Different methodologies for evaluating the effect of clopidogrel on platelet function in high-risk coronary artery disease patients

Cancer progression and tumor hypercoagulability: a platelet perspective

Venous thromboembolism, which is common in cancer patients and accompanies or even precedes malignant tumors, is known as cancer-related thrombosis and is an important cause of cancer- associated death. At present, the exact etiology of the elevated incidence of venous thrombosis in cancer patients remains elusive. Platelets play a crucial role in blood coagulation, which is intimately linked to the development of arterial thrombosis. Additionally, platelets contribute to tumor progression and facilitate immune evasion by tumors. Tumor cells can interact with the coagulation system through various mechanisms, such as producing hemostatic proteins, activating platelets, and directly adhering to normal cells. The relationship between platelets and malignant tumors is also significant. In this review article, we will explore these connections.

Guided Anti-P2Y12 Therapy in Patients Undergoing PCI: Three Systematic Reviews with Meta-analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials with Homogeneous Design

BACKGROUND

 The value of guided therapy (GT) with anti-P2Y12 drugs in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unclear. Meta-analyses lumped together randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with heterogeneous designs, comparing either genotype-GT or platelet function test (PFT)-GT with unguided therapy. Some meta-analysis also included RCTs that did not explore GT, but included the effects of switching patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to alternative therapies (HTPR-Therapy). We performed three distinct systematic reviews/meta-analyses, each exploring only RCTs with homogeneous design.

METHODS

 MEDLINE, Embase, and Central databases were searched for RCTs testing genotype-GT, PFT-GT, or HTPR-Therapy in PCI-treated patients, through October 1, 2022. Two reviewers extracted the data. Risk ratios (RRs) (95% confidence intervals) were calculated. Primary outcomes were major bleedings (MBs) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

RESULTS

 In seven genotype-GT RCTs, RRs were: MB, 1.06 (0.73-1.54; p = 0.76); MACE, 0.65 (0.47-0.91; p = 0.01), but significant risk reduction was observed in RCTs performed in China (0.30, 0.16-0.54; p < 0.0001) and not elsewhere (0.75, 0.48-1.18; p = 0.21). In six PFT-GT RCTs, RRs were: MB, 0.91 (0.64-1.28, p = 0.58); MACE, 0.82 (0.56-1.19; p = 0.30): 0.62 (0.42-0.93; p = 0.02) in China, 1.08 (0.82-1.41; p = 0.53) elsewhere. In eight HTPR-Therapy RCTs, RRs were: MB, 0.71 (0.41-1.23; p = 0.22); MACE, 0.57 (0.44-0.75; p < 0.0001): 0.56 (0.43-0.74, p < 0.0001) in China, 0.58 (0.27-1.23, p = 0.16) elsewhere.

CONCLUSION

 No GT strategy affected MB. Overall, genotype-GT but not PFT-GT reduced MACE. However, genotype-GT and PFT-GT reduced MACE in China, but not elsewhere. PFT-GT performed poorly compared to HTPR-Therapy, likely due to inaccurate identification of HTPR patients by PFT.

Platelets and the Atherosclerotic Process: An Overview of New Markers of Platelet Activation and Reactivity, and Their Implications in Primary and Secondary Prevention

The key role played by platelets in the atherosclerosis physiopathology, especially in the acute setting, is ascertained: they are the main actors during thrombus formation and, thus, one of the major investigated elements related to atherothrombotic process involving coronary arteries. Platelets have been studied from different points of view, according with the technology advances and the improvement in the hemostasis knowledge achieved in the last years. Morphology and reactivity constitute the first aspects investigated related to platelets with a significant body of evidence published linking a number of their values and markers to coronary artery disease and cardiovascular events. Recently, the impact of genetics on platelet activation has been explored with promising findings as additional instrument for patient risk stratification; however, this deserves further confirmations. Moreover, the interplay between immune system and platelets has been partially elucidated in the last years, providing intriguing elements that will be basic components for future research to better understand platelet regulation and improve cardiovascular outcome of patients.

Inadequate response to antiplatelet therapy in patients with peripheral artery disease: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are treated with preventive strategies to improve the cardiovascular risk. The incidence of cardiovascular events and mortality however remains high in PAD populations. We therefore aimed to better characterize PAD patients suffering from cardiovascular events and mortality in order to tailor preventive treatment.

METHODS

Between 2018 and 2020, 246 PAD outpatients (17 newly diagnosed, 229 with known PAD) were prospectively enrolled in this observational cohort study. Patient data and blood samples were collected after inclusion, and the primary composite endpoint (myocardial infarction, elective coronary revascularization, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, mortality) was evaluated after one year. Secondary outcomes included platelet reactivity, measured using the VerifyNow assay, and medication adherence, assessed using the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-8 (MMAS-8). Logistic regression models were used to identify associations between characteristics and the occurrence of events.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 207 patients with claudication and 39 with chronic limb threatening ischemia. Twenty-six (10.6%) patients suffered from an event during follow-up. Prior myocardial infarction (OR 3.3 [1.4-7.7]), prior ischemic stroke (OR 4.5 [1.8-10.9]), higher levels of creatinine (OR 5.2 [2.2-12.6]), lower levels of high-density lipoprotein (OR 4.2 [1.5-10.6]) and lower haemoglobin levels (OR 3.1 [1.3-7.1]) were associated with events. Patients with events had more often high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) on aspirin (OR 5.9 [1.4-25.1]) or clopidogrel (OR 4.3 [1-19.3]). High adherence to medication was associated with the occurrence of events (OR 4.1 [1-18]).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients suffering from cardiovascular events and mortality were characterized by prior cardiovascular events as compared to patients who did not experience any events. Antiplatelet therapy was not optimally protective despite high medication adherence, and HTPR was independently associated with the occurrence of events. More research is needed on alternative treatment strategies such as dual antiplatelet therapy or combinations with anticoagulant drugs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Medical Ethics Committee (METC) of the MUMC+ approved the study (NL63235.068.17) and the study was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR7250 ).

A Sticky Situation: Variable Agreement Between Platelet Function Tests Used to Assess Anti-platelet Therapy Response

Background

Platelet function testing to monitor antiplatelet therapy is important for reducing thromboembolic complications, yet variability across testing methods remains challenging. Here we evaluated the agreement of four different testing platforms used to monitor antiplatelet effects of aspirin (ASA) or P2Y₁₂ inhibitors (P2Y12-I).

Methods

Blood and urine specimens from 20 patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy were analyzed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), whole blood aggregometry (WBA), VerifyNow PRUTest and AspirinWorks. Result interpretation based on pre-defined cutoff values was used to calculate raw agreement indices, and Pearson's correlation coefficient determined using individual units of measure.

Results

Agreement between LTA and WBA for P2Y12-I-response was 60% (r = 0.65, high-dose ADP; r = 0.75, low-dose ADP). VerifyNow agreed with LTA in 75% (r = 0.86, high-dose ADP; r = 0.75, low-dose ADP) and WBA in 55% (r = 0.57) of cases. Agreement between LTA and WBA for ASA-response was 45% (r = 0.09, high-dose collagen WBA; r = 0.19, low-dose collagen WBA). AspirinWorks agreed with LTA in 60% (r = 0.32) and WBA in 35% (r = 0.02, high-dose collagen WBA; r = 0.08, low-dose collagen WBA) of cases.

Conclusions

Overall agreement varied from 35 to 75%. LTA and VerifyNow demonstrated the highest agreement for P2Y12-I-response, followed by moderate agreement between LTA and WBA. LTA and AspirinWorks showed moderate agreement for aspirin response, while WBA showed the weakest agreement with both LTA and AspirinWorks. The results from this study support the continued use of LTA for monitoring dual antiplatelet therapy, with VerifyNow as an appropriate alternative for P2Y12-I-response. Integration of results obtained from these varied testing platforms with patient outcomes remains paramount for future studies.

Sex-specific platelet activation through protease-activated receptor-1 in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Protease-activated receptor (PAR)-1-mediated platelet activation may vary according to sex and clinical situation. In order to investigate sex-specific platelet activation through PAR-1, we assessed platelet response to thrombin receptor-activating peptide (TRAP) in 562 patients undergoing cardiac catheterization without (Group 1A) and with (Group 1B) acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Subsequently, we sought to confirm our findings in 287 patients undergoing elective (Group 2A) or acute (Group 2B) percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

TRAP-stimulated platelet surface expression of P-selectin and activated glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GPIIb/IIIa) were measured by flow cytometry in Group 1. Light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) in response to TRAP were assessed in Group 2.

RESULTS

In Group 1A, platelet activation in response to TRAP was significantly higher in women compared to men (P-selectin: 511 MFI [443-597 MFI] vs. 471 MFI [393-552 MFI]; GPIIb/IIIa: 84 MFI [58-119 MFI] vs. 70 MFI [47-103 MFI]; both p ≤ 0.002). In contrast, in Group 1B, TRAP-stimulated P-selectin and activated GPIIb/IIIa were similar in men and women (both p ≥ 0.3). Likewise, TRAP-stimulated platelet aggregation was significantly higher in female patients in Group 2A (LTA: 66% [54-76%] vs. 51% [41-65%]; MEA: 78 AU [66-107 AU] vs. 62 AU [52-88 AU]; both p ≤ 0.02), whereas men and women in Group 2 B had similar platelet aggregation (p = 0.5). The occurrence of ischemic endpoints did not differ significantly between men and women in Group 1A and Group 1B.

CONCLUSIONS

Platelet PAR-1 signaling is more pronounced in women than in men without ACS. In ACS, however, PAR-1-mediated platelet activation is similar in male and female patients.

Differential Impact of Cytochrome 2C19 Allelic Variants on Three Different Platelet Function Tests in Clopidogrel-Treated Patients

On-treatment platelet reactivity in clopidogrel-treated patients can be measured with several platelet function tests (PFTs). However, the agreement between different PFTs is only slight to moderate. Polymorphisms of the CYP2C19 gene have an impact on the metabolization of clopidogrel and, thereby, have an impact on on-treatment platelet reactivity. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the differential effects of the CYP2C19 genotype on three different PFTs.

METHODS

From a prospective cohort study, we included patients treated with clopidogrel following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). One month after PCI, we simultaneously performed three different PFTs; light transmission aggregometry (LTA), VerifyNow P2Y12, and Multiplate. In whole EDTA blood, genotyping of the CYP2C19 polymorphisms was performed.

RESULTS

We included 308 patients treated with clopidogrel in combination with aspirin (69.5%) and/or anticoagulants (33.8%) and, based on CYP2C19 genotyping, classified them as either extensive (36.4%), rapid (34.7%), intermediate (26.0%), or poor metabolizers (2.9%). On-treatment platelet reactivity as measured by LTA and VerifyNow is significantly affected by CYP2C19 metabolizer status (p < 0.01); as metabolizer status changes from rapid, via extensive and intermediate, to poor, the mean platelet reactivity increases accordingly (p < 0.01). On the contrary, for Multiplate, no such ordering of metabolizer groups was found (p = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

For VerifyNow and LTA, the on-treatment platelet reactivity in clopidogrel-treated patients correlates well with the underlying CYP2C19 polymorphism. For Multiplate, no major effect of genetic background could be shown, and effects of other (patient-related) variables prevail. Thus, besides differences in test principles and the influence of patient-related factors, the disagreement between PFTs is partly explained by differential effects of the CYP2C19 genotype.

Comparison of three common whole blood platelet function tests for in vitro P2Y12 induced platelet inhibition

In the context of interventional cardiology, platelet function testing may identify patients treated with P2Y12-inhibitors at an increased risk of mortality, thrombosis and bleeding. Several whole blood point-of-care platelet function analyzers are available; however, inter-device differences have not been examined systematically. To compare three platelet function tests under standardized in vitro conditions. Healthy volunteer (n = 10) blood samples were spiked with increasing concentrations of ticagrelor (0–7500 ng/mL) and/or ASA (0–3280 ng/mL), measured on three platelet function analyzers (TEG^®6s, Multiplate^®, and VerifyNow^®) and respective Effective Concentration (EC) levels EC10, EC50 and EC90 were calculated. Repeatability was assessed in a separate group of pooled blood samples (n = 10) spiked with ticagrelor at EC10, EC50 and EC90. ASA had no impact on ADP-activated channels for all three devices. TEG^®6s was able to distinguish (p ≤ 0.05) between all ticagrelor EC zones; VerifyNow^® and Multiplate^® were able to distinguish between three and two zones, respectively. Multiplate^® showed the largest window between EC10 and EC90 (19–9153 ng/mL), followed by TEG^®6s (144–2589 ng/mL), and VerifyNow^® (191–1100 ng/mL). Drug effect models distribution of disagreements were identified for TEG^®6s (5.0%), VerifyNow^® (8.3%), and Multiplate^® (13.3%). TEG^®6s showed the smallest average coefficient of variation between EC conditions (5.1%), followed by Multiplate^® (14.1%), and VerifyNow^® (17.7%). Linear models could be generated between TEG^®6s and Multiplate^®, but not VerifyNow^®. Significant differences were found between whole blood point-of-care platelet function analyzers and the clinical impact of these differences needs to be further investigated.

Evening aspirin intake results in higher levels of platelet inhibition and a reduction in reticulated platelets - a window of opportunity for patients with cardiovascular disease?

Cardiovascular events occur most frequently in the early morning. Similarly, the release of reticulated platelets (RP) by megakaryocytes has a peak in the late night and early morning. Which aspirin regimen most effectively inhibits platelets during these critical hours is unknown. Hence, the primary objective of this trial was to assess platelet function and RP levels at 8.00 AM, in stable cardiovascular (CVD) patients, during three different aspirin regimens. In this open-label randomized cross-over study subjects were allocated to three sequential aspirin regimens: once-daily (OD) 80 mg morning; OD-evening, and twice-daily (BID) 40 mg. Platelet function was measured at 8.00 AM & 8.00 PM by serum Thromboxane B₂ (sTxB₂) levels, the Platelet Function Analyzer (PFA)-200® Closure Time (CT), Aspirin Reaction Units (ARU, VerifyNow®), and RP levels. In total, 22 patients were included. At 8.00 AM, sTxB₂ levels were the lowest after OD-evening in comparison with OD-morning (p = <0.01), but not in comparison with BID. Furthermore, RP levels were similar at 8.00 AM, but statistically significantly reduced at 8.00 PM after OD-evening (p = .01) and BID (p = .02) in comparison with OD-morning. OD-evening aspirin intake results in higher levels of platelet inhibition during early morning hours and results in a reduction of RP levels in the evening. These findings may, if confirmed by larger studies, be relevant to large groups of patients taking aspirin to reduce cardiovascular risk.

Cytochrome 2C19 and paraoxonase-1 polymorphisms and clopidogrel resistance in ischemic heart disease patients

Aim: Polymorphisms in cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 and paraoxonase-1 (PON-1) genes are thought to be involved in clopidogrel high on treatment reactivity in ischemic heart disease (IHD) patients. Methods: A total of 240 patients with IHD were screened for CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles (LOF; *2, *3) and PON-1 Q192R. Patients were classified as responders and nonresponders to clopidogrel based upon platelet aggregation studies. Genotyping of the CYP2C19 and PON-1 allele was carried out by PCR-RFLP. Results: Results showed that 14.3% of the patients were nonresponders, whereas 85.7% were responders to the clopidogrel therapy. CYP2C19*3 allele showed significant association with clopidogrel high on treatment reactivity in IHD patients. Conclusion: Result of our study demonstrate that IHD patients with CYP2C19*3 allele can face the problem of clopidogrel high on treatment reactivity in Punjabi Pakistani population.

Recent advances in microfluidic platelet function assays: Moving microfluidics into clinical applications

The analysis of platelet aggregation and thrombosis kinetics has significantly advanced with progress in microfluidic technology. However, the results of platelet aggregation tests do not fully reflect the observed clinical outcomes. To address the present unmet clinical needs, the basic but essential biology of platelets should be reconsidered in relation to the characteristics of microfluidic systems employed for platelet tests. To this end, the present article provides an overview of commercially available point of care devices and focuses on recent microfluidic studies, describing their measurement principles. We critically discuss the characteristics of the microfluidics systems used to evaluate the complex processes underlying platelet aggregation, and that are specifically designed to mimic the pathophysiological environment of blood vessels, including hemodynamic factors as well as blood vessel injury. To this end, we summarize unsolved issues related to the application of platelet function tests based on microfluidics. Overall, we confirm that platelet function tests based on microfluidics provide a versatile platform that encompasses a variety of basic research, as well as clinical diagnostic applications.

Effectiveness of Platelet Function Analyzer-100 for Laboratory Detection of Anti-Platelet Drug-Induced Platelet Dysfunction

BACKGROUND

High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) is the phenomenon wherein patients exhibit normal platelet activity in laboratory testing despite adequate adherence to anti-platelet treatment. We investigated the detection rates of Platelet Function Analyzer (PFA)-100 (Dade Behring AG, Düdingen, Switzerland) for drug-induced platelet dysfunction and analyzed potential contributors to HTPR with practical PFA-100 data over six years.

METHODS

We used data from 6,957 patients who underwent PFA-100 testing after receiving aspirin, clopidogrel, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Of these, 6,163 patients were tested with only the collagen/epinephrine cartridge (Col/EPI) of PFA-100; 794 were tested with both Col/EPI and the collagen/ADP cartridge (Col/ADP). We calculated PFA-100 closure time (CT) for each drug and compared the clinical and laboratory characteristics of the patients with prolonged CTs and normal CTs (i.e., HTPR).

RESULTS

In Col/EPI, 73.2% (365/499), 72.6% (390/537), and 55.3% (3,442/6,228) patients showed prolonged CTs for aspirin, clopidogrel, and NSAIDs, respectively. In Col/ADP, prolonged CTs were observed in 37.4% (34/91), 43.2% (35/81), and 29.6% (200/676) of patients receiving aspirin, clopidogrel, and NSAIDs, respectively. Of the patients tested with both cartridges, 88.9% (48/54), 95.3% (41/43), and 89.0% (577/648) of the patients receiving aspirin, clopidogrel, and NSAIDs had prolonged CTs, and 10.0% (79/794) showed normal CTs regardless of drugs. For clopidogrel users (both cartridges), there were more patients with malignancies in the normal CT than prolonged CT group.

CONCLUSIONS

PFA-100 is not sufficiently effective for laboratory screening of drug-induced platelet dysfunction. Malignancy may contribute to clopidogrel-related HTPR in PFA-100.

Aspirin and clopidogrel high on-treatment platelet reactivity and genetic predictors in peripheral arterial disease

OBJECTIVES

Our aims were to examine the prevalence and genetic predictors of aspirin and clopidogrel high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HoTPR), and associated adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

BACKGROUND

The association of aspirin and clopidogrel HoTPR with outcomes in PAD remains unclear.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of patients with angiographically documented PAD involving carotid and lower extremity arteries. Aspirin and clopidogrel HoTPR (using the VerifyNow Assay) and associated genetic predictors were compared to clinical outcomes. The primary end-point was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events: all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and limb-loss in patients who underwent extremity intervention.

RESULTS

The study was stopped prematurely due to slow patient enrolment. Of 195 patients enrolled, the primary analysis was performed in 154 patients taking both drugs. Aspirin HoTPR was present in 31 (20%) and clopidogrel HoTPR in 76 (49%) patients. There was a trend toward more primary composite outcome events with PRU ≥ 235 (52% freedom-from-event rate vs. 70% for PRU < 235; P = 0.09). TVR was higher in those with PRU ≥ 235 (20 vs. 6%, unadjusted P = 0.02). There was no association between aspirin HoTPR and combined outcomes. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in serum paraoxonase/arylesterase 1 (PON1) gene was associated with aspirin HoTPR (P = 0.005) while SNP in phospholipase A2, group III (PLA2G3) gene was associated with clopidogrel HoTPR (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Clopidogrel HoTPR was significantly associated with TVR, while aspirin HoTPR was not associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients with PAD.

Point of Care Tests VerifyNow P2Y12 and INNOVANCE PFA P2Y Compared to Light Transmittance Aggregometry After Fibrinolysis

Detection of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) by point-of-care tests has not been validated after successful fibrinolysis for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. We assessed the validity of the point-of-care VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN) and INNOVANCE PFA P2Y (PFA) tests on HPR compared to light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) in these patients. The HPR was identified in 10 (34.5%) patients, 15 (51.7%) patients, and 14 (50%) patients using LTA, VN, and PFA, respectively. Discrepancies were observed between the tests despite significant correlations between platelet reactivity measures by LTA and VN (r = 0.74; P < .0001) and LTA and PFA (r = .75; P < .0001). Compared to LTA, VN and PFA were associated with a 92% and 53% and 92% and 64% positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), respectively, in detecting HPR. When combined, VN and PFA results yielded 90% and 100% PPV and NPV values if discrepancies between the 2 tests were considered as non-HPR. The VN or PFA identify patients without HPR correctly but overestimate the proportion of HPR patients. The association of the 2 tests, in case of HPR, improves the accuracy of the detection of HPR.

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.

Decrease in high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) prevalence on switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel: Insights from the switching anti-platelet (SWAP) study

The prevalence of high platelet reactivity (HPR) in patients who have switched from clopidogrel to prasugrel during maintenance phase after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event is unknown. Therefore, the effect of switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel on the prevalence of HPR was evaluated. This analysis from the previously reported SWAP (SWitching Anti Platelet) study assessed HPR at baseline, 2 and 24 hours, and seven days after switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel maintenance dose (MD), with or without a prasugrel loading dose (LD) using four definitions: maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) >65% (primary endpoint), MPA >50%, P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) >235, and platelet reactivity index (PRI) ≥50%. A total of 95 patients were available for analysis; 56 patients provided DNA for genetic assessments of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19. There were 26 (27.4%) patients with HPR at the end of the clopidogrel run-in (defined as MPA >65%). The HPR prevalence varied by each definition and ranged from 19% (PRU >235) to 68% (PRI ≥50%). A significantly higher HPR prevalence was observed during clopidogrel versus the combined prasugrel therapy groups at seven days as measured by MPA >65% (21.2% vs. 4.5%, p>0.05), PRU >235 (18.8% vs. 0%, p=0.001), and PRI ≥50% (66.7% vs. 7.9%, p<0.0001). There was a significantly higher percentage of subjects carrying at least one reduced function allele with HPR measured by MPA >65% (p=0.02) or PRU >235 (p=0.05) than non-carriers with HPR. Switching ACS patients during maintenance clopidogrel therapy to prasugrel with or without an LD is associated with a reduced HPR prevalence and may provide an alternative strategy to treat patients with HPR, independent of CYP2C19 genotype.

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.

In vivo and protease-activated receptor-1-mediated platelet activation but not response to antiplatelet therapy predict two-year outcomes after peripheral angioplasty with stent implantation

Data linking the response to antiplatelet therapy with clinical outcomes after angioplasty and stenting for lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) are scarce. Moreover, associations of in vivo and thrombin-inducible platelet activation with the occurrence of adverse events have not been investigated in these patients, so far. We therefore assessed clinical outcomes and on-treatment platelet reactivity by four test systems in 108 patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy after infrainguinal angioplasty and stenting for LEAD. Further, in vivo and thrombin receptor-activating peptide (TRAP)-6-inducible glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa activation and P-selectin expression were measured as sensitive parameters of platelet activation. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of atherothrombotic events and target vessel restenosis or reocclusion. Residual platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate and arachidonic acid was similar between patients without and with adverse outcomes within two-year follow-up (all p>0.05). Further, the occurrence of clinical endpoints did not differ significantly between patients without and with high on-treatment residual platelet reactivity by all test systems (all p>0.05). In contrast, in vivo and TRAP-6-inducible platelet activation were significantly more pronounced in patients with subsequent adverse events (all p<0.05), and high levels of platelet activation were independent predictors of the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratios: 3.5 for high in vivo activated GPIIb/IIIa, 2.9 for high TRAP-6-inducible activated GPIIb/IIIa, 2.3 for high in vivo P-selectin, and 3 for high TRAP-6-inducible P-selectin; all p<0.05). In conclusion, in vivo and protease-activated receptor-1-mediated platelet activation predict two-year clinical outcomes in stable patients undergoing angioplasty and stenting for LEAD.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity – definition and measurement

In the last decade, several studies revealed inter-patient response variability to antiplatelet agents: patients who display negligible or no responses to these drugs are considered poor responders, or “resistant” to treatment. In order to identify poor responders to an antiplatelet drug, laboratory tests of platelet function that specifically explore the platelet activation pathway that is targeted by the drug should be utilised. In addition, they should be performed both at baseline and during treatment: however, most studies explored platelet function during antiplatelet treatment, in order to identify those patients with “high on-treatment platelet reactivity” (HPR), which exposes them to increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Many tests of platelet function have been used, most of which are able to identify patients at risk of MACE. Unfortunately, universal cut-off values for HPR have not been clearly established yet. In addition, the concordance among different tests in the identification of patients at risk is very poor and the most effective and safe treatment for patients at risk is still unknown.

Comparison of current platelet functional tests for the assessment of aspirin and clopidogrel response

The two most widely used antiplatelet drugs in the world are aspirin and clopidogrel. However, some patients on aspirin and/or clopidogrel therapy do not respond appropriately to either aspirin or clopidogrel. This phenomenon is usually called “aspirin/clopidogrel resistance”. Several platelet function tests have been used in various studies for the assessment of aspirin and clopidogrel resistance in healthy individuals and patients admitted in cardiology departments. An accurate assessment of platelet response to aspirin/clopidogrel could benefit patients by proposing tailored-antiplatelet therapy based on test results. However, there is a clear lack of standardisation of such techniques and their analytical variability may induce misinterpretation. After a quick report of the mechanisms responsible for aspirin/clopidogrel resistance, we describe the pre-analytical aspects and the analytical performances of current platelet function tests (Light-transmission aggregometry, whole-blood aggregometry, VerifyNow®, Platelet Function Analyzer®, thromboelastography, VASP assay) that are used for the assessment of aspirin/clopidogrel resistance in clinical studies. Considering the different variables that have to be taken into account with each of the platelet function tests, a particular attention should be paid when interpreting results.

Do CYP2C19 and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms and low CYP3A4 isoenzyme activity have an impact on stent implantation complications in acute coronary syndrome patients?

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of CYP2C19 and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms and CYP3A4 isoenzyme activity on stent implantation complications among patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-six patients (median age 63, range 37-91 years) with an ACS who underwent PCI were screened for CYP2C19 and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms with real-time polymerase chain reaction: CYP2C19*2, CYP2C19*17, and ABCB1 3435. CYP3A4 isoenzyme activity was determined by urine cortisol and 6-beta-hydroxycortisol levels. Stent implantation complications such as stent thrombosis (n=2) and restenosis (n=1) were observed among drug-eluting stent recipients.

RESULTS

Low mean 6-beta-hydroxycortisol/cortisol ratio is indicative of impaired CYP3A4 activity and was associated with higher risk of thrombosis (b coefficient=0.022, SE 0.009, p=0.021 in the linear regression model). The increase in the length of the implanted stent was associated with higher risk of restenosis (b coefficient=0.006, SE=0.002, p=0.001 in the linear regression model). The presence of the CYP2C19*2 polymorphism did not affect the incidence of stent thrombosis (b coefficient=-1.626, SE=1.449, p=0.262 in the logistic regression model), nor did the CYP2C19*17 (b coefficient=-0.907, SE=1.438, p=0.528 in the logistic regression model) and ABCB1 3435 polymorphisms (b coefficient=1.270, SE=1.442, p=0.378 in the logistic regression model).

CONCLUSION

We did not find evidence that the presence of CYP2C19*2, CYP2C19*17, and ABCB1 3435 polymorphisms may jeopardize the safety of stent implantation in patients with an ACS. Patients with low CYP3A4 isoenzyme activity may have increased risk of stent thrombosis.

Novel strategies for assessing platelet reactivity

There are many approaches to assessing platelet reactivity and many uses for such measurements. Initially, measurements were based on the ability of platelets separated from other blood cells to aggregate together following activation with an appropriate 'aggregating agent'. Later, measurements of platelet aggregation in blood itself were performed, and this led to a point-of-care approach to platelet function testing. Measurement of secretory activity through the appearance of the activation marker P-selectin on platelets now provides an alternative approach, which enables remote testing. Measurement of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation is also moving toward application in situations remote from the testing laboratory. Here we provide an overview of the various approaches that are now available, assess their advantages and disadvantages, and describe some of the clinical situations in which they are being used.

Platelet function testing in cardiac surgery

Bleeding in cardiac surgery is known to cause increased morbidity and mortality. The rise in the use of anti-platelet medication has led to an increase in the number of patients presenting for cardiac surgery with platelet dysfunction, who are at a heightened risk of bleeding. However, the extent of platelet inhibition is well known to differ among individuals. In the past few years, a number of point-of-care platelet function testing devices, which may be able to assess platelet reactivity, have entered the market. This review will examine the devices most commonly studied and the evidence surrounding their use in cardiac surgery and their effect on blood loss.

Point-of-Care Platelet Function Testing

Cardiopulmonary bypass has unpredictably deleterious effects on platelet function. Patients with cardiovascular disease have treatments aimed at reducing platelet aggregation and are at risk of excessive bleeding during surgery. Transfusion of blood products, particularly platelets, probably causes increased morbidity and mortality. Conversely, patients with excessive platelet aggregation are at risk of thrombotic complications—undesirable outcomes in the context of myocardial revascularization and prevention of stroke. Platelet function is difficult to monitor. Laboratory tests take time, and the results are not immediately available. Point-of-care (POC) testing of platelet function should facilitate the clinical management of bleeding patients by rationalizing platelet transfusion and avoiding unnecessary transfusion. Furthermore, POC platelet function could alert the clinician to risks of excessive platelet activation and measure the efficacy of antiplatelet therapy. This article outlines some of the POC platelet function monitors available as well as their potential applications.

Platelet function testing as a biomarker for efficacy of antiplatelet drugs

Despite the overwhelming evidence in support of the efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel, it is also obvious that not all patients benefit from these drugs to the same extent. This interindividual variability in platelet responses may underlie clinical differences in drug efficacy, with potential for optimization of antiplatelet therapy to prevent ischemic events without excessively increasing bleeding risk. This review presents the current evidence regarding platelet function testing for monitoring of antiplatelet therapy, with emphasis on the prognostic value of platelet function testing to predict ischemic and bleeding events. The potential of platelet function testing to provide personalized antiplatelet therapy is also discussed, with an outlook toward the future of platelet function testing in high-risk individuals.

The Prognostic Value of ADP-Induced Platelet Aggregation for Bleeding Complications in Low - Intermediate Risk Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Taking Clopidogrel After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Platelet aggregation may predict the bleeding outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Consecutive patients with non-high risk acute coronary syndrome and indication for PCI were enrolled. Maximum adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation (ADP-PGmax) was assessed by light transmission aggregometry. Study endpoints were the incidence of haemorrhage, categorised by Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction criteria, and significant entry-site complications during hospitalisation and six-month follow-up period. Platelet aggregation test was organised at 24h after PCI and 1 month after discharge respectively. The optimal platelet aggregation was detected defining enhanced clopidogrel response, and associations of measurements with endpoints were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 278 patients were included in analyses. Study endpoints were observed in 24 (8.6%) patients [major bleeding, n=4 (1.4%); minor bleeding, n=11 (4.0%); significant entry-site complication, n=9 (3.2%)]. In multivariate analysis, follow-up ADP-PG_max[odds ratio (OR)=0.96;95% confidence interval (CI),0.93-0.99;p=0.008) and renal insufficiency (OR=3.29; 95%CI, 1.23-8.85; p=0.018) were predictors of bleeding events. The optimal cutoff value for follow-up ADP-PG_max was 24.5% (area under the curve=0.72; 95% CI, 0.59-0.85; p<0.001). Bleeding occurred in 26.2% (16/61) of patients with enhanced clopidogrel response and 3.7% (8/217) of other patients (OR=9.26; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Enhanced clopidogrel responsiveness was associated with an increased risk of bleeding and entry-site complication. Platelet function testing at an appropriate time after clopidogrel administration helps to identify patients at high risk of bleeding.

Comparative effect on platelet function of a fixed-dose aspirin and clopidogrel combination versus separate formulations in patients with coronary artery disease: A phase IV, multicenter, prospective, 4-week non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The effect of aspirin and clopidogrel in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) on platelet function was compared with separate formulations in patients that had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES).

METHODS

This was a phase IV, prospective, multicenter, single-arm, non-inferiority study. Patients that had taken aspirin 100 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg once daily as separate formulations for >6 months after PCI with DES were enrolled, and then switched to an aspirin/clopidogrel FDC once-daily for 4 weeks. Platelet reactivity was determined using the VerifyNow® P2Y12 assay at baseline (immediately prior to switching) and 4 weeks later.

RESULTS

A total of 648 patients (the full-analysis population; age, 63.6±9.0 years; male, 76.5%) finished the study, and 565 (the per-protocol population) completed without protocol violations. In the per-protocol population, the % inhibitions of P2Y12 and ARU were not significantly different between baseline and after 4 weeks of FDC treatment (29.2±20.0% to 29.0±19.9%, P=0.708; 445.1±69.2 to 446.2±63.0, P=0.799, respectively) and the difference in P2Y12 inhibition observed did not exceed the predetermined limit of non-inferiority (95% CI, -0.9 to 1.3). In the full-analysis population, the % inhibitions of P2Y12, PRU, and ARU were not significantly changed after 4 weeks of FDC treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the efficacy of platelet inhibition by an aspirin/clopidogrel FDC was not inferior to that of separate aspirin and clopidogrel formulations in patients that had undergone PCI with DES.

Comparison of Aggregometry with Flow Cytometry for the Assessment of Agonists´-Induced Platelet Reactivity in Patients on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

Data on the agreement between aggregometry and platelet activation by flow cytometry regarding the measurement of on-treatment platelet reactivity to arachidonic acid (AA) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP) are scarce. We therefore sought to compare three platelet aggregation tests with flow cytometry for the assessment of the response to antiplatelet therapy. Platelet aggregation in response to AA and ADP was determined by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), the VerifyNow assays, and multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) in 316 patients receiving aspirin and clopidogrel therapy after angioplasty with stent implantation. AA- and ADP-induced P-selectin expression and activated glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa were determined by flow cytometry. LTA, the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay and MEA in response to ADP correlated significantly (all p<0.001), and the best correlation was observed between LTA and the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay (r = 0.63). ADP-induced platelet reactivity by all aggregation tests correlated significantly with ADP-induced P-selectin expression and activated GPIIb/IIIa (all p<0.001). The best correlation was seen between the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay and activated GPIIb/IIIa (r = 0.68). The platelet surface expressions of P-selectin and activated GPIIb/IIIa in response to ADP were significantly higher in patients with high on-treatment residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) to ADP by all test systems (all p<0.001). A rather poor correlation was observed between AA-induced platelet reactivity by LTA and the VerifyNow aspirin assay (r = 0.15, p = 0.007), while both methods did not correlate with MEA. AA-induced platelet reactivity by all aggregation tests correlated significantly, but rather poorly with AA-induced P-selectin expression (all p<0.05), while only AA-induced platelet reactivity by LTA correlated significantly with AA-induced activated GPIIb/IIIa (r = 0.21, p<0.001). The platelet surface expression of P-selectin in response to AA was significantly higher in patients with HRPR by LTA AA and MEA AA (both p<0.02). In contrast, P-selectin expression in response to AA was similar in patients without and with HRPR by the VerifyNow aspirin assay (p = 0.5), and platelet surface activated GPIIb/IIIa in response to AA did not differ significantly between patients without and with HRPR to AA by all test systems (all p>0.1). In conclusion, ADP-induced platelet reactivity by aggregometry translates partly into flow cytometry. In contrast, AA-induced platelet reactivity correlates poorly between different platelet aggregation tests, and between aggregometry and flow cytometry. Overall, both approaches capture different aspects of platelet function and are therefore not interchangeable in the assessment of agonists´-induced platelet reactivity. Clinical outcome data are needed to determine which test systems and settings are associated with different in vivo consequences.

Prognostic impact of high residual platelet reactivity after chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The study sought to determine the impact of high residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) on long-term cardiac mortality in diabetic patients treated with PCI for CTO. No data exist about the impact of HRPR after 600 mg clopidogrel loading on long-term clinical outcome in patients with diabetes mellitus and treated with percutaneous coronary angioplasty (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO).

METHODS

From the Florence CTO-PCI registry, we identified consecutive diabetic patients with available in vitro platelet reactivity assessment by light transmittance aggregometry after a loading dose of 600 mg of clopidogrel. HRPR was defined as residual platelet aggregation by 10 μmol/L ADP test ≥70%. The primary end point of the study was long-term cardiac mortality.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and three diabetic patients underwent CTO-PCI. The incidence of HRPR was 23%. The 3-year cardiac survival was lower in the HRPR group than the low residual platelet reactivity (LRPR) group (70 ± 7% and 92 ± 3%, respectively; p=0.001). Within the oral antidiabetic patients there were no significant differences in long-term survival between HRPR and LRPR groups. Conversely, the association of insulin therapy and HRPR was related to a dramatic decrease in survival compared to the LRPR group (34 ± 14% vs. 89 ± 4%; p<0.001). At multivariable analysis insulin therapy (HR 4.31; p=0.001) and HRPR (HR 3.26; p=0.004) were significantly related to long-term mortality, while completeness of revascularization was inversely related to cardiac mortality (HR 0.40; p=0.029).

CONCLUSION

HRPR is a strong marker of increased risk of cardiac death in patients with DM who underwent PCI for CTO.

Platelet function tests: a comparative review

In physiological hemostasis a prompt recruitment of platelets on the vessel damage prevents the bleeding by the rapid formation of a platelet plug. Qualitative and/or quantitative platelet defects promote bleeding, whereas the high residual reactivity of platelets in patients on antiplatelet therapies moves forward thromboembolic complications. The biochemical mechanisms of the different phases of platelet activation – adhesion, shape change, release reaction, and aggregation – have been well delineated, whereas their complete translation into laboratory assays has not been so fulfilled. Laboratory tests of platelet function, such as bleeding time, light transmission platelet aggregation, lumiaggregometry, impedance aggregometry on whole blood, and platelet activation investigated by flow cytometry, are traditionally utilized for diagnosing hemostatic disorders and managing patients with platelet and hemostatic defects, but their use is still limited to specialized laboratories. To date, a point-of-care testing (POCT) dedicated to platelet function, using pertinent devices much simpler to use, has now become available (ie, PFA-100, VerifyNow System, Multiplate Electrode Aggregometry [MEA]). POCT includes new methodologies which may be used in critical clinical settings and also in general laboratories because they are rapid and easy to use, employing whole blood without the necessity of sample processing. Actually, these different platelet methodologies for the evaluation of inherited and acquired bleeding disorders and/or for monitoring antiplatelet therapies are spreading and the study of platelet function is strengthening. In this review, well-tried and innovative platelet function tests and their methodological features and clinical applications are considered.

Genotype- and phenotype-directed antiplatelet therapy selection in patients with acute coronary syndromes

Although dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been a standard treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) for over a decade, only recently have therapeutic options beyond aspirin and clopidogrel become available. Additional treatment options are particularly useful because of the documented history of variability in antiplatelet response. This article reviews the current treatment options for DAPT in ACS, and reviews both genotype- and phenotype-guided methods for determining optimal antiplatelet therapy for patients with ACS. Additionally, recommendations from current guidelines as well as expert commentary are provided for the use of available testing methods to determine optimal DAPT for ACS patients.

Assessment of platelet function: Laboratory and point-of-care methods

In the event of blood vessel damage, human platelets are promptly recruited on the site of injury and, after their adhesion, activation and aggregation, prevent blood loss with the formation of a clot. The consequence of abnormal regulation can be either hemorrhage or the development of thrombosis. Qualitative and/or quantitative defects in platelets promote bleeding, whereas the residual reactivity of platelets, despite antiplatelet therapies, play an important role in promoting arterial thrombotic complications. Platelet function is traditionally assessed to investigate the origin of a bleeding syndrome, to predict the risk of bleeding prior surgery or during pregnancy or to monitor the efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in thrombotic syndromes that, now, can be considered a new discipline. “Old” platelet function laboratory tests such as the evaluation of bleeding time and the platelet aggregation analysis in platelet-rich plasma are traditionally utilized to aid in the diagnosis and management of patients with platelet and hemostatic disorders and used as diagnostic tools both in bleeding and thrombotic diathesis in specialized laboratories. Now, new and renewed automated systems have been introduced to provide a simple, rapid assessment of platelet function including point of care methods. These new methodologies are also suitable for being used in non-specialized laboratories and in critical area for assessing platelet function in whole blood without the requirement of sample processing. Some of these methods are also beginning to be incorporated into routine clinical use and can be utilized as not only as first panel for the diagnosis of platelet dysfunction, but also for monitoring anti-platelet therapy and to potentially assess risk of both bleeding and/or thrombosis.

High clopidogrel dose in patients with chronic kidney disease having clopidogrel resistance after percutaneous coronary intervention

We evaluated the impact of clopidogrel 150 mg/d in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) having clopidogrel resistance (CR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); 1076 consecutive patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) having CKD were enrolled. Maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) was assessed before, 24 hours, and 30 days after a 300-mg loading dose of clopidogrel prior to PCI. After PCI, 370 patients with CR were randomized to receive clopidogrel 75 mg/d (n = 184) or 150 mg/d (n = 186) for 30 days. Stent thrombosis (ST), major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and bleeding were analyzed after 1 month. Patients in the 150 mg group had significant lower rates of ST and MACE. There was no significant difference in major or minor bleeding. Patients in the 150 mg group had lower MPA and greater inhibition of platelet aggregation. One-month administration of 150 mg/d of clopidogrel decreases the rate of ST and MACE without increasing bleeding in patients with CKD having CR after PCI.

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

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