Differential inhibitory effects of proton pump inhibitors on the metabolism and antiplatelet activities of clopidogrel and prasugrel

Estimation of CDK inhibitors by RP-HPLC: application for pharmacokinetic interactions studies with PPIs

Background: The study investigated pharmacokinetic interactions between palbociclib and ribociclib with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) using the reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC) method.Methods: Developed RP-HPLC method quantified palbociclib and ribociclib in biological matrices. In vitro metabolic stability assays and in vivo studies in rats evaluated effect of omeprazole and esomeprazole on pharmacokinetics of palbociclib and ribociclib.Results: The RP-HPLC method was sensitive, accurate and linear. Esomeprazole and omeprazole decreased metabolic clearance of palbociclib and ribociclib by several folds. In vivo, esomeprazole elevated Cmax of palbociclib and ribociclib by 90.1% and 86.4%, whereas omeprazole reduced it by 32.0% and 16.8%, respectively.Conclusion: The RP-HPLC method was used to analyze in vitro and in vivo samples. Long-term treatment with PPIs affects pharmacokinetics of palbociclib and ribociclib, necessitating optimal chemotherapy regimen.

Proton pump inhibitors and gastroprotection in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs: A cardiologic point of view

Aspirin, other antiplatelet agents, and anticoagulant drugs are used across a wide spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. A concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed in these patients, as gastrointestinal complications are relatively frequent. On the other hand, a potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested in patients treated with PPIs; in particular, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection of clopidogrel, due to pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions through hepatic metabolism. Previously, the concomitant use of clopidogrel and omeprazole or esomeprazole has been discouraged. In contrast, it remains less known whether PPI use may affect the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor and prasugrel, new P2Y12 receptor antagonists. Current guidelines recommend PPI use in combination with antiplatelet treatment in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, PPIs could be recommended, even if their usefulness deserves further data. H. pylori infection should always be investigated and treated in patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication) treated with antithrombotic drugs. The present review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread combined use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs, discussing consequent clinical implications.

Gastroprotection in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy: a position paper of National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO)

Aspirin and P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists are widely used across the spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Gastrointestinal complications, including ulcer and bleeding, are relatively common during antiplatelet treatment and, therefore, concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed. However, potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested for PPIs, and, in recent years, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection by aspirin and, even more so, clopidogrel. Indeed, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies suggested an interaction through hepatic CYP2C19 between PPIs and clopidogrel, which could translate into clinical inefficacy, leading to higher rates of cardiovascular events. The FDA and the EMA sent a warning in 2010 discouraging the concomitant use of clopidogrel with omeprazole or esomeprazole. In addition, whether the use of PPIs may affect the clinical efficacy of the new P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists, ticagrelor and prasugrel, remains less known. According to current guidelines, PPIs in combination with antiplatelet treatment are recommended in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori infection. Like vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), DOACs can determine gastrointestinal bleeding. Results from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies suggest that high-dose dabigatran (150 mg bid), rivaroxaban and high-dose edoxaban (60 mg daily) are associated with a higher risk of GI bleeding as compared with apixaban and warfarin. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with GI risk factor, PPI could be recommended, even if usefulness of PPIs in these patients deserves further data. Helicobacter pylori should always be searched, and treated, in patients with history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication). Given the large number of patients treated with antithrombotic drugs and PPIs, even a minor reduction of platelet inhibition or anticoagulant effect potentially carries a considerable clinical impact. The present joint statement by ANMCO and AIGO summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs in combination. Moreover, it outlines evidence supporting or opposing drug interactions between these drugs and discusses consequent clinical implications.

Inhibitory Effect of Vonoprazan on the Metabolism of [14C]Prasugrel in Human Liver Microsomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A recent report indicated that the pharmacodynamic interaction between clopidogrel and vonoprazan leading to attenuation of the anti-platelet effect of clopidogrel was unlikely to be caused by the inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2B6, CYP2C19, or CYP3A4/5 by vonoprazan, based on in vitro CYP inhibition data. The current report investigates another important antiplatelet inhibitor, prasugrel, that is also activated through metabolism by CYP2B6, CYP2C19 and CYP3A4/5, for its CYP-based DDI potential with vonoprazan. The report describes in vitro metabolic inhibition assessments using radiolabeled prasugrel and human liver microsomes (HLMs).

METHODS

Reversible and time-dependent inhibition studies of vonoprazan as well as esomeprazole on the formation of the active metabolite R-138727 of prasugrel were conducted using HLMs.

RESULTS

Vonoprazan up to 10 μM, a concentration over 100-fold higher than the clinical maximum plasma concentration (C_max) of 75.9 nM after 20 mg once daily for 7 days, did not significantly affect the formation of R-138727 from [¹⁴C]prasugrel via reversible or time-dependent inhibition.

CONCLUSIONS

The in vitro data show that the pharmacodynamic interaction reported in the literature between vonoprazan and prasugrel is unlikely to be caused by CYP inhibition by vonoprazan. The results were similar to those obtained from the study with clopidogrel.

Proton Pump Inhibition in Patients Treated With Novel Antithrombotic Drugs: Should We Worry About Thrombosis?

Proton pump inhibition (PPI) administered together with antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents reduces the risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Several novel antithrombotic agents have been recently introduced for patients with acute coronary syndrome (prasugrel and ticagrelor) or for patients requiring long-term anticoagulation (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban). In fact, these agents might offer even stronger inhibition of platelets or coagulation compared with older agents; therefore, the need for gastroprotection might be even stronger when these new agents are used for long-term antithrombotic therapy. On the contrary, there are several reports regarding an adverse interaction between PPI and antithrombotic agents connected with a reduction in antithrombotic therapy on-treatment levels, implicating a higher risk of thrombosis. This interaction was demonstrated in clopidogrel-treated patients and more recently also in dabigatran-treated patients. This article discusses a possible novel antithrombotic therapy/PPI interaction leading to higher risk of thrombosis.

Effects of omeprazole or pantoprazole on platelet function in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients receiving clopidogrel

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the effect of omeprazole or pantoprazole on platelet reactivity in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients receiving clopidogrel.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with NSTE-ACS (n = 620) from general hospital of Shenyang Military Command were randomized to the omeprazole or pantoprazole (20 mg/d) group (1:1), and received routine dual antiplatelet treatment. Patients' reversion rate of adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation (ADP-PA) was assessed at baseline, 12 to 24 h after administration of medication, and after 72 h of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The primary endpoint of the study was platelet reactivity assessed with ADP-PA at 30 days after PCI. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded for 30-day and 180-day follow-up periods.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between both the groups in platelet response to clopidogrel at 12-24 h after drug administration (54.09% ± 18.90% vs 51.62% ± 19.85%, P = 0.12), 72 h after PCI (52.15% ± 19.45% vs 49.66% ± 20.05%, P = 0.18), and 30 days after PCI (50.44% ± 14.54% vs 48.52% ± 15.08%, P = 0.17). The rate of AEs did not differ significantly between groups during the 30-day (15.2% vs 14.8%, P = 0.91) and 180-day (16.5% vs 14.5%, P = 0.50) follow-up periods after PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of omeprazole or pantoprazole to clopidogrel did not restrict the effect of platelet aggregation by reducing the conversion of clopidogrel. Compared with clopidogrel alone, pantoprazole-clopidogrel and omeprazole-clopidogrel combinations did not increase the incidence of adverse clinical events during 30-day and 180-day follow-up periods after PCI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered in the National Institutes of Health website with identifier NCT01735227. Registered 14 November 2012.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation of esomeprazole for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used for the treatment of acid-related diseases such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). They are recommended by the American College of Gastroenterology for healing erosive esophagitis (EO) and as long-term treatment in patients with healed EO. The available PPIs differ somewhat in their pharmacokinetics and clinical properties, but whether these differences are of clinical relevance is a matter of debate. Some safety concerns have been raised with the use of PPIs, mostly an increased incidence of infectious diseases such as community-acquired pneumonia or Clostridium difficile diarrhea.

AREAS COVERED

This article explores the results of clinical studies on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of esomeprazole , as well as on its clinical efficacy to manage patients with GERD.

EXPERT OPINION

GERD is a public health concern as its worldwide incidence and associated complications are increasing alongside the exponentially increasing problem of obesity. PPIs are the first pharmacological option because of their efficacy and overall positive risk-to-benefit ratio. Improved efficacy with the use of stereospecific isomers of PPIs, such as esomeprazole, has not yet been convincingly demonstrated. Nevertheless, because of individual experience with former treatment, some patients may report better symptom control when treated with a specific PPI rather than with others.

Prasugrel but not high dose clopidogrel overcomes the lansoprazole neutralizing effect of P2Y12 inhibition: Results of the randomized DOSAPI study

AIMS

The potential negative metabolic interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel is an unsolved issue. We hypothesized that doubling the clopidogrel maintenance dose (150 mg) would be less effective than switching to prasugrel 10 mg maintenance dose (MD) to overcome this negative interaction.

METHOD AND RESULTS

In a randomized study with a factorial design, 82 stable coronary artery disease patients treated with 75 mg clopidogrel MD and aspirin were assigned to receive in a double blind fashion lansoprazole (30 mg/day) or placebo and to receive in an open fashion 150 mg clopidogrel MD or 10 mg prasugrel MD. The primary endpoint was the relative change in residual platelet reactivity over the 14-day study period [(RPA14day-RPAbaseline)/RPAbaseline]. The effect of doubling the clopidogrel MD on relative change in RPA was neutralized by lansoprazole (-53.6±48.4% versus +0.8±53.7% without and with lansoprazole, respectively, p = 0.02) whereas 10 mg of prasugrel MD dramatically reduced RPA irrespective of lansoprazole co-administration (-81.8 %±24.8% vs. -72.9%±32.9% without and with lansoprazole, respectively, p = NS). Lansoprazole exposure was the only parameter with a significant interaction with RPA among subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The higher platelet inhibitory effect obtained by doubling the clopidogrel MD was totally neutralized by the co-administration of lansoprazole. This drug interaction was not observed with prasugrel 10 mg.

Pharmacodynamic effects of cilostazol versus clopidogrel in stented patients under proton pump inhibitor co-administration: the ACCEL-PARAZOL study

AIM

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy has been shown to attenuate the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel. The aim of this study was to compare the antiplatelet effects of cilostazol versus clopidogrel in patients co-administered a PPI.

METHODS

We enrolled PPI-naïve stented patients treated with standard clopidogrel and aspirin therapy for at least six months (n=100). The patients were randomly assigned to receive either cilostazol at a dose of 100mg twice daily (CILO group) or clopidogrel at a dose of 75mg daily (CLPD group) in addition to lansoprazole (30mg daily). The platelet aggregation (PA) determined using light transmittance aggregometry and the platelet reactivity index (PRI) obtained using a vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay were measured before randomization and at the 14-day follow-up visit. The primary endpoint was the PRI value at follow-up.

RESULTS

At follow-up, the CLPD group showed similar values of PRI as the CILO group (66.9±14.0% vs. 63.1±14.1%; mean difference: 3.9%; 95% confidence interval of difference: -1.7% to 9.4%; p=0.174). However, the 6μg/mL collagen- and 0.5mg/mL arachidonic acid-induced PA values in the CLPD group were higher than those observed in the CILO group (mean differences: 9.8% to 11.1%; all p values ＜0.001). CYP2C19 loss-of-function allele carriage was the major contributing factor associated with the PRI level in the absence of lansoprazole treatment (with a gene-dose effect); this association was not observed in the subjects receiving lansoprazole co-administration in the CLPD group.

CONCLUSIONS

During lansoprazole co-administration, cilostazol treatment achieves a more favorable platelet function profile than clopidogrel therapy. The use of combination treatment with cilostazol and aspirin deserves further attention with respect to the management of stable stented patients requiring PPI co-administration.

Effect of esomeprazole with/without acetylsalicylic acid, omeprazole and lansoprazole on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE

The effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel was assessed in two healthy volunteer crossover studies.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Study 1: subjects received clopidogrel alone (300-mg loading dose, then 75 mg/day for 28 days) and two of three PPIs (omeprazole 80 mg, esomeprazole 40 mg or lansoprazole 60 mg) plus clopidogrel for 29 days in three treatment periods (randomized treatment sequence assignment). Study 2: subjects received clopidogrel alone (75 mg/day for 9 days) and clopidogrel alone for 4 days followed by clopidogrel plus fixed-combination esomeprazole 20 mg/low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) 81 mg for 5 days in two treatment periods (randomized treatment sequence assignment). Pharmacokinetic effects were estimated by measuring active metabolite of clopidogrel, and pharmacodynamic effects by inhibition of adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation.

RESULTS

There was a relative decrease of up to 50 % in exposure to the active metabolite of clopidogrel with the different PPIs (study 1), and close to 40 % with esomeprazole/low-dose ASA (study 2), compared with clopidogrel alone. There was an absolute decrease of up to 17 % in inhibition of ADP-induced platelet aggregation with co-administration of different PPIs, compared with clopidogrel alone; however, no differences in platelet inhibition were observed during co-administration with the esomeprazole/low-dose ASA fixed-dose combination.

CONCLUSION

Omeprazole, esomeprazole and lansoprazole decreased systemic exposure to the active metabolite of clopidogrel in healthy volunteers, leading to modest decreases in its antiplatelet effect. However, no apparent differences in platelet inhibition were observed when esomeprazole was co-administered with low-dose ASA as a fixed-dose combination.

Combination of high on-treatment platelet aggregation and low deaggregation better predicts long-term cardiovascular events in PCI patients under dual antiplatelet therapy

High on-treatment platelet reactivity is associated with short-term major cardiovascular (CV) events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Maximum and final aggregation assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) have both been used to predict short-term outcome after PCI, however their long-term prognostic impact remains controversial. There is currently no information regarding the prognostic role of deaggregation and its added value in combination with established aggregation parameters. About 1279 patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing PCI were enrolled in this monocentric study. On-treatment platelet aggregation under clopidogrel maintenance therapy, as well as deaggregation was determined by maximum and final aggregation (5 min after adding of the agonist). Deaggregation was defined as slope of the tangent between Aggmax +0.5 min. Primary endpoints were the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, and CV death or stent thrombosis according to the ARC criteria. Low deaggregation, defined as values in the lowest tertile (<1.5), was more frequent in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) compared to patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP), ACS: 29.6% vs. SAP: 22.0%, p = 0.001. The combination of high on-treatment platelet reactivity, defined by the upper tertile of Aggmax and low deaggregation, was associated with significantly increased risk for combined long-term CV events. The combination of low deaggregation and high on-treatment platelet reactivity is associated with higher risk for recurrent events in patients with CAD undergoing PCI. Thus, deaggregation might be a more sensitive parameter providing added value in terms of risk prediction for long-term recurrent CV events in relation with established aggregation parameters.

Interaction between Red Yeast Rice and CYP450 Enzymes/P-Glycoprotein and Its Implication for the Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Lovastatin

Red yeast rice (RYR) can reduce cholesterol through its active component, lovastatin. This study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic properties of lovastatin in RYR products and potential RYR-drug interactions. Extracts of three registered RYR products (LipoCol Forte, Cholestin, and Xuezhikang) were more effective than pure lovastatin in inhibiting the activities of cytochrome P450 enzymes and P-glycoprotein. Among CYP450 enzymes, RYR showed the highest inhibition on CYP1A2 and CYP2C19, with comparable inhibitory potencies to the corresponding typical inhibitors. In healthy volunteers taking the RYR product LipoCol Forte, the pharmacokinetic properties of lovastatin and lovastatin acid were linear in the dose range of 1 to 4 capsules taken as a single dose and no significant accumulation was observed after multiple dosing. Concomitant use of one LipoCol Forte capsule with nifedipine did not change the pharmacokinetics of nifedipine. Yet, concomitant use of gemfibrozil with LipoCol Forte resulted in a significant increase in the plasma concentration of lovastatin acid. These findings suggest that the use of RYR products may not have effects on the pharmacokinetics of concomitant comedications despite their effects to inhibit the activities of CYP450 enzymes and P-gp, whereas gemfibrozil affects the pharmacokinetics of lovastatin acid when used concomitantly with RYR products.