Association of proton pump inhibitor use on cardiovascular outcomes with clopidogrel and ticagrelor: insights from the platelet inhibition and patient outcomes trial

β1-blockers in the reduction of bleeding risk in patients prescribed with potent dual antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

β1-blockers could improve clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease by lowering the heart rate, blood pressure, and myocardial contractility. Moreover, recent studies have suggested that β1-blockers may also have the potential to reduce bleeding risk.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the association between β1-blockers and bleeding risk in the patients prescribed with potent dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Patients with ACS or undergoing PCI treated by DAPT of ticagrelor and aspirin were consecutively recruited. Follow-up for all eligible patients was conducted for 1 year. Major bleeding outcomes were defined as events that were type ≥2 based on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 1,113 eligible ticagrelor-treated patients were recruited. During the 1-year follow-up interval, 142 (12.6%) patients experienced BARC ≥2 bleedings including 23 patients (2.1%) suffering BARC ≥3 bleedings, with the most common site of bleeding located in the gastrointestinal tract. β1-blockers treatment was associated with a lower risk of BARC ≥2 bleedings (11.2% vs. 23.3%, adjusted HR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.28-0.62, P < 0.01). Moreover, metoprolol (11.1% vs. 23.3%, adjusted HR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.37-0.83, P < 0.01) and bisoprolol (11.3% vs. 23.3%, adjusted HR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.33-0.96, P = 0.04) had similar effects on the reduction of bleeding risk.

CONCLUSION

β1-blockers might be beneficial for the reduction of bleeding risk in potent dual antiplatelet therapy patients with ACS or undergoing PCI.

Impact of proton pump inhibitor use on clinical outcomes in East Asian patients receiving clopidogrel following drug-eluting stent implantation

BACKGROUND

Concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is common, but PPI may reduce the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We evaluated the impact of PPI use on clinical outcomes in post-PCI patients, by incorporating P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) and CYP2C19 genotyping results.

METHODS

From a multicenter registry of patients who underwent PCI with drug-eluting stent implantation and received clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), patients who were prescribed a PPI at the time of PCI (PPI users) were compared to those who were not (non-users). The primary outcome included all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or cerebrovascular accident at 12 months. Major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3-5) and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (BARC types 3-5) were important secondary outcomes. The adjusted outcomes were compared using a 1:1 propensity-score (PS) matching and competing risk analysis.

RESULTS

Of 13,160 patients, 2,235 (17.0%) were prescribed PPI, with an average age of 65.4 years. PPI users had higher on-treatment PRU levels than non-users. After PS matching, the primary outcome occurred in 51 patients who were PPI users (cumulative incidence, 4.7%) and 41 patients who were non-users (cumulative incidence, 3.7%; log-rank p = 0.27). In carriers of both CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles, PPI use was linked to an increased risk of the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 3.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-8.78). The incidence of major bleeding and GI bleeding (BARC types 3-5) was comparable between PPI users and non-users in the PS-matched cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In post-PCI patients receiving clopidogrel-based DAPT, PPI use was not linked to an increased risk of adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, but there was a small but significant increase in on-treatment PRU. Future research using a more individualized approach would further elucidate these interactions and guide evidence-based clinical practices.

An update on oral antiplatelet drug interactions with proton pump inhibitors: what are the risks?

INTRODUCTION

Aspirin and anti-P2Y12 are widely prescribed in cardiovascular patients, often in combination with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to limit the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleedings. The potential interaction between PPIs and antiplatelet agents has been widely discussed, but doubts remain as to whether PPIs may reduce the cardiovascular protection provided by aspirin, prasugrel, ticagrelor, and clopidogrel.

AREAS COVERED

Many pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) studies have confirmed the interaction, especially between PPIs and clopidogrel, but with uncertain consequences on clinical outcomes. Therefore, we aimed to summarize the evidence for the widespread combined use of oral antiplatelet drugs and PPIs, to outline the current evidence supporting or opposing drug-drug interaction, and to discuss the clinical implications of such interactions.

EXPERT OPINION

A large body of evidence describes the PK/PD interaction of antiplatelet drugs with PPIs and its potential role in increasing clinical cardiovascular adverse events, but no solid clinical data have confirmed these effects. In the light of the published studies, there seems to be no restriction on the choice of PPI with aspirin, prasugrel, and/or ticagrelor. The choice of a PPI with no (or minimal) interference with the hepatic cytochrome P450 2C19 is preferred in patients receiving clopidogrel.

From Atherosclerotic Plaque to Myocardial Infarction-The Leading Cause of Coronary Artery Occlusion

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) constitutes the most common cause of death worldwide. In Europe alone, approximately 4 million people die annually due to CVD. The leading component of CVD leading to mortality is myocardial infarction (MI). MI is classified into several types. Type 1 is associated with atherosclerosis, type 2 results from inadequate oxygen supply to cardiomyocytes, type 3 is defined as sudden cardiac death, while types 4 and 5 are associated with procedures such as percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. Of particular note is type 1, which is also the most frequently occurring form of MI. Factors predisposing to its occurrence include, among others, high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in the blood, cigarette smoking, chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, and familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH). The primary objective of this review is to elucidate the issues with regard to type 1 MI. Our paper delves into, amidst other aspects, its pathogenesis, risk assessment, diagnosis, pharmacotherapy, and interventional treatment options in both acute and long-term conditions.

Association between regular proton pump inhibitors use and cardiovascular outcomes: A large prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed for gastroesophageal reflux disease and peptic ulcer disease. However, the association between the regular PPIs use and the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to determine whether regular proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) use is associated with an altered incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the general population.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 459,207 participants (mean [SD] age, 56.2 [8.1] years) from the UK Biobank study without prevalent CVD who enrolled between 2006 and 2010 and were followed until 2018. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident CVD and its components (coronary heart disease [CHD], stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and venous thromboembolism) were obtained using Cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for potential confounding factors, including demographic factors, lifestyle behaviors, prevalent comorbidities, and clinical indicators for PPIs use.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, we recorded 26,346 incident CVD events (including 13,749 CHD events, 4144 stroke events, 5812 atrial fibrillation events, 1159 heart failure events, and 4206 venous thromboembolism events). The fully adjusted HRs (and 95% CIs) associated with PPIs users compared to nonusers were 1.44 (95% CI 1.39-1.50) for incident CVD, 1.65 (95% CI 1.57-1.74) for CHD, 1.21 (95% CI 1.09-1.33) for stroke, 1.17 (95% CI 1.08-1.28) for atrial fibrillation, 1.61 (95% CI 1.37-1.89) for heart failure, and 1.36 (95% CI 1.24-1.50) for venous thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular PPIs use was associated with higher risk of CVD outcomes. Clinicians should therefore exercise caution when prescribing PPIs.

The benefit of omeprazole exposure on all-cause mortality and length of ICU/hospital stay might vary with age in critically ill pediatric patients: A cohort study

PURPOSE

To investigate the association between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) administration during hospitalization and mortality and length of stay in critically ill pediatric patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective observational cohort study on pediatric ICU patients (0 to 18 years). Propensity score matching (PSM), Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazards model and Linear regression model was applied for assessing the effects of PPIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 2269 pediatric ICU patients were included, involving 1378 omeprazole (OME) users and 891 non-OME users. The results showed significant association between OME exposure and decreased ICU stay (β -0.042; 95% CI -0.073--0.011; P = 0.008) but prolonged non-ICU hospital stay (β 0.121; 95% CI 0.097-0.155; P = 0.040). No statistical significance was observed between OME exposure and reduced mortality, but the OME group had a slightly decreased tendency in 28-day mortality (HR 0.701; 95% CI 0.418-1.176) and in-hospital mortality (HR 0.726; 95% CI 0.419-1.257). Furthermore, subgroup analyses revealed that the decreased tendency of mortality were more obvious in patients less than 1 year old compared with older pediatric patients, although not statistically significant. In addition, we also observed that OME exposure was significantly associated with reduced mortality of general ICU subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided a sign that PPIs used only in the ICU, rather than throughout hospital stay, might provide more benefit for critically ill pediatric patients. Additionally, younger pediatric patients might gain relatively more benefit than older children when receiving PPIs.

CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles and use of omeprazole or esomeprazole increase the risk of cardiovascular outcomes in patients using clopidogrel

Our aim was to investigate in a real-life prospective patient cohort how CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) variants and CYP2C19 inhibitor omeprazole or esomeprazole influence the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients using clopidogrel. Data based simultaneously on these factors are conflicting and sparse. A cohort of prospective patients (n = 1972) with acute coronary syndrome (n = 1302) or symptomatic chronic coronary disease (n = 656) was followed for 365 days after hospitalization with information on purchased prescription drugs, hospital discharge, death, and genotype for CYP2C19*2, CYP2C19*3, and CYP2C19*8 LOF variants. The primary study outcome measurement was cardiovascular death or recurring myocardial infarction or stroke. Altogether, 608 patients (30.8%) carried CYP2C19 LOF alleles. During the 365-day follow-up 252 patients (12.8%) had an ischemic vascular event. Cardiovascular events were significantly more frequent in carriers of CYP2C19 LOF alleles (14.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.7-17.8) than in non-carriers (10.8%, 95% CI, 9.0-12.6, p = 0.0159). Omeprazole or esomeprazole use was similar among LOF allele carriers (n = 131, 21.5%) and non-carriers (n = 250, 18.3%, p = 0.185). Cardiovascular events were significantly more common in a composite group consisting of all CYP2C19 LOF carriers regardless of proton pump inhibitor use status and non-carriers using omeprazole or esomeprazole than in non-carriers not using omeprazole or esomeprazole (14.8%, 95% CI, 12.2-17.3 vs. 9.9%, 95% CI, 8.0-11.9, p = 0.00173). We observed significantly more cardiovascular events in carriers of CYP2C19 LOF variants and in non-carriers using omeprazole or esomeprazole. For optimal patient care, both genetics and concomitant medication should be considered.

Impact of Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel on Recurrent Stroke and Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Conflicting results have been reported regarding the interaction between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel. We investigated whether concomitant PPI use influenced the risk of recurrence in patients with stroke and myocardial infarction (MI).

METHODS

This study used two databases for two different designs, the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database for a self-controlled case series design, and the national sample cohort of the NHIS data base converted to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership-Common Data Model version for a cohort study based on large-scale propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In the PPI co-prescription group, recurrent hospitalization with stroke occurred in 17.6% of the 8201 patients with history of stroke, and recurrent MI occurred in 17.1% of the 1216 patients with history of MI within1 year. According to the self-controlled case series, the overall relative risk (RR) of recurrent stroke was 2.09 (95% confidence interval (CI); 1.83-2.38); the RR showed an increasing trend parallel to the time from the beginning of PPI co-prescription. In the cohort study, there was a higher incidence of recurrent stroke in the PPI co-prescription group (Hazard ratio (HR): 1.34, 95% CI: 1.01-1.76, p = 0.04). The overall RR of recurrent MI was 1.47 (95% CI; 1.02-2.11) in the self-controlled case series; however, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrent MI in the cohort study (HR:1.42, 95% CI:0.79-2.49, p = 0.23). The impact of individual PPIs on stroke and MI showed different patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

A PPI co-prescription >4 weeks with clopidogrel was associated with hospitalization of recurrent stroke within 1 year of initial diagnosis; however, its association with recurrent MI remains inconclusive. The influence of individual PPIs should be clarified in the future.

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

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

Association Between Proton Pump Inhibitor Exposure and Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of preoperative proton pump inhibitor (PPI) exposure with incident acute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Severance cardiac surgery cohort included 9860 cardiac surgery patients aged 18 years or older. The National Health Insurance Service-senior cohort included 2933 patients aged 60 years or older who underwent cardiac surgery. Preoperative PPI exposure was defined as a PPI prescription within 3 weeks prior to cardiac surgery. Primary outcomes were postoperative AKI and AKI requiring dialysis (AKI-dialysis).

RESULTS

In the Severance cardiac surgery cohort after propensity score matching for PPI exposure, incident AKI (44.0% [472 of 1073] vs 40.5% [1304 of 3219]) and AKI-dialysis (5.8% [62 of 1073] vs 3.7% [119 of 3219]) were more common in patients exposed to PPI than in those who were not. Hospital and intensive care unit stay durations were longer among PPI-exposed than PPI-nonexposed patients. Multivariable conditional logistic analyses revealed that PPI exposure was significantly associated with incident AKI (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.42; P=.02) and AKI-dialysis (AOR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.63; P=.009). The National Health Insurance Service-Senior cohort had similar results, revealing a significant association between PPI exposure and incident AKI-dialysis (AOR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.81; P=.003). Discontinuation of PPI prior to operation was associated with a lower odds of AKI development in both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative PPI exposure may be a modifiable risk factor for AKI among patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Efficacy and safety of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors with aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are usually prescribed to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) complications in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of the concomitant use of PPIs with aspirin-clopidogrel DAPT in patients with Coronary heart disease (CHD). Method: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 2022 for eligible studies. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the clinical outcomes. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to different PPI subtypes, populations, follow-up times and study types. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022332195). Results: A total of 173,508 patients from 18 studies [2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 post hoc analyses of RCTs, and 13 cohort studies] were included in this study. Pooled data revealed that coadministration of PPIs significantly increased the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.06-1.26, p = .001) and reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications (HR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.64, p < .0001). Subgroup analysis results showed that the esomeprazole users and patients with coronary stenting in the PPI group were associated with an increased risk of MACEs compared with the non-PPI group. The occurrence of MACEs in PPI users was more common than that in non-PPI users in long-term follow-up (≥12 months) studies and in the observational studies. There was no significant differences in the incidences of net clinical adverse events (NACEs), all-cause mortality, or cardiac death between the two groups. Conclusion: In patients with CHD, the concomitant use of PPIs with aspirin and clopidogrel was associated with a reduced risk of GI complications but could increase the rates of MACEs (particularly in patients receiving esomeprazole or with coronary stenting). There was no clear evidence of an association between PPI use and NACEs, all-cause mortality, or cardiac death. The results could have been affected by the follow-up time and study type. Further large-scale RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed.

Impact of proton pump inhibitors on efficacy of antiplatelet strategies with ticagrelor or aspirin after percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the GLOBAL LEADERS trial

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may reduce the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel and/or aspirin, possibly leading to cardiovascular events.

AIMS

We aimed to investigate the association between PPI and clinical outcomes in patients treated with ticagrelor monotherapy or conventional antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

This is a subanalysis of the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial, comparing the experimental antiplatelet arm (23-month ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy [DAPT]) with the reference arm (12-month aspirin monotherapy following 12-month DAPT) after PCI. Patient-oriented composite endpoints (POCEs: all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization) and its components were assessed stratified by PPI use as a time-dependent covariate in patients with the experiment or reference antiplatelet arm.

RESULTS

Among 15,839 patients, 2115 patients (13.5%) experienced POCE at 2 years. In the reference arm, the use of PPIs was independently associated with POCE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.44) and its individual components, whereas it was not in the experimental arm (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.92-1.19; pinteraction  = 0.035). During the second-year follow-up, patients taking aspirin with PPIs had a significantly higher risk of POCE compared to those on aspirin without PPIs (HR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.27-1.94), whereas the risk did not differ significantly irrespective of PPI in ticagrelor monotherapy group (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.83-1.28; pinteraction  = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to conventional antiplatelet strategy, there were no evidence suggesting the interaction between ticagrelor monotherapy and PPIs on increased cardiovascular events, which should be confirmed in further studies.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov.

Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor and Infection and Major Adverse Clinical Events in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background

Infections are not common but important in patients with acute myocardial infarction, and are associated with worse outcomes. Infection was proved to be associated with the use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in several cohorts. It remains unclear whether PPI usage affects infection in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Methods

We consecutively enrolled patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from January 2010 to June 2018. All patients were divided into the PPI group and non-PPI group according to whether the PPI was used. The primary endpoint was the development of infection during hospitalization.

Results

A total of 3027 patients were finally enrolled, with a mean age of 62.2 ± 12.6 years. 310 (10.2%) patients were developed infection during hospitalization. Baseline characteristics were similar between the PPI and non-PPI groups (n = 584 for each group) after propensity score analysis. PPI usage was significantly associated with infection based on the propensity score matching analysis (adjusted OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.02-2.57, P = 0.041). Comparing to patients with non-PPI usage, PPI administration was positively associated with higher risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality (adjusted OR = 3.25, 95% CI = 1.06-9.97, P = 0.039) and in-hospital major adverse clinical events (adjusted OR = 3.71, 95% CI = 1.61-8.56, P = 0.002). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the impact of PPI on infection was not significantly different among patients with or without diabetes and patients with age ≥65 years or age <65 years.

Conclusion

PPI usage was related to a higher incidence of infection during hospitalization, in-hospital all-cause mortality, and in-hospital major adverse clinical events (MACE) in STEMI patients.

Influence of individual proton pump inhibitors on clinical outcomes in patients receiving clopidogrel following percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Data are conflicting on whether proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) diminish the efficacy of clopidogrel. We investigated individual PPIs and adverse cardiovascular events in postpercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel.

METHODS

We searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane from inception to March 2020 to identify studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel added PPIs versus clopidogrel only in post-PCI patient. We extracted data from 28 studies for major adverse cardiovascular endpoints (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular death, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) were pooled separately.

RESULTS

Data were extracted on 131,412 patients from the 28 studies included. Concomitant use of PPI with clopidogrel was associated with increased risk of MACE (RR 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.48; P < .001) and MI (RR 1.43; 95% CI 1.25-1.64; P < .001). Random-effects meta-analyses with individual PPIs demonstrated an increased risk of MACE in those taking pantoprazole (RR 1.31; 95% CI 1.07-1.61, P = .01) or lansoprazole (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.19-1.54, P < .0001) compared with patients not on PPIs. Likewise, in adjusted analyses, the pooled HR of adjusted events for MACEs showed that the increased risk of MACEs was similar for 4 classes of PPIs but not for rabeprazole (HR: 1.32; 95% CI 0.69-2.53, P = .40).

CONCLUSION

The post-PCI patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel in the PPI group were associated with higher risk of MACE and MI. Although the results for rabeprazole were not robust, it was the only PPI that did not yield a significantly increased risk of MACE.

Effect of esomeprazole on lipid profile in patients with peptic ulcer

Esomeprazole; a newly introduced PPI has been widely prescribed by healthcare providers due to its improved pharmacokinetic profile. Most users could have other diseases and the PPIs are indicated as acid-suppressor to minimize gastric side effects of polypharmacy. A high percentage of users could suffer from cardiovascular diseases and lipid dysmetabolism. Hence, this study was designed to determine the impact of long-term use of esomeprazole on lipid profile in a normal subject other than having peptic ulcer for which esomeprazole has been indicated. Results confirmed that esomeprazole reduced triglyceride and HDL levels and elevated total cholesterol level and correspondingly LDL level was elevated, however, no effect was noticed with VLDL. To sum up, esomeprazole impaired lipid metabolism in apparently normal healthy individuals apart from having peptic ulcer for which the esomeprazole was indicated, this finding rise a caution during prescribing esomeprazole for the patient with multiple diseases and polypharmacy including cardiovascular ailments.

Clinical Outcomes of Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The safety and efficacy associated with the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) by patients with coronary artery disease receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) remain unclear. Methods: The evaluated outcomes included combined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. A random effects meta-analysis, stratified by study design, was performed and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Results: In total, 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (6930 patients) and 16 observational studies (183,546 patients) were included. Analysis of RCTs showed that there were no significant differences in the incidences of MACEs (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75-1.05]), MI (RR = 0.93 [95% CI = 0.76-1.15]), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.79 [95% CI = 0.50-1.23]) in the PPI groups vs. the non-PPI groups. Pooled data from observational studies revealed an inconsistent association between the use of each PPI subtype and the increased risks of MACEs during clopidogrel treatment. There was no increased risk of MACEs or all-cause mortality associated with the use of PPIs (as a class) and other P2Y12 inhibitors. Both the RCTs and observational studies revealed that the use of PPIs significantly reduced the risks of GI bleeding. Conclusion: The use of PPIs was associated with a reduced risk of GI bleeding in patients treated with DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention or acute coronary syndrome. There was no clear evidence of an association between the use of PPIs and adverse cardiovascular events. Clinical Trial Registration: identifier [CRD42020190315].

Potential drug-drug interactions in patients with cardiovascular diseases: findings from a prospective observational study

Background

Patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are at high risk of experiencing drug–drug interactions (DDIs). The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency, level and risk factors associated with potential-DDIs (pDDIs) in hospitalized CVD patients at cardiology departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Quetta, Pakistan.

Methods

In the current prospective observational study, a total of 300 eligible CVD inpatients were evaluated for pDDIs using Lexicomp Interact®. The pDDIs were classified into class A (no known interaction); B (no action needed); C (monitor therapy: it is documented that the benefits of an interaction outweigh the risk, appropriately monitor therapy in order to avoid potential adverse outcomes); D (consider therapy modification: it is documented that proper actions must be taken to reduce the toxicity resulting from an interaction); X (avoid combination: the risk of an interaction outweighs the benefits and are usually contraindicated). Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis was used to find factors associated with the presence of Class-D and/or X pDDIs. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

With a median of 8.50 pDDIs per patient, all patients (100%) had ≥ 1 pDDIs. Out of total 2787 pDDIs observed, 74.06% (n = 2064) were of moderate and (n = 483) 17.33% of major severity. Class C pDDIs were most common (n = 1971, 70.72%) followed by D (n = 582, 20.88%), B (n = 204, 7.32%) and X (n = 30, 1.08%). Suffering from cardiovascular diseases other than myocardial infarction (OR 0.053, p-value < 0.001) and receiving > 12 drugs (OR 4.187, p-value = 0.009) had statistical significant association with the presence of class D and/or X pDDIs.

Conclusion

In the current study, pDDIs were highly prevalent. The inclusion of DDI screening tools, availability of clinical pharmacists and paying special attention to the high-risk patients may reduce the frequency of pDDIs at the study sites.

Proton Pump Inhibitors: Exploring Cardiovascular Complications and Prescription Protocol

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most extensively prescribed medications internationally for gastroesophageal reflux disease treatment and the prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding. Their efficiency, ease of availability, and low side effect profile offer several advantages over other treatment modalities. Long-term use and inappropriate prescribing habits have increased the presence of this class of drugs, prompting several studies to reassess their adverse effects. This article explored the possibility of a relationship between PPIs and cardiovascular adverse effects while highlighting the current prescription guidelines for PPIs. We further examined the need for more research into the etiology of PPI-related cardiovascular adverse effects and strategies to alleviate these risks.

Biomarkers for Antiplatelet Therapies in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Clinical Review

Stroke is one of the world's leading causes of disability and death. Antiplatelet agents are administered to acute ischemic stroke patients as secondary prevention. Clopidogrel involves biotransformation by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes into an active metabolite, and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) can influence the efficacy of this biotransformation. Despite the therapeutic advantages of aspirin, there is significant inter-individual heterogeneity in response to this antiplatelet drug. In this clinical review, the recent advances in the biomarkers of antiplatelet agents in acute ischemic stroke are discussed. The studies reviewed herein highlight the clinical relevance of antiplatelet resistance, pharmacotherapy of antiplatelet agents predicting drug response, strategies for identifying aspirin resistance, pharmacogenetic variants of antiplatelet agents, miRNAs, and extracellular vesicles (EVs) as biomarkers toward the personalized approach in the management of acute ischemic stroke. The precise pathways contributing to antiplatelet resistance are not very well known but are presumably multi-factorial. It is essential to understand the clinical relevance of clopidogrel and aspirin-related single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) as potential predictive and prognostic biomarkers. Prasugrel is a next-generation antiplatelet agent that prevents ADP-platelet activation by binding irreversibly to P2Y12 receptor. There are sporadic reports of prasugrel resistance and polymorphisms in the Platelet endothelial aggregation receptor-1 (PEAR1) that may contribute to a change in the pharmacodynamics response. Ticagrelor, a direct-acting P2Y12-receptor antagonist, is easily absorbed and partly metabolized to major AR-C124910XX metabolite (ARC). Ticagrelor's primary active metabolite, ARC124910XX (ARC), is formed via the most abundant hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme, CYP3A4, and CYP3A5. The integration of specific biomarkers, genotype as well as phenotype-related data in antiplatelet therapy stratification in patients with acute ischemic stroke will be of great clinical significance and could be used as a guiding tool for more effective, personalized therapy.

Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events for concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors in patients inheriting CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles: meta-analysis

Background Efficacy of clopidogrel may be diminished due to either co-administration of proton pump inhibitors or carrying CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles. However, patients may be at greater risk of major adverse cardiovascular events if taking clopidogrel together with proton pump inhibitors and also inherited the CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles which may cause further reduction of clopidogrel efficacy. This is due to the cumulative effects of drug-drug interactions and drug-gene interactions collectively referred to as multifactorial drug-gene interactions. Aim of the review The aim of this analysis was to estimate aggregated risk of major adverse cardiovascular events for either coronary heart disease or stroke patients with multifactorial drug-gene interactions versus clopidogrel alone with or without drug-gene interactions. Methods Literatures were searched using different resources based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software following either fixed/random effects model based on the levels of heterogeneity. A p value < 0.05 (2-sided) was considered statistically significant. Results In total, five studies consisting 8,802 patients of coronary artery diseases or stroke were included in this meta-analysis in which 3,767 were prescribed clopidogrel alone, 1,931 were concomitantly taking clopidogrel and PPIs, 2,146 were carrying CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles and 958 were taking both clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors while also carrying CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles. It was found that patients with multifactorial drug-gene interactions were associated with significantly increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to those taking clopidogrel alone without CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles (12% vs. 5.8%; RR 1.73; 95% CI 1.12-2.67; p = 0.01). Patients with multifactorial drug-gene interactions were also associated with significantly increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to drug-gene interactions (RR 1.63; 95% CI 1.31-2.03; p < 0.0001). Patients taking clopidogrel with proton pump inhibitors were also associated with 35% significantly increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared to those taking only clopidogrel (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.11-1.65; p = 0.003). Conclusion Patients inheriting CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles have significantly increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events when taking clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors concurrently.

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

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

Dabigatran Dual Therapy vs Warfarin Triple Therapy Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation With/Without a Proton Pump Inhibitor: A Pre-Specified Analysis of the RE-DUAL PCI Trial

Background and Objective

In patients with atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention, if a proton pump inhibitor is used, could that allow the use of warfarin triple therapy, or is there additional reduction in bleeding while using it with dual therapy?

Methods

The RE-DUAL PCI trial randomized 2725 patients with atrial fibrillation post-percutaneous coronary intervention to dabigatran dual therapy (110 or 150 mg twice daily, with clopidogrel or ticagrelor) or warfarin triple therapy (with clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin for 1–3 months). This prespecified subgroup analysis evaluated risks of a first major bleeding event or clinically relevant non-major bleeding event, all gastrointestinal bleeding, and a composite efficacy endpoint of all-cause mortality/thromboembolic event or unplanned revascularization according to baseline use of a proton pump inhibitor.

Results

Of 2678 analyzed patients, 1641 (61.3%) were receiving a proton pump inhibitor at baseline. Dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced the risk of major bleeding events or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events vs warfarin triple therapy regardless of proton pump inhibitor use, with comparable risk of the composite efficacy endpoint (all interaction p values > 0.05). For gastrointestinal bleeding, no interaction was observed between study treatment and proton pump inhibitor use (interaction p values 0.84 and 0.62 for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy, respectively, vs warfarin triple therapy).

Conclusions

Dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced the risk of major bleeding events or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events vs warfarin triple therapy, regardless of proton pump inhibitor use at baseline, in patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Risk of the composite efficacy endpoint appeared to be similar for dabigatran dual therapy vs warfarin triple therapy in patients receiving/not receiving a proton pump inhibitor.

ClinicalTrials.gov unique identifier

NCT02164864.

Video abstract

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40265-020-01323-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

2020 Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology Consensus Recommendations on the Use of P2Y12 Receptor Antagonists in the Asia-Pacific Region

The unique characteristics of patients with acute coronary syndrome in the Asia-Pacific region mean that international guidelines on the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) cannot be routinely applied to these populations. Newer generation P2Y12 inhibitors (i.e. ticagrelor and prasugrel) have demonstrated improved clinical outcomes compared with clopidogrel. However, low numbers of Asian patients participated in pivotal studies and few regional studies comparing DAPTs have been conducted. This article aims to summarise current evidence on the use of newer generation P2Y12 inhibitors in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome and provide recommendations to assist clinicians, especially cardiologists, in selecting a DAPT regimen. Guidance is provided on the management of ischaemic and bleeding risks, including duration of therapy, switching strategies and the management of patients with ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation MI or those requiring surgery. In particular, the need for an individualised DAPT regimen and considerations relating to switching, de-escalating, stopping or continuing DAPT beyond 12 months are discussed.

Investigation of the interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel using VerifyNow P2Y12 assay

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials and observation studies have revealed conflicting results regarding the interaction between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The aim of our study was to provide laboratory evidence regarding whether PPIs blunt the antiplatelet reactivity of clopidogrel.

METHODS

We included records of Asian patients who received clopidogrel treatment for cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events and the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay for platelet reactivity monitoring. The responsiveness of antiplatelet effect to clopidogrel was analyzed according to 3 criteria:Results: Patients treated without PPIs did not differ significantly from those concomitantly treated with PPIs in terms of levels of PI (25.7% ± 24.3% vs 23.0 ± 25.3%, P = .4315), PRU (187.3 ± 74.0 vs 197.4 ± 77.3, P = .3373), or responsiveness to antiplatelet (adjusted absolute risk, 3.5%; 95% confidence interval, - 10.7 to 17.7%; P = .6297). Patients treated with lansoprazole, esomeprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole exhibited no significant differences in PRU or PI levels compared with those treated without PPIs. By contrast, patients treated with dexlansoprazole exhibited a significantly decreased level of PI (25.7% ± 24.3% vs 14.0% ± 21.6%, P = .0297) and responsiveness to clopidogrel under the criterion PI > 20% (adjusted absolute risk: 10.5%; 95% confidence interval: 2.6% to 43.6%; P = .0274).

CONCLUSION

No robust interaction between clopidogrel and PPIs was found, but caution should be exercised in the concomitant use of dexlansoprazole and clopidogrel in Asians.

Clopidogrel drug interactions: a review of the evidence and clinical implications

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cardiovascular disease are commonly affected by a number of comorbidities leading to a high prevalence of polypharmacy. Polypharmacy increases the probability of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Amongst these, DDIs involving clopidogrel, the most commonly utilized platelet P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, is a topic of potential clinical concern.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews DDIs between clopidogrel and drugs which are widely used in clinical practice. In particular, drugs shown to interfere with the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic effects of clopidogrel and the clinical implications of these findings are reviewed. These drugs include inhibitors of gastric acid secretion, statins, calcium channel blockers, antidiabetic agents, and antimicrobial agents. For the references, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, or the Cochrane Library.

EXPERT OPINION

Clopidogrel-drug interactions are common. Most of these DDIs are limited to laboratory findings showing an impact on clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects. While variability in clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects is known to affect clinical outcomes, with high platelet reactivity being associated with thrombotic complications among patients undergoing coronary stenting, most studies assessing the clinical implications of clopidogrel-drug interactions have not shown to significantly affect outcomes. However, awareness of these DDIs remains important for optimizing the selection of concomitant therapies.

Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular Events Following a Myocardial Infarction in Patients Receiving Combined Clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitor Treatment: A Nested Case-Control Study

Background

The clinical implications of potential interactions between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel have been debated for over a decade.

Objective

We assessed the association between combined clopidogrel–PPI treatment and the risk of recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) and three secondary outcomes.

Patients and Methods

A nested case–control study was conducted within Cerner Corporation’s Health Facts^® database. A retrospective cohort of patients who experienced a first MI and started clopidogrel treatment was created. Within this cohort, patients experiencing a second MI (cases) were matched with up to five controls. Logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs). Findings were compared with those obtained from models with three negative control exposure drugs: H₂ receptor antagonists, prasugrel, and ticagrelor.

Results

In total, 2890 recurrent MI cases were identified within 12 months following entry into the cohort of clopidogrel users (N = 52,006). aOR for PPI use versus non-use among clopidogrel users was 1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95–1.23]. Similar ORs were obtained for secondary endpoints. A positive association between combined use of clopidogrel/PPIs and increased risk of MI was seen in the group aged 80–89 years (aOR 1.26; 95% CI 1.05–1.51). No associations with MI were observed for (1) H2 receptor antagonist use versus non-use among clopidogrel users or (2) PPI use versus non-use among prasugrel users or among ticagrelor users.

Conclusions

Overall, our findings do not support a significant adverse clinical impact of concomitant clopidogrel/PPI use by patients with MI. Nonetheless, investigation of the possible association seen in those aged 80–89 years may be warranted.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40801-020-00204-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Proton-pump inhibitor use and the development of new ischemic heart disease in non-cardiac chest pain patients

BACKGROUND

The growing reports regarding cardiac-related adverse events of chronic proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) treatment, a mainstay therapy of non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP), have raised concerns about alteration of the natural course in NCCP patients using PPI. We aimed to determine if NCCP patients receiving PPI have a higher risk of developing ischemic heart disease (IHD) compared to those not receiving PPI therapy.

METHODS

Three groups of NCCP patients were included; PPI, histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA), and no antireflux treatment. Diagnosis of NCCP had to precede diagnosis of IHD by at least 30 days, and in those receiving antireflux treatment at 30 days after starting the medication. Data analysis was corrected for 6 known confounding factors for IHD including hyperlipidemia, hypertension, obesity, smoking status, male gender, and diabetes mellitus.

KEY RESULTS

Of the patients on PPI or H2RA, 1280 and 250, respectively, developed IHD. Patients on PPI therapy displayed an increased odd of developing ischemic heart disease compared to patients never placed on therapy (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03-1.25, P-value .0093). Patients placed on H2RA therapy did not show a statistically significant change in risk compared to patients who were not placed on therapy (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77-1.06, P-value .2049). Number needed to harm in the PPI and H2RA groups was 17 and 45, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PPIs confer a statistically significant, but marginal effect on the risk of IHD development in NCCP patients. Thus, PPI use in NCCP only minimally alters the overall benign natural course of the disease.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

AIM

The objective of this article is to review the contemporary literature on the use of antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease after undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Special consideration was given to the type and duration of therapy, treatment strategies for the elderly (≥65 years of age), and strategies to reduce bleeding.

METHODS

Relevant studies were searched through MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar. Of the 236 publications retrieved, 76 were considered relevant including 35 randomized controlled trials, 17 meta-analyses, 16 observational studies, and 8 published major guidelines.

RESULTS

Most trials, meta-analyses, and guidelines support 1 month of triple therapy (TT) with an oral anticoagulant (OAC), dual antiplatelet agents (DAPT) with aspirin (ASA)/clopidogrel, and, afterward, dual therapy (DT) with OAC and single antiplatelet agent for an additional 11 months, or alternatively DT alone for 12 months after PCI. Individual consideration is given to the risk and impact of stent thrombosis (ST), thromboembolism, and bleeding. Several trials and meta-analyses have also suggested that shorter DAPT duration (≤6 months) may be safer than longer therapy (≥6 months) when weighing the risk of bleeding with ischemic outcomes, especially with newer generation drug-eluting stents. The selective use of proton-pump inhibitors in patients prone to gastrointestinal bleeding who are subjected to prolonged exposure with TT or DT may be beneficial. In the elderly, the risk of bleeding from TT, compared with DT, outweighs the benefit of reducing ischemic events.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, tailoring therapy to the individual patient is recommended considering the ischemic and bleeding risk as well as the risk of thromboembolism. For most patients with AF, 1 month of TT and subsequently DT for additional 11 months are recommended.

Artificial Intelligence Uncovered Clinical Factors for Cardiovascular Events in Myocardial Infarction Patients with Glucose Intolerance

PURPOSE

Glucose intolerance (GI), defined as either prediabetes or diabetes, promotes cardiovascular events in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). Using the pooled clinical data from patients with MI and GI in the completed ABC and PPAR trials, we aimed to identify their clinical risk factors for cardiovascular events.

METHODS

Using the limitless-arity multiple testing procedure, an artificial intelligence (AI)-based data mining method, we analyzed 415,328 combinations of < 4 clinical parameters.

RESULTS

We identified 242 combinations that predicted the occurrence of hospitalization for (1) percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina, (2) non-fatal MI, (3) worsening of heart failure (HF), and (4) all causes, and we analyzed combinations in 1476 patients. Among these parameters, the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or plasma glucose levels > 200 mg/dl after 2 h of a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test were linked to the coronary events of (1, 2). Plasma BNP levels > 200 pg/dl were linked to coronary and cardiac events of (1, 2, 3). Diuretics use, advanced age, and lack of anti-dyslipidemia drugs were linked to cardiovascular events of (1, 3). All of these factors were linked to (4). Importantly, each finding was verified by independently drawn Kaplan-Meier curves, indicating that the determined factors accurately affected cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

In most previous MI patients with GI, progression of GI, PPI use, or high plasma BNP levels were linked to the occurrence of coronary stenosis or recurrent MI. We emphasize that use of AI may comprehensively uncover the hidden risk factors for cardiovascular events.

Proton pump inhibitors and cardiovascular adverse effects: Real or surreal worries?

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most widely prescribed agents, either for treatment or prophylaxis of gastrointestinal (GI) disease, that are often administered for prolonged or chronic use. Patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease frequently receive PPIs for prophylaxis against GI bleeding due to common use of antithrombotic drugs. Over the last several years there is a growing number of reports associating chronic PPI use with a variety of serious CV and non-CV adverse effects. In this context, PPI use has been independently associated with an increased risk of CV morbidity (myocardial infarction, stroke, other CV events) and mortality. However, the critique remains that these data do not largely derive from randomized controlled trials. On the other hand, in certain conditions, the benefits of PPIs may outweigh the risks of adverse CV effects. As the indications for prolonged, particularly lifelong, prophylactic use of PPIs are not compelling and in the light of evidence of serious CV and other adverse effects, clinicians have to reconsider such long-term use of these drugs. Importantly, histamine 2 blockers have not been found to be associated with increased CV risk and thus may be an alternative therapeutic option in certain patients. These issues are amply discussed together with the potential mechanisms of these pleiotropic and off-target effects of PPIs, which are also depicted in an illustrative schema; data are also presented on differential effects of specific agents involved, alternative modes of therapy available, and relevant current guidelines on this issue.

Drug-Drug Interactions in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Systematic Review

Drug-drug interaction (DDI) is defined as a clinically significant change in the exposure and/or response to a drug caused by co-administration of another drug which may result in a precipitation of an adverse event or alteration of its therapeutic effects. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of DDIs that were actually observed or evaluated in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with particular focus on DDIs with clinical relevance. Electronic searches of the literature were conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, EBSCO, Scopus, Google Scholar and SCIndeks. A total of 117 articles were included in the review. This review showed that ACS patients can be exposed to a variety of DDIs with diverse outcomes which include decreased efficacy of antiplatelet drugs, thrombolytics or anticoagulants, increased risk of bleeding, rhabdomyolysis, hepatotoxicity, adverse effects on cardiovascular system (e.g. QT interval prolongation, arrhythmias, excessive bradycardia, severe hypotension), serotonin syndrome and drug-induced fever. Majority of the DDIs involved antiplatelet drugs (e.g. aspirin, clopidogrel and ticagrelor). Evidence of some of the reported DDIs is inconclusive as some of the studies have shown conflicting results. There is a need for additional post-marketing and population-based studies to evaluate the true effects of disease states and other factors on the clinical outcomes of DDIs. Clinicians should be attentive to the potential for DDIs and their associated harm in order to minimize or, if possible, avoid medication-related adverse events in ACS patients.

Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors with Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

There is inconsistency in the literature regarding the clinical effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) when added to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in subjects with coronary artery disease (CAD). We performed meta-analysis stratified by study design to explore these differences.

METHODS AND RESULTS

39 studies [4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 35 observational studies) were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Inception-January 2018). In 221,204 patients (PPI = 77,731 patients, no PPI =143,473 patients), RCTs restricted analysis showed that PPI did not increase the risk of all-cause mortality (Risk Ratio (RR): 1.35, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.56-3.23, P = 0.50, I2 = 0), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.94, 95% CI, 0.25-3.54, P = 0.92, I2 = 56), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR: 0.97, 95% CI, 0.62-1.51, P = 0.88, I2 = 0) or stroke (RR: 1.11, 95% CI, 0.25-5.04, P = 0.89, I2 = 26). However, PPI significantly reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR: 0.32, 95% CI, 0.20-0.52, P < 0.001, I2 = 0). Conversely, analysis of observational studies showed that PPI significantly increased the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI, 1.11-1.41, P < 0.001, I2 = 82), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI, 1.03-1.52, P = 0.02, I2 = 71), MI (RR: 1.30, 95% CI, 1.16-1.47, P < 0.001, I2 = 82) and stroke (RR: 1.60, 95% CI, 1.43-1.78, P < 0.001, I2 = 0), without reducing GI bleeding (RR: 0.74, 95% CI, 0.45-1.22, P = 0.24, I2 = 79).

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis of RCTs endorsed the use of PPI with DAPT for reducing GI bleeding without worsening cardiovascular outcomes. These findings oppose the negative observational data regarding effects of PPI with DAPT.

Are proton pump inhibitors among the risk factors for acute coronary syndrome? A multi-centric case-control study between patients attending governmental hospitals in western Saudi Arabia

Objectives:

To identify the predictors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to determine the relationship between usage of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the occurrence of a first non-fatal ACS event among patients that attended governmental hospitals in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Methods:

A matched, multi-centric case-control study was performed between January and June of 2015 in Jeddah involving 2 governmental hospitals and the main university hospital. A total of 118 cases aged ≥18 years who were recently diagnosed with ACS were selected. For each case, one control matched by age and gender was selected. Information from an interview questionnaire and from reviewing patients’ medical records was recorded on a standardized data collection sheet.

Results:

Risk factors for ACS and the relationship between usage of PPIs and the occurrence of a first non-fatal ACS event were measured in 236 cases and matched controls. Current smoking (OR: 4.5; 95% CI: 1.92-10.98), excessive body weight (OR: 2.99; 95% CI: 1.38-6.45), and dyslipidemia (OR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.07-5.84) were the predictors of ACS. Hypertension, diabetes, and moderate-to-high physical activity were associated with ACS. However, there was no statistical association between use of PPIs and occurrence of the first non-fatal ACS event (p>0.05).

Conclusions:

There was no association between PPIs and the occurrence of a first non-fatal ACS event. Smoking, increased weight, and dyslipidemia are considered predictors of ACS. Furthermore, ACS is associated with self-reported diabetes, hypertension, and physical activity.

[The relationship between the combined use of various proton pump inhibitors with antiplatelet drugs and the risk of cardiovascular complications]

In the article the problem of the combined use of clopidogrel and various proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in terms of cardiovascular complications risk and stent thrombosis is considered. The results of meta - analyses and a systematic reviews affecting this issue are represented in detail. The inter - drug interactions mechanisms of various PPIs with clopidogrel based on the characteristics of the metabolism in the liver cytochromes system are discussed. The authors conducted a search, systematization and analysis of studies regarding the association between cardiovascular risk and combined use of individual medications from PPI class with clopidogrel, and these results are presented in the review. Currently available data do not allow to answer the question about the differences between individual PPIs in their impact on the risk of adverse cardiovascular events due to the small number of such studies, design heterogeneity, differences in the inclusion criteria and end points as well as in the rate of administration of individual PPIs.

A potential risk factor for paraoxonase 1: in silico and in-vitro analysis of the biological activity of proton-pump inhibitors†

Objectives

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are drugs commonly utilized by about 7% of adults in the world. Recent researches have shown that there are countless and severe side effects of these drugs. This situation has raised concern among clinicians and patients alike. The purpose of this study is to contribute the novel drug discovery and development technology and toxicology field by researching interactions of PPIs on paraoxonase 1.

Methods

In this study, the paraoxonase 1 enzyme was purified from human serum by using rapid and straightforward chromatographic techniques. Subsequently, the inhibition effects of pantoprazole, omeprazole, and esomeprazole, PPIs, were investigated on paraoxonase 1. Besides, molecular docking studies were performed to unravel the binding mechanism between the enzyme and drugs.

Key findings

All drugs showed potent inhibitory activities. IC50 of the drugs values were 54.780 ± 0.524, 86.470 ± 0.818 and 93.390 ± 0.885 mm and Ki constants were found as 39.895 ± 0.005 mm, 70.112 ± 0.010 mm and 78.868 ± 0.008 mm, respectively. The binding scores observed in silico studies were found to agree with the obtained from in-vitro experimental results.

Conclusions

We observed that the drugs decreased PON1 activity at low concentrations. The results show that adjusting the dosages of these medications is a crucial case for each patient. The physicians should more carefully interpret whether there is an essential indication before prescribing PPIs and, if there is, to approve the proper dosing for the situation.

Different Clopidogrel Response Elicited by Lansoprazole or Esomeprazole in Patients Undergoing Neurointervention with Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

BACKGROUND

Aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy and a proton-pump inhibitor are used worldwide to prevent thromboembolism and peptic ulceration in patients undergoing neurointervention. We performed VerifyNow assays (Accumetrics, San Diego, CA, USA) to retrospectively examine the relationship between the effectiveness of antiplatelet agents and different proton-pump inhibitor types.

METHODS

Sixty-four patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysm scheduled for neurointervention received aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy plus the proton-pump inhibitor lansoprazole (n = 34) or esomeprazole (n = 30). A low response to aspirin and clopidogrel was defined in terms of aspirin reaction units > 550 and P2Y12 reaction units ≥ 230, respectively, by VerifyNow assay. The characteristics, response to antiplatelet therapy, and clinical outcomes were compared in patients treated with lansoprazole or esomeprazole.

RESULTS

The preoperative mean VerifyNow aspirin reaction units and P2Y12 reaction units were 466.0 ± 67.3 and 205.0 ± 67.6, respectively. The mean aspirin reaction unit value was 482.0 ± 64.1 in the lansoprazole group, and 461.5 ± 70.9 in the esomeprazole group (p = 0.77). The mean P2Y12 reaction unit was 220.0 ± 64.4 in the lansoprazole group, and 174.5 ± 65.0 in the esomeprazole group; there was a significant difference in the clopidogrel response of patient treated with lansoprazole or esomeprazole (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our VerifyNow assay results suggest that when on lansoprazole fewer patients achieved the therapeutic goal and required extra therapy before neurointervention.

The Association between Proton Pump Inhibitors and Myocardial Infarction: What Do Food and Drug Administration Data Tell Us?

Objective:

There is limited and conflicting evidence on the association between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and myocardial infarction (MI). This study aims to examine the occurrence of MI associated with PPI use from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System database.

Methods:

This is a cross-sectional study using data from the FDA dated from December 2013 to April 2018. Standard descriptive statistics were used to describe demographic information. Logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the association between the independent variables and MI.

Findings:

Among the 52,443 individuals who were taking a PPI and experienced an adverse event which was registered on the FDA database, 726 (1.38%) experienced MI. Of all the PPIs, esomeprazole had the largest proportion of users experiencing MI (1.81%). Compared to other PPIs, esomeprazole was associated with a significantly higher rate of MI (odds ratio [OR] =1.53, P < 0.001), whereas lansoprazole was associated with a lower rate of MI (OR = 0.74, P = 0.03).

Conclusion:

Among the PPIs, esomeprazole appeared to have the highest risk of MI. Although the observed associations do not infer causality, this study highlighted a need for further studies to determine if a PPI, especially esomeprazole, can indeed cause MI.

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

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

Blockade of Cardiac Proton Pump Impairs Ventricular Remodeling Through a Superoxide-DDAH-Dependent Pathway in Infarcted Rats

Background

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are frequently used to prevent or treat peptic ulcers. Recently, PPIs have been shown to increase the risk of myocardial infarction. The purpose of this study was to determine whether PPIs adversely affect ventricular remodeling in infarcted rats.

Methods

Male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to receive either vehicle, omeprazole, omeprazole + vitamin C, omeprazole + olmesartan, or famotidine treatment for 4 weeks starting 24 hours after inducing myocardial infarction by ligating coronary arteries.

Results

Compared with vehicle-treated infarcted rats, omeprazole-treated infarcted rats had significant changes with reduced myocardial vitamin C levels, increased oxidant production, and decreased dimethylarginine dimethylaminohydrolase 2 (DDAH2) activity, which in turn increased asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) levels and impaired ventricular remodeling. With gastric protection similar to omeprazole, the H2 blocker famotidine had no effect on ventricular remodeling. In contrast to the in vivo results, the ex vivo study showed similar superoxide and DDAH2 protein levels between vehicle- and omeprazole-treated infarcted rats, suggesting involvement of gastric vitamin C uptake rather than myocardial vitamin C in mediating the impaired axis of vitamin C-superoxide-DDAH2 in the in vivo measurements. The administration of PPIs was associated with impaired DDAH2 expression and increased myocardial ADMA, which impaired ventricular remodeling after infarction. These effects were prevented by the coadministration of vitamin C or olmesartan.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that the administration of PPIs was associated with impaired DDAH2 expression and increased myocardial ADMA by reducing gastric vitamin C uptake, which impaired ventricular remodeling after infarction.

Prescription of proton pump inhibitors in older adults with complex polytherapy

OBJECTIVES

Prescription of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may be a source of potentially clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and related complications for elderly patients with complex polytherapy at discharge from hospital. The aim of the study was to identify, through the analysis of hospital discharge records, the co-administrations (PPIs + one or more drugs potentially generating DDIs) hypothetically leading to severe consequences according to the literature and online databases. Subsequently, alternatives to PPIs were evaluated for the treatment of gastric acidity and ulcers.

METHODS

The medical records of 1288 patients, discharged from a geriatric ward at the Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital in Turin from January 2012 to December 2013, were collected in an Excel database for analysis of DDIs using the literature and online sources such as Micromedex. RESULTS : Six hundred and sixty-three of the 1288 clinical folders had a PPI prescription. A list of 18 drugs considered potentially hazardous and able to trigger a DDI when co-administrated with PPIs was drafted; the frequencies of the co-prescriptions of each PPI with one of the listed drugs were esomeprazole 65.38%, lansoprazole 52.87%, omeprazole 48.19% and pantoprazole 37.11%. An analysis of these co-prescriptions, according to Micromedex classification, gave a percentage of major interactions of 11.01% over 663 clinical folders including a PPI.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a collection of potentially hazardous drug associations and helpful suggestions to improve the quality of prescriptions for elderly patients and strengthens the case for synergic work between doctors and pharmacists in the wards.

A Review of Danshen Combined with Clopidogrel in the Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease

OBJECTIVE

Danshen, the root of Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge, is a traditional herbal medicine in China, which has been used to treat irregular menstruation, cold hernia, and abdominal pain for thousands of years. Danshen is frequently used in combination with drugs to treat cardiovascular diseases. Clopidogrel is a commonly used drug for treating coronary heart disease, but clopidogrel resistance restricts its development. Therefore, the clinical efficacy of Danshen combined with clopidogrel treats coronary heart disease and the relationship between Danshen and clopidogrel metabolism enzymes is suggested for future investigations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The information was collected by searching online databases, and the RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two articles, including 2587 patients, were enrolled after the evaluation. Meta-analysis showed that Danshen combined with clopidogrel was more effective than clopidogrel alone in treating coronary heart disease by improving clinical curative effect, reducing the frequency of angina pectoris, improving electrocardiogram results, shortening the duration of angina pectoris, and easing adverse reactions. Danshen inhibited carboxylesterase 1 and most enzyme of cytochrome P450, especially cytochrome P450 1A2, which may affect the metabolism of clopidogrel.

CONCLUSION

Danshen combined with clopidogrel may compensate for individual differences of clopidogrel resistance among individuals in the treatment of coronary heart disease. Meanwhile, the inhibitory effect of Danshen on cytochrome P450 and carboxylesterase 1 could be partly responsible for the synergistic and attenuating effects of Danshen combined with clopidogrel.

2018 update of expert consensus statement on antiplatelet therapy in East Asian patients with ACS or undergoing PCI

East Asians are the most populous race in the world and their health status is an important global issue. Compared with Caucasian populations, East Asian patients have a different benefit/risk ratio when using antithrombotic treatment. Despite this observation, treatment strategies in East Asian patients are mostly based on the American and European guidelines. Despite a lower platelet inhibitory response to clopidogrel, East Asian patients show a similar or even a lower rate of ischemic event occurrence and higher bleeding risk compared with Caucasian patients. For potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitors (ticagrelor and prasugrel), East Asian patients have shown less favorable net clinical benefits compared with Caucasian patients, which may be related to differences in pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and therapeutic zone of antiplatelet effect. This updated consensus mainly focuses on state-of-the-art and current controversies in the East Asian population. In addition, when East Asian patients are administered potent P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors, the strategies and ongoing trials to overcome the related hurdles are discussed.

Plasma miR-142 predicts major adverse cardiovascular events as an intermediate biomarker of dual antiplatelet therapy

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are widely expressed in organisms and are implicated in the regulation of most biological functions. The present study investigated the association of plasma miRNAs with the clinical outcomes of dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Plasma miRNA levels were screened using high-throughput Illumina sequencing to evaluate the antiplatelet efficacy of clopidogrel and aspirin. Six plasma miRNAs (miR-126, miR-130a, miR-27a, miR-106a, miR-21, and miR-142) were associated with clopidogrel-treated platelet aggregation. These miRNAs were validated in a prospective cohort of 1230 CAD patients using quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). High plasma miR-142 levels were associated with a high risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with a hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 1.83 (1.30-2.59) at a false discovery rate of <5%. Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that diabetes mellitus, heart failure, calcium channel blocker application, and a high plasma miR-142 level were independent risk factors of MACE. The levels of the six plasma miRNAs were not significantly associated with bleeding events during the 3-year follow-up. In conclusion, plasma miR-142 is potential marker to predict MACE in CAD patients after PCI.