型组较快代谢型氯吡格雷抵抗的发生率增高(P0.05),且慢代谢发生CR率显著增高。冠心病合并高血压患者logistic多元回归分析提示CYP2C19基因是CR发生的独立预测因子。结论冠心病患者CYP2C19基因多态性及CR发生率与是否合并高血压无关,但CR和CYP2C19基因多态性显著相关。     

CYP2C19基因多态性对冠心病PCI术后氯吡格雷抵抗的影响及替代治疗方案的比较

目的探讨CYP2C19基因多态性对冠心病经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)术后抗血小板治疗的影响及替代治疗方案的选择。方法选取2016年4月至2017年4月在我院治疗的冠心病患者90例,采用PCR扩增片段长度多态性检测患者CYP2C19基因型分布,散射比浊法检测血小板聚集率;将氯吡格雷抵抗(CR)患者随机分为氯吡格雷双倍剂量组(150mg/d,1个月后减量为75mg/d)和替格瑞洛组(90mg/d,每日2次),观察两组治疗后血小板抑制率和不良心血管事件发生率。结果 90例患者中,CYP2C19~*1/~*1患者28例,CYP2C19~*1/~*2患者48例,CYP2C19~*2/~*2患者8例,CYP2C19~*2/~*3患者6例;野生型组CR发生比例为21.43%,明显低于非野生型组的66.13%(P0.05);替格瑞洛组术后12个月血小板抑制率为(55.03±9.10)%,明显高于氯吡格雷双倍剂量组(P0.05);替格瑞洛组术后12个月不良心血管事件发生率为0.00%,明显低于氯吡格雷双倍剂量组的24.00%,差异比较有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 CYP2C19基因多态性与冠心病PCI术后氯吡格雷抵抗有关;氯吡格雷抵抗患者应用替格瑞洛具有较好的效果。     

血栓弹力图检测氯吡格雷药效与CYP2C19基因型的相关性分析

目的研究临床血栓弹力图检测氯吡格雷药效与CYP2C19基因型的相关性及对PCI术后氯吡格雷治疗的指导意义。方法选择2016年12月至2017年4月于我院心血管内科行PCI治疗的冠心病且术后阿司匹林和氯吡格雷双联抗血小板药物治疗的患者共230例,检测患者血栓弹力图检测结果及CYP2C19的基因型,比较氯吡格雷抵抗组和氯吡格雷敏感组患者的血小板抑制率与CYP2C19基因型的相关性。结果本实验受试者为230人,其中,氯吡格雷抵抗组(94例)和氯吡格雷敏感组(136例); CYP2C19基因型为慢代谢型(107例),非慢代谢型(快代谢型+中间代谢型)共(123例)。利用血栓弹力图测定的ADP抑制率及MA-ADP相关结果,预测CYP2C19基因型的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为:ADP抑制率:0. 663(95%CI:0. 598—0. 723,P0. 001),当ADP抑制率取最佳临界值(31. 26%)时,诊断CYP2C19基因型为慢代谢型的敏感性为80. 49%,特异性为50. 77%; MA-ADP:0. 635(95%CI:0. 570—0. 697,P0. 001),当MA-ADP取最佳临界值(26. 35)时,诊断CYP2C19基因型为慢代谢型的敏感性为56. 10%,特异性为70. 26%。结论血栓弹力图所得ADP抑制率及MA-ADP与CYP2C19慢代谢型有较好的相关性,对指导PCI术后的抗血小板治疗指导意义。     

PCI术后6月氯吡格雷反应与CYP2C19基因多态性关系的研究

氯吡格雷在临床中的应用比较广泛,它属于抗血小板药物,通常同阿司匹林联合使用。患者行PCI（经皮冠状动脉介入治疗）术后,通过使用氯吡格雷,有利于控制心血管疾病发生率,防止支架内血栓的形成[1]。就抗血板药物而言,患者的反应存在个体差异,部分患者用药之后,可能未充分抑制血小板,难以取得理想效果[2]。CYP2C19属于红细胞色素P450的主要代谢酶之一,在氯吡格雷氧化代谢作用中,CYP2C19是关键。本文主要分析PCI术后6月氯吡格雷反应与CYP2C19基因多态性关系,现将研究情况报告如下。     

支架置入冠状动脉分叉病变后的生物相容性

背景:通过检测CYP2C19基因分型可评估冠状动脉内支架置入患者对氯吡格雷反应性的高低,但目前国内尚缺乏通过检测CYP2C19基因分型指导分叉病变部位支架置入后抗血小板治疗的临床应用。目的:根据CYP2C19基因分型结果,优化冠状动脉分叉病变支架置入后抗血小板治疗方案的效果。方法:纳入136例冠状动脉分叉病变支架置入患者,于支架置入前进行阿司匹林联合氯吡格雷抗血小板治疗,7 d后检测CYP2C19基因分型。若CYP2C19基因分型为*1/*1的作为合格组,支架置入后服用氯吡格雷75 mg/d;若CYP2C19基因分型为*2/*2、*2/*3、*3/*3的作为不合格组,再随机分为2组,一组为常规剂量组,支架置入后即保持氯吡格雷75 mg/d治疗不变,另一组为大剂量组,即增加氯吡格雷剂量为150 mg/d长期服用。随访9个月记录主要心脏不良事件和出血事件发生情况。结果与结论:发生主要心脏不良事件14例中,合格组6例(7.9%)、常规剂量组6例(17.7%)、大剂量组2例(7.7%),合格组发生率明显低于常规剂量组(P<0.05),提示CYP2C19基因分型有较好预测主要心脏不良事件的价值;大剂量组发生率明显小于常规剂量组(P<0.05),说明在CYP2C19基因分型监测下增加抗血小板药物剂量,能明显降低主要心脏不良事件的发生率;大剂量组发生率与合格组比较差异无显著性意义(P>0.05),提示通过检测CYP2C19基因分型,优化氯吡格雷剂量可达到与合格组相同的临床效果。3组出血事件发生率比较差异无显著性意义(P>0.05),提示通过检测CYP2C19基因分型抗血小板治疗不会增加出血风险。     

CYP2C19基因多态性与冠心病患者氯吡格雷疗效的相关性研究

目的对CYP2C19基因多态性与冠心病患者氯吡格雷疗效的相关性进行分析探讨,为今后的临床工作,提供有价值的参考信息。方法选取2015年1月至2016年1月该院收治的,拟接受经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)进行治疗的冠心病患者128例作为研究对象,对其均开展氯吡格雷治疗,负荷剂量为300mg,维持剂量为75mg,将受试者分成氯吡格雷抵抗组与反应组,对比两组患者药物代谢CYP2C19基因型,观察CYP2C19基因型对氯吡格雷反应性的影响。结果该组受试者中,氯吡格雷抵抗者27例,检出CYP2C19慢代谢基因型携带者共计16例,慢代谢基因型患者VASP-PRI与快代谢基因型、中间代谢基因型患者比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);氯吡格雷抵抗组与氯吡格雷反应组临床不良终点事件发生率比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论氯吡格雷抵抗的危险因素中,包括CYP2C19慢代谢基因型,氯吡格雷抵抗会使临床不良终点事件发生风险增加,临床应对其给予足够的重视。     

YP2C19基因多态性与中国北方地区人群缺血性脑卒中氯吡格雷抵抗的相关性研究

目的调查CYP2C19基因多态性与中国北方人群缺血性脑卒中患者氯吡格雷抵抗(CR)的相关性。方法选取2015年9月至2016年11月入住呼和浩特市第一医院并留取基因血标本、临床诊断为缺血性脑卒中的患者作为研究对象;用Taqman探针法检测CYP2C19基因多态性。结果所研究人群的氯比格雷抵抗的比例为59%,CYP2C19*2突变株与氯比格雷抵抗有强相关性(P=0.006),而且发现糖尿病、高血压、吸烟饮酒、C反应蛋白(CRP)及天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶(AST)增高与氯比格雷抵抗有相关性。结论携带CYP2C19*2等位基因的患者在抗血栓治疗时发生氯比格雷抵抗的风险更大,有糖尿病、高血压、吸烟饮酒史及CRP、AST增高的危险因素患者,发生CR的风险更大。     

冠心病患者CYP2C19基因多态性及临床不良事件发生与氯吡格雷抵抗的关系

目的通过分析经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)术后冠心病患者的CYP2C19基因型结果、临床相关危险因素和主要心血管不良事件发生情况与氯吡格雷抵抗的关系,探讨影响氯吡格雷抵抗发生、发展的因素,为临床治疗提供有效依据。方法收集2017年1月至2018年12月该院收治并进行过基因检测的346例冠心病患者资料,分析其CYP2C19基因型和代谢型分布特征,筛选出251例使用氯吡格雷的PCI术后冠心病患者,进行血小板聚集功能试验检测,根据血小板最大聚集率(MAR)分为氯吡格雷敏感组(MAR<50%)和氯吡格雷抵抗组(MAR≥50%)。利用荧光PCR法进行CYP2C19基因多态性检测,根据基因型结果分为快代谢型(*1/*1)、中代谢型(*1/*2、*1/*3)和慢代谢型(*2/*2、*2/*3、*3/*3)。比较氯吡格雷抵抗组与氯吡格雷敏感组不同代谢型的患者比例、相关危险因素情况及临床心血管不良事件发生情况。结果慢代谢型患者的MAR较中代谢型、快代谢型患者高,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。入选的251例患者中,氯吡格雷抵抗组CYP2C19代谢型分别为快代谢型38例(34.5%)、中代谢型57例(51.8%)、慢代谢型15例(13.6%),氯吡格雷抵抗组与氯吡格雷敏感组在快代谢型中的患者比例差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。氯吡格雷抵抗组的高血压患者比例(91.8%)与氯吡格雷敏感组(63.8%)比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。氯吡格雷抵抗组临床心血管不良事件发生率(94.5%)高于氯吡格雷敏感组(84.4%),差异有统计学意义(P <0.05)。结论CYP2C19基因突变和高血压可能是氯吡格雷抵抗发生的两个重要影响因素,并且氯吡格雷抵抗增加了PCI术后冠心病患者临床心血管不良事件发生的风险。     

Relationship between cytochrome P450 2C19*2 polymorphism and stent thrombosis following percutaneous coronary intervention in Chinese patients receiving clopidogrel

This study investigated the relationship between the cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) *2 polymorphism (681A) and definite stent thrombosis (ST) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and receiving clopidogrel (75 mg/day, orally). The CYP2C19*2 polymorphism status of 1738 Chinese patients with coronary artery disease was examined. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of definite ST during the 180-day follow-up period. The presence of at least one CYP2C19*2 allele was significantly associated with increased ST risk (19 CYP2C19*2/*2 or *1/*2 patients [2.4%] versus seven homozygous wild-type CYP2C19*1/*1 patients [0.75%]). The risk of definite ST was highest in patients with the CYP2C19*2/*2 genotype. The CYP2C19*2 genotype is associated with an increased risk of definite ST following coronary stent placement among Chinese patients with coronary artery disease receiving clopidogrel.     

DNA微阵列芯片法与直接测序法检测CYP2C19基因型的比较研究

目的 用DNA微阵列芯片法和直接测序法两种方法检测氯吡格雷相关基因CYP2C19的突变情况,并进行比较分析。同时将基因型检测结果与临床资料进行分析,初步探讨CYP2C19基因型检测在氯吡格雷用药治疗中的临床意义。方法收集180例诊断为急性冠脉综合症并首次接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗术(PCI)的全血标本。其中90例患者术后服用氯吡格雷之前,采用DNA微阵列芯片法和DNA直接测序法检测CYP2C19突变位点,确定其基因型。另外90例对照组患者使用氯吡格雷药物但不检测CYP2C19基因型。分析两组患者随访过程中发生冠脉血栓事件的差异。结果 ①两种检测方法准确度比较:在试验组90例患者中,DNA微阵列芯片法和DNA测序法均检出4种基因型组合:*1/*1(636GG,681GG),*1/*2(636GG,681GA),*2/*2(636GG,681AA)和*1/*3(636GA,681GG),分布频率分别为44例(48.9%),36例(40%),5例(5.6%)和5例(5.6%),而*3/*3(636AA,681GG)和*2/*3(636GA,681GA)未检测到。两种方法的准确度完全一致。②将检测结果与临床资料进行相关性分析:经CYP2C19基因型指导氯吡格雷用药的患者发生支架冠脉血栓事件的比例(0%)明显低于对照组(3.33%,P<0.05)。结论①DNA微阵列芯片法灵敏度和准确度与DNA直接测序法(金标准方法)检测相符率为100%。②DNA微阵列芯片法是一种快速、准确发现CYP2C19突变位点,鉴别CYP2C19基因型的检测方法。③检测结果与临床相关性分析结果显示基因型指导氯吡格雷用药有助于患者用药剂量的调整,或选用其它抗凝血药物,从而可降低冠脉血栓事件的发生率。     

Predicting clopidogrel response using DNA samples linked to an electronic health record

Variants in ABCB1 and CYP2C19 have been identified as predictors of cardiac events during clopidogrel therapy initiated after myocardial infarction (MI) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In addition, PON1 has recently been associated with stent thrombosis. The reported effects of these variants have not yet been replicated in a real-world setting. We used BioVU, the Vanderbilt DNA repository linked to de-identified electronic health records (EHRs), to find data on patients who were on clopidogrel treatment after an MI and/or a PCI; among these, we identified those who had experienced one or more recurrent cardiac events while on treatment (cases, n = 225) and those who had not experienced any cardiac event while on treatment (controls, n = 468). We found that CYP2C19*2 (hazard ratio (HR) 1.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-2.06, P = 0.003) and ABCB1 (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04-1.57, P = 0.018), but not PON1 (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73-1.12, P = 0.370), were associated with recurrent events. In this population, genetic signals for clopidogrel resistance in ABCB1 and CYP2C19 were replicated, supporting the use of EHRs for pharmacogenomic studies. Our data do not show an association between PON1 and recurrent cardiovascular events.     

Phenotyping vs. genotyping for prediction of clopidogrel efficacy and safety: the PEGASUS‐PCI study

Summary. Background: Prognostic values of genotyping and phenotyping for assessment of clopidogrel responsiveness have been shown in independent studies.Objectives: To compare different assays for prediction of events during long‐term follow‐up.Methods: In this prospective cohort study polymorphisms of CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*17 alleles, vasodilator‐stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation (VASP) assay, multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA), cone and platelet analyser (CPA) and platelet function analyser (PFA‐100) were performed in 416 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The rates of events were recorded during a 12‐month follow‐up.Results: Platelet aggregation by MEA predicted stent thrombosis (2.4%) better (c‐index = 0.90; P < 0.001; sensitivity = 90%; specificity = 83%) than the VASP assay, CPA or PFA‐100 (c‐index < 0.70; P > 0.05; sensitivity < 70%; specificity < 70% for all) or even the CYP2C19*2 polymorphism (c‐index < 0.56; P > 0.05; sensitivity = 30%; specificity = 71%). Survival analysis indicated that patients classified as poor responders by MEA had a substantially higher risk of developing stent thrombosis or MACE than clopidogrel responders (12.5% vs. 0.3%, P < 0.001, and 18.5% vs. 11.3%, P = 0.022, respectively), whereas poor metabolizers (CYP2C19*1/*2 or *2/*2 carriers) were not at increased risks (stent thrombosis, 2.7% vs. 2.5%, P > 0.05; MACE, 13.5% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.556). The incidence of major bleedings (2.6%) was numerically higher in patients with an enhanced vs. poor response to clopidogrel assessed by MEA (4% vs. 0%) or in ultra‐metabolizers vs. regular metabolizers (CYP2C19*17/*17 vs. CYP2C19*1/*1; 9.5% vs. 2%). The classification tree analysis demonstrated that acute coronary syndrome at hospitalization and diabetes mellitus were the best discriminators for clopidogrel responder status.Conclusions: Phenotyping of platelet response to clopidogrel was a better predictor of stent thrombosis than genotyping.     

广东省肇庆地区冠心病患者CYP2C19基因多态性差异性分布

目的 探讨广东省肇庆地区冠心病(CHD)患者CYP2C19基因多态性分布,并比较不同性别和不同地区间CYP2C19基因多态性的分布,为CHD患者抗血小板治疗的个体化用药策略提供理论基础.方法 2019年6月-2020年11月诊断为CHD的501例患者均采用数字荧光分子杂交技术对CYP2C19*2、CYP2C19*3和C...     

Antiplatelets in acute coronary syndrome: personal perspectives

High platelet reactivity (HPR) during dual-antiplatelet therapy is a marker of vascular risk, in particular stent thrombosis, in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Genetic determinants (CYP2C19*2 polymorphism), advanced age, female gender, diabetes and reduced ventricular function are related to a higher risk to develop HPR. In addition, inflammation and increased platelet turnover, as revealed by the elevated percentage of reticulate platelets in patients’ blood, that characterize the acute phase of acute coronary syndrome are associated with HPR. To overcome the limitation of clopidogrel, new antiplatelet agents (prasugrel and ticagrelor) were developed and the demonstration of their superiority over clopidogrel was obtained in the two randomized trials, TRITON TIMI 38 and PLATO. Due to the current possibility not a choice between multiple antiplatelet strategies, the future prospect is to include, in addition to clinical data and classical risk factors, the definition of platelet function during treatment in order to set a tailored therapy.     

Clopidogrel resistance: myth or reality?

Platelets have a central role in the development of arterial thrombosis and subsequent cardiovascular events. An appreciation of this complex process has made antiplatelet therapy the cornerstone of cardiovascular disease management. Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel has been approved for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events and is currently part of the postpercutaneous coronary intervention treatment regimen. However, subacute stent thrombosis continues to occur in 1% to 2% of patients despite dual antiplatelet therapy. Studies have shown interindividual variations in response to clopidogrel, where a cohort of patients seems to be resistant to the antithrombotic effects of clopidogrel. Furthermore, there is an apparent link between clopidogrel resistance and clinical outcomes. Currently, there is neither a universally accepted definition of clopidogrel resistance nor an agreement on the phenomenon's mechanism. This review highlights the origins of clopidogrel resistance, the current problems that exist with its definition, and discusses the future implications and relevant challenges it poses for the clinician.