Platelet reactivity tests for assessing antiplatelet drug response: what the clinician needs to know

Antiplatelet therapy is a cornerstone in the treatment of cardiovascular disease to prevent ischemic events. Various tests have become clinically available to measure platelet function after antiplatelet treatment. A wide interpatient variability in the magnitude of platelet inhibition has been demonstrated in numerous studies, especially in response to clopidogrel. Several reasons including clinical, pharmacological and genetic factors have been identified. High on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity has been linked to adverse clinical outcome, in particular to stent thrombosis after percutaneous coronary interventions. New antiplatelet drugs including prasugrel and ticagrelor have been advocated to overcome the limitations of clopidogrel. Several studies addressed the concept of tailored antiplatelet treatment according to the results of platelet function testing. Within this review, we summarize the current status of personalized antiplatelet therapy for cardiovascular disease.     

Assessing post-treatment platelet reactivity: a focus on patient selection and setting

Dual antiplatelet therapy is critical to inhibit platelet reactivity in order to prevent ischemic reccurences in stented patients. However, studies have observed a variable blockade of the P2Y12 adenosine diphosphate receptor between patients following clopidogrel intake. This interindividual variability in the biological response is not uncommon with clopidogrel (about 50%) and even prasugrel (20%). High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) is correlated with thrombotic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Several studies suggested that tailoring of antiplatelet therapy based on platelet reactivity (PR) monitoring could safely reduce the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events in HTPR patients. In addition, low on-treatment PR was recently associated with bleeding events both in patients treated with prasugrel and clopidogrel. Of importance, bleedings are associated with a poor prognosis in stented patients. Overall, the potential of PR monitoring to individualize antiplatelet therapy might benefit stented patients by reducing both ischemic and bleeding risks. However, such strategies remain to be evaluated in adequately designed large-scale randomized clinical trials.     

Monitoring of antiplatelet therapy. Current limitations, challenges, and perspectives

Screening of platelet function can be performed by point-of-care testing followed by platelet aggregometry in response to agonists such as collagen, adenosine diphosphate, epinephrine, and arachidonic acid. Despite in use for decades, this technique is not well standardized. Monitoring of antiplatelet therapy is increasingly applied in patients at high risk for re-thrombosis or bleeding. To assess pharmacological inhibition of platelet function, agonist-induced platelet aggregation, thromboxane B2 (TxB2) and vasodilator-stimulated protein phosphorylation (VASP) are being measured. While serum TxB2 levels of < 2 ng/ml reflect aspirin-induced inhibition of cyclo-oxygenase-1 activity with high sensitivity, VASP exhibits a wide variability upon treatment with clopidogrel or prasugrel. Multiple studies reveal an association between high residual platelet reactivity and adverse cardiovascular events in patients on antiplatelet therapy. However, despite the plethora of platelet function assays currently under investigation, their use in daily practice cannot be recommended. This is due to several reasons: (i) there is no consensus on the method and a respective cut-off value associated with clinical adverse outcome, and (ii) data demonstrating any benefit of tailored antiplatelet therapy and its monitoring (based on assessment of platelet functions) are still limited. Thus, appropriate identification of 'resistant' or 'poor responders' to antiplatelet agents remains challenging in clinical practice.     

Contemporary antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

The proper use of antiplatelet agents in the cardiac catheterization laboratory is important for ensuring optimal results in patients undergoing percutaneous revascularization. Understanding the mechanisms by which these drugs exerts their effects is important for both interventional and non-interventional cardiologists. The effects of these agents on platelet function can be assessed and monitored using a variety of commercially available laboratory assays but so far these tests have not been adopted in routine clinical practice. Currently, aspirin, thienopyridines and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors are the primary types of antiplatelet drugs being utilized. The use of these drugs and of several newer antiplatelet drugs in the treatment of patients undergoing percutaneous revascularization in the cardiac catheterization laboratory will be discussed, especially in the light of the recently published guidelines.     

抗血小板治疗实验室监测之我见

抗血小板药物在各种动脉血栓性疾病防治中具有重要地位。虽然目前抗血小板药物多采用固定剂量给药,但不同患者对抗血小板治疗的反应性存在明显差异。治疗后的血小板高反应性或低反应性可能与血栓事件或出血事件风险相关。基于血小板功能检测的个体化抗血小板治疗方案可能有助于预防血栓或出血不良事件的发生,但目前仍缺乏上述治疗策略能够最终改善患者预后的确切临床证据。迄今为止,对于接受抗血小板治疗的患者是否应常规进行实验室监测仍存在诸多争议。本文对抗血小板治疗反应多样性的成因及血小板功能检测是否可用于指导个体化抗血小板治疗进行讨论。     

Response variability to clopidogrel: is tailored treatment,based on laboratory testing,the right solution?

Summary. Clopidogrel is an antithrombotic prodrug, whose active metabolite inhibits platelet function by irreversibly binding to the platelet receptor for adenosine diphosphate, P2Y₁₂. Wide inter‐individual variability of response to clopidogrel has been reported in several studies: a significant proportion of treated patients (about one‐third) exhibit a suboptimal inhibition of platelet function. Genetic and environmental factors that influence the absorption and/or the extent of metabolism of clopidogrel to its active metabolite account for the observed variability of response. Tailored treatment based on the results of laboratory tests of platelet function has been proposed as a solution to this problem, which has important clinical implications. Although it is often considered a desirable evolution of modern medicine, tailored treatment based on laboratory tests is actually an old remedy (of yet unproven efficacy, in the case of antiplatelet therapy) for the problem of response variability to antithrombotic drugs with unpredictable bioavailability. When possible, the use of alternative drugs with more uniform and predictable bioavailability, and with favourable profiles in terms of risk/benefit and cost‐benefit ratios should be preferred. Moreover, tailored treatment with laboratory tests must be validated in randomized clinical trials before its implementation can be recommended. We still need to identify and standardize the laboratory test for this purpose, as well as answer basic questions on its clinical utility and cost‐effectiveness, before tailoring clopidogrel therapy based on laboratory tests can be recommended in clinical practise.     

Platelet function tests for monitoring of acetylsalicylic acid: clinical significance in antiplatelet treatment

Several studies have demonstrated with the use platelet function tests (PFT) that subgroups of patients under acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) fail to produce the anticipated antiplatelet effect. This phenomenon as well as the clinical failure of ASA to protect patients from thromboembolic complications has been termed ASA resistance (AR) or ASA nonresponsiveness. Several subtypes of AR can be distinguished by PFT. The following PFT were used to characterize AR: optical aggregometry, platelet aggregation in whole blood, platelet function analyzer (PFA-100), platelet reactivity test or platelet aggregate ratio, flow cytometry and thromboxane B(2) generation. All PFT have in common that their widespread clinical use is substantially limited due to complex preanalytic factors, reduced specificity and poor reproducibility. PFT are not interchangeable for monitoring antiplatelet treatment. Three prospective clinical trials revealed a possible relationship between AR and subsequent cardiovascular events. There is a need for a simple and reliable assay for predicting the clinical efficacy of antiplatelet therapy. Recent data demonstrate that none of the currently available assays including the PFA-100 system are capable to accomplish these objectives.     

Resistance to acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel: current status

Resistance to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) or clopidogrel is understood from the clinical point of view as failure of the drugs to prevent recurrent vascular occlusions. Non-response to ASA and clopidogrel is defined from the laboratory aspect as an inability to cause in vitro detectable platelet function inhibition. It would be beneficial to monitor non-response to ASA or clopidogrel with platelet function methods, which detect the specific effect of these drugs, and thus prevent clinical events caused by failure of therapy. Non-response to ASA and clopidogrel are detected with different platelet function methods, which are not always clinically standardized and are assessing only the global platelet function and not the specific drug effect. Although various studies reporting 5 to 59% non-response for both drugs, support a clinical relevance of ASA and clopidogrel non-response, well-designed clinical prospective trials are required to identify patients with antiplatelet drug resistance. Furthermore, mechanisms explaining this phenomenon of drug resistance are still unknown.     

Adenosine diphosphate-inducible platelet reactivity shows a pronounced age dependency in the initial phase of antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel

Summary.  Background:  Until recently, there were hardly any data on the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel in advanced age. Like other metabolic processes, the conversion of clopidogrel to its active metabolite may be impaired in older patients, leading to high on-treatment residual ADP-inducible platelet reactivity. Objective:  To investigate the age dependency of clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition. Patients and methods:  This was a prospective observational study. We determined adenosine 5'-diphosphate (ADP)-inducible platelet reactivity using light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay in 191 patients on dual antiplatelet therapy after angioplasty and stenting for cardiovascular disease. Results:  ADP-inducible platelet reactivity increased linearly with age after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors, type of intervention, medication, C-reactive protein (CRP) and renal function [using LTA 0.36% of maximal aggregation per year, 95% CI 0.08–0.64%, P  = 0.013; using the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay 3.2 P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) per year, 95% CI 1.98–4.41 PRU, P  < 0.001]. ADP-inducible platelet reactivity was significantly higher in patients aged 75 years or older compared with younger patients ( P  = 0.003 for LTA and P  < 0.001 for the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay). Further, high on-treatment residual ADP-inducible platelet reactivity was significantly more common among patients aged 75 years or older ( P  = 0.02 for LTA and P  < 0.001 for the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay). Conclusion:  ADP-inducible platelet reactivity shows a pronounced age dependency in the initial phase of antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel. The clinical implications of these findings need to be addressed in future trials.     

New Antiplatelet Agents and the Role of Platelet Function Testing in Acute Coronary Syndromes

Background

Dual antiplatelet therapy is a guideline mandated for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Despite its use, thrombotic events continue to occur both early and late. Platelet function testing has been used to define the in vitro effects of new antiplatelet agents, and it has been suggested that it be used to choose therapy. The role of platelet function testing, particularly with newer antiplatelet agents, remains unclear.

Objective

We review the rationale for platelet function testing and its application in monitoring patients on antiplatelet therapy. We also review recent clinical trials of newer antiplatelet agents. On the basis of this review, we reach conclusions on the current role of antiplatelet function testing in monitoring modern antiplatelet therapy and the role of the new antiplatelet agents in the treatment of ACS.

Methods

We reviewed recent publications on platelet function testing and clinical trials of newer antiplatelet therapies compared with clopidogrel.

Results

Platelet function testing is complex, but there is now a bedside test, VerifyNow. High platelet reactivity has been associated with worse cardiovascular outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Recent clinical trials have not found any advantage in outcomes in patients who have their therapy adjusted by monitoring their platelet function. Newer agents, prasugrel, ticagrelor, and cangrelor, produce more rapid, complete, less variable effects on platelet function than clopidogrel. Prasugrel was found to improve outcomes compared with clopidogrel in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous intervention. Ticagrelor is beneficial in all patients with ACS and reduces cardiovascular mortality compared with clopidogrel. Cangrelor improves outcomes in patients undergoing stenting. Recent studies to assess the role of platelet function monitoring of the effects of clopidogrel and modifying treatments have not been successful.

Conclusion

Recent clinical trials have indicated that newer antiplatelet agents have advantages over clopidogrel in the treatment of ACS. Platelet function testing gives us a guide to the timing, efficacy, and variability of therapy and can correlate with poor patient outcomes; however, the use of antiplatelet function testing to tailor therapy does not seem appropriate.     

Overcoming limitations of current antiplatelet drugs: a concerted effort for more profitable strategies of intervention

Platelets play a central role in the pathophysiology of atherothrombosis, an inappropriate platelet activation leading to acute ischemic complications (acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke). In view of this, platelets are a major target for pharmacotherapy. Presently, the main classes of antiplatelet agents approved for the use in such complications are aspirin and thienopyridines. Although antiplatelet treatment with these two types of drugs, alone or in combination, leads to a significant reduction of non-fatal myocardial infarction (-32%), non-fatal stroke (-25%), and of cardiovascular death (-17%), a residual risk persists. Newer antiplatelet agents have addressed some, but not all, these limitations. Vis-à-vis their net clinical benefit, the higher potency of some of them is associated with a rise in bleeding complications. Moreover, newer thienopyridines do not show advantages over and above the older ones as to reduction of stroke. A concerted effort that takes into consideration clinical, genetic, and laboratory information is increasingly recognized as a major direction to be pursued in the area. The well-established road signs of clinical epidemiology will provide major information to define newer potentially useful targets for platelet pharmacology.     

加强血小板功能试验在抗血小板药物治疗监测中的应用

可用于抗血小板药物预防或治疗血栓性疾病监测的血小板功能试验有多种，可根据不同药物选择监测试验，包括阿司匹林、氯吡格雷和血小板膜糖蛋白（GPⅡb／Ⅲa）拮抗剂的监测。不同血小板功能试验确认的药物抵抗性存在差异，与临床不良事件的相关性有待确认。     

Recent advance in antiplatelet therapy: the mechanisms, evidence and approach to the problems

Antiplatelet therapy has been established as a preventive medicine for ischemic cardiovascular diseases both at acute and chronic phases. This therapy is also crucial for the prevention of thrombotic events after coronary stent implantation. So far, many lines of clinical evidence have demonstrated the beneficial effects of aspirin (an irreversible cyclooxygenase inhibitor) and thienopyridine derivatives (adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-receptor P2Y12 inhibitors). Recently, it has been reported that the cardiovascular risk is elevated in patients with platelets resistant to these drugs, compared to the good responders. One of the current problems to be solved in antiplatelet therapy is to find out patients resistant to the antiplatelet therapy and improve its preventive effects. In addition to aspirin and thienopyridines, several types of drugs with antiplatelet effects are currently available in clinical practice. Clinical evidence has recently been accumulating for these drugs that can be potential alternatives in patients with aspirin or thienopyridine resistance. In this review, the mechanisms, evidence and approach to the present problems of drugs with antiplatelet effects are discussed.     

Antiplatelet medications and their indications in preventing and treating coronary thrombosis

Platelets play a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of unstable angina, acute myocardial infarction, and complications following percutaneous coronary intervention. Three classes of platelet-inhibiting drugs, aspirin, thienopyridines and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, are now commonly used for the prevention and treatment of disorders of coronary artery thrombosis. For the last several decades aspirin has been the sole option for antiplatelet therapy in the treatment and prevention of the manifestations of cardiovascular disease. However, a wider selection of antiplatelet agents, including the thienopyridines (ticlopidine and clopidogrel) and the platelet glycoprotein (GP)IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, are now available and provide clinicians with the opportunity to potentially improve upon the previous gold standard of aspirin. This review summarizes these drugs and the scientific data that have led to their use in primary and secondary prevention, unstable angina, myocardial infarction, and percutaneous coronary intervention.     

The future of platelet function testing to guide therapy in clopidogrel low and enhanced responders

Dual oral antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is the therapy of choice in patients with acute coronary syndromes and in patients undergoing coronary stent placement to lower the risk of thrombotic events. Responsiveness to aspirin and especially to clopidogrel is not uniform and is subject to considerable interindividual variability. Furthermore, there is a broad consensus that clopidogrel low response or so-called high on-treatment platelet reactivity is linked to the occurrence of ischemic events. On the other hand, evidence is accumulating that enhanced clopidogrel responders are at increased risk of bleeding. Newer antiplatelet drugs, such as prasugrel and ticagrelor, are more potent and produce more consistent inhibition of platelet aggregation via the P2Y(12) ADP platelet receptor. A variety of methods of platelet function testing are available for evaluating platelet inhibition in percutaneous coronary intervention-treated patients in order to help determine the individual risk for ischemic and bleeding complications. Although not yet routinely undertaken, platelet function testing offers the potential to tailor antiplatelet therapy for individual patients. Whether alteration of therapy based on platelet function testing improves patients' outcomes remains unclear and is currently under investigation. This article reviews the impact of antiplatelet drug responsiveness on clinical outcomes with a focus on P2Y(12) receptor inhibition as well as on current and future concepts for personalized antiplatelet strategies.     

Flow cytometric analysis of intraplatelet VASP phosphorylation for the detection of clopidogrel resistance in patients with ischemic cardiovascular diseases

Interindividual variability of the inhibitory effect of clopidogrel on platelet functions leading to clopidogrel resistance has been described in some patients with ischemic cardiovascular disease. A reliable laboratory test is therefore needed to identify patients insufficiently protected by this antiplatelet treatment. The phosphorylation of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP), an intraplatelet actin regulatory protein, is dependent on the level of activation of the platelet P2Y12 receptor, which is targeted by clopidogrel. The aim of this study was to use a flow cytometric VASP phosphorylation assay to evaluate the efficacy of clopidogrel therapy. The platelet reactivity index (PRI), expressed as a percentage, is the difference in VASP fluorescence intensity between resting (+PGE1) and activated (+ADP) platelets. In vitro, the PRI was strongly correlated with the inhibition of platelet aggregation induced by specific blockade of the P2Y12 receptor by the competitive antagonist AR-C69931MX (R = 0.72, P < 0.0001). Ex vivo, the PRI was 78.3 +/- 4.6% in 47 healthy donors, 79.0 +/- 4.1% in 34 patients not receiving clopidogrel and 61.1 +/- 17.0% in 33 patients treated with clopidogrel (P < 0.0001). In the clopidogrel group, the PRI values were widely dispersed (from 6.6 to 85.8%) and more than 30% of these patients had a PRI equivalent of values in patients not receiving clopidogrel. The flow cytometric analysis of VASP phosphorylation seems to be a suitable test to evaluate the efficacy of clopidogrel treatment. This assay demonstrated a wide interindividual variability of the inhibitory response of platelets to clopidogrel and showed that one-third of the patients treated appeared to be 'unprotected' by this therapy.     

Antiplatelet medications and their indications in preventing and treating coronary thrombosis

Platelets play a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of unstable angina, acute myocardial infarction, and complications following percutaneous coronary intervention. Three classes of platelet-inhibiting drugs, aspirin, thienopyridines and platelet glycoprotein IIb/ IIIa inhibitors, are now commonly used for the prevention and treatment of disorders of coronary artery thrombosis. For the last several decades aspirin has been the sole option for antiplatelet therapy in the treatment and prevention of the manifestations of cardiovascular disease. However, a wider selection of antiplatelet agents, including the thienopyridines (ticlopidine and clopidogrel) and the platelet glycoprotein (GP)IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, are now available and provide clinicians with the opportunity to potentially improve upon the previous gold standard of aspirin. This review summarizes these drugs and the scientific data that have led to their use in primary and secondary prevention, unstable angina, myocardial infarction, and percutaneous coronary intervention.     

Clopidogrel resistance in diabetic patient with acute myocardial infarction due to stent thrombosis

Stent thrombosis is a morbid complication after percutaneous coronary intervention. Dual antiplatelet therapy significantly reduces stent thrombosis risk and forms currently the basis in acute ST elevation myocardial infarction pharmacologic treatment. The introduction of clopidogrel has made a major advance in the acute coronary syndrome treatment. However, there is growing evidence about failure in antiplatelet response after clopidogrel, which may lead to subsequent risk of future thrombotic events. The antiplatelet inhibitory effect of clopidogrel varies widely among individuals. High on-treatment platelet reactivity has been repeatedly associated with a hazard for cardiovascular events, including stent thrombosis. Laboratory monitoring of antiplatelet therapy efficacy may help identify patients with insufficient antiplatelet response. Prasugrel therapy was repeatedly described as an effective method to overcome clopidogrel resistance. We report a case of diabetic patient in whom myocardial reinfarction due to stent thrombosis developed. Clopidogrel resistance was detected in this patient using light transmission aggregometry and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assessment. After prasugrel administration, no other ischemic event occurred, and patient was released to outpatient care in good general condition.     

Prasugrel, a new thienopyridine

The introduction of thienopyridines, specifically of clopidogrel, offered for the first time an orally active therapeutic alternative to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) as an antiplatelet agent. Despite of established clinical efficacy, it became also evident with increasing clinical use that the antiplatelet actions of clopidogrel are subject of considerable interindividual variations of its antiplatelet efficacy (clopidogrel resistance) in laboratory tests which might also be clinically relevant. Prasugrel is a new, orally active thienopyridine with an expected spectrum of biological activities similar to clopidogrel. Prasugrel, like clopidogrel, is also an inactive prodrug that has to be transformed into the active metabolite by the liver cytochrome P450 system. However, different cytochromes appear to be involved for different extent in the generation of the active metabolite. The active metabolite of prasugrel, R-138727, inhibits irreversibly the platelet P2Y(12) ADP receptor. In contrast to ASA, neither clopidogrel nor prasugrel inhibit the arachidonic acid metabolism. This allows synergistic interactions with ASA as thromboxane inhibitor and PGI(2) as stimulator of cAMP-formation in platelets. Prasugrel is orally more potent and acts more rapidly than clopidogrel, allowing lower oral dosing despite of similar in vitro activity of the active metabolites. These pharmacological advantages of prasugrel are probably due to its improved pharmacokinetics, i.e. the higher conversion rate of the prodrug into the active metabolite. In case of clopidogrel, only about 10-15% of the prodrug is converted into the active metabolite. This higher conversion rate possibly also explains the more rapid onset of platelet inhibition, the lower interindividual variability and higher oral potency with apparently less "resistance" than clopidogrel. Clinically, this might result in an improved efficacy. Whether this is associated with an increased risk of bleeding will be seen from the first phase III clinical trial in PCI-patients. The first results are expected at the end of the year.     

On-treatment platelet reactivity in peripheral and coronary blood in patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)

Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (p-PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Pre-analytical variables may influence platelet function analysis results. Our aim was to evaluate the on-treatment platelet reactivity in peripheral artery vs coronary blood in patients with STEMI. We enrolled one hundred and nine patients who consecutively underwent p-PCI at Cardiology Unit of Padua University Hospital between June 2014 and June 2015. Before the procedure, all patients received intravenous aspirin 250?mg and either of the thienopyridines; clopidogrel 600?mg, prasugrel 60?mg or ticagrelor 180?mg. ASPI-test and ADP-test using multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) were performed in samples collected from both a peripheral artery and the culprit coronary artery. ‘Low responders’ were patients with an ASPI-test or ADP-test value greater than or equal to a pre-established normal range. No significant differences were observed in ASPI-test values between peripheral (19 (median) [3–49 (10–90 percentiles)] U) vs coronary (12 [1–40] U, p?=?.06) blood and in ADP-test (40 [14–82] U vs 33 [7–79] U, p?=.68) blood. In peripheral blood, fifteen (14%) patients were ‘low aspirin’ and forty-one (38%) ‘low thienopyridines’ responders. The prevalence of ‘low clopidogrel’ responders was higher (45%) than prasugrel (36%) and ticagrelor (33%). Similar results were observed in coronary blood. In patients undergoing p-PCI for STEMI, MEA platelet function observed in coronary arteries was consistent with peripheral artery blood’s independently of the antiplatelet drug used. The clinical significance of peripheral and coronary on-aspirin/thienopyridines platelet reactivity needs further clarification.