Pharmacodynamic study of prasugrel or clopidogrel in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome with CYP2C19 genetic variants undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PRAISE-GENE trial)

Comparative effects of different antiplatelet strategies in carriers of CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Carriers of cytochrome 2C19 (CYP2C19) loss-of-function (LoF) alleles treated with clopidogrel have impaired drug metabolism, resulting in reduced active metabolite levels, high platelet reactivity (HPR), and an increased risk of thrombotic events. Several alternative antiplatelet therapies have been proposed to overcome HPR in these patients, but their comparative effects remain poorly explored.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different oral antiplatelet therapies in carriers of CYP2C19 LoF alleles undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were included. A frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted to estimate mean difference (MD) or odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary outcome was platelet reactivity assessed by VerifyNow and reported as P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU). The secondary outcome was the rate of HPR. Standard dose of clopidogrel (75 mg daily) was used as a reference treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 12 RCTs testing 6 alternative strategies (i.e. clopidogrel 150 mg, prasugrel 3.75 mg, 5 mg, and 10 mg, ticagrelor 90 mg bid, and adjunctive cilostazol 100 mg bid) were included in the network. Compared with standard-dose clopidogrel, the greatest reduction in PRU was observed with prasugrel 10 mg (MD -127.91; 95% CI -141.04; -114.78) and ticagrelor 90 mg bid (MD -124.91; 95% CI -161.78; -88.04), followed by prasugrel 5 mg (MD -76.33; 95% CI -98.01; -54.65) and prasugrel 3.75 mg (MD -73.00; 95% CI -100.28; -45.72). Among other strategies, adjunctive cilostazol (MD -42.64; 95% CI -64.72; -20.57) and high-dose clopidogrel (MD -32.11; 95% CI -51.33; -12.90) were associated with a modest reduction in PRU compared with standard-dose clopidogrel.

CONCLUSION

Among carriers of CYP2C19 LoF alleles undergoing PCI, standard-dose prasugrel or ticagrelor are most effective in reducing platelet reactivity, while double-dose clopidogrel and additional cilostazol showed modest effects. Reduced-dose of prasugrel may represent a balanced strategy to overcome HPR without a significant increase in bleeding. The clinical implications of these pharmacodynamic findings warrant further investigation.

CYP2C19 Genetic Testing for Oral P2Y12 Inhibitor Therapy: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

There is significant variability in the efficacy and safety of oral P2Y12 inhibitors, which are used to prevent ischemic outcomes in common diseases such as coronary and peripheral arterial disease and stroke. Clopidogrel, a prodrug, is the most used oral P2Y12 inhibitor and is activated primarily after being metabolized by a highly polymorphic hepatic cytochrome CYP2C219 enzyme. Loss-of-function genetic variants in CYP2C219 are common, can result in decreased active metabolite levels and increased on-treatment platelet aggregation, and are associated with increased ischemic events on clopidogrel therapy. Such patients can be identified by CYP2C19 genetic testing and can be treated with alternative therapy. Conversely, universal use of potent oral P2Y12 inhibitors such as ticagrelor or prasugrel, which are not dependent on CYP2C19 for activation, has been recommended but can result in increased bleeding. Recent clinical trials and meta-analyses have demonstrated that a precision medicine approach in which loss-of-function carriers are prescribed ticagrelor or prasugrel and noncarriers are prescribed clopidogrel results in reducing ischemic events without increasing bleeding risk. The evidence to date supports CYP2C19 genetic testing before oral P2Y12 inhibitors are prescribed in patients with acute coronary syndromes or percutaneous coronary intervention. Clinical implementation of such genetic testing will depend on among multiple factors: rapid availability of results or adoption of the concept of performing preemptive genetic testing, provision of easy-to-understand results with therapeutic recommendations, and seamless integration in the electronic health record.

Differences in Optimal Platelet Reactivity after Potent P2Y12 Inhibitor Treatment in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background: East Asian patients receiving treatment with the potent P2Y12 inhibitors prasugrel or ticagrelor experience more potent platelet inhibition than with clopidogrel. Methods: This study investigated differences in OPR rates with reduced doses of prasugrel (n = 38) or ticagrelor (n = 40) for maintenance therapy in 118 Korean ACS patients who had undergone PCI, in comparison to conventional-dose clopidogrel (n = 40). We assessed drug responses at one- and three-months post-PCI with VerifyNow and multiple electrode aggregometry assays. Results: At the one-month period, patients receiving standard-dose prasugrel or ticagrelor had lower platelet reactivity as determined by the three assays than those receiving the conventional dose of clopidogrel (VN: p = 0.000; MEA: p = 0.000; LTA: p = 0.000). At the 3-month point, platelet reactivity was lower in those receiving reduced-dose prasugrel or ticagrelor than the clopidogrel-treated patients (VN: p = 0.000; MEA: p = 0.012; LTA: p = 0.002). Prasugrel resulted in significantly lower platelet inhibition than ticagrelor as determined by VN and LTA (VN: p = 0.000; LTA: p = 0.003). At three months, there was a significant overall difference in OPR among the three groups when measured by VN (p < 0.001), but not when measured by MEA (p = 0.596). OPR in the reduced-dose prasugrel group was not significantly different to the clopidogrel group at three months (VN: p = 0.180; MEA: p = 0.711). OPR in the reduced-dose ticagrelor group was similar to clopidogrel as determined by MEA at three months, but was different when assessed by VN (VN: p = 0.000; MEA: p = 0.540). Compared to standard-dose, the reduced-dose prasugrel OPR rate was significantly increased (VN: p = 0.008; MEA: p = 0.020). Conclusions: OPR values for reduced-dose prasugrel and conventional-dose clopidogrel at three months were similar but higher than for reduced-dose ticagrelor as determined by VN, but no differences were noted by MEA. The MEA assay might have less sensitivity and consistency than the VN assay. Further studies are needed to explore this discrepancy.

Prasugrel switching from clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome in Taiwanese patients: an analysis of safety and efficacy

The recommended maintenance dose of prasugrel for East Asian populations (i.e., Japanese and Taiwanese) is 3.75 mg as part of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for the prevention of recurrent ischemia and stent thrombosis in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This modified dosage regimen has been established in studies conducted in Japan; however, the efficacy and safety of switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel DAPT among Taiwanese patients remain to be explored. In this phase IV, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study, we evaluated the 4-week pharmacodynamic response, and the 48-week safety outcomes of prasugrel 3.75 mg after a switch from clopidogrel in Taiwanese ACS patients. A total of 203 prasugrel-naïve ACS patients (over 90% male) who had received post-PCI clopidogrel DAPT for at least 2 weeks were enrolled from ten medical centers in Taiwan and subsequently switched to prasugrel 3.75 mg DAPT. Four weeks after the switch, P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) values were significantly decreased in the total cohort (mean - 18.2 ± 48.1; 95% confidence interval - 24.9 to - 11.5, p < 0.001), and there was an overall consistent antiplatelet response in the treated subjects. The proportion of patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR; PRU > 208) dropped from 23.5 to 10% (p < 0.001). Female sex was associated with a greater PRU reduction with prasugrel, whereas HPR at baseline, age ≥ 65 years, and body mass index ≥ 25 best predicted HPR at Week 4. Throughout the 48-week treatment with prasugrel, the incidences of MACE (1.0%) and TIMI major bleeding (2.0%) were rather low, accompanying an acceptable safety profile of TIMI minor (6.4%) and non-major, non-minor clinically relevant bleeding (3.0%). Overall, switching to the maintenance dose of prasugrel (3.75 mg) was observed to be effective and well tolerated among post-PCI ACS patients in Taiwan. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT03672097.

Pharmacodynamics and Outcomes of a De-Escalation Strategy with Half-Dose Prasugrel or Ticagrelor in East Asians Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Results from HOPE-TAILOR Trial

East Asians treated with potent P2Y12 inhibitors (prasugrel or ticagrelor) generally experience more intense platelet inhibitory responses resulting in an increased risk of major bleeding. Whether a half-dose de-escalation strategy improves the net clinical benefit in Korean patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains uncertain. A total of 120 patients were pragmatically randomized to either prasugrel (n = 39, 60 mg loading dose (LD)/10 mg maintenance dose (MD)), ticagrelor (n = 40, 180 mg LD/90 mg MD), or clopidogrel (n = 41, 600 mg LD/75 mg MD) followed by a half-dose reduction at 1 month, or conventional dose 75 mg clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was the incidence of optimal platelet reactivity (OPR), defined as a P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) value between 85 and 208 (by VerifyNow) at 3 months. Ticagrelor treatment achieved a significantly lower PRU compared with prasugrel and clopidogrel (31.0 ± 34.5 vs. 93.2 ± 57.1 vs. 153.1 ± 69.4), resulting in the lowest rate of OPR (12.5% vs. 48.7% vs. 63.4%). At 9 months, the minor bleeding was significantly higher with potent P2Y12 inhibitors than with clopidogrel (31.6% vs. 12.2%; HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.12-7.75). Only a few patients experienced ischemic complications. In Korean ACS patients, a de-escalation strategy with half-dose ticagrelor and prasugrel from standard dose increased the OPR rate significantly. Half-dose ticagrelor had a lower OPR rate and greater platelet inhibition compared with half-dose prasugrel as well as conventional-dose clopidogrel. Optimal dose reduction strategies for potent P2Y12 inhibitors require further investigation to balance safety and efficacy.

Point-of-Care Platelet Function Monitoring: Implications for Patients With Platelet Inhibitors in Cardiac Surgery

Although most physicians are comfortable managing the limited anticoagulant effect of aspirin, the recent administration of potent P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors in patients undergoing cardiac surgery remains a dilemma. Guidelines recommend discontinuation of potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitors 5- to- 7 days before surgery to reduce the risk of postoperative hemorrhage. Such a strategy might not be feasible before urgent surgery, due to ongoing myocardial ischemia or in patients at high risk for thromboembolic events. Recently, different point-of-care devices to assess functional platelet quality have become available for clinical use. The aim of this narrative review was to evaluate the implications and potential benefits of platelet function monitoring in guiding perioperative management and therapeutic options in patients treated with antiplatelets, including aspirin or P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors, undergoing cardiac surgery. No objective superiority of one point-of-care device over another was found in a large meta-analysis. Their accuracy and reliability are generally limited in the perioperative period. In particular, preoperative platelet function testing has been used to assess platelet contribution to bleeding after cardiac surgery. However, predictive values for postoperative hemorrhage and transfusion requirements are low, and there is a significant variability between and within these tests. Further, platelet function monitoring has been used to optimize the preoperative waiting period after cessation of dual antiplatelet therapy before urgent cardiac surgery. Furthermore, studies assessing their value in therapeutic decisions in bleeding patients after cardiac surgery are scarce. A general and liberal use of perioperative platelet function testing is not yet recommended.