Point-of-care platelet reactivity determination with VerifyNow-P2Y12 following administration of clopidogrel or prasugrel: data from a real-world, clinical care inpatient setting

Use of the VerifyNow point of care assay to assess the pharmacodynamic effects of loading and maintenance dose regimens of prasugrel and ticagrelor

Prasugrel and ticagrelor are potent oral platelet P2Y₁₂ inhibitors and are recommended over clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Oral platelet P2Y₁₂ inhibitors are characterized by varying degrees of pharmacodynamic response profiles as assessed by a variety of commercially available assays. Because of its ease of use, rapid turnaround times and ability to provide results specific to P2Y₁₂ inhibitory effects, VerifyNow has emerged as one of the most commonly utilized platelet function assays. However, reference ranges with VerifyNow have been reported mainly for clopidogrel and there has not yet been any study specifically conducted to provide the expected on treatment reference ranges following administration of prasugrel and ticagrelor. This was a prospective single center investigation conducted in 120 patients with ACS who were treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor as per standard of care. Patients who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were treated with a loading dose of prasugrel (60 mg) or ticagrelor (180 mg), and patients who were on maintenance therapy were taking prasugrel (10 mg qd or 5 mg qd) or ticagrelor (90 mg bid). Platelet function testing was performed using the VerifyNow™ PRUTest™. The overall range of PRUTest values was lower than that observed in studies of patients treated with clopidogrel. The use of a maintenance dose regimen had a wider range of PRUTest values compared to the use of a loading dose for both prasugrel (1–179 vs. 2–128) and ticagrelor (1–196 vs. 1–177). The average PRUTest values in patients on prasugrel and ticagrelor maintenance dosing were 20% and 9% higher those observed in patients treated with a loading dose. PRUTest results following loading dose administration were very similar between drugs, but were 20% higher with prasugrel compared with ticagrelor during maintenance dosing. This study establishes expected PRUTest ranges for patients taking loading and maintenance doses of prasugrel and ticagrelor.

Clinical Trial Registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT04492423, registered July 2020 retrospectively registered.

Vitamin D levels and platelet reactivity in diabetic patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy

BACKGROUND

Hypovitaminosis D represents an emerging cardiovascular risk factor, and especially among higher-risk subsets of patients, such as in those with diabetes mellitus. The anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombotic properties of vitamin D, in fact, could be even more beneficial among diabetics, where platelet hyperreactivity and suboptimal response to antiplatelet drugs has been associated with poorer outcomes. However, no study has so far evaluated the impact of vitamin D levels on platelet reactivity and high-on treatment platelet reactivity (HRPR) among diabetic patients receiving dial antiplatelet therapy (DAPT).

METHODS

Our population is represented by a consecutive cohort ofdiabetic patients treated with DAPT (ASA + clopidogrel or ticagrelor or dose-adjusted prasugrel) for an acute coronary syndrome or elective PCI, undergoing platelet reactivity assessment at 30-90 days post-discharge. Aggregation was assessed by multiple-electrode aggregometry. HRPR was defined for values above the lower limit of normality (in non-treated patients).

RESULTS

We included 440 patients, that were divided according to quartiles values of vitamin D (< 9.4; 9.4-15.59; 15.6-21.64; ≥ 21.65 ng/ml). Among them, 31 were excluded as chronically treated with vitamin D supplementation. Lower vitamin D quartiles were associated with more advanced age (p = 0.01), female gender (p = 0.04), renal failure (p = 0.005), history of previous MI (p = 0.01), CABG and use of diuretics (p = 0.003), severe coronary disease (p = 0.002), but lower ejection fraction (p = 0.001), treatment with statins (p = 0.04) and new ADP-antagonists (p = 0.002). Vitamin D levels related with higher HbA1c (p = 0.001), cholesterol (p = 0.02) and creatinine (p = 0.004) and lower hemoglobin (p = 0.004). The prevalence of HRPR with ASA was low and not related to vitamin D quartiles (3.4% vs 2.7% vs 1.8% vs 2.1%, p = 0.44; adjusted OR[95%CI] = 1.16[0.60-2.26], p = 0.67). The prevalence of HRPR for ADP antagonists was associated to hypovitaminosis D (40.2% vs 29.1% vs 29.4% vs 25.5%, p = 0.03; (adjusted OR[95%CI] = 1.76[1.04-2.98], p = 0.036for I vs II-IV quartile). The impact of vitamin D quartiles, was significant only in patients on new ADP antagonists (n = 225, of whom 81 on prasugrel 5 mg; p = 0.03; adjusted OR[95%CI] = 3.12[1.34-7.49], p = 0.009) but not with clopidogrel (p = 0.85, adjusted OR[95%CI] = 1.05[0.49-2.24], p = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Among diabetic patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy for an acute coronary syndrome or elective percutaneous coronary intervention, severe vitamin D deficiency is associated with a higher ADP-mediated platelet reactivity and rate of HRPR, and especially for new ADP-antagonists over clopidogrel.