Sequential ADP-stimulated light transmission and multiple electrode aggregometry in patients taking aspirin and clopidogrel after non ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Abstract

Background. Fast platelet function tests can identify weak clopidogrel responders, but data on variability over time in clopidogrel responsiveness in several clinical settings are lacking. We wanted to explore long-term variability of multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) measurements and the agreement between MEA and light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) treated with aspirin and clopidogrel. Methods. Parallel MEA and LTA were performed at baseline and after 6 and 12 weeks in 31 patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention after NSTEMI. Adenosine diphosphate (ADP) concentrations 2 μM, 6.5 μM and 10 μM were used. Parallel testings in both arterial and venous blood were performed at baseline. MEA and LTA cut-off levels were applied to discriminate aggregation values suggesting presence or absence of high platelet reactivity (HPR). Results. Arterial and venous MEA and LTA aggregation were similar. Within-subject variability in both MEA and LTA aggregation throughout the study was moderate. According to MEA, eight patients had HPR at baseline (MEA aggregation >?47 U). Defining >?47% as the LTA aggregation HPR cut-off level, the same number of patients (eight) had HPR according to LTA. Of the 93 MEA/LTA observations 81 (87.1%) gave the same HPR classification. MEA vs. LTA agreement at baseline was slightly inferior to that obtained after 12 weeks. Conclusions. MEA and LTA aggregation in arterial and venous blood seem similar. Within-subject variability over time was moderate, and the agreement between LTA and MEA was good, and stable in most patients.     

Reversal of the anti‐platelet effects of aspirin and clopidogrel

Summary. Background: Guidelines recommend stopping aspirin and clopidogrel 7 to 10 days before surgery to allow time for replacement of permanently inhibited platelets by newly released uninhibited platelets.Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to determine the rate of offset of the anti‐platelet effects of aspirin and clopidogrel after stopping treatment and the proportion of untreated donor platelets that are required to reverse their anti‐platelet effects.Methods: Cohort 1 consisted of 15 healthy subjects who received aspirin 81 mg day^?1 or clopidogrel 75 mg day^?1 for 7 days and underwent serial blood sampling until platelet function testing results normalized. Cohort 2 consisted of 36 healthy subjects who received aspirin 325 mg day^?1, clopidogrel 75 mg day^?1, aspirin 81 mg day^?1 plus clopidogrel 75 mg day^?1 or no treatment for 7 days and underwent a single blood sampling.Results: In cohort 1, arachidonic acid (AA)‐induced light transmission aggregation (LTA) returned to baseline levels in all subjects within 4 days of stopping aspirin, coinciding with the partial recovery of plasma thromboxane B₂ concentrations. ADP‐induced LTA did not return to baseline levels until 10 days after stopping clopidogrel. In cohort 2, AA‐induced LTA in patient treated with aspirin reached control levels after mixing with 30% untreated donor platelets whereas ADP‐induced LTA in patients treated with clopidogrel reached control levels only after the addition of 90% or more donor platelets.Conclusions: Platelet aggregation recovers within 4 days of stopping aspirin but clopidogrel must be stopped for 10 days to achieve a normal aggregatory response.     

Standardization of light transmittance aggregometry for monitoring antiplatelet therapy: an adjustment for platelet count is not necessary

Summary. Background: Light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) is considered to be the ‘gold standard’ of platelet function testing. As LTA has been poorly standardized, we analyzed the results of LTA in healthy subjects and patients with antiplatelet therapy using different concentrations of agonists and performing tests in non‐adjusted and platelet count‐adjusted platelet‐rich plasma (PRP). Methods: LTA was performed in 20 healthy subjects and in patients treated with aspirin (n = 30) or clopidogrel (n = 30) monotherapy, as well as in patients on combination therapy (n = 20), using arachidonic acid (ARA 0.25 and 0.5 mg mL⁻¹) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP 2 and 5 μm ) as agonists and performing platelet function tests in non‐adjusted and platelet count (250 nL⁻¹ ± 10%)‐adjusted PRP. Results: The overall platelet aggregation response is decreased after adjusting the PRP for platelet count compared with measurements in unadjusted PRP. The variability of aggregation results is high in adjusted PRP in the subgroup of healthy subjects, ranging from 9.2–95.3% (5th–95th percentile) relative to 77.6–95.5% in non‐adjusted PRP when determining maximum aggregation to ARA 0.5 mg mL⁻¹. Late aggregation using ADP 2 μm ranges from 3.8–89.9% in adjusted PRP compared with 42.9–92.5% in non‐adjusted PRP. Maximum aggregation using ARA 0.5 mg mL⁻¹ in non‐adjusted PRP differentiates between aspirin‐treated patients and healthy controls well, whereas late aggregation using ADP 2 μm in non‐adjusted PRP offers the best discrimination between clopidogrel‐treated patients and healthy controls. Conclusion: Adjustment of PRP for platelet count does not provide any advantage and therefore the time‐consuming process of platelet count adjustment is not necessary.     

Bleeding tendency in dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin/clopidogrel: rescue of the template bleeding time in a single-center prospective study

Background

Patients with heightened platelet reactivity in response to antiplatelet agents are at an increased risk of recurrent ischemic events. However, there is a lack of diagnostic criteria for increased response to combined aspirin/clopidogrel therapy. The challenge is to identify patients at risk of bleeding. This study sought to characterize bleeding tendency in patients treated with aspirin and clopidogrel.

Patients/methods

In a single-center prospective study, 100 patients under long-term aspirin/clopidogrel treatment, the effect of therapy was assayed by template bleeding time (BT) and the inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) by light transmission aggregometry (LTA). Arachidonic acid (0.625 mmol/L) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP; 2, 4, and 8 ??mol/L) were used as platelet agonists.

Results

Bleeding episodes (28 nuisance, 2 hematuria [1 severe], 1 severe proctorrhagia, 1 severe epistaxis) were significantly more frequent in patients with longer BT. Template BT ?? 24 min was associated with bleeding episodes (28 of 32). Risk of bleeding increased 17.4% for each 1 min increase in BT. Correlation was found between BT and IPAmax in response to ADP 2 ??mol/L but not to ADP 4 or 8 ??mol/L.

Conclusion

In patients treated with dual aspirin/clopidogrel therapy, nuisance and internal bleeding were significantly associated with template BT and with IPAmax in response to ADP 2 ??mol/L but not in response to ADP 4 ??mol/L or 8 ??mol/L.     

High post-treatment platelet reactivity identified low-responders to dual antiplatelet therapy at increased risk of recurrent cardiovascular events after stenting for acute coronary syndrome

Summary.  Background and objectives: Low response to antiplatelet therapy may be a risk factor for the development of ischemic complications in patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS) undergoing coronary stenting. Methods: We prospectively studied the platelet response to both clopidogrel and aspirin in 106 NSTE ACS consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting. A single post-treatment blood sample was obtained just before PCI and analyzed by platelet aggregometry using both ADP and arachidonic acid (AA) as agonists to explore the responses to clopidogrel and aspirin, respectively. Patients were divided into quartiles according to the ADP or AA induced maximal intensity of platelet aggregation. Patients of the highest quartile (quartile 4) were defined as the 'low-responders'. Results: Twelve recurrent cardiovascular (CV) events occurred during the 1-month follow-up. Clinical outcome was significantly associated with platelet response to clopidogrel [Quartile 4 vs. 1, 2, 3: OR (95% CI) 22.4 (4.6–109)]. Low platelet response to aspirin was significantly correlated with clopidogrel low response ( P  = 0.003) but contributed less to CV events [OR (95%CI): 5.76 (1.54–35.61)]. Conclusions: A post-treatment ADP-induced platelet aggregation performed just before PCI identifies low responders to dual antiplatelet therapy with an increased risk of recurrent CV events.     

Clopidogrel discontinuation and platelet reactivity following coronary stenting

See also Lordkipanidzé M, Harrison P. Beware of being caught on the rebound. This issue, pp 21–3. Summary. Aims: Antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is recommended for 1 year after drug‐eluting stent (DES) implantation or myocardial infarction. However, the discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy has become an important issue as recent studies have suggested a clustering of ischemic events within 90 days of clopidogrel withdrawal. The objective of this investigation was to explore the hypothesis that there is a transient ‘rebound’ increase in platelet reactivity within 3 months of clopidogrel discontinuation. Methods and Results: In this prospective study, platelet function was assessed in patients taking aspirin and clopidogrel for at least 1 year following DES implantation. Platelet aggregation was measured using a modification of light transmission aggregometry in response to multiple concentrations of adenosine diphosphate (ADP), epinephrine, arachidonic acid, thrombin receptor activating peptide and collagen. Clopidogrel was stopped and platelet function was reassessed 1 week, 1 month and 3 months later. Thirty‐two patients on dual antiplatelet therapy were recruited. Discontinuation of clopidogrel increased platelet aggregation to all agonists, except arachidonic acid. Platelet aggregation in response to ADP (2.5, 5, 10, and 20 μm ) and epinephrine (5 and 20 μm ) was significantly increased at 1 month compared with 3 months following clopidogrel withdrawal. Thus, a transient period of increased platelet reactivity to both ADP and epinephrine was observed 1 month after clopidogrel discontinuation. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a transient increase in platelet reactivity 1 month after clopidogrel withdrawal. This phenomenon may, in part, explain the known clustering of thrombotic events observed after clopidogrel discontinuation. This observation requires confirmation in larger populations.     

Which platelet function test is suitable to monitor clopidogrel responsiveness? A pharmacokinetic analysis on the active metabolite of clopidogrel

Summary. Background: Multiple platelet function tests claim to be P2Y12‐pathway specific and capable of capturing the biological activity of clopidogrel. Objectives: The aim of the present study was to determine which platelet function test provides the best reflection of the in vivo plasma levels of the active metabolite of clopidogrel (AMC). Patients/methods: Clopidogrel‐naive patients scheduled for elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) received a 600 mg loading dose of clopidogrel and 100 mg of aspirin. For pharmacokinetic analysis, blood was drawn at 0, 20, 40, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240 and 360 min after clopidogrel loading and peak plasma concentrations (C_max) of the AMC were quantified with liquid chromatography‐tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS/MS). Platelet function testing was performed at baseline and 360 min after the clopidogrel loading. Results: The VASP‐assay, the VerifyNow P2Y12‐assay and 20 μmol L^?1 adenosine diphosphate (ADP)‐induced light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) showed strong correlations with C_max of the AMC (VASP: R² = 0.56, P < 0.001; VerifyNow platelet reactivity units (PRU): R² = 0.48, P < 0.001; VerifyNow %inhibition: R² = 0.59, P < 0.001; 20 μmol L^?1 ADP‐induced LTA: R² = 0.47, P < 0.001). Agreement with C_max of the AMC was less evident for 5 μmol L^?1 ADP‐induced LTA or whole blood aggregometry (WBA), whereas the IMPACT‐R ADP test did not show any correlation with plasmalevels of the AMC. Conclusion: The flow cytometric VASP‐assay, the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay and, although to a lesser extent, 20 μmol L^?1 ADP‐induced LTA correlate best with the maximal plasma level of the AMC, suggesting these may be the preferred platelet function tests for monitoring the responsiveness to clopidogrel.     

Modified platelet aggregation test in patients on ASA and/or clopidogrel

Therapy with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and/or clopidogrel is used to achieve prophylactic inhibition of platelet aggregation in patients with arterial thrombosis. We examined if aggregometry can be used to see the effect of antiplatelet drugs (ASA 30, 50, 100, 300 mg/d, clopidogrel 75 mg/d or ASA 100 + clopidogrel 75 mg/d). A modified platelet aggregation test was used to investigate maximum aggregation in response to ADP, collagen, adrenalin and arachidonic acid. Reference values were established based on healthy individuals. We devised a simple scoring system for detection of inadequate platelet inhibition. Compared with the control group, we detected a significant delay of maximum aggregation in response to all agonists in patients on ASA and combination therapy ASA + clopidogrel. Patients on clopidogrel alone were found to have prolonged aggregation when induced with ADP, collagen and arachidonic acid. The failure rate to achieve adequate platelet inhibition on 100 mg/d ASA, 75 mg/d clopidogrel or combination therapy was 27%, 26% and 7%, respectively. Our results demonstrate that platelet inhibition in aggregometry is inadequate in many patients with arterial thrombosis.     

Potentiation of clopidogrel active metabolite formation by rifampicin leads to greater P2Y12 receptor blockade and inhibition of platelet aggregation after clopidogrel

Summary. Background: The thienopyridine P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonist clopidogrel reduces the risk of arterial thrombosis and individual pharmacodynamic responses to clopidogrel are believed to reflect the levels of active metabolite (AM) generated. Rifampicin increases the inhibitory effect of clopidogrel on platelet aggregation (PA). We studied the response to clopidogrel before and during administration of rifampicin in order to study the relationship between individual AM levels and P2Y₁₂ blockade. Methods: Healthy volunteers received a 600‐mg loading dose of clopidogrel followed by 75 mg daily for 7 days and, after a washout period and treatment with rifampicin [300 mg twice a day (b.i.d.)], received the same regimen of clopidogrel. Clopidogrel AM levels were determined over 4 h after the clopidogrel loading dose and unblocked P2Y₁₂ receptor number was assessed using a ³³P‐2MeSADP binding assay. PA was measured by optical aggregometry with ADP and TRAP. Results: Rifampicin enhanced clopidogrel AM production [area‐under‐the‐curve (AUC): clopidogrel 89 ± 22 ng h mL^?1, clopidogrel + rifampicin 335 ± 86 ng h mL^?1, P < 0.0001], and P2Y₁₂ blockade (unblocked receptors: clopidogrel 48 ± 24, clopidogrel + rifampicin 4 ± 2, P < 0.0001) and reduced PA (5 μmol L^?1 ADP: clopidogrel 20 ± 4, clopidogrel + rifampicin 5 ± 2, P < 0.01). Increasing numbers of unblocked receptors were required for an aggregation response with a decreasing concentration of ADP. PA induced by ADP 2 μmol L^?1 was particularly sensitive to low levels of receptor blockade. Conclusion: Potentiation of clopidogrel AM production by rifampicin leads to greater P2Y₁₂ blockade and consequently greater inhibition of PA. PA responses to low concentrations of ADP are more sensitive to P2Y₁₂ blockade.     

Normalization of platelet reactivity in clopidogrel-treated subjects

BACKGROUND: Aspirin (ASA) + clopidogrel are commonly used in acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but persistent antiplatelet effects may complicate surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: To study the possibility of normalizing platelet reactivity after ASA + clopidogrel treatment, 11 healthy subjects received a 325-mg ASA + clopidogrel loading dose (300 or 600 mg dependent on study arm), followed by 81 mg of ASA + 75 mg of clopidogrel daily for 2 days. Platelet reactivity was assessed by light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) [challenged by adenosine diphosphate (ADP), arachidonic acid (AA), collagen, and thrombin receptor activating peptide (TRAP)] and flow cytometry for platelet activation by GPIIb/IIIa receptor exposure pretreatment, 4 and 72 h postload. To normalize platelet reactivity, increasing amounts of pooled platelets from five untreated volunteers [volunteers (V)-platelet-rich plasma (PRP)] were added ex vivo to the subject's PRP (S-PRP). At both 4 and 72 h, 40% and 50% V-PRP were needed to overcome platelet disaggregation in the 300 or 600 mg arms, respectively, after ADP challenge; an additional 10% V-PRP fully normalized aggregation. Recovery of function was linear with each incremental increase of V-PRP. ADP-induced GPIIb/IIIa activation showed the same pattern as LTA (r = 0.74). Forty percent V-PRP was required to normalize platelet function to AA, collagen, and TRAP. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the pre-operative transfusion of 10 platelet concentrate units (the equivalent of 40% V-PRP) after a 300-mg clopidogrel loading or 12.5 units (50% V-PRP) after a 600 mg loading may adequately reverse clopidogrel-induced platelet disaggregation to facilitate postoperative hemostasis. An additional 2.5 units fully normalized platelet function. The potential clinical implications of our observations could include shorter hospitalizations and reduced bleeding complications. But these observations should be fully explored in an in vivo clinical setting with clopidogrel-treated patients before and after surgery.     

Decreased platelet inhibition by P2Y12 receptor blockers in anaemia

Background

Anaemic patients undergoing angioplasty and stenting are at an increased risk of ischaemic events, which may be caused by an inadequate response to antiplatelet therapy with adenosine diphosphate (ADP) P2Y₁₂ inhibitors. In the current study, we investigated the associations between anaemia and on‐treatment platelet reactivity in clopidogrel‐treated (group 1, n = 306) and prasugrel‐/ticagrelor‐treated (group 2, n = 109) patients undergoing elective and acute angioplasty with stent implantation, respectively.

Materials and methods

Monocyte‐platelet aggregate (MPA) formation was determined by flow cytometry in both groups. On‐treatment residual platelet reactivity in response to ADP was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in both groups, and by the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay and the Impact‐R in group 1. P‐selectin expression was measured by flow cytometry in group 2.

Results

In both groups, anaemia was associated with significantly higher MPA formation in response to ADP (both P ≤ .02). Moreover, by LTA maximal aggregation in response to ADP was significantly higher in patients with anaemia in both groups (both P < .05), and anaemic patients in group 1 had a significantly higher on‐treatment platelet reactivity by the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay and the Impact‐R than those without anaemia (both P < .001). In group 2, significantly higher platelet surface expression of P‐selectin was seen in anaemia after stimulation with ADP (P = .02).

Conclusion

Anaemia is associated with decreased platelet inhibition by ADP P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists after elective and acute percutaneous interventions with stent implantation. However, due to inconsistencies between different platelet function tests additional data are needed to clarify the role of anaemia for platelet inhibition.     

Greater inhibition of platelet aggregation and reduced response variability with prasugrel versus clopidogrel: an integrated analysis

Multiple studies report response variability to a 300-mg clopidogrel loading dose (LD). Pooled platelet aggregometry data compared responses (change in maximal platelet aggregation [DeltaMPA] or inhibition of platelet aggregation [IPA]) to clopidogrel 300-mg (n = 131) or prasugrel 60-mg (n = 109) LDs. Poor responder rates were determined using empiric criteria (IPA < 10% and DeltaMPA < 10% for 20 microM and 5 microM adenosine diphosphate [ADP]) and Bayesian model-based criteria (IPA < 20% and DeltaMPA < 15% for 20 microM ADP; IPA < 25% and DeltaMPA < 20% for 5 microM ADP). Prasugrel achieved greater DeltaMPA and IPA from 2 to 24 hours post-LD (P < .001). For 20 microM ADP, poor responder rates for clopidogrel ranged from 17% to 43%; no prasugrel poor responders were observed. Regardless of the criterion, prasugrel 60 mg achieved greater IPA and fewer poor responders than the clopidogrel 300-mg LD.     

Randomized,double‐blind comparison of effects of abiciximab bolus only vs. on‐label regimen on ex vivo inhibition of platelet aggregation in responders to clopidogrel undergoing coronary stenting

Summary. Background: On top of aspirin, an abciximab bolus‐only regimen results in a 30% drop in platelet inhibition at 6 h as compared with the on‐label regimen. The concomitant administration of high loading dose clopidogrel, by bridging with abciximab bolus, may sustain suppression of platelet activity over time. Objectives: To investigate the non‐inferiority of abciximab bolus‐only and concomitant high loading dose clopidogrel vs. abciximab bolus + infusion with respect to the inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) as determined by light transmission aggregometry. Patients/Methods: Seventy‐three patients with non‐ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes underwent double‐blind randomization to abciximab bolus followed by a 12‐h placebo infusion and concomitant 600‐mg clopidogrel vs. abciximab bolus + a 12‐h infusion and 300 mg of clopidogrel. IPA was determined by light transmission aggregometry throughout 24 h. Clopidogrel poor responsiveness was defined as ≥ 50% 5 μmol L^?1 ADP‐induced maximum platelet aggregation. Results: In clopidogrel responders (n = 68), IPA after 20 μmol L^?1 ADP at 4 h was 89% ± 13% in the bolus‐only arm vs. 92% ± 14% in the bolus + infusion arm (P = 0.011 for non‐inferiority). IPA after 5 or 20 μmol L^?1 ADP and 5 or 15 μmol L^?1 TRAP and the proportion of patients showing ≥ 80% IPA did not differ at any time point, irrespective of clopidogrel responsiveness status. Thirty‐day outcomes were similar, whereas hemoglobin (0.91 ± 0.8 vs. 0.5 ± 0.7 g dL^?1; P = 0.01) and platelet count mean drop (41.7 ± 57 vs. 18.6 ± 34 10⁹ L^?1; P = 0.042) were significantly reduced in the bolus‐only arm. Conclusions: Withholding abciximab post‐bolus infusion in patients receiving high loading dose clopidogrel does not impair platelet inhibition throughout 24 h, and has the potential to improve the safety profile of the drug at reduced costs.     

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.     

Dual antiplatelet therapy unmasks distinct platelet reactivity in patients with coronary artery disease

Summary. Background: Platelet‐induced thrombosis is a major risk factor for recurrent ischemic events, although platelet function in patients with cardiovascular disease taking aspirin and clopidogrel is very poorly characterized. The aim of this study was to assess platelet reactivity in patients with cardiovascular disease taking aspirin and clopidogrel. Methods: We developed a rapid assay to measure platelet aggregation in response to arachidonic acid, collagen, adenosine diphosphate (ADP), epinephrine and thrombin receptor activating peptide (TRAP) in 80 healthy volunteers. We then recruited 200 consecutive patients from outpatient clinics and the cardiac catheterization laboratory and tested platelet function. Platelet aggregation induced by epinephrine is a marker of global platelet reactivity. We tested platelet function in 146 patients compliant with antiplatelet therapy. Platelet aggregation to epinephrine was divided into quartiles. The platelet response to the other agonists was analysed based on the response to epinephrine. Results: Platelet reactivity increased significantly across the quartiles in response to epinephrine in healthy volunteers and patients (P < 0.0001). A significant increase in response across quartiles was seen with all agonists in healthy volunteers (P < 0.001). In contrast, a significant increase in response across quartiles was only seen with ADP in patients (P < 0.0001). Hypertension, smoking and diabetes were significantly associated with increasing platelet reactivity to epinephrine (P < 0.05). Conclusion: This study shows that platelet response differs between healthy volunteers and patients on dual antiplatelet therapy. In patients with cardiovascular disease, dual antiplatelet therapy unmasks a distinct type of platelet reactivity in response to epinephrine and ADP but not other agonists.     

Combined influence of proton‐pump inhibitors,calcium‐channel blockers and CYP2C19*2 on on‐treatment platelet reactivity and on the occurrence of atherothrombotic events after percutaneous coronary intervention

Summary. Background: The carriage of CYP2C19*2 and the use of proton‐pump inhibitors (PPIs) and calcium‐channel blockers (CCBs) has been associated with the diminished efficacy of clopidogrel. However, previous studies have only assessed the isolated impact of these risk factors for clopidogrel poor response. Objectives: The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of the combined presence of three risk factors for clopidogrel poor response, that is, the use of CCBs, PPIs and the carriage of CYP2C19*2, on on‐treatment platelet reactivity and the occurrence of atherothrombotic events in 725 patients on dual antiplatelet therapy undergoing elective coronary stenting. Methods: In a prospective, follow‐up study, on‐treatment platelet reactivity was quantified using ADP‐induced light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) and the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. The clinical study endpoint was the composite of all‐cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and stroke at 1 year after stenting. Results: Patients with either one or more than one risk factor exhibited increased platelet reactivity (mean relative increase one risk factor: 11% and > 1 risk factor: 22%, respectively). Sixty‐four events occurred during follow‐up (8.8% of the study population). Patients with one risk factor for clopidogrel poor response did not have an increased risk of the composite endpoint. However, patients using both CCBs and PPIs and carriers of CYP2C19*2 who used CCBs had a statistically significant increased risk of the composite endpoint [hazard ratio(HR)_adj 2.2 95% CI, 1.0–5.3, P = 0.044 and HR_adj 3.3 95% CI, 1.1–9.8, P = 0.032, respectively]. Conclusions: The presence of more than one of the three investigated risk factors for clopidogrel poor response is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events within 1 year after elective coronary stenting.     

Clinical implications of clopidogrel non‐response in cardiovascular patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Summary. Background: Previous studies have shown an important risk of cardiovascular events in patients with clopidogrel biological non‐response, and data have shown considerable, unexplored heterogeneity. Objectives: To evaluate the magnitude of cardiovascular risk associated with clopidogrel non‐response and to explore heterogeneity. Methods: This was a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective studies of patients treated with clopidogrel for symptomatic atherothrombosis, evaluated by light transmission aggregometry with ADP and monitored prospectively for clinical ischemic events. Results: Fifteen studies were included, totaling 3960 patients, of whom 25% were considered to be clopidogrel non‐responders. The global relative risk (RR) for recurrent ischemic events in clopidogrel non‐responders was 3.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4–5.2, P < 0.0001]. The results of the different studies were heterogeneous (Cochran P = 0.01 and I² = 52%). The most recent studies yielded lower RRs [global RR = 2.9 (95% CI 2.3–3.8) after 2007, and global RR = 6.6 (95% CI 3.7–11.9) before 2007, P = 0.01]. Heterogeneity was present in the group of studies in which more than 10% of patients took glycoprotein (GP)IIb–IIIa inhibitors [Cochran P = 0.003 and I² = 70%; RR = 3.8 (95% CI 2.9–5.1)] and was absent in the other studies [Cochran P = 0.88 and I² = 0; RR = 2.5 (95% CI 1.7–3.6)]. The RR was significantly higher in studies using higher ADP maximal aggregation cut‐offs (> 65%) for clopidogrel non‐response than in studies using lower cut‐offs [RR = 5.8 (95% CI 3.2–10.3) and RR = 2.9 (95% CI 2.2–3.7), respectively, P = 0.03]. Conclusions: The risk of ischemic events associated with clopidogrel non‐response is now more precisely defined. The risk is heterogeneous across studies, possibly because of an interaction with GPIIb–IIIa inhibitors and the use of different cut‐offs to identify non‐responders.     

Investigation of drug–drug interactions between clopidogrel and fluoxetine

Drug–drug interactions may contribute to the variability of the response of clopidogrel. Several hypotheses have been proposed concerning the potential modification of clopidogrel pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics by fluoxetine. This open‐label crossover study assessed the effect of fluoxetine on the pharmacological activity of clopidogrel in healthy volunteers. Eight healthy male volunteers received a single 600‐mg loading dose of clopidogrel followed by 20 mg of fluoxetine on 4 days and then 20 mg of fluoxetine plus 600 mg of clopidogrel on the fifth day. Eleven blood samples were withdrawn after clopidogrel administration to determine plasma concentrations of clopidogrel active metabolite (CAM) and platelet function. Platelet aggregation was measured by light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) and platelet reactivity index by flow cytometric vasodilator‐stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) analysis. The areas under the curve and maximum plasma concentrations of CAM were, respectively, 20.6 and 25.3% lower after co‐administration of fluoxetine compared with administration of clopidogrel alone. The percentage maximum platelet aggregation values in the presence of 5 μm and 10 μm adenosine diphosphate, measured by LTA, were, respectively, 13.9 and 22.4% lower after fluoxetine co‐administration. The platelet reactivity index measured by the flow cytometric VASP method was 36.8% lower when clopidogrel was administered in conjunction with fluoxetine.     

Determination of clopidogrel resistance by whole blood platelet aggregometry and inhibitors of the P2Y12 receptor

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of platelet aggregation by clopidogrel may be insufficient in up to 30% of users. These nonresponders carry an increased risk of cardiovascular events. We reported here a simple assay to study clopidogrel responsiveness. METHODS: Electrical impedance aggregometry was performed in diluted whole blood in the presence of 5 and 20 micromol/L ADP. Some samples were incubated with 0.1 mmol/L methyl-S-adenosine monophosphate (MeSAMP), a P2Y12 receptor blocker, to maximize inhibition of aggregation before aggregometry. To validate the assay, we analyzed 6-min impedance in 21 healthy probands and 244 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). RESULTS: At 5 micromol/L ADP, the imprecision of the assay was 11%. Mean (SD) impedance of the healthy cohort was 12.2 (2.2) Omega. The mean - 3 SD was used to define the cutoff for clopidogrel responsiveness: responders and nonresponders exhibited a 6-min impedance < or =5 Omega and >5 Omega, respectively. Samples from nonresponders were incubated with MeSAMP and analyzed again to distinguish pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic types of resistance. Sixteen percent of CAD patients were classified as nonresponders (38 and 2 cases of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic resistance, respectively). Female sex was strongly associated with clopidogrel resistance (P = 0.0002, Fisher exact test). A higher clopidogrel loading dose (P = 0.0353, Mann-Whitney U-test) was given to responders (median, 450 mg) than nonresponders (median, 300 mg). Age and cardiovascular diagnosis showed no significant associations. CONCLUSIONS: Impedance aggregometry using 5 mumol/L ADP is a useful tool for studying clopidogrel responsiveness. MeSAMP allows characterization of responsiveness "on treatment" and may be useful for optimizing clopidogrel dosing.     

Differential antiplatelet effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence suggests that angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors exert antithrombotic effects. Based on the assumption of differential effects of various ACE inhibitors on coagulation, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the coagulative activities of cardiovascular (CV) patients treated with either ramipril, captopril, and enalapril, and to compare these with patients treated with established antithrombotics such as aspirin (ASA) and clopidogrel or none of these medication. METHODS: Blood samples of 320 CV patients with coronary artery disease and/or arterial hypertension were analyzed by wholeblood aggregometry. Platelet aggregation was determined by measuring the increase in impedance across paired electrodes in response to the aggregatory agents collagen and adenosine diphosphate (ADP), respectively. These data were correlated with medical treatment. RESULTS: Platelet aggregation was attenuated ex vivo by ramipril and captopril as well as by ASA and clopidogrel. While collagen-induced platelet aggregation was significantly reduced by ramipril (35%; P <0.01) and captopril (27%; P = 0.01), no change was seen with enalapril. After induction with ADP, platelet aggregation was reduced in the presence of captopril therapy by 46% (P <0.05). There was a trend of inhibition with ramipril (32%, P = n.s.), whereas no antithrombotic effect was seen with enalapril. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that ACE inhibitors decrease platelet aggregation ex vivo. The differential antiaggregatory profile may explain at least in part different effects of ACE inhibitors on cardiovascular endpoints as observed in large clinical trials.