Inflammation modifies the platelet reactivity among thrombocytopenia patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients combined with thrombocytopenia (TP) are usually considered to be at low ischemic risk, receiving less proper antiplatelet therapy. However, recent studies reported a paradoxical phenomenon that PCI patients with TP were prone to experience thrombotic events, while the mechanisms and future treatment remain unclear. We aim to investigate whether inflammation modifies platelet reactivity among these patients. Consecutive 10 724 patients undergoing PCI in Fuwai Hospital were enrolled throughout 2013. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) ≥2 mg/L was considered inflammatory status. TP was defined as platelet count <150×109/L. High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) was defined as adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet maximum amplitude of thromboelastogram >47mm. Among 6617 patients finally included, 879 (13.3%) presented with TP. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that patients with TP were associated with a lower risk of HTPR (odds ratio [OR] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.76) than those without TP in the overall cohort. In further analysis, among hsCRP <2 mg/L group, patients with TP exhibited a decreased risk of HTPR (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41-0.68); however, in hsCRP ≥2mg/L group, TP patients had a similar risk of HTPR as those without TP (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.63-1.08). Additionally, these results remain consistent across subgroups, including patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and chronic coronary syndrome. Inflammation modified the platelet reactivity of PCI patients with TP, providing new insights into the mechanisms of the increased thrombotic risk. Future management for this special population should pay more attention to inflammation status and timely adjustment of antiplatelet therapy in TP patients with inflammation.

What is the context? Recent studies reported a paradoxical phenomenon that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients with thrombocytopenia (TP) were prone to experience thrombotic events. The potential mechanisms underlying the increased thrombotic risk and how to manage antiplatelet therapy in PCI patients with TP remain unclear.Growing attention has been paid to immunothrombosis. Inflammation is closely associated with high-on treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) and thrombotic risk.HTPR is an independent risk factor of thrombosis and can provide information for guiding antiplatelet therapy.What is new? This prospective cohort study enrolled 10 724 patients undergoing PCI in Fuwai Hospital (National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Beijing, China), with HTPR risk being the study endpoint of interest.We first reported that inflammation significantly modified the platelet reactivity of PCI patients with TP.When hsCRP level <2 mg/L, PCI patients with TP had a decreased risk of HTPR. However, when hsCRP ≥2 mg/L, TP patients had similar HTPR risk as those without TP.HsCRP levels could modify the relationship between TP and HTPR risks both in patients with acute coronary syndrome and chronic coronary syndrome.What is the impact? These results provide insights into potential mechanisms of the increased thrombotic risk in PCI patients with TP. Specifically, inflammation might be involved in the thrombotic risk of PCI patients with TP by modifying the platelet reactivity.As for future management, personalized antiplatelet therapy should be administrated to TP patients with inflammation status.

Role of Cyp2c19 Genotype-Guided Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Identification of a reliable discriminatory test to accurately stratify patient responses to antiplatelet therapy following coronary revascularization has become increasingly desirable to optimize therapeutic efficacy and safety. RECENT FINDINGS: The expansion of platelet function testing to include genotype assessment has been an evolutionary journey, initially fraught with confounding results. However, more recent and rigorous data analysis suggests that genotype testing- guided, tailored antiplatelet therapy may hold promise in optimizing treatment of patients after coronary intervention. Current evidence increasingly supports the use of genotype guided CYP2C19 testing to better match the post coronary intervention patient with the most efficacious and least risky antiplatelet inhibitor. The risk stratification of poor, intermediate, and good metabolizers of these drugs with such testing promises to yield clinical dividends in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost control, in this growing patient population.

Inadequate response to antiplatelet therapy in patients with peripheral artery disease: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are treated with preventive strategies to improve the cardiovascular risk. The incidence of cardiovascular events and mortality however remains high in PAD populations. We therefore aimed to better characterize PAD patients suffering from cardiovascular events and mortality in order to tailor preventive treatment. METHODS: Between 2018 and 2020, 246 PAD outpatients (17 newly diagnosed, 229 with known PAD) were prospectively enrolled in this observational cohort study. Patient data and blood samples were collected after inclusion, and the primary composite endpoint (myocardial infarction, elective coronary revascularization, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, mortality) was evaluated after one year. Secondary outcomes included platelet reactivity, measured using the VerifyNow assay, and medication adherence, assessed using the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-8 (MMAS-8). Logistic regression models were used to identify associations between characteristics and the occurrence of events. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 207 patients with claudication and 39 with chronic limb threatening ischemia. Twenty-six (10.6%) patients suffered from an event during follow-up. Prior myocardial infarction (OR 3.3 [1.4-7.7]), prior ischemic stroke (OR 4.5 [1.8-10.9]), higher levels of creatinine (OR 5.2 [2.2-12.6]), lower levels of high-density lipoprotein (OR 4.2 [1.5-10.6]) and lower haemoglobin levels (OR 3.1 [1.3-7.1]) were associated with events. Patients with events had more often high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) on aspirin (OR 5.9 [1.4-25.1]) or clopidogrel (OR 4.3 [1-19.3]). High adherence to medication was associated with the occurrence of events (OR 4.1 [1-18]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients suffering from cardiovascular events and mortality were characterized by prior cardiovascular events as compared to patients who did not experience any events. Antiplatelet therapy was not optimally protective despite high medication adherence, and HTPR was independently associated with the occurrence of events. More research is needed on alternative treatment strategies such as dual antiplatelet therapy or combinations with anticoagulant drugs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Medical Ethics Committee (METC) of the MUMC+ approved the study (NL63235.068.17) and the study was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR7250 ).

High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity: Aspirin versus Clopidogrel.

BACKGROUND: Antithrombotic regimen in patients on oral anticoagulation (OAC) post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is challenging. At least, one antiplatelet agent in combination with OAC is recommended after PCI for 6-12 months. Clopidogrel is used most frequently in this setting. However, data comparing P2Y12 inhibition with clopidogrel versus cyclooxygenase inhibition by acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) is missing. It is well known that the antiplatelet effects of ASA and clopidogrel are frequently impaired (high on-treatment platelet reactivity [HTPR]). In this pilot investigation, we compared the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel versus ASA. METHODS: In this retrospective single-center database analysis, we investigated platelet reactivity by light transmission aggregometry in patients under different antiplatelet regimes. Results were presented as maximum of aggregation (MoA). HTPR to ASA and to clopidogrel were assessed. RESULTS: 755 patients were enrolled. 677 were on ASA, 521 were on clopidogrel, and 198 had OAC. Overall mean age was 73 ± 13.4 years, and 458 (60.7%) were male. HTPR to ASA occurred in 94/677 patients (13.9%), and mean arachidonic acid-induced MoA was 14.15 ± 19.04%. HTPR to clopidogrel occurred in 241/521 patients (46.3%), and mean adenosine diphosphate-induced MoA was 50.06 ± 20.42%. HTPR to clopidogrel was significantly more frequent than HTPR to ASA; single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT)-mono ASA: 27/199 (13.6%) versus mono clopidogrel: 6/18 (33.3%); p = 0.037; SAPT with OAC-OAC with ASA: 8/35 (22.9%) versus OAC with clopidogrel: 27/60 (45%); p = 0.046. Same difference in HTPR contingency could be shown in subgroups of dual antiplatelet therapy and ASA + clopidogrel + OAC therapy. CONCLUSION: Impaired pharmacodynamic response to clopidogrel was more frequent as HTPR to ASA. Hence, ASA should be tested in combination with OAC post-PCI.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity in peripheral arterial disease: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To highlight current evidence pertaining to the measurement methods and prevalence of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) in patients with PAD, as well as to evaluate the relationship between HTPR and recurrent adverse cardiovascular and limb events in PAD patients. METHODS: A systematic review of English-language literature on HTPR in patients with PAD. An electronic literature search of PubMed and Medline was performed in May 2021. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies with a total number of 11,201 patients with PAD were identified. HTPR during clopidogrel treatment ranges from 9.8 to 77%, and during aspirin treatment ranges from 4.1 to 50% of PAD patients. HTPR was associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The need for limb revascularisation was higher in patients with HTPR during clopidogrel use. Similarly, HTPR during aspirin use in the PAD population was predictive of adverse cardiovascular events (HR 3.73; 95% CI, 1.43-9.81; p = .007). A wide range of techniques were applied to measure platelet resistance, without consensus on cut-off values. Furthermore, differing patient populations, a variety of antiplatelet regimens, and differing clinical endpoints highlight the high degree of heterogeneity in the studies included in this review. CONCLUSION: No consensus on technique or cut-off values for HTPR testing has been reached. Patients with HTPR are potentially at a greater risk of adverse limb-related and cardiovascular events than patients sensitive to antiplatelet therapy illustrating the need for clinical implementation of HTPR testing. Future research must aim for consistent methodology. Adaptation of antiplatelet therapy based on HTPR results requires further exploration.

Intensified antiplatelet therapy in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention with high on-treatment platelet reactivity: the OPTImal Management of Antithrombotic Agents (OPTIMA)-2 Trial.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HOPR) is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We randomised post-PCI patients with HOPR after 5 days of standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to intensified therapy with aspirin 100 mg once daily in combination with either clopidogrel 150 mg once daily, clopidogrel 75 mg once daily plus cilostazol 100 mg twice daily, ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily, or standard therapy with clopidogrel 75 mg once daily (STD) for 1 month, after which all patients were switched to standard DAPT for a further 11 months. The primary outcome was residual HOPR rate at 1 month. We screened 1724 patients with light transmission aggregation studies and randomised 434 with HOPR. At 1 month the proportion of patients with persistent HOPR was significantly lower in the intensified therapy groups compared with STD group. Compared to the group receiving STD therapy, those receiving intensified therapy had significantly lower rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at both 1 month and 12 months with no significant increase in bleeding. In patients with post-PCI HOPR, 1 month of intensified antiplatelet therapy provides greater platelet inhibition and improves outcomes without increasing bleeding. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT01955200.

Clopidogrel versus ticagrelor for antiplatelet therapy in transcarotid artery revascularization in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) with dynamic flow reversal is a hybrid technique for operative management of carotid artery stenosis. Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended for patients undergoing TCAR; however, nonresponders to these medications may be predisposed to perioperative thromboembolic complications. Prevalent in up to 44% to 66% of patients taking clopidogrel, high on-treatment platelet reactivity may thus be responsible for a portion of adverse cerebrovascular events in TCAR. A previous single-institution study has demonstrated the use of ticagrelor as a viable alternative to clopidogrel for antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing TCAR; however, large-scale comparisons between clopidogrel and ticagrelor are needed to confirm the safety of ticagrelor outside of highly selected patients and providers. METHODS: Data from patients enrolled in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative undergoing TCAR with a perioperative antiplatelet therapy regimen including either clopidogrel or ticagrelor from January 2015 to March 2021 were analyzed and compared. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to evaluate the primary 30-day outcomes of stroke, major bleeding event, and combined stroke/myocardial infarction (MI)/death rate while adjusting for baseline characteristics of the patients. RESULTS: A total of 11,973 patients underwent TCAR with a dual antiplatelet therapy regimen that included clopidogrel vs 426 patients with ticagrelor. Compared with patients on clopidogrel, patients on ticagrelor were significantly more likely to have coronary artery disease (51% vs 66%; P < .001), particularly unstable angina or MI within 6 months (3% vs 9%; P < .001), and more likely to have insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (14% vs 19%; P < .001). The unadjusted 30-day rates of stroke, major bleeding, and combined stroke/MI/death were not statistically significant among both groups (1.3% vs 0.5%; P = .14, 2.4% vs 1.4%; P = .18, and 1.9% vs 1.6%; P = .71], respectively). After multivariable adjustment and propensity matching, these remained statistically insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a substantially higher medical risk in patients undergoing TCAR with ticagrelor, 30-day rates of stroke, major bleeding events, and combined stroke/MI/death were similar between patients on ticagrelor and clopidogrel as part of adjunctive antiplatelet therapy. Randomized prospective trials, and studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up will be needed to better examine the outcome differences in TCAR between these two medications.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity is associated with poor outcomes after ischemic stroke: A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) determined by platelet function assays is present in certain patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). However, it is unclear whether HTPR is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Our study aimed to investigate the relationship of HTPR with recurrent vascular events in ischemic stroke or TIA. METHODS: Pubmed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies from inception to January 1, 2022. Stata 17.0 software was used to calculate the risk ratio (RR). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the source of heterogeneity. A random-effects model was used when heterogeneity was present. Primary endpoint of the meta-analysis was the risk ratio of recurrent vascular events in HTPR Patients. While stroke and TIA, all-cause death, early neurological deterioration, early new ischemic lesions, and stroke severity measured by National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores at admission were also pooled. RESULTS: Thirty articles (7995 patients) were eligible including 28 cohort studies and 2 prospective case-control studies. The prevalence of HTPR varied from 5.9% to 60%. HTPR was associated with an increased risk of recurrent vascular events (RR = 2.94, 95% CI 2.04-4.23), stroke recurrence (RR = 2.05; 95% CI 1.43-2.95), and all-cause mortality (RR = 2.43; 95% CI 1.83-3.22). Subgroup analysis showed that HTPR determined by optical aggregometry, Verify-Now system and 11dh TXB2 is related to a higher risk of recurrent vascular events (RR = 3.53, 95% CI 1.51-9.40; RR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.02-4.56; RR = 3.76, 95% CI 1.51-9.40, respectively). Moreover, patients with HTPR had an increased incidence of early neurological deterioration (RR = 2.75; 95% CI 1.76-4.30) and higher NIHSS scores at admission (Mean difference 0.19, 95% CI 0.01-0.36). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates HTPR is associated with higher risk of recurrent vascular events, early neurological deterioration and increased severity in patients with ischemic stroke and TIA. HTPR measured by platelet function assays may guide the use of antiplatelet agents in ischemic stroke and TIA.

High triglyceride is an independent predictor of high on-treatment platelet reactivity in ischemic stroke patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown high triglyceride (TG) is associated with platelet hyperactivation in metabolic syndrome patients. However, limited information is available regarding this relationship on dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) in ischemic stroke (IS). In this study, we attempted to evaluate the association between TG and high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) in IS patients. METHODS: Ischemic stroke patients who received maintenance doses of clopidogrel and aspirin were categorized and analyzed retrospectively in this research. The platelet reactivity was assessed by Thromboelastography (TEG). If ADP-induced platelet inhibition rate (ADPi)<30%, it was defined as HTPR, else, it would be defined as normal on-treatment platelet reactivity (NTPR). Patients were divided into high-TG-level and lower-TG-level based on a TG level of 1.7mmol/L, the cutoff point of hypertriglyceridemia. A logistic regression model was applied to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were included in this study and 24 (19.51%) patients were identified as HTPR. HTPR was observed in 36.2% of the patients in high-TG-level (TG≥1.7mmol/L) group while only 9.2% of the patients in the low-TG-level group (TG<1.7mmol/L) were HTPR (P<0.001 ). According to multivariate analysis, TG≥1.7mmol/L was independently associated with HTPR (OR=14.715, 2.445-88.549,P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: High TG is an independent predictor of HTPR in IS patients. For IS patients with high TG level undergoing DAPT, platelet reactivity should be monitored to identify HTPR, which may proactively help to optimize the anti-platelet therapy.

Aspirin platelet reactivity on platelet function and clinical outcome in minor stroke or transient ischemic attack.

OBJECTIVE: Whether aspirin platelet reactivity affects platelet function and clinical outcomes with different antiplatelet therapies in patients with mild stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) remains unclear. We conducted a subgroup analysis of the PRINCE trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with mild stroke or TIA were randomized into aspirin+ticagrelor, or aspirin+clopidogrel groups; aspirin reaction units (ARU) were measured at the baseline and after 7 ± 2 days to assess response to treatment. High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) was defined as ≥550 ARU (poor response to aspirin). The platelet functions of ticagrelor and clopidogrel were measured using the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay for P2Y12 reaction units (PRU); HPR to P2Y12 was defined as >208 PRU (poor response to P2Y12). Clinical outcomes included stroke and clinical vascular and bleeding events after 90 days. RESULTS: Among 628 enrolled patients, 69 (11%) were poor aspirin responders. After 7 ± 2 days, the proportion of poor P2Y12 responders for ticagrelor versus clopidogrel significantly reduced in poor (2.6% versus 27.4%) and good (14.3% versus 29.4%) aspirin responders. There were significant interactions between treatment groups, and between treatment groups and aspirin platelet reactivity for poor P2Y12 responders (P = 0.01). After 90 ± 7 days, there were no significant interactions between treatment groups and aspirin platelet reactivity for new stroke risk (good aspirin responders: 5.5% versus 8.8%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 1.16; P = 0.13; poor aspirin responders: 8.6% versus 8.8%, HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.20-4.81; P = 0.97; P for interaction = 0.60). Major bleeding was less frequent in poor than good aspirin responders (ticagrelor/aspirin: 0.4%/0%; clopidogrel/aspirin: 1.4%/0%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with minor stroke or TIA, clopidogrel, and particularly ticagrelor, decreased platelet function in poor versus good aspirin responders. The poor platelet reactivity of aspirin could not sufficiently reduce the risk of recurrent stroke with ticagrelor or clopidogrel; however, HPR (poor aspirin response) may have a protective effect on clinically relevant major bleeding.

A HANC Risk Stratification Score for Antiplatelet Therapy Optimization with Low-Dose Prasugrel in Taiwanese Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients from the Switch Study.

Background: A significant proportion of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients experience high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) on clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives: This study assessed key independent risk factors associated with significant HPR risk on clopidogrel, but not prasugrel, in the Switch Study cohort of 200 Taiwanese ACS patients who switched from clopidogrel to low-dose prasugrel for maintenance DAPT after PCI. Methods: Univariate analysis and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis were conducted to identify key independent risk factors for HPR on clopidogrel, but not prasugrel. Results: A HANC [H: low hemoglobin (< 13 g/dL for men and < 12 g/dL for women); A: age ≥ 65 years; N: non-ST elevation myocardial infarction; C: chronic kidney disease as defined by estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min] risk stratification score was developed, and demonstrated optimal sensitivity and specificity at a cutoff score of ≥ 2. The HANC score compared favorably against the recently validated ABCD score in the full Switch Study cohort (n = 200), and the ABCD-GENE score in a genotyped cohort (n = 102). Conclusions: The HANC score may serve to alert clinicians to patients at potentially higher HPR risk on clopidogrel, but not prasugrel. Further research to validate this score and assess its correlation with clinical outcomes is warranted.

Outcomes and strategy of tailored antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor in patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Antiplatelet drug resistance is associated with periprocedural ischemic complications in patients undergoing intravascular stent implantation. Nonresponders are subject to increased risk of stent thrombosis and in-stent stenosis, and high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) is present in up to 44% of patients taking clopidogrel, a widely used component of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Evidence points to ticagrelor as a viable alternative to overcome HTPR on clopidogrel. Studies have shown fewer thromboembolic events with ticagrelor therapy; however, results on bleeding risk are mixed, and its safety and efficacy in hybrid operative techniques have yet to be established. Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is a hybrid procedure to treat severe carotid stenosis. The objective of this study was to establish the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor as part of DAPT in patients undergoing TCAR and to develop a protocol to ensure adequate antithrombotic protection throughout the operative course. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively for patients undergoing TCAR on DAPT of aspirin and ticagrelor for symptomatic (≥50%) or asymptomatic (≥80%) carotid stenosis. Preoperative platelet reactivity was determined using Thromboelastography with Platelet Mapping (Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, Mass), with adequate platelet reactivity defined as maximal amplitude produced by adenosine diphosphate <50 mm. The primary safety end point was 30-day major bleeding event rate. Primary efficacy end points were 30-day incidence of ipsilateral cerebrovascular ischemic event (stroke or transient ischemic attack), myocardial infarction, and death. Secondary end points were postoperative length of hospital stay, procedure time, and clamp/flow reversal time. RESULTS: Sixty-seven TCAR procedures with patients receiving periprocedural DAPT of ticagrelor and aspirin were performed during the study period. Patients had an average age of 79 years, and 28 (42%) were symptomatic. The mean procedure time was 45.8 ± 9.2 minutes, with a mean clamp/flow reversal time of 4.8 ± 1.5 minutes, and mean postoperative length of hospital stay of 3.1 ± 2.2 days for inpatients and 1.3 ± 0.8 days for outpatients. Technical success was achieved in all cases, with no 30-day major bleeding events and no occurrence of ipsilateral cerebrovascular ischemic event, myocardial infarction, or death. CONCLUSIONS: Initial experience with ticagrelor as part of DAPT in patients undergoing TCAR demonstrated its safety and efficacy in both symptomatic and asymptomatic disease. No bleeding events or thromboembolic complications occurred. Furthermore, a protocol to administer ticagrelor to assay for HTPR on ticagrelor and consequent medication and patient management is proposed. Ticagrelor may represent a safe and effective alternative to overcome clopidogrel nonresponsiveness in DAPT regimens for TCAR.

Clopidogrel versus ticagrelor in the treatment of Chinese patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: effects on platelet function assessed by platelet function tests and mean platelet volume.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge on the pharmacodynamic effects of antiplatelet drugs including clopidogrel and ticagrelor on Asian patients is scarce. We aim to evaluate the effects of the two drugs on platelet reactivity in the treatment of Chinese patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), using two platelet function tests (PFT). Meanwhile, the relationship between mean platelet volume (MPV), a routine index of platelet size, and high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) is also investigated. METHODS: Patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were scheduled for the assessment of platelet reactivity at 2-3 days after PCI. Two PFTs, light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP)-FCM assay, were applied in the evaluation of platelet reactivity. The MPV was measured simultaneously with EDTA plasma using a Sysmex XN 2000 automated hematology analyzer. RESULTS: The final study population included the aspirin + clopidogrel group (n = 46) and the aspirin + ticagrelor group (n = 66). In the aspirin + ticagrelor group, the maximal light transmittance (LT) changes in response to 5 µM ADP assessed by LTA was obviously lower than that in the aspirin + clopidogrel group (P <  0.001). The platelet reactivity index (PRI) level in the VASP test was also markedly lower in the group given aspirin and ticagrelor (P <  0.001). There was a significant difference in HPR between the two groups. MPV showed a potent ability to predict the presence of HPR at VASP assay (AUC = 0.788, 95% CI: 0.701-0.875, P <  0.001) in receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor has dramatically greater antiplatelet effect, with a superiority in suppressing platelet function and a lower HPR rate. In addition, there existed a significant independent association between MPV and high prevalence of HPR in the VASP assay.

Association of FMO3 rs1736557 polymorphism with clopidogrel response in Chinese patients with coronary artery disease.

PURPOSE: Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is commonly used for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to prevent stent thrombosis and ischemic events. However, some patients show high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) during clopidogrel therapy. Genetic factors such as loss-of-function variants of CYP2C19 are validated to increase the risk of HTPR. Flavin-containing monooxygenase 3 (FMO3) is reported to be associated with potency of platelet responsiveness and thrombosis. This study aimed to explore the association between FMO3 rs1736557 polymorphism and clopidogrel response. METHODS: Five hundred twenty-two Chinese CAD patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy were recruited from Xiangya Hospital. After oral administration of 300 mg loading dose (LD) clopidogrel for 12-24 h or 75 mg daily maintenance dose (MD) clopidogrel for at least 5 days, the platelet reaction index (PRI) was determined by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein-phosphorylation assay. FMO3 rs1736557, CYP2C19*2, and CYP2C19*3 polymorphisms were genotyped by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP). RESULTS: Mean PRI value was significantly higher in CYP2C19 poor metabolizers (PMs) and intermediate metabolizers (IMs) than the extensive metabolizers (EMs) (p < 0.001). In addition, FMO3 rs1736557 AA homozygotes showed significantly lower PRI as compared with carriers of the major rs1736557 G allele in the entire cohort and in the MD cohort (p = 0.011, p = 0.008, respectively). The risk of HTPR was decreased significantly in carriers of the rs1736557 A allele (AA vs GG: OR = 0.316, 95% CI: 0.137-0.726, p = 0.005; AA vs GA: OR = 0.249, 95% CI: 0.104-0.597, p = 0.001; AA vs GG+GA: OR = 0.294, 95% CI: 0.129-0.669, p = 0.002), and the association was observed mainly in patients carrying the CYP2C19 LOF allele and in those administered with MD. CONCLUSION: The FMO3 rs1736557 AA genotype was related to an increased the antiplatelet potency of clopidogrel in Chinese CAD patients. Additional studies are required to verify this finding.

Effect of prediabetes on asprin or clopidogrel resistance in patients with recent ischemic stroke/TIA.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus (DM) had been discovered as an independent risk factor for high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) in patients with ischemic stroke. However, studies on the relationship between prediabetes and the occurrence of HPR remain scarce. This study is aimed at clarifying the association between prediabetes and HPR among patients with recent ischemic stroke or transient ischemic stroke (TIA). METHODS: Patients with ischemic stroke or TIA within 90 days after onset were recruited consecutively. All patients were divided into three groups: DM, prediabetes, and normal glucose tolerance according to fasting glucose, HbA1c, or OGTT. Three months later, all patients were performed platelet aggregation inhibition test and screened for high on-treatment platelet reactivity. The effect of prediabetes on HPR was analyzed in a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: This study recruited 237 patients with ischemic stroke or TIA, including 57 cases with prediabetes, 108 with DM, and 72 with normal glucose tolerance. Aspirin and/or clopidogrel resistance was discovered in 28 cases among prediabetes group, which was significantly more frequent than normal glucose tolerance group(49.1% versus 33.3%, P = 0.046). After adjusting for confounding factors, prediabetes was found as an independent risk factor for high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) among patients with recent ischemic stroke or TIA (odds ratio 2.92; 95% CI, 1.29 to 6.63, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Prediabetes was an independent risk factor for high on-treatment platelet reactivity in patients with recent ischemic cerebrovascular disease. Patients with prediabetes should be highlighted for the efficacy test of antiplatelet drugs.

Aspirin I.V. Loading during Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Additional loading dose of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) despite permanent oral ASA medication is frequently applicated. The impact on platelet reactivity and clinical events is not known. In this pilot study, we aimed to analyze high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to aspirin in patients undergoing elective PCI. Platelet reactivity was measured using light-transmission aggregometry in 100 patients on permanent low-dose ASA medication undergoing elective PCI. Platelet reactivity measured by arachidonic acid-induced maximum of aggregation (MoA) in patients with versus without additional peri-procedural ASA loading (500 mg i.v.) was compared. HTPR was defined as MoA >20% for ASA. Major adverse cerebro- and cardiovascular events (MACCEs) and bleeding events were evaluated during hospital course. HTPR rate was similar in both groups (HTPR to ASA: loading vs. control 6% vs. 16%, odds ratio [OR] = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08-1.35, p = 0.12). In-hospital MACCEs were not different between groups (MACCE: loading vs. control: 0 vs. 0 patient, OR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.03-67.95, p = 0.89). Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction minimal bleedings were numerically higher in patients without ASA loading dose. In this pharmacodynamic pilot study, additional ASA loading did not reduce HTPR to ASA. Furthermore, ASA loading did not increase in-hospital MACCE and bleeding complications.

Enhanced Platelet Reactivity under Aspirin Medication and Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease.

Aspirin is indispensable in secondary prevention of ischemic events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, insufficient platelet inhibition despite aspirin medication is frequent. This is referred to as high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR). Nevertheless, if this is associated with clinical outcome instead of only laboratory phenomenon remains unclear so far. In this study, we test whether patients with ischemic events have higher platelet reactivity despite aspirin medication than patients without ischemic events. In this prospective study of 72 CAD patients, we determined pharmacodynamic response to aspirin by arachidonic acid induced aggregation via light-transmission aggregometry and expressed as maximum of aggregation (MoA). During a mean follow-up duration of 3.2 years, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), mortality, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and stroke were assessed as endpoints via yearly telephone interviews with the treating physician of the patients. Patients who suffered from MACCE, death, and NSTEMI had a significantly higher MoA than those without (MACCE: 5.4 vs. 16.4%, p < 0.05; death: 5.6 vs. 16.8%, p < 0.05; NSTEMI: 1.8 vs. 21%, p < 0.001). MoA did not differ with regard to the occurrence of stroke (10.1 vs. 14.9%, p = 0.59). Patients with MACCE, death, and NSTEMI show enhanced platelet reactivity despite aspirin medication as compared to patients without ischemic events. Hence, insufficient response to aspirin medication should be regarded as risk factor for ischemic events in CAD patients. Further trials are needed to assess options to overcome HTPR to aspirin.

Platelet reactivity in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor in comparison to clopidogrel: a retrospective pharmacodynamic analysis.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor is a mainstay of the prevention of stent thrombosis following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the 2015 European guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), prasugrel (PRA) and ticagrelor (TICA) combined with aspirin are recommended as first-line therapy. Clopidogrel (CLO) is recommended as an alternative medication for patients with contradictions to these new drugs. This single-center study analyzed the platelet function of 809 ACS patients undergoing PCI and treatment with DAPT. The platelet response to ADP was determined using Multiplate® analyzer at a median of 3 days after PCI in 254 patients treated with PRA (loading dose [LD] 60 mg, 10 mg qd), 162 patients receiving TICA (LD 180 mg, D 90 mg bid), and 393 CLO-treated patients (LD 600 mg, 75 mg qd). An aggregation >468 arbitrary units (AU)*min was defined as "high on-treatment platelet reactivity" (HPR), <188 AU*min as "low on-treatment platelet reactivity" (LPR). Platelet response in PRA-treated patients was lower compared to CLO or TICA (median; interquartile range: PRA 220 [163-275] AU*min vs. CLO 268 [186-387] AU*min, p < 0.001 vs. TICA 245 [190-320] AU*min, p = 0.001). Only 1.6% of PRA patients were stratified as HPR and 34.6% as LPR, while in the TICA group 1.9% fulfilled the criteria of HPR and 24.1% criteria of LPR. Sixteen percent of CLO patients were stratified as HPR and 26.2% as LPR. In a real-world cohort of ACS patients following PCI, PRA results in more potent inhibition of platelet function compared to CLO and TICA. TICA achieves a consistent antiplatelet effect with reduced rates of HPR and LPR in relation to CLO.

Malondialdehyde Assay in the Evaluation of Aspirin Antiplatelet Effects.

Aspirin is essential in secondary prevention of patients after myocardial infarction and with coronary artery disease. However, impaired pharmacodynamic response to aspirin is frequent (high on-treatment platelet reactivity [HTPR]). This leads to an enhanced prevalence of cardiovascular events and to an impaired clinical outcome. The current specific assays to evaluate aspirin antiplatelet effects are complex, time-consuming and demand for a high laboratory expertise. Therefore, we developed a potentially bedside assay based on the determination of malondialdehyde (MDA). MDA is a by-product of the thromboxane (TX) formation, which is synthesized in equimolar concentrations. In this study, we compared this MDA assay to the conventional assays in determination of pharmacodynamic aspirin response. For this, aspirin antiplatelet effects were measured in 22 healthy individuals and 63 aspirin treated patients using TX B2 formation enzyme-linked antibody assay, arachidonic acid induced light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and the new fluorometric MDA assay. In patients, MDA levels correlated well with TX formation (R = 0.81; 95% CI 0.69-0.88; p < 0.001) and LTA (R = 0.84; CI 0.74-0.91; p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analyses revealed that the MDA assay does detect HTPR to aspirin sufficiently (area under the curve: 0.965; p < 0.001). The optimal cut-off was > 128 nmol/L (sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 91%). The new MDA assay is reliable in detecting HTPR. It is highly specific in the evaluation of antiplatelet effects by aspirin. This promising and potential bedside assay needs to be evaluated in clinical practice.

Association of platelet-derived microvesicles with high on-treatment platelet reactivity in convalescent ischemic stroke patients treated with acetylsalicylic acid

Introduction: Elevated concentrations of platelet-derived microvesicles are found in cerebrovascular diseases. The impact of acetylsalicylic acid on these microvesicles remains inconsistent, despite its well-established effect on platelet aggregation. High residual platelet aggregation is defined as high on-treatment platelet reactivity, while "treatment failure" is the occurrence of vascular events despite antiplatelet treatment. The aim of this study was to determine whether the antiaggregatory effect of acetylsalicylic acid correlates with platelet-derived microvesicles in convalescent ischaemic stroke patients and cardiovascular risk factor controls as well as to evaluate the association between high on-treatment platelet reactivity and recurrent vascular events with the studied platelet-derived microvesicle parameters. Material and methods: The study groups consisted of 76 convalescent stroke patients and 74 controls. Total platelet-derived microvesicles, annexino-positive microvesicles number, and platelet-derived microvesicles with surface expression of proinflammatory (CD40L, CD62P, CD31) and procoagulant (PS, GPIIb/IIIa) markers were characterized and quantified using flow cytometry. Cyclooxygenase-1-specific platelet responsiveness, with whole blood impedance platelet aggregation under arachidonic acid stimulation and the serum concentration of thromboxane B2, were evaluated. Results: Neither acetylsalicylic acid intake nor modification of its daily dose caused statistically significant differences in the studied microvesicle parameters. Additionally, no statistically significant differences in the studied microvesicle parameters were revealed between high on-treatment platelet reactivity and non-high on-treatment platelet reactivity subjects in either study subgroup. However, elevated concentrations of PAC-1+/CD61+, CD62P+/CD61+ and CD31+/CD61+ microvesicles were found in stroke patients with treatment failure, defined in this study as a recurrent vascular events in a one-year follow-up period. Conclusions: This study revealed no relationship between circulating microvesicle number and platelet aggregation. The procoagulant and proinflammatory phenotype of circulating platelet-derived microvesicles might contribute to acetylsalicylic acid treatment failure.