The effect of antiplatelet drugs clopidogrel and aspirin is less immediately after stent implantation

Enhanced platelet inhibition by clopidogrel and risk of bleeding in patients requiring oral anticoagulation after drug-eluting stent implantation

AIMS

Clopidogrel is the P2Y12 inhibitor of choice in patients who undergo PCI and have an indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC). Prediction of the bleeding risk is of major interest in this population. The aim of this analysis was to investigate whether an enhanced platelet inhibition by clopidogrel measured by platelet function testing (PFT) with the Multiplate Analyzer is associated with an increased bleeding risk in patients on triple antithrombotic therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This investigation was performed in a cohort of 524 patients from the randomised ISAR-TRIPLE trial; 458 (87.4%) had PFT results available in the first 24 hours after PCI. Patients belonging to the lowest quintile according to PFT were considered as enhanced responders to clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was major bleeding according to TIMI criteria at nine months. The median of ADP-induced platelet aggregation in the whole population was 163 AU*min (107-241). Patients in the lowest quintile had values below 93 AU*min. These enhanced responders (92 patients) had a significantly higher risk of TIMI major bleeding (hazard ratio [HR] 3.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38-7.09, p=0.01) and overall mortality (HR 3.42, 95% CI: 1.55-7.52, p=0.004) compared with the remaining patients (366 patients). No significant difference was observed for the secondary combined ischaemic endpoint (HR 1.27, 95% CI: 0.47-3.47, p=0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced platelet inhibition delivered by clopidogrel is associated with an increased risk for major bleeding and death in patients on OAC who undergo PCI. These results support the use of PFT to identify patients with an increased risk for bleeding.

How to improve the concept of individualised antiplatelet therapy with P2Y12 receptor inhibitors – is an algorithm the answer?

Within the past decade, high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) on clopidogrel and its clinical implications have been frequently discussed. Although it has been previously assumed that HTPR is a phenomenon occurring only in patients treated with clopidogrel, recent data show that HTPR might also occur during treatment with prasugrel or ticagrelor in the acute phase of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Moreover, it has been postulated that there is a therapeutic window for P2Y12 receptor blockers, thus indicating that HTPR is associated with thrombotic events whereas low on-treatment platelet reactivity (LTPR) is associated with bleeding events. The current paper focuses on tools to identify risk factors for HTPR (pharmacogenomic testing, clinical scoring and drug-drug interactions) and on the use of platelet function testing in order to identify patients who might not respond adequately to clopidogrel. The majority of recent clinical randomised trials have not supported the hypothesis that platelet function testing and tailored antiplatelet therapy are providing a favourable clinical outcome. These trials, mainly performed in low-to-moderate risk patients, will be reviewed and discussed. Finally, an algorithm based on current knowledge is suggested, which might be of use for design of clinical trials.

Prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel

The existence of poor biological response to clopidogrel has been shown in some patients. Despite the increasing number of studies, this phenomenon remains difficult to quantify. We performed a systematic review to estimate the prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel and investigate the factors known to modulate this. An exhaustive search was performed. Altogether 171 publications were identified, providing data for a total of 45,664 subjects. The estimated prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel ranged from 15.9% to 49.5% according to the platelet function assay employed. The assays most frequently used were light transmittance aggregometry (LTA), the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) assay and the Verify -now® assay. For all these assays, higher cut-off values were associated with a lower prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel. However, when choosing a fixed cut-off point for each assay, the prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel was highly variable suggesting that other factors could modulate poor biological response to clopidogrel. Finally, none of the studied factors could apparently explain the variability of poor biological response to clopidogrel. This meta-analysis shows that the prevalence of poor biological response depends on the assay employed, the cut-off value and on various unidentified additional factors.

Does percutaneous coronary stent implantation increase platelet reactivity?

High platelet reactivity (PR) values on treatment with clopidogrel are associated with an increased rate of thrombotic events after a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, we do not know the optimal timing of the performance of the PR measurements. Platelets might be activated during a PCI, which means that the timing of PR measurements, before or after PCI, could influence the outcome. In turn, this could lead to misinterpretation of the patient's response to antiplatelet therapy and a less accurate prediction of the patient's risk of thrombotic events during follow-up. We aimed to evaluate the effect of stent implantation on PR in patients with and without acute coronary syndromes who undergo PCI to assess the optimal timing of PR measurements. A systematic literature search was performed and the results are summarized in this review.

Does the response to aspirin and clopidogrel vary over 6 months in patients with ischemic heart disease?

BACKGROUND

Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor, mostly clopidogrel, is the default therapy in both acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and after intracoronary stents. It is well established that responses to antiplatelet therapy (APT), particularly clopidogrel, are subject to considerable interindividual variability.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated whether responses to APT in individuals vary significantly over time.

METHODS

Simultaneous assay with VerifyNow(™) and short thrombelastography (s-TEG) was performed before and at four time points over 6 months after hospital discharge in 40 patients receiving DAPT. Serum thromboxane B2 levels were also measured.

RESULTS

While aspirin response units (ARU) by VerifyNow(™) and serum thromboxane B2 levels remained stable over time, arachidonic acid (AA)-mediated platelet aggregation with s-TEG (i.e. area under the curve at 15 min in AA channel, AUC15AA ) increased at 1 week compared with predischarge (P < 0.008). In addition, platelet reactivity units (PRU) by VerifyNow(™) (P = 0.046) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-mediated platelet aggregation with s-TEG (i.e. AUC15ADP ) also increased at 1 week compared with predischarge (P = 0.026). There were no significant changes in either platelet reactivity or rates of high on-treatment platelet reactivity while receiving clopidogrel beyond 1 week.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates important variability in responses to APT within individuals between predischarge and 1 week but not thereafter. The use of a single early (predischarge) platelet function assay as an indicator of future response may therefore be flawed. The design of future strategies to assess individual responses for tailored therapy needs to take this into account.

A comparative cohort study on personalised antiplatelet therapy in PCI-treated patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity. Results of the ISAR-HPR registry

In clopidogrel-treated patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), high platelet reactivity (HPR) is associated with a higher risk for thrombotic events including stent thrombosis (ST). A personalised therapy with selective intensification of treatment may improve HPR patients´ outcome in this setting although recent randomised trials are against this hypothesis. The aim of the ISAR-HPR registry was to assess whether clopidogrel-treated HPR patients benefit from selective intensification of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. For the registry, outcomes were compared between two cohorts. We identified 428 clopidogrel treated HPR patients (AU x min ≥468 on the Multiplate analyser) between 2007-2008 (historical control cohort) without a change of treatment based on platelet function (PF) testing results. Between 2009-2011, we identified 571 HPR patients (guided therapy cohort) and used this information for guidance and selective intensification of P2Y12 receptor directed treatment (reloading with clopidogrel, switch to prasugrel, re-testing) in a setting of routine PF testing. The primary outcome was the composite of death from any cause or ST after 30 days. Major bleeding according to TIMI criteria was also monitored. The incidence of the primary outcome was significantly lower in the guided vs the control cohort (7 [1.2%] vs 16 [3.7%] events; HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.79; p=0.009). The incidence of major bleeding was numerically but not statistically higher in the guided vs the control cohort (1.9 vs 0.7%; p=0.10). In conclusion, present findings are in support for a PF testing guided antiplatelet therapy with selective intensification of P2Y12 receptor inhibition. The issue of personalised antiplatelet treatment warrants further investigation in randomized and well-controlled clinical trials.

Rationale and design of the on-treatment PLAtelet Reactivity-Guided Therapy Modification FOR ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (PLATFORM) randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

The present trial aims at examining whether antiplatelet regimen modification, guided by assessment of the on-treatment platelet reactivity, might result with clinical benefit in moderate to high-risk patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).

BACKGROUND

High platelet reactivity has been associated with an increased rate of ischemic events after PCI. Recent large trials did not show a clinical benefit of platelet reactivity-guided therapy modification in acute coronary syndrome patients treated by PCI.

METHODS

PLATFORM is an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial. Approximately 632 STEMI patients with intermediate to high-risk (RISK-PCI score >3) clinical features undergoing PPCI will be randomly allocated to treatment modification or standard therapy. Low responders to aspirin will receive 200 mg aspirin for 30 days. Low responders to clopidogrel will receive 180 mg ticagrelor for 1 year. The primary end-point is the time to the first composite major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) including death, nonfatal infarction, stroke, or immediate target vessel revascularization. Key safety end-point is the rate of TIMI major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Our secondary end-points are individual components of MACE, definite stent thrombosis, total bleeding, and the need for blood transfusions. Patients will be followed-up at 30 days and at 1 year after PPCI.

CONCLUSION

PLATFORM will determine whether the platelet reactivity-guided use of ticagrelor in combination with 200 mg aspirin, compared with standard antiplatelet regimen, improves clinical outcome in moderate to high-risk STEMI patients undergoing PPCI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) at www.clinicaltrials.gov. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01739556, and Current Controlled Trials at www.controlledtrials.com. International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN83081599.

Periprocedural variations of platelet reactivity during elective percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) modulates platelet reactivity (PR).

OBJECTIVES

To assess: (i) the impact of coronary interventions on periprocedural variations (Δ) of PR; (ii) whether ΔPR correlates with periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI); and (iii) the mechanisms of these variations in vitro.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We enrolled 65 patients on aspirin (80-100 mg day(-1)) and clopidogrel (600 mg, 12 h before PCI): 15 with coronary angiography (CA group), 40 with PCI (PCI group), and 10 with rotational atherectomy plus PCI (RA group). PR was assessed by ADP, high-sensitivity ADP and thrombin receptor activator peptide 6 tests prior to, immediately after and 24 h after the procedure. E-selectin and ICAM-1 were assessed prior to and immediately after the procedure. In vitro, PR was measured during pulsatile blood flow at baseline, after balloon inflation and after stent implantation in six porcine carotid arteries and five plastic tubes. PR declined in the CA group, but significantly increased in the PCI and RA groups immediately postprocedure, and decreased to baseline at 24 h. ΔPR increased across the three groups (P < 0.0001). In the PCI group, ΔPR was directly related to total inflation time (r = 0.435, P = 0.005) and total stent length (r = 0.586, P < 0.001). The change in E-selectin significantly and inversely correlated with ΔPR (P < 0.001). No correlation was found with sICAM-1. PR increased significantly more in patients with PMI than in patients without PMI (P = 0.013). In vitro, platelet activation was observed in the presence of carotid arteries but not in the presence of plastic tubes.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite dual antiplatelet therapy, PCI affected platelet function proportionally to procedural complexity and the extent of vascular damage.

Prognostic value of a high on-clopidogrel treatment platelet reactivity in bivalirudin versus abciximab treated non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients. ISAR-REACT 4 (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment-4) platelet substudy

OBJECTIVES

The ISAR-REACT 4 (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment-4) platelet substudy aimed to determine the relevance of high on-clopidogrel treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients that received abciximab with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or bivalirudin during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing PCI, HPR has been linked to a higher risk for ischemic events. The influence of HPR on clinical outcomes may differ with regard to the adjunctive antithrombotic treatment administered. In ISAR-REACT 4, bivalirudin treatment showed similar efficacy profiles as compared to abciximab with UFH. The impact of HPR on clinical outcomes in abciximab with UFH versus bivalirudin treated non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients has never been investigated specifically.

METHODS

A total of 564 patients (274 in abciximab/UFH group vs. 290 in bivalirudin group) were enrolled in this study. Presence or absence of HPR following clopidogrel loading was determined by platelet function testing on a Multiplate analyzer (Verum Diagnostica, Munich, Germany). Per study group and stratified in HPR and no-HPR patients, the 30-day incidence of a combined efficacy endpoint (death, myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization) was determined.

RESULTS

For abciximab with UFH, the incidence of the efficacy endpoint was similar in HPR versus no-HPR patients (9.4% vs. 6.7%; odds ratio: 1.4; 95% confidence interval: 0.6 to 3.5; p = 0.43). For bivalirudin, the incidence of the efficacy endpoint was significantly higher in HPR versus no-HPR patients (22.0% vs. 5.0%; odds ratio: 5.4; 95% confidence interval: 2.4 to 12.1; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with a risk profile similar to the subjects enrolled in this platelet substudy, the impact of HPR on clinical outcomes may depend on the type of adjunctive antithrombotic therapy used during PCI. Further investigations are warranted to clarify whether assessment of platelet function may help tailoring antithrombotic therapy during PCI.

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

BACKGROUND

Prognostic values of genotyping and phenotyping for assessment of clopidogrel responsiveness have been shown in independent studies.

OBJECTIVES

To compare different assays for prediction of events during long-term follow-up.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study polymorphisms of CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*17 alleles, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation (VASP) assay, multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA), cone and platelet analyser (CPA) and platelet function analyser (PFA-100) were performed in 416 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The rates of events were recorded during a 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Platelet aggregation by MEA predicted stent thrombosis (2.4%) better (c-index = 0.90; P < 0.001; sensitivity = 90%; specificity = 83%) than the VASP assay, CPA or PFA-100 (c-index < 0.70; P > 0.05; sensitivity < 70%; specificity < 70% for all) or even the CYP2C19*2 polymorphism (c-index < 0.56; P > 0.05; sensitivity = 30%; specificity = 71%). Survival analysis indicated that patients classified as poor responders by MEA had a substantially higher risk of developing stent thrombosis or MACE than clopidogrel responders (12.5% vs. 0.3%, P < 0.001, and 18.5% vs. 11.3%, P = 0.022, respectively), whereas poor metabolizers (CYP2C19*1/*2 or *2/*2 carriers) were not at increased risks (stent thrombosis, 2.7% vs. 2.5%, P > 0.05; MACE, 13.5% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.556). The incidence of major bleedings (2.6%) was numerically higher in patients with an enhanced vs. poor response to clopidogrel assessed by MEA (4% vs. 0%) or in ultra-metabolizers vs. regular metabolizers (CYP2C19*17/*17 vs. CYP2C19*1/*1; 9.5% vs. 2%). The classification tree analysis demonstrated that acute coronary syndrome at hospitalization and diabetes mellitus were the best discriminators for clopidogrel responder status.

CONCLUSIONS

 Phenotyping of platelet response to clopidogrel was a better predictor of stent thrombosis than genotyping.

ARC15105 is a potent antagonist of von Willebrand factor mediated platelet activation and adhesion

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the stability, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profile of the 2(nd) generation anti-von Willeband factor aptamer ARC15105.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Platelet plug formation was measured by collagen/adenosine diphosphate-induced closure time with the platelet function analyzer-100 and platelet aggregation by multiple electrode aggregometry. Platelet adhesion was measured on denuded porcine aortas and in a flow chamber. Aptamer stability was assessed by incubation in nuclease rich human, monkey, and rat serum for up to 72 hours. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles were tested in cynomolgus monkeys after IV and SC administration. The median IC(100) and IC(50) to prolong collagen/adenosine diphosphate-induced closure timewere 27 nmol/L and 12 nmol/L, respectively. ARC15105 (1.3 μmol/L) completely inhibited ristocetin-induced platelet aggregation in whole blood (P<0.001), but also diminished collagen, ADP, arachidonic acid, and thrombin receptor activating peptide-induced platelet aggregation to some extent (P<0.05). ARC15105 (40 nmol/L) decreased platelet adhesion by >90% on denuded porcine aortas (P<0.001), which was comparable to the degree of inhibition obtained with abciximab. ARC15105 (100 nmol/L) also inhibited platelet adhesion to collagen under arterial shear in a flow chamber by >90% (P<0.001). The IV and SC terminal half-lives in cynomolgus monkeys were 67 and 65 hours, respectively, and the SC bioavailability was ≈98%. Allometric scaling estimates the human T(1/2) would be ≈217 hours. Pharmacodynamic analysis confirms that ARC15105 inhibits von Willeband factor activity >90% in blood samples taken 300 hours after a 20 mg/kg IV or SC dose in monkeys.

CONCLUSIONS

The potency, pharmacokinetic profile, and SC bioavailability of ARC15105 support its clinical investigation for chronic inhibition of von Willeband factor -mediated platelet activation.

Diurnal variation in platelet inhibition by clopidogrel

Morning increase in the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke and sudden cardiac death is a well-recognized phenomenon, which is in line with a morning enhancement of platelet aggregation. We investigated whether platelet inhibition during clopidogrel and aspirin therapy varies during the day. Fifty-nine consecutive patients (45 men and 14 women) with first ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary interventions (pPCI) on dual antiplatelet therapy were prospectively enrolled into the study. Blood samples were collected 4 days after start of clopidogrel treatment at 6.00 a.m., 10.00 a.m., 2.00 p.m. and 7.00 p.m. Arachidonic acid and adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation were assessed by impedance aggregometry. Platelet inhibition by clopidogrel was lowest in the midmorning: median ADP-induced platelet aggregation was 55%, 17% and 27% higher at 10.00 a.m. compared to 6.00 a.m., 2.00 p.m. and 7.00 p.m., respectively (p < 0.002). Nonresponsiveness to clopidogrel defined according to the device manufacturer was 2.4-fold more frequent in the midmorning than in the early morning. We observed a more pronounced midmorning increase in ADP-induced platelet aggregation in diabetic patients when compared to non-diabetics. In contrast, no diurnal variation in the antiplatelet effect of aspirin was observed. In conclusion, in patients presenting with STEMI undergoing pPCI, platelet inhibition by clopidogrel is less strong in the midmorning hours. This periodicity in platelet aggregation in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy should be taken into consideration when assessing platelet function in clinical studies.

Clinical, genetic and confounding factors determine the dynamics of the in vitro response/non response to clopidogrel

Platelet inhibition by clopidogrel varies from one individual to the next. Further, in vitro high on-treatment residual adenosine-diphosphate inducible platelet reactivity (HRPR) is associated with an increased risk for major adverse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation. Recent studies identified numerous influencing factors for the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. Besides genetic predispositions, diverse clinical conditions as well as pharmacological interactions were shown to significantly impair clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition. Consequently, these influencing factors may affect clinical outcome after PCI and it is therefore desirable to identify cofounders of HRPR by platelet reactivity testing. It is apparent, that not all assays are sensitive to the same variables, and only cofounders of HRPR that are repeatedly identified by more than one test system may be clinically meaningful. However, treatment adjustment based on platelet function testing has not been associated with improved patients' outcome. This summary shall provide an overview over current knowledge on influencing factors for clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition and aid guidance for critical interpretation of in vitro obtained data on HRPR.

Ticagrelor: from discovery to Phase III clinical trial

Ticagrelor (AZD6140), a cyclopentyl-triazolo-pyrimidine, is the first orally available antagonist of the ADP receptor of the P2Y12 subtype. Ticagrelor inhibits platelets in a reversible manner and does not require hepatic bioactivation. The pharmacology of ticagrelor indicates that it provides more consistent, more rapid and more potent platelet inhibition than clopidogrel. Preclinical and clinical studies with ticagrelor have demonstrated that this drug has excellent oral bioavailability. The Phase III clinical study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) has shown that ticagrelor reduced ischemic events and all-cause mortality without an increase in major bleeding complications. Potential advantages of ticagrelor include more flexibility in its use if rapid onset of action is needed before percutaneous coronary interventions or when cessation is required before coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Potential disadvantages include more side effects such as dyspnea, ventricular pauses or an increase in concentrations of uric acid and creatinine. However, ticagrelor did not only reduce death due to vascular causes but also all-cause mortality. Further clinical trials in indications other than acute coronary syndrome are awaited.

The influence of proton pump inhibitors on the antiplatelet potency of clopidogrel evaluated by 5 different platelet function tests

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are metabolized by the cytochrome P450 enzyme system to a variable degree and may therefore interact with the metabolism of clopidogrel to its active form. The conflicting data on this potential interaction may be due to the use of different PPIs and platelet function tests in recent studies. We therefore evaluated the influence of different PPIs on the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel by 5 platelet function tests in the same population. Adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-inducible platelet reactivity was assessed in 230 patients on dual antiplatelet therapy after angioplasty and stenting for cardiovascular disease by the light transmission aggregometry, VerifyNow P2Y12 assay, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay, multiple electrode aggregometry, and Impact-R. ADP-inducible platelet reactivity showed no significant differences between patients without (n = 95, 41.3%) and with PPI therapy (n = 135, 58.7%) in each test system (all P > 0.05). Furthermore, we observed no significant differences of ADP-inducible platelet reactivity between patients without PPIs and patients with pantoprazole (n = 95, 70.4%), esomeprazole (n = 22, 16.3%), omeprazole (n = 9, 6.65%), or lansoprazole (n = 9, 6.65%) (all P > 0.3). High on-treatment residual ADP-inducible platelet reactivity occurred to a similar extent in patients without and with PPI therapy in each assay (all P > 0.05). In conclusion, concomitant treatment with PPIs did not attenuate the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy irrespective of the type of PPI and the used test system.

Multiple electrode aggregometry predicts stent thrombosis better than the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The prognostic value of the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) phosphorylation assay and multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) for thrombotic adverse events has been shown in independent studies. As no direct comparison between the two methods has been made so far, we investigated which laboratory approach has a better predictive value for stent thrombosis.

METHODS

The VASP phosphorylation assay and MEA were performed in 416 patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The rate of stent thrombosis was recorded during a 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Definite stent thrombosis occurred in three patients (0.7%) and probable stent thrombosis in four (1%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis demonstrated that MEA distinguishes between patients with or without subsequent stent thrombosis better than the VASP phosphorylation assay: the area under the ROC curve was higher for MEA (0.92; P=0.012) than for the VASP phosphorylation assay (0.60; P=0.55). At equal levels of sensitivity (100%), the specificity was greater for MEA than for the VASP phosphorylation assay (86% vs. 37%). Stent thrombosis occurred in 9% of patients with platelet hyperreactivity in MEA, who were simultaneously clopidogrel non-responders in the VASP phosphorylation assay. Interestingly, clopidogrel non-responders in the VASP phosphorylation assay without platelet hyperreactivity in MEA did not suffer from stent thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Platelet hyperreactivity in MEA might be a better risk predictor for stent thrombosis than the assessment of the specific clopidogrel effect with the VASP phosphorylation assay.

Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and clinical profile of novel antiplatelet drugs targeting vascular diseases

Platelet inhibitors are the mainstay treatment for patients with vascular diseases. The current 'gold standard' antiplatelet agent clopidogrel has several pharmacological and clinical limitations that have prompted the search for more effective platelet antagonists. The candidates include various blockers of the purinergic P2Y12 receptor such as prasugrel, an oral irreversible thienopyridine; two adenosine triphosphate analogues that bind reversibly to the P2Y12 receptor: ticagrelor (oral) and cangrelor (intravenous); elinogrel, a direct-acting reversible P2Y12 receptor inhibitor (the only antiplatelet compound that can be administered both intravenously and orally); BX 667, an orally active and reversible small-molecule P2Y12 receptor antagonist; SCH 530348, SCH 205831, SCH 602539 and E5555, highly selective and orally active antagonists on the protease-activated receptor 1. A number of drugs also hit new targets: terutroban, an oral, selective and specific inhibitor of the thromboxane receptor; ARC1779, a second-generation, nuclease resistant aptamer which inhibits von Willebrand factor-dependent platelet aggregation; ALX-0081, a bivalent humanized nanobody targeting the GPIb binding site of von Willebrand factor and AJW200, an IgG4 monoclonal antibody of von Willebrand factor. The pharmacology and clinical profiles of new platelet antagonists indicate that they provide more consistent, more rapid and more potent platelet inhibition than agents currently used. Whether these potential advantages will translate into clinical advantages will require additional comparisons in properly powered, randomized, controlled trials.