Aspirin Resistance: An Evaluation of Current Evidence and Measurement Methods

Thromboelastography-Guided Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients with Ischemic Cerebrocardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of thromboelastography (TEG)-guided antiplatelet therapy in patients with ischemic cerebrocardiovascular diseases is not well-established. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of TEG-guided antiplatelet therapy compared to standard treatment in patients with ischemic cerebrocardiovascular diseases.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing TEG-guided antiplatelet therapy with standard therapy in patients suffering from ischemic stroke (IS) or coronary artery disease (CAD) were identified. The primary efficacy measure was a composite of ischemic and hemorrhagic events. Secondary efficacy measures included any ischemic events, while safety was assessed by the occurrence of bleeding events.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 4 RCTs and 6 observational studies with a total of 1,678 patients were included. When considering a composite of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in RCTs, a significant reduction was observed in IS or CAD patients under TEG-guided therapy compared to standard therapy (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.27-0.75, p = 0.002). After pooling RCTs and observational studies together, compared to standard antiplatelet therapy, TEG-guided therapy significantly reduced the risk of a composite of ischemic and hemorrhagic events (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.19-0.37; p < 0.00001), ischemic events (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.19-0.41; p < 0.00001), and bleeding events (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16-0.62; p = 0.0009) in patients with IS or CAD.

CONCLUSION

TEG-guided antiplatelet therapy appears to be both effective and safe for patients with IS or CAD. These findings support the use of TEG testing to tailor antiplatelet therapy in individuals with ischemic cerebrocardiovascular diseases.

Contemporary Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Therapies for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Narrative Review of Current Literature and Guidelines

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. The annual incidence of new or recurrent stroke is approximately 795,000 cases per year in the United States, of which 87% are ischemic in nature. In addition to the management of modifiable high-risk factors to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke, antithrombotic agents (antiplatelets and anticoagulants) play an important role in secondary stroke prevention. This review will discuss the published literature on the use of antiplatelets and anticoagulants in secondary prevention of acute ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), including their pharmacology, efficacy, and adverse effects. We will also highlight the role of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in secondary stroke prevention, along with supporting literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) with aspirin or clopidogrel reduces the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke in patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA. However, as shown in recent trials, short-term DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 21-30 days is more effective than SAPT in patients with minor acute non-cardioembolic stroke or high-risk TIA. Although short-term DAPT is highly effective in preventing recurrent stroke, a more prolonged course can increase bleeding risks without additional benefit. DAPT for 90 days, followed by aspirin monotherapy for patients with large vessel intracranial atherosclerotic disease, is suitable for secondary stroke prevention. However, patients need to be monitored for both minor (e.g., bruising) and major (e.g., intracranial) bleeding complications. Conversely, oral warfarin and newer direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban are the agents of choice for secondary stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular cardioembolic strokes. DOACs may be preferred over warfarin due to decreased bleeding risks, including ICH, lack of need for international normalized ratio monitoring, no dietary restrictions, and limited drug-drug interactions. The choice between different antiplatelets and anticoagulants for prevention of ischemic stroke depends on the underlying stroke mechanism, cytochrome P450 2C19 polymorphisms, bleeding risk profile, compliance, drug tolerance, and drug resistance. Physicians must carefully weigh each patient's relative benefits and bleeding risks before initiating an antiplatelet/anticoagulant treatment regimen. Further studies are warranted to study the optimal duration of DAPT in symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis since the benefit is most pronounced in the short term while the bleeding risk remains high during the extended duration of therapy.

Antiplatelet Use in Ischemic Stroke

Objective:

A literature review of antiplatelet agents for primary and secondary stroke prevention, including mechanism of action, cost, and reasons for lack of benefit.

Data sources:

Articles were gathered from MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews, and PubMed databases (1980-2021). Abstracts from scientific meetings were considered. Search terms included ischemic stroke, aspirin, clopidogrel, dipyridamole, ticagrelor, cilostazol, prasugrel, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors.

Study selection and data extraction:

English-language original and review articles were evaluated. Guidelines from multiple countries were reviewed. Articles were evaluated independently by 2 authors.

Data synthesis:

An abundance of evidence supports aspirin and clopidogrel use for secondary stroke prevention. In the acute phase (first 21 days postinitial stroke), these medications have higher efficacy for preventing further stroke when combined, but long-term combination therapy is associated with higher hemorrhage rates. Antiplatelet treatment failure is influenced by poor adherence and genetic polymorphisms. Antiplatelet agents such as cilostazol may provide extra benefit over clopidogrel and aspirin, in certain racial groups, but further research in more diverse ethnic populations is needed.

Relevance to patient care and clinical practice:

This review presents the data available on the use of different antiplatelet agents poststroke. Dual therapy, recurrence after initiation of secondary preventative therapy, and areas for future research are discussed.

Conclusions:

Although good evidence exists for the use of certain antiplatelet agents postischemic stroke, there are considerable opportunities for future research to investigate personalized therapies. These include screening patients for platelet polymorphisms that confer antiplatelet resistance and for randomized trials including more racially diverse populations.

Platelet Reactivity Testing for Aspirin Patients Who Sustain Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Patients who take aspirin and sustain traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (tICH) are often transfused platelets in an effort to prevent bleeding progression. The efficacy of platelet transfusion is questionable, however, and some medical societies recommend that platelet reactivity testing (PRT) should guide transfusion decisions. The study hypothesis was that utilization of PRT to guide platelet transfusion for tICH patients suspected of taking aspirin would safely identify patients who did not require platelet transfusion.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients with blunt tICH who received PRT for known or suspected aspirin use between June 2014 and December 2017 at a level I trauma center. Chart abstraction was conducted to determine home aspirin status, and PRT values were used to classify patients as therapeutic or nontherapeutic on aspirin. Differences were assessed with Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

157 patients met study inclusion criteria, and 118 (75%) patients had documented prior aspirin use. PRT results were available approximately 1.7 h (IQR: 0.9, 3.2) after arrival. Upon initial PRT, 70% of patients were considered inhibited and 88% of those patients had aspirin documented as a home medication. Conversely, 18% of patients with home aspirin use had normal platelet reactivity. Clinically significant worsening of the tICH did not significantly differ when comparing those who received platelet transfusion with those who did not (8% versus 7%, P = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Platelet reactivity testing can detect platelet inhibition related to aspirin and should guide transfusion decisions for head injured patients in the initial hours after trauma.

Comparison of Multiplate, Platelet Function Analyzer-200, and Plateletworks in Healthy Dogs Treated with Aspirin and Clopidogrel

BACKGROUND

Platelet function testing may be warranted to assess response to aspirin and clopidogrel.

HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of aspirin, clopidogrel, or combination therapy using 3 platelet function tests: Multiplate Analyzer (MP), Platelet Function Analyzer-200 (PFA), and Plateletworks (PW).

ANIMALS

Six healthy laboratory Beagles.

METHODS

Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study (crossover design). Dogs were given aspirin 1 mg/kg, clopidogrel 2 mg/kg, or combination therapy for 1 week each, with a washout period of 2 weeks. Platelet function was assessed on days 0 and 7 of each phase using MP (adenosine diphosphate [ADP], arachidonic acid [AA], collagen [COL] agonists), PFA (P2Y, COL-ADP [CADP], COL-Epinephrine [CEPI] cartridges), and PW (ADP, AA, COL agonists). Platelet counts were obtained with impedance and optical counters.

RESULTS

For MP, mean aggregation was decreased for COL and AA with combination therapy and for ADP with all treatments. For PFA, mean CT was increased for the CEPI cartridge with aspirin; and for the P2Y and CADP cartridges with clopidogrel or combination therapy. More dogs receiving clopidogrel showed an increase in PFA CT using the P2Y than the CADP cartridge. For PW, mean aggregation was decreased for AA with all treatments; for ADP with clopidogrel or combination therapy; and for COL with clopidogrel. The PW results with the 2 hematology counters showed almost perfect agreement.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

All platelet function tests detected treatment effects in some dogs and may have utility for monitoring therapy.

Establishment of reference ranges and evaluation of in vitro concentration-dependent platelet inhibition by acetylsalicylic acid for multiple electrode impedance aggregometry in healthy dogs

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) is an antiplatelet medication used for prevention of thromboembolism. Effects of ASA appear to vary widely between dogs, but the underlying mechanisms are not understood. The Multiplate analyzer is a newer form of whole-blood impedance aggregometry recently validated for use in healthy dogs. A method utilizing this instrument to measure ASA effects on platelet function has not been established. The goals of this study were to establish reference ranges for the Multiplate in healthy dogs and secondly, to develop a technique to determine the in vitro concentration of ASA needed to cause 50% inhibition of platelet aggregation (IC50). Reference ranges established from 40 dogs at multiple test times for three agonists were consistent with previously published values. In vitro IC50 values were calculated using the sigmoid E_max model in 20 healthy dogs on two occasions to determine individual repeatability. Calculated in vitro IC50 demonstrated four ASA response groups: responder (n = 16), poor responder (n = 1), variable responder (n = 2), and nonresponder (n = 1). Multiplate within-assay variability was  <10% for area under the curve (AUC), and between-assay baseline AUC variability was  <15%. The described technique allowed for determination of an in vitro IC50 for ASA in dogs using a multiple electrode impedance aggregometer.

Cardiology: Aspirin Resistance in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease with and without a History of Myocardial Infarction

Background:

Aspirin therapy is a cornerstone in the prevention of atherothrombotic events, but recurrent vascular events are estimated to occur in 8-18% of patients taking aspirin for secondary prevention after 2 years. Estimates of biologic aspirin resistance vary from 5% to 60%, depending on the assay used. However, the relationship between biologic measurements of aspirin resistance and adverse clinical events remains unclear.

Objective:

To determine whether patients with documented myocardial infarction (Ml) while on aspirin therapy (cases) were more likely to be aspirin resistant than were patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) who had no history of Ml (controls) and to assess clinical predictors of aspirin resistance in patients with stable CAD.

Methods:

This case-control study examined aspirin responses using the VerifyNow Aspirin Assay system in 50 cases and 50 controls who had taken a dose of aspirin within 48 hours of presentation to the clinic visit. Odds ratios were estimated to determine the association between aspirin resistance and MI, Independent predictors of aspirin resistance were determined using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results:

An increase in the prevalence of aspirin resistance among cases (16% vs 12% in controls) was not observed (OR 1.40; 95% CI 0.45 to 4.37; p = 0.566). In the overall CAD population, female sex was independently associated with aspirin resistance (OR 4.01; 95% CI 1.15 to 13.92; p = 0.029).

Conclusions:

Additional large studies are required to understand whether biologically defined aspirin resistance is associated with increased risk for cardiovascular events, with special attention paid to sex differences.

Aspirin treatment failure: is this a real phenomenon? A review of the aetiology and how to treat it

Multiple clinical trials have shown that aspirin can reduce all cardiovascular events in primary and secondary prevention and yet there is a large population in whom aspirin fails. This review brings together the evidence and controversies surrounding the definition of ‘aspirin treatment failure’, its clinical significance and the possible approaches to managing such patients. Several different assays have been developed to measure the biochemical action of aspirin. At present there is no ‘gold standard’ and there is massive disparity between methods. Studies thus far have shown inconsistent results and to date the treatment of aspirin therapy failure is left to the discretion of the leading physician.

Cyclooxygenase expression and platelet function in healthy dogs receiving low-dose aspirin

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin is used to prevent thromboembolic complications in dogs, but some animals are nonresponsive to the antiplatelet effects of aspirin ("aspirin resistance").

HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES

That low-dose aspirin would inhibit platelet function, decrease thromboxane synthesis, and alter platelet cyclooxygenase (COX) expression.

ANIMALS

Twenty-four healthy dogs.

METHODS

A repeated measures study. Platelet function (PFA-100 closure time, collagen/epinephrine), platelet COX-1 and COX-2 expression, and urine 11-dehydro-thromboxane B(2) (11-dTXB(2)) were evaluated before and during aspirin administration (1 mg/kg Q24 hours PO, 10 days). Based on prolongation of closure times after aspirin administration, dogs were divided into categories according to aspirin responsiveness: responders, nonresponders, and inconsistent responders.

RESULTS

Low-dose aspirin increased closure times significantly (62% by Day 10, P < .001), with an equal distribution among aspirin responsiveness categories, 8 dogs per group. Platelet COX-1 mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) increased significantly during treatment, 13% on Day 3 (range, -29.7-136.1%) (P = .047) and 72% on Day 10 (range, -0.37-210%) (P < .001). Platelet COX-2 MFI increased significantly by 34% (range, -29.2-270%) on Day 3 (P = .003) and 74% (range, -19.7-226%) on Day 10 (P < .001). Urinary 11-dTXB(2) concentrations significantly (P = .005, P < .001) decreased at both time points. There was no difference between aspirin responsiveness and either platelet COX expression or thromboxane production.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

Low-dose aspirin consistently inhibits platelet function in approximately one-third of healthy dogs, despite decreased thromboxane synthesis and increased platelet COX expression in most dogs. COX isoform expression before treatment did not predict aspirin resistance.

Antiplatelet drugs: mechanisms and risks of bleeding following cardiac operations

Preoperative antiplatelet drug use is common in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The impact of these drugs on bleeding and blood transfusion varies. We hypothesize that review of available evidence regarding drug-related bleeding risk, underlying mechanisms of platelet dysfunction, and variations in patient response to antiplatelet drugs will aid surgeons as they assess preoperative risk and attempt to limit perioperative bleeding. The purpose of this review is to (1) examine the role that antiplatelet drugs play in excessive postoperative blood transfusion, (2) identify possible mechanisms to explain patient response to antiplatelet drugs, and (3) formulate a strategy to limit excessive blood product usage in these patients. We reviewed available published evidence regarding bleeding risk in patients taking preoperative antiplatelet drugs. In addition, we summarized our previous research into mechanisms of antiplatelet drug-related platelet dysfunction. Aspirin users have a slight but significant increase in blood product usage after CABG (0.5 U of nonautologous blood per treated patient). Platelet adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor inhibitors are more potent antiplatelet drugs than aspirin but have a half-life similar to aspirin, around 5 to 10 days. The American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons guidelines recommend discontinuation, if possible, of ADP inhibitors 5 to 7 days before operation because of excessive bleeding risk, whereas aspirin should be continued during the entire perioperative period in most patients. Individual variability in response to aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs is common with both hyper- and hyporesponsiveness seen in 5 to 25% of patients. Use of preoperative antiplatelet drugs is a risk factor for increased perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion. Point-of-care tests can identify patients at high risk for perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion, although these tests have limitations. Available evidence suggests that multiple blood conservation techniques benefit high-risk patients taking antiplatelet drugs before operation. Guidelines for patients who take aspirin and/or thienopyridines before cardiac procedures include some or all of the following: (1) preoperative identification of high-risk patients using point-of-care testing; (2) withdrawal of aspirin or other antiplatelet drugs for a few days and delay of operation in patients at high risk for bleeding if clinical circumstances permit; (3) selective perioperative use of evidence-based blood conservation interventions (e.g., short-course erythropoietin, off-pump procedures, and use of intraoperative blood conservation techniques), especially in high-risk patients; and (4) platelet transfusions if clinical bleeding occurs.

Aspirin: pharmacology and clinical applications

Antiplatelet therapy has been documented to reduce risks of cardiovascular disease after acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, and in chronic atrial fibrillation patients, amongst other risk factors. Conventional management of thrombosis-based disorders includes the use of heparin, oral anticoagulants, and the preferred antiplatelet agent aspirin. Interestingly, aspirin was not intended to be used as an antiplatelet agent; rather, after being repurposed, it has become one of the most widely prescribed antithrombotic drugs. To this end, there have been several milestones in the development of antiplatelet agents in the last few decades, such as adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitors, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors. However, given some of the limitations of these therapies, aspirin continues to play a major role in the management of thrombotic and cardiovascular disorders and is expected to do so for years to come.

Preoperative aspirin resistance does not increase myocardial injury during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

We performed a prospective cohort trial on 220 patients undergoing elective off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and taking aspirin to evaluate the effect of aspirin resistance on myocardial injury. The patients were divided into aspirin responders and aspirin non-responders by the value of the aspirin reaction units obtained preoperatively using the VerifyNow™ Aspirin Assay. The serum levels of troponin I were measured before surgery and 1, 6, 24, 48 and 72 hr after surgery. In-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, graft occlusion, the postoperative blood loss and reexploration for bleeding were recorded. Of the 220 patients, 181 aspirin responders (82.3%) and 39 aspirin non-responders (17.7%) were defined. There were no significant differences in troponin I levels (ng/mL) between aspirin responders and aspirin non-responders: preoperative (0.04 ± 0.08 vs 0.03 ± 0.06; P = 0.56), postoperative 1 hr (0.72 ± 0.87 vs 0.86 ± 1.10; P = 0.54), 6 hr (2.92 ± 8.76 vs 1.50 ± 2.40; P = 0.94), 24 hr (4.16 ± 13.44 vs 1.25 ± 1.95; P = 0.52), 48 hr (2.15 ± 7.06 vs 0.65 ± 0.95; P = 0.64) and 72 hr (1.20 ± 4.63 vs 0.38 ± 0.56; P = 0.47). Moreover, no significant differences were observed with regard to in-hospital outcomes. In conclusion, preoperative aspirin resistance does not increase myocardial injury in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. Postoperative dual antiplatelet therapy might have protected aspirin resistant patients.

Prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase genes COX1 and COX2 - novel modifiers of disease severity in cystic fibrosis patients

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is one of the most common autosomal recessive diseases among Caucasians caused by a mutation in the CFTR gene. However, the clinical outcome of CF pulmonary disease varies remarkably even in patients with the same CFTR genotype. This has led to a search for genetic modifiers located outside the CFTR gene. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of functional variants in prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase genes (COX1 and COX2) on the severity of lung disease in CF patients. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first time when analysis of COX1 and COX2 as potential CF modifiers is provided. The study included 94 CF patients homozygous for F508del mutation of CFTR. To compare their clinical condition, several parameters were recorded, e.g. a unique clinical score: disease severity status (DSS). To analyse the effect of non-CFTR genetic polymorphisms on the clinical course of CF patients, the whole coding region of COX1 and selected COX2 polymorphisms were analysed. Statistical analysis of genotype-phenotype associations revealed a relationship between the heterozygosity status of identified polymorphisms and better lung function. These results mainly concern COX2 polymorphisms: -765G>C and 8473T>C. The COX1 and COX2 polymorphisms reducing COX protein levels had a positive effect on all analysed clinical parameters. This suggests an important role of these genes as protective modifiers of pulmonary disease in CF patients, due to inhibition of arachidonic acid conversion into prostaglandins, which probably reduces the inflammatory process.

Aspirin and antiplatelet agent resistance: implications for prevention of secondary stroke

Oral antiplatelet drugs, including aspirin, clopidogrel and extended-release dipyridamole, are widely prescribed for the secondary prevention of vascular events, including stroke. Despite the benefits of antiplatelet therapy, 10−20% of patients experience a recurrent vascular event while taking antiplatelet medication. This article discusses the concept of antiplatelet resistance in general, focusing on aspirin resistance in particular, as a poorly defined cause of recurrent vascular events. Factors such as the lack of a standardized method to diagnose aspirin resistance and a poor clinical correlation with laboratory assays make the treatment of aspirin nonresponders difficult. In addition, there are confounding conditions such as diabetes mellitus that can affect aspirin resistance and determine a different course of treatment for these patients. Other antiplatelet options may also have resistant subpopulations; thus, alternative strategies for the secondary stroke patient must be explored.

Resistance to low-dose aspirin therapy among patients with acute coronary syndrome in relation to associated risk factors

BACKGROUND

A substantial proportion of patients have recurrence of vascular events despite daily intake of low-dose aspirin therapy. Therefore, different patients may require different aspirin dosages to achieve complete inhibition of platelet function.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work was to measure the response to low-dose aspirin therapy (150 mg/day) among patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and to find out whether titrating aspirin dosage to 300 mg/day, would provide a better therapeutic response in the resistant cases. Moreover, we also aimed to study any association between aspirin non-responsiveness and atherothrombotic risk factors.

METHODS

The antiplatelet effect of 150 mg/day aspirin was studied prospectively in 50 consecutive patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Platelet aggregation was measured using optical platelet aggregometry and serum thromboxane B(2) level. Aspirin resistance was defined as collagen (1 μg/mL) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP) (5 μmol/L)-induced platelet aggregation of ≥ 40% when compared with control values. Twenty healthy age- and sex-matched individuals were taken as a control group. All patients were subjected to complete medical history (risk factors, medications), thorough clinical examination, ECG, coronary angiography and laboratory investigations including: complete haemogram, coagulation, kidney, liver and lipid profiles, fasting blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1C) ).

RESULTS

Eleven of 50 patients (22%) were found to be aspirin resistant. A highly significant difference was found between the mean values of ADP, collagen-induced platelet aggregation percentage and thromboxane B(2) level after aspirin 150 mg/day when compared with the corresponding mean values after aspirin 300 mg/day among the resistant patients (66 ± 7.01%, 62 ± 4.34% and 620 ± 64.58 pg/mL, respectively, vs. 26.87 ± 2.85%, 16.5 ± 3.8% and 77 ± 11.3 pg/mL) indicating enhanced response to aspirin after escalating the dose. The presence of atherothrombotic risk factors (hypertension, smoking, family history of ischaemic heart disease and previous MI) were not statistically different between aspirin-resistant and aspirin-sensitive patients. However, there was a highly significant difference between the aspirin sensitive and the resistant patients regarding the other risk factors (diabetes mellitus and dyslipidaemia) (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

There is inter-individual variability in response to the antiplatelet effect of standard doses of aspirin (150, 300 mg/day). The response to aspirin 300 mg/day is enhanced in resistant patients when compared to 150 mg/day. There was a significant association between aspirin resistance and atherothrombotic risk factors (diabetes, hyperlipidaemia and obesity).

Aspirin resistance in coronary artery disease is correlated to elevated markers for oxidative stress but not to the expression of cyclooxygenase (COX) 1/2, a novel COX-1 polymorphism or the PlA1/2polymorphism

Aspirin resistance (AR) is estimated to be present in 5-75% of patients and is related to increased cardiovascular mortality. However, the underlying mechanisms are mostly unknown. In the present study, AR was detected in 14 out of 55 patients (25%) with coronary artery disease. The presence of concomitant anti-inflammatory drugs did not affect AR. Plasma levels of thromboxane B(2) as well as the markers for oxidative stress and known platelet activators 8-isoprostane and lipid peroxidation products were significantly higher in aspirin-resistant individuals (349.3 pg/ml, 53.9 pg/ml, and 538 micromol/l) compared to controls (113.7 pg/ml, 10.3 pg/ml, and 32.2 micromol/l; P < 0.05, respectively). Platelet cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and COX-2 mRNA and protein expression were without significant differences between the two groups. DNA sequencing detected a novel platelet COX-1 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) resulting in amino acid exchange at position 8 (Arg8/Trp8). The wild-type as well as the heterozygous and homozygous SNP were present in both patient groups without significant differences. The aspirin binding (Arg120) and acetylation site (Ser529) were unaffected in the samples tested. Neither was AR related to the platelet integrin PlA(1)/A(2) polymorphism. In conclusion, AR appears to be unrelated to differences in platelet COX-1 and COX-2 expression or to a novel platelet COX-1 SNP and the PlA(1)/A(2) SNP. However, a correlation exists to elevated eicosanoids generated by oxidative stress indicating COX-1-independent pathways for the generation of platelet activating molecules represent a potential cause for AR.

Aspirin resistance: disparities and clinical implications

Abstract Aspirin is one of the most widely prescribed drugs for the prevention of thrombosis in patients with vascular disease. Yet, aspirin is unable to prevent thrombosis in all patients. The term "aspirin resistance" has been used to broadly define the failure of aspirin to prevent a thrombotic event. Whether this is directly related to aspirin itself through biochemical aspirin resistance or treatment failure, or if it is because of aspirin's inability to overcome the thrombogenic aspects of the disease process itself, has not been elucidated. This can have dramatic clinical implications for a variety of vascular disease subsets and is cause for concern, considering the high prevalence of aspirin use for both primary and secondary prevention. Disparities exist in the rates of aspirin resistance among certain patient populations, such as women, patients with diabetes mellitus, and those with heart failure, and across clinical conditions, such as cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. Clinical trial data from studies observing resistance have revealed that regardless of study size, dose of aspirin, control for drug interactions and adherence, or assay used to measure platelet function, aspirin resistance is associated with an increased risk for adverse events. Although the evidence is mounting, there has yet to be a consensus on the appropriate clinical response to aspirin resistance.

The role of aspirin in cardiovascular prevention: implications of aspirin resistance

Aspirin is well recognized as an effective antiplatelet drug for secondary prevention in subjects at high risk of cardiovascular events. However, most patients receiving long-term aspirin therapy still remain at substantial risk of thrombotic events due to insufficient inhibition of platelets, specifically via the thromboxane A2 pathway. Although the exact prevalence is unknown, estimates suggest that between 5.5% and 60% of patients using this drug may exhibit a degree of "aspirin resistance," depending upon the definition used and parameters measured. To date, only a limited number of clinical studies have convincingly investigated the importance of aspirin resistance. Of these, few are of a sufficient scale, well designed, and prospective, with aspirin used at standard doses. Also, most studies do not sufficiently address the issue of noncompliance to aspirin as a frequent, yet easily preventable cause of resistance to this antiplatelet drug. This review article provides a comprehensive overview of aspirin resistance, discussing its definition, prevalence, diagnosis, and therapeutic approaches. Moreover, the clinical implications of aspirin resistance are explored in various cardiovascular disease states, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, heart failure, and other similar disorders where platelet reactivity is enhanced.

Antiplatelet drug nonresponsiveness

The response to most medication, including antiplatelet drugs, is highly variable between individuals. Observational studies have shown that nonresponders to antiplatelet agents appear to have an increased incidence of vascular events. This review article reviews the background, mechanisms, and evidence in support of the clinical significance of this phenomenon.

Prevalence of platelet nonresponsiveness to aspirin in patients treated for secondary stroke prophylaxis and in patients with recurrent ischemic events

To determine the prevalence of platelet nonresponsiveness to aspirin treatment for secondary stroke prophylaxis, the authors studied consecutive patients during a 29-month period. Information regarding their ischemic events, risk factors, and medications was collected. Platelet aggregation in response to collagen and arachidonic acid was used to determine platelet responsiveness to aspirin. A total of 653 patients were evaluated. Of these, 129 patients (20%) were determined to be nonresponsive to aspirin based on continued platelet aggregation in response to collagen, arachidonic acid, or both. A total of 87 (13%) of the 653 patients were clinical aspirin failures (ie, presented with new focal cerebral ischemic symptoms while taking aspirin). Of the patients with new cerebral ischemic symptoms, 57 (66%) were determined to be platelet nonresponsive to aspirin. The odds ratio for platelet nonresponsiveness to aspirin in patients who suffered a recurrent ischemic event while taking aspirin was 14.25 (95% confidence interval: 8.5-23.7; P < .5). Continued platelet aggregation despite aspirin treatment occurred in 20% of ambulatory patients treated for secondary stroke prophylaxis. The prevalence of nonresponsiveness to aspirin was statistically higher in those patients who suffered recurrent cerebral ischemia while taking aspirin (P < .5) compared with patients who remained without new ischemic symptoms.

Coronary stent thrombosis related to aspirin resistance: what are the underlying mechanisms?

Acute coronary stent thrombosis represents a serious complication for which aspirin resistance could be a potential cause. The actual case is a myocardial infarction treated with immediate stenting of the right coronary artery followed by elective stenting of the left anterior descending artery 4 days later. Despite standard antiplatelet therapy, stents in both arteries occluded 2 days after the last procedure. The patient's blood samples were analyzed and revealed the presence of aspirin resistance as well as elevated thromboxane B(2) plasma levels. No thrombophilic disorder was detected. Today the mechanism of aspirin resistance is mostly unknown. Further research as well as recommendations for laboratory screening and for alternative pharmacological treatment options are required.

Antiplatelet Drug Resistance and Drug-Drug Interactions: Role of Cytochrome P450 3A4

Antiplatelet therapy provided pivotal advances in the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Aspirin and thienopyridine, clopidogrel, is currently the treatment of choice in acute coronary syndromes and the prevention of thrombosis after coronary stent implantation. Despite the efficacy of this dual antiplatelet therapy in reduction of adverse coronary events in patients with acute coronary syndromes, complications persist in a subgroup of these patients. Emerging causes of aspirin and clopidogrel resistance may translate to increase risk for recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiac related mortality. However, the mechanism of antiplatelet drug resistance remains incompletely characterized, and a sensitive and specific assay of aspirin and clopidogrel effect that reliably predicts treatment failure has not emerged. To date, evidence supporting antiplatelet drug resistance are pharmacokinetic response variability, drug-drug interaction through competitive inhibition a specific enzymatic pathway, genetic variability, and variability in the induction of enzymatic pathway in metabolic activation of prodrugs, like clopidogrel. Further investigation or guidelines are needed to optimize antiplatelet treatment strategies to identify and treat patients resistant to aspirin and/or clopidogrel.

Cardiovascular pharmacology and physiology of the isoprostanes

F(2)-isoprostanes are a complex family of compounds produced from arachidonic acid via a free radical-catalyzed mechanism. Their quantification as a pathophysiological biomarker provides a unique opportunity to investigate lipid peroxidation in vascular diseases. Their measurement also provides an interesting biomarker for the rational dose selection of antioxidants in vascular diseases where oxidative stress might be involved. In addition to their use as biomarkers, some isoprostanes possess a biological activity. The 15-series F(2)- and E(2)-isoprostanes mediate vasoconstriction in different vascular beds and species. In addition, 15-F(2t)-IsoP induces smooth muscle cells mitogenesis and monocyte adhesion to endothelial cells. The data available supports but does not prove the hypothesis that isoprostanes are involved in vascular physiology and pathogenesis.

Aspirin and clopidogrel resistance: an emerging clinical entity

Antiplatelet therapy is a cornerstone of cardiovascular medicine. Aspirin and clopidogrel have emerged as critical therapies in the treatment of cardiovascular disease. Despite their efficacy, patients on these medications continue to suffer complications. Millions of patients are currently on low-dose antiplatelet therapy but it is unknown how many of these patients are under-treated or on the wrong medication. Aspirin and clopidogrel resistance are emerging clinical entities with potentially severe consequences such as recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or death. The mechanism of resistance remains incompletely defined, but there are specific clinical, cellular, and genetic factors that influence therapeutic failure. These factors range from physicians who fail to prescribe these medications despite appropriate indications to polymorphisms of platelet membrane glycoproteins. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of antiplatelet resistance also remains an issue as new bedside tests are developed. By understanding the mechanism of therapeutic failure and by improving the diagnosis of this clinical entity, a new era of individualized antiplatelet therapy may arise with routine measurements of platelet activity in the same way that cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood sugar are followed, thus improving the care for millions of people.

Underutilization of aspirin persists in US ambulatory care for the secondary and primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Despite the proven benefits of aspirin therapy in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), utilization rates of aspirin remain suboptimal in relation to recommendations. We studied national trends of aspirin use among intermediate- to high-risk patients in the US ambulatory care settings and compared the priority given to aspirin versus statins for CVD risk reduction. We also examined patient and health care provider contributors to the underuse of aspirin.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used the 1993-2003 US National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey to estimate aspirin use by cardiovascular risk. Physician-noted cardiovascular diseases defined high risk. Intermediate risk was defined as having diabetes mellitus or multiple major risk factors. The proportion of patient visits in which aspirin was reported increased from 21.7% (95% confidence interval: 18.8%-24.6%) in 1993-1994 to 32.8% (25.2%-40.4%) in 2003 for the high-risk category, 3.5% (2.0%-5.0%) to 11.7% (7.8%-15.7%) for visits by patients diagnosed with diabetes, and 3.6% (2.6%-4.6%) to 16.3% (11.4%-21.2%) for those with multiple CVD risk factors. Beginning in 1997-1998, statins were prioritized over aspirin as prophylactic therapy for reducing CVD risk, and the gaps remained wide through 2003. In addition to elevated CVD risk, greater aspirin use was independently associated with advanced age, male gender, cardiologist care, and care in hospital outpatient departments.

CONCLUSION

Improvements in use of aspirin in US ambulatory care for reducing risks of CVD were at best modest during the period under study, particularly for secondary prevention, where the strongest evidence and most explicit guidelines exist. Aspirin is more underused than statins despite its more favorable cost-effectiveness. Aggressive and targeted interventions are needed to enhance provider and patient adherence to consensus guidelines for CVD risk reduction.