Tailored antiplatelet therapy and clinical adverse outcomes

Platelet reactivity after clopidogrel loading in patients with acute ischemic stroke

Objective

It remains unclear when sufficient antiplatelet effect is achieved after administration of a loading dose of clopidogrel in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). This study aimed to evaluate the clopidogrel response in patients with AIS identified by the platelet function test (PFT).

Methods

P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) values measured using VerifyNow at baseline and at 6, 24, and 72 h after administration of a loading dose (300 mg) of clopidogrel were compared between patients with AIS and those of other cerebrovascular diseases (CVD). The prevalence of clopidogrel abnormal response and its associated factors were examined.

Results

The PRU value was significantly reduced with time in the other CVD group (p < 0.0001), and also in the AIS group (p = 0.0073). The PRU values were significantly higher in the AIS group than in the other CVD group (p < 0.0001 between the groups, baseline: 314 ± 53 vs. 284 ± 62, p = 0.35; 6 h: 290 ± 66 vs. 214 ± 71, p = 0.016; 24 h: 270 ± 75 vs. 190 ± 70, p < 0.0001; and 72 h: 231 ± 76 vs. 163 ± 93, p = 0.105). The prevalence of clopidogrel hypo-responder (PRU > 240 at 24 h after administration) was higher in the AIS group (79 vs. 33%, p < 0.0001) and associated with the baseline PRU value but not with the cytochrome P450 2C19 genotype or clinical ischemic events.

Conclusions

Residual platelet reactivity at 24 h after clopidogrel loading was substantially higher in patients with AIS than in patients with other CVD. In addition, most patients with AIS were judged to be hypo-responders on PFT. This should be carefully interpreted in patients with AIS because of poor specificity for predicting clinical ischemic events.

Clopidogrel responder status is uninfluenced by CYP2C19*2 in Danish patients with stroke

Background

Antiplatelet therapy is a cornerstone of secondary stroke prevention, but the responsiveness to antiplatelet medication varies among patients. Clopidogrel is a pro-drug that requires hepatic transformation to reach its active metabolite. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in key enzymes or the target adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor on the platelet surface are believed to be involved in clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition and decreased antiplatelet effect with high-on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR).

Objective

This study investigated whether specific SNPs in key hepatic enzymes (CYP2C19*2, *3, *17, CYP3A4*1G, and NR1I2) or the ADP receptor (PR2Y12) are associated with HTPR to clopidogrel.

Patients & methods

This observational study included patients with ischemic stroke (IS) and transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) receiving clopidogrel at a dose of 75 mg/day. Patients were genotyped for eight different SNPs in the genes encoding CYP2C19, CYP3A4, NR1I2, and the P2Y12 receptor.

Results

Of the 103 patients that were included, 30.7% carried the CYP2C19*2 allele and had higher platelet reaction unit (PRU) values than non-carriers, but no patients showed HTPR. Carriers of the *17 allele had higher platelet inhibition but showed no difference in PRU values compared with non-carriers. The remaining SNPs were neither associated with PRU nor with platelet inhibition.

Conclusions

Patients with IS and TIAs treated with 75 mg clopidogrel/day do not have HTPR. A genetic analysis of CYP2C19*2, *3, *17, CYP3A4*1G, and NR1I2 revealed no associations with clopidogrel HTPR. CYP2C19*2 carriers and patients with HTPR in the acute phase after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attacks exhibit higher PRU values, but not long-term treatment HTPR.

The Influence of Inflammation on Fibrinogen Turnover and Redistribution of the Hemostatic Balance to a Prothrombotic State in High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity-Dual Poor Responder (HTPR-DPR) Patients

Knowledge about the influence of inflammation on platelet function and relocation of hemostatic balance to hypercoagulable state is still unclear. We compared two groups of patients who suffer from acute vs. chronic inflammatory process and additionally present high on-treatment platelet reactivity-dual platelet resistance. We did not found any differences in platelet aggregation between both investigated groups, but patients who suffer from chronic inflammation presented stronger relocation of the hemostatic balance to the hypercoagulability. A high concentration of prothrombin fragment F1+2 together with higher activity of von Willebrand factor in critical limb ischemia shows more exaggerated fibrinogen turnover although the blood concentration of this factor was in normal range. We concluded that high on-treatment platelet reactivity-dual platelet resistance and intensified inflammation are linked with elevated platelet and fibrinogen turnover to counteract proper hemostatic balance in favor of a prothrombotic state.

Eicosanoids in platelets and the effect of their modulation by aspirin in the cardiovascular system (and beyond)

Platelets are important players in thrombosis and haemostasis with their function being modulated by mediators in the blood and the vascular wall. Among these, eicosanoids can both stimulate and inhibit platelet reactivity. Platelet Cyclooxygenase (COX)-1-generated Thromboxane (TX)A₂ is the primary prostanoid that stimulates platelet aggregation; its action is counter-balanced by prostacyclin, a product of vascular COX. Prostaglandin (PG)D₂ , PGE₂ and 12-hydroxyeicosatraenoic acid (HETE), or 15-HETE, are other prostanoid modulators of platelet activity, but some also play a role in carcinogenesis. Aspirin permanently inhibits platelet COX-1, underlying its anti-thrombotic and anti-cancer action. While the use of aspirin as an anti-cancer drug is increasingly encouraged, its continued use in addition to P₂ Y₁₂ receptor antagonists for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases is currently debated. Aspirin not only suppresses TXA₂ but also prevents the synthesis of both known and unknown antiplatelet eicosanoid pathways, potentially lessening the efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapies. LINKED ARTICLES: This article is part of a themed section on Eicosanoids 35 years from the 1982 Nobel: where are we now? To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v176.8/issuetoc.

Platelet Function Testing in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The measurement of platelet reactivity in patients with stroke undergoing antiplatelet therapies is not commonly performed in clinical practice. We assessed the prevalence of therapy responsiveness in patients with stroke and further investigated differences between patients on prevention therapy at stroke onset and patients naive to antiplatelet medications. We also sought differences in responsiveness between etiological subtypes and correlations between Clopidogrel responsiveness and genetic polymorphisms.

METHODS

A total of 624 stroke patients on antiplatelet therapy were included. Two different groups were identified: "non-naive patients", and "naive patients". Platelet function was measured with multiple electrode aggregometry, and genotyping assays were used to determine CYP2C19 polymorphisms.

RESULTS

Aspirin (ASA) responsiveness was significantly more frequent in naive patients compared with non-naive patients (94.9% versus 82.6%, P < .0010). A better responsiveness to ASA compared with Clopidogrel or combination therapy was found in the entire population (P < .0010), in non-naive patients (P < .0253), and in naive patients (P < .0010). Multivariate analysis revealed a strong effect of Clopidogrel as a possible "risk factor" for unresponsiveness (odds ratio 3.652, P < .0001). No difference between etiological subgroups and no correlations between responsiveness and CYP2C19 polymorphisms were found.

CONCLUSION

In our opinion, platelet function testing could be potentially useful in monitoring the biological effect of antiplatelet agents. A substantial proportion of patients with stroke on ASA were "resistant", and the treatment with Clopidogrel was accompanied by even higher rates of unresponsiveness. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess whether aggregometry might supply individualized prognostic information and whether it can be considered a valid tool for future prevention strategies.

Twelve Months Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Drug-eluting Stents - Too Long, too Short or Just Right?

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) remains a cornerstone in the secondary prevention of coronary artery disease. Further, in contemporary practice, a period of DAPT is considered a mandatory requirement after intracoronary stents to prevent stent thrombosis (ST), a complication associated with heart attack and a mortality rate of up to 40 %. In current clinical practice, the default strategy in most centres is 12 months' DAPT followed by aspirin alone for life. However, the optimal duration of DAPT, particularly given the rapid iterative turnover of drug-eluting stents (DES) is the subject of discrepant evidence and clinical uncertainty. In particular, the 12-month regimen is based upon relatively weak evidence. A series of fairly small randomised trials, not powered to look specifically at ST as an endpoint, have recently indicated that there is no apparent disadvantage to shorter versus longer duration DAPT (including several trials of >12 months versus 12 months) when looking at various composite clinical endpoints. By contrast, the 9,961 patient DAPT trial, published in the New England Journal of Medicine at the end of 2014, demonstrated clinical outcome benefit, including a significantly lower rate of ST as a predefined primary endpoint, in DES patients randomised to 30 months' DAPT compared to stopping at 12 months. Here, the authors to assess the data, including the most recent meta-analyses, in an attempt to answer the question: DAPT after DES...12 months, longer or shorter?

Current state and novel approaches of antiplatelet therapy

An unresolved problem with clinical use of antiplatelet therapy is that a significant number of individuals either still get thrombosis or run the risk of life-threatening bleeding. Antiplatelet drugs are widely used clinically, either chronically for people at risk of athero/thrombotic disease or to prevent thrombus formation during surgery. However, a subpopulation may be resistant to standard doses, while the platelet targets of these drugs are also critical for the normal hemostatic function of platelets. In this review, we will briefly examine current antiplatelet therapy and existing targets while focusing on new potential approaches for antiplatelet therapy and improved monitoring of effects on platelet reactivity in individuals, ultimately to improve antithrombosis with minimal bleeding. Primary platelet adhesion-signaling receptors, glycoprotein (GP)Ib-IX-V and GPVI, that bind von Willebrand factor/collagen and other prothrombotic factors are not targeted by drugs in clinical use, but they are of particular interest because of their key role in thrombus formation at pathological shear.