The prognostic utility of tests of platelet function for the detection of 'aspirin resistance' in patients with established cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Comparison of Different Laboratory Tests to Identify “Aspirin Resistance” and Risk of Vascular Events among Ischaemic Stroke Patients: A Double-Blind Study

“Aspirin resistance” (AR) is associated with increased risk of vascular events. We aimed to compare different platelet function tests used in identifying AR and assess their implications on clinical outcome. We performed platelet aggregation studies on non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke patients taking aspirin 100 mg/day and 30 non-stroke controls. Data were collected on demographics, vascular risk factors, and concomitant medications. Cut-offs for AR were (1) light transmission aggregometry (LTA) of ≥20% using arachidonic acid (AA), ≥70% using ADP, or ≥60% using collagen; and (2) VerifyNow® assay ≥ 550 ARU. Telephone follow-ups were conducted by study staff blinded to AR status to ascertain the occurrence of vascular outcomes (stroke, myocardial infarction, amputation, death). A total of 113 patients were recruited, mean age 65 ± 8 years, 47% women, 45 ± 15 days from index stroke. 50 (44.3%, 95% CI 34.9–53.9) had AR on at least 1 test. Frequency of AR varied from 0% to 39% depending on method used and first vs. recurrent stroke. There were strong correlations between LTA AA, VerifyNow® and Multiplate® ASPItest (r = 0.7457–0.8893), but fair to poor correlation between LTA collagen and Multiplate® COLtest (r = 0.5887) and between LTA ADP and Multiplate® ADPtest (r = 0.0899). Of 103 patients with a mean follow up of 801 ± 249 days, 10 (9.7%) had vascular outcomes, of which six had AR by LTA-ADP. AR by LTA-ADP is associated with increased risk of vascular outcome (p = 0.034). Identification of AR is not consistent across different platelet function tests. LTA of ≥70% using 10 µM ADP in post-stroke patients taking aspirin is associated with increased risk of vascular outcome.

Perioperative changes of response to antiplatelet medication in vascular surgery patients

Introduction

Reduced antiplatelet activity of aspirin (ALR) or clopidogrel (CLR) is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events. The reported prevalence data for low-responders vary widely and there have been few investigations in vascular surgery patients even though they are at high risk for thromb-embolic complications. The aim of this prospective observational monocentric study was to elucidate possible changes in ALR or CLR after common vascular procedures.

Methods

Activity of aspirin and clopidogrel was measured by impedance aggregometry using a multiple electrode aggregometer (Multiplate®). Possible risk factors for ALR or CLR were identified by demographical, clinical data and laboratory parameters. In addition, a follow-up aggregometry was performed after completion of the vascular procedure to identify changes in antiplatelet response.

Results

A total of 176 patients taking antiplatelet medications aspirin and/or clopidogrel with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and/or carotid stenosis (CS) were included in the study. The prevalence of ALR was 13.1% and the prevalence of CLR was 32% in the aggregometry before vascular treatment. Potential risk factors identified in the aspirin group were concomitant insulin medication (p = 0.0006) and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) (p = 0.0021). The overall ALR increased significantly postoperatively to 27.5% (p = 0.0006); however, there was no significant change in CLR that was detected. In a subgroup analysis elevation of the platelet count was associated with a post-procedure increase of ALR incidence.

Conclusion

The incidence of ALR in vascular surgery patients increases after vascular procedures. An elevated platelet count was detected as a risk factor. Further studies are necessary to analyse this potential influence on patency rates of vascular reconstructions.

Effect of aspirin response signature gene expression on preterm birth and preeclampsia among women with lupus: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Women with lupus have an increased risk of preeclampsia and preterm birth, and aspirin 81 mg/day is recommended as a preventative measure for preeclampsia. This pilot study quantified the association between a 60-gene aspirin response signature (ARS) gene expression with preterm birth and preeclampsia risk among women with lupus taking aspirin.

METHODS

The analysis included 48 RNA samples from 23 pregnancies in the Duke Autoimmunity Pregnancy Registry. RNA was isolated from peripheral blood, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction was performed for ARS genes. The primary outcome was poor pregnancy outcome (preeclampsia or preterm birth). Gene expression was modeled as a response to presence or absence of a poor pregnancy outcome using linear regression models, stratified by trimester.

RESULTS

Of the 23 pregnancies, nine delivered preterm and four had preeclampsia. Expression of PBX1 and MMD was higher in the second trimester among patients who experienced a poor pregnancy outcome compared to those who did not. However, in a global test of all ARS genes, we identified no association between expression of ARS genes and poor pregnancy outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study identified two candidate genes that are reflective of the platelet function response to aspirin. Further work is needed to determine the role of these genes in identifying women with lupus at high risk for preeclampsia and preterm delivery despite aspirin therapy.

Metabolomic Analysis of Platelets of Patients With Aspirin Non-Response

Background: Aspirin is the most commonly used antiplatelet agent for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. However, a certain proportion of patients do not respond to aspirin therapy. The mechanisms of aspirin non-response remain unknown. The unique metabolomes in platelets of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with aspirin non-response may be one of the causes of aspirin resistance.

Materials and Methods: We enrolled 29 patients with CAD who were aspirin non-responders, defined as a study subject who were taking aspirin with a platelet aggregation time less than 193 s by PFA-100, and 31 age- and sex-matched patients with CAD who were responders. All subjects had been taking 100 mg of aspirin per day for more than 1 month. Hydrophilic metabolites from the platelet samples were extracted and analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Both 1D ¹H and 2D J-resolved NMR spectra were obtained followed by spectral processing and multivariate statistical analysis, such as partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA).

Results: Eleven metabolites were identified. The PLS-DA model could not distinguish aspirin non-responders from responders. Those with low serum glycine level had significantly shorter platelet aggregation time (mean, 175.0 s) compared with those with high serum glycine level (259.5 s). However, this association became non-significant after correction for multiple tests.

Conclusions: The hydrophilic metabolic profile of platelets was not different between aspirin non-responders and responders. An association between lower glycine levels and higher platelet activity in patients younger than 65 years suggests an important role of glycine in the pathophysiology of aspirin non-response.

Early invasive strategy in senior patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: is it cost-effective? - a decision-analytic model and value of information analysis

BACKGROUND

Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is the most common type of heart attack in the UK and it is becoming increasingly prevalent among older people. An early invasive treatment strategy may be effective and cost-effective for treating NSTEMI but evidence is currently unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-effectiveness of the early invasive strategy versus medical management in elderly patients with NSTEMI and to provide guidance for future research in this area.

METHODS

A long-term Markov state transition model was developed. Model inputs were systematically derived from a number of sources most appropriate to a UK relevant analysis, such as published studies and national routine data. Costs were estimated from the perspective of National Health Service and Personal Social Services. The model was developed using TreeAge Pro software. Based on a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, a value of information analysis was carried out to establish the value of decision uncertainty both overall and for specific input parameters.

RESULTS

In 2017 UK £, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the early invasive strategy was £46 916 for each additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, with a probability of being cost-effective of 23% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000/QALY. There was a considerable decision uncertainty with these results. The value of removing all this uncertainty was up to £1 920 000 annually. Most uncertainty related to clinical effectiveness parameters and the optimal study design to remove this uncertainty would be a randomised controlled trial.

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, the early invasive strategy is not likely to be cost-effective for elderly patients with NSTEMI. This conclusion should be interpreted with caution mainly due to the absence of NSTEMI-specific data and long-term clinical effectiveness estimates.

MicroRNAs in acute myocardial infarction: Evident value as novel biomarkers?

Traditional circulating biomarkers play a fundamental role in the diagnosis and prognosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, they have several limitations. microRNAs (miRs), a class of RNA molecules that do not encode proteins, function directly at the RNA level by inhibiting the translation of messenger RNAs. Due to their significant roles in disease development, they can be used as biomarkers. Accumulating evidence has revealed an attractive role of miRs as biomarkers of AMI and its associated symptoms, including vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques, and their role in disease diagnosis, platelet activation monitoring, and prognostic outcome prediction. This manuscript will highlight the recent updates regarding the involvement of miRs as biomarkers in AMI and emphasize their value in vulnerable atherosclerotic plaque prediction and monitoring of platelet activation.

[Prevalence of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) - low response in vascular surgery]

BACKGROUND

Research has revealed that a decreased antiplatelet effect (low response [LR]/high on-treatment platelet reactivity [HPR]) of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and clopidogrel is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events. There are extensive ASA low response (ALR) and clopidogrel low response (CLR) prevalence data in the literature, but there are only a few studies concerning vascular surgical patients. The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence and risk factors of ALR and CLR in vascular surgical patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined n = 154 patients with an antiplatelet long-term therapy, who were treated due to peripheral artery occlusive disease (PAD) and/or arteria carotis interna stenosis (CVD). To detect an ALR or CLR, we examined full blood probes with impedance aggregometry (ChronoLog® Aggregometer model 590). Risk factors were examined by acquisition of concomitant disease, severity of vascular disease, laboratory test results and medication.

RESULTS

We found a prevalence of 19.3 % in the ALR group and of 21.1 % in the CLR group. Risk factors for ALR were an increased platelet and leucocyte count and co-medication with pantoprazole. We found no significant risk factors for a decreased antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel treatment.

CONCLUSION

The investigated prevalence for ALR and CLR are in the range of other studies, particularly based on cardiological patients. More investigations are needed to gain a better evaluation of the risk factors for HPR and to develop an effective antiplatelet therapy regime to prevent cardiovascular complications.

PFA-100-measured aspirin resistance is the predominant risk factor for hospitalized cardiovascular events in aspirin-treated patients: A 5-year cohort study

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Aspirin therapy is the clinical gold standard for the prevention of cardiovascular events. However, cardiovascular events still develop in some patients undergoing aspirin therapy. Many laboratory methods exist for measuring aspirin resistance. Using the platelet Function Analyzer (PFA)-100 system, we aimed to determine the effect of aspirin resistance on hospitalized cardiovascular events (hCVE) in a 5-year follow-up cohort. We also sought to determine the impact of aspirin resistance on the relationship between common cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular hospitalization.

METHOD

Aspirin resistance was evaluated in aspirin-treated patients from the outpatient department. A total of 465 patients during a 5-year follow-up period were included in this study. The primary endpoint of the study was hospitalization for any acute cardiovascular event. The prevalence and associated risk factors of acute cardiovascular events were evaluated.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Aspirin resistance was prevalent in 91 (20.0%) of 465 patients. Prior hospitalization history of cardiovascular events was highly associated with aspirin resistance (P = .001). At the 5-year follow-up, cardiovascular events were found to have developed in 11 patients (8 stroke and 3 myocardial infarction) who exhibited aspirin resistance (12.1%) and in 9 (4 stroke and 5 myocardial infarction) patients who did not exhibit aspirin resistance (2.4%) (P < .001). At the 5-year follow-up, multivariate logistic regression analysis results showed a strong association between aspirin resistance and cardiovascular events (adjusted odds ratio 4.28; 95% CI: 1.64-11.20; P = .03).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

PFA-100 measurements of aspirin resistance correlate with hCVE, as evidenced by both the past medical history and the 5-year follow-up. The logistic regression analysis results showed that aspirin resistance plays a larger role in hospitalized cardiovascular disease than do other cardiovascular risk factors.

Reduced Antiplatelet Effect of Aspirin Does Not Predict Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Background

Increased platelet aggregation during antiplatelet therapy may predict cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. The majority of these patients receive aspirin monotherapy. We aimed to investigate whether high platelet‐aggregation levels predict cardiovascular events in stable coronary artery disease patients treated with aspirin.

Methods and Results

We included 900 stable coronary artery disease patients with either previous myocardial infarction, type 2 diabetes mellitus, or both. All patients received single antithrombotic therapy with 75 mg aspirin daily. Platelet aggregation was evaluated 1 hour after aspirin intake using the VerifyNow Aspirin Assay (Accriva Diagnostics) and Multiplate Analyzer (Roche; agonists: arachidonic acid and collagen). Adherence to aspirin was confirmed by serum thromboxane B₂. The primary end point was the composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular death. At 3‐year follow‐up, 78 primary end points were registered. The primary end point did not occur more frequently in patients with high platelet‐aggregation levels (first versus fourth quartile) assessed by VerifyNow (hazard ratio: 0.5 [95% CI, 0.3–1.1], P=0.08) or Multiplate using arachidonic acid (hazard ratio: 1.0 [95% CI, 0.5–2.1], P=0.92) or collagen (hazard ratio: 1.4 [95% CI, 0.7–2.8], P=0.38). Similar results were found for the composite secondary end point (nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, stent thrombosis, and all‐cause death) and the single end points. Thromboxane B₂ levels did not predict any end points. Renal insufficiency was the only clinical risk factor predicting the primary and secondary end points.

Conclusions

This study is the largest to investigate platelet aggregation in stable coronary artery disease patients receiving aspirin as single antithrombotic therapy. We found that high platelet‐aggregation levels did not predict cardiovascular events.

Platelet function testing as a biomarker for efficacy of antiplatelet drugs

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

Methodological issues and recommendations for systematic reviews of prognostic studies: an example from cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Prognostic factors are associated with the risk of future health outcomes in individuals with a particular health condition. The prognostic ability of such factors is increasingly being assessed in both primary research and systematic reviews. Systematic review methodology in this area is continuing to evolve, reflected in variable approaches to key methodological aspects. The aim of this article was to (i) explore and compare the methodology of systematic reviews of prognostic factors undertaken for the same clinical question, (ii) to discuss implications for review findings, and (iii) to present recommendations on what might be considered to be 'good practice' approaches.

METHODS

The sample was comprised of eight systematic reviews addressing the same clinical question, namely whether 'aspirin resistance' (a potential prognostic factor) has prognostic utility relative to future vascular events in patients on aspirin therapy for secondary prevention. A detailed comparison of methods around study identification, study selection, quality assessment, approaches to analysis, and reporting of findings was undertaken and the implications discussed. These were summarised into key considerations that may be transferable to future systematic reviews of prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Across systematic reviews addressing the same clinical question, there were considerable differences in the numbers of studies identified and overlap between included studies, which could only partially be explained by different study eligibility criteria. Incomplete reporting and differences in terminology within primary studies hampered study identification and selection process across reviews. Quality assessment was highly variable and only one systematic review considered a checklist for studies of prognostic questions. There was inconsistency between reviews in approaches towards analysis, synthesis, addressing heterogeneity and reporting of results.

CONCLUSIONS

Different methodological approaches may ultimately affect the findings and interpretation of systematic reviews of prognostic research, with implications for clinical decision-making.