Role of thromboelastography and rapid thromboelastography to assess the pharmacodynamic effects of vitamin K antagonists.

Thromboelastography (TEG) measures the effects of antithrombotic agents by assessing global functional clotting status by evaluating the viscoelastic properties of in vitro clot formation. Recently, rapid TEG (r-TEG), which uses tissue factor in addition to standard kaolin to accelerate activation of the clotting cascade, has been proposed to obtain more immediate results. The correlation between results of TEG or r-TEG with international normalized ratio (INR) in patients on vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy has not been explored and represents the aim of this study. Patients on chronic therapy with VKAs (n = 100) were included in an observational prospective pharmacodynamic study. The correlation between TEG parameters, in particular markers of thrombus generation [Reaction time (R), maximum rate of thrombus generation (MRTG), and time to maximum rate of thrombus generation (TMRTG)], and INR values as well as the concordance between these parameters and therapeutic INR ranges were evaluated. In addition, in a subgroup of subjects (n = 17), the correlation of r-TEG parameters with TEG parameters and INR values was also assessed. No correlation was found between INR and TEG parameters of thrombus generation, in particular between INR and R (r = 0.189, p = 0.06), MRTG (r = -0.027, p = 0.79), and TMRTG (r = 0.188, p = 0.06). Further, no concordance was found between these parameters and recommended INR ranges. Significant Spearman correlations were found between INR and activated clotting time (rS = 0.546, p < 0.001), r-R (rS = 0.572, p = 0.017), and r-TMRTG (rS = 0.510, p = 0.037), but not r-MRTG (rS = 0.131, p = 0.617). Results were obtained in 24 ± 6 versus 12 ± 4 min with TEG and r-TEG, respectively (p < 0.001). In patients on chronic VKA therapy, TEG is not a useful tool to evaluate VKA anticoagulant effect, compared with standard INR measurements. However, r-TEG parameters of thrombus generation correlate with INR levels, suggesting a possible role of this assay for measuring more expeditiously anticoagulant treatment effects.

Pharmacodynamic effects of EV-077 in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease on aspirin or clopidogrel monotherapy: results of an in vitro pilot investigation.

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have increased propensity to generate thromboxane A2 (TXA2) and other eicosanoids which can contribute to their heightened platelet reactivity. EV-077 is a potent thromboxane receptor antagonist and thromboxane synthase inhibitor and thus represents an attractive therapy in patients with DM. However, the effects of EV-077 on pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles in patients with DM and coronary artery disease (CAD) while on antiplatelet therapy is poorly explored and represented the aim of this in vitro pilot investigation. Patients with DM and stable CAD (n = 10) on low-dose aspirin (81 mg/day) were enrolled and then switched to clopidogrel (75 mg/day) monotherapy for 7-10 days. PD assessments were conducted while on aspirin and on clopidogrel using light transmittance aggregometry following stimuli with U-46619 [TXA2 stable analogue (7 µM)], arachidonic acid [AA (1 mM)], collagen (3 µg/mL) and adenosine diphosphate [ADP (5 µM and 20 µM)] with and without in vitro EV-077. EV-077 completely inhibited U-46619-stimulated platelet aggregation (p = 0.005 for both aspirin and clopidogrel) and also showed a significant reduction of collagen-induced aggregation (aspirin p = 0.008; clopidogrel p = 0.005). EV-077 significantly reduced AA-induced platelet aggregation in clopidogrel (p = 0.009), but not aspirin (p = 0.667) treated patients. Ultimately, EV-077 significantly reduced ADP-mediated platelet aggregation in both aspirin (ADP 5 µM p = 0.012; ADP 20 µM p = 0.032) and clopidogrel (ADP 5 µM p = 0.007; ADP 20 µM p = 0.008) treated patients. In conclusion, in DM patients with CAD on aspirin or clopidogrel monotherapy, in vitro EV-077 exerts potent platelet inhibitory effects on multiple platelet signaling pathways. These data support that EV-077 has only additive platelet inhibiting effects on top of standard antiplatelet therapies. These findings warrant further investigation in ex vivo settings.

Pharmacodynamic effects of adjunctive cilostazol therapy in patients with coronary artery disease on dual antiplatelet therapy: impact of high on-treatment platelet reactivity and diabetes mellitus status.

BACKGROUND: In patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel, the adjunctive use of cilostazol is associated with enhanced platelet inhibition. However, if cilostazol exerts different pharmacodynamic (PD) effects according to levels of on-treatment platelet reactivity remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the PD effects of cilostazol in patients with and without high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity (HPR) according to diabetes mellitus (DM) status. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis derived from patients (n = 79) enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover study comparing cilostazol with placebo in stable coronary artery disease patients on aspirin and clopidogrel therapy. In the present analysis, patients were divided according to the presence or absence of HPR (HPR and non-HPR). HPR was defined as a P2Y12 units (PRU) > 240 as assessed by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. The PD effects of cilostazol were evaluated in patients with and without HPR according to DM status. RESULTS: Significant absolute changes in PRU values were observed after adjunctive cilostazol in both HPR [53.4 (95% CI 24.7-82.1), P = 0.001] and non-HPR [40.8 (95% CI 28.7-52.8), P < 0.0001] patients. This difference was statistically significant in HPR patients with DM (P = 0.001), but not without DM (P = 0.24), and in non-HPR patients with and without DM (P = 0.0001 for both). The greatest mean reduction in PRU was observed in HPR patients with DM (72.9; 95% CI 33.7-112.0). Thrombin generation was not affected by cilostazol, irrespective of HPR status. CONCLUSION: Cilostazol reduces platelet reactivity both in HPR and non-HPR patients, although these PD effects are enhanced in HPR patients with DM. Nevertheless, larger studies are needed to better evaluate possible differential effects of cilostazol on platelet reactivity by diabetes status.

Impact of renal function on clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects in coronary artery disease patients without diabetes mellitus.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is the most important predictor of chronic kidney disease (CKD), and pharmacodynamic (PD) studies have shown that DM patients with impaired renal function are characterized by reduced clopidogrel response. However, post-hoc PD studies conducted in unselected cohorts, composed of both DM and non-DM patients, have reached controversial findings on the effects of CKD on clopidogrel response, likely attributed to patient heterogeneity. The impact of renal function on clopidogrel response in non-DM patients remains unexplored and represented the aim of this prospective investigation. We conducted a prospective PD investigation in non-DM patients with and without CKD defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) below or above 60 mL/min, respectively. All patients had known coronary artery disease and were on maintenance aspirin therapy. PD assessments were assessed at baseline and 2 and 24 h after a 600 mg loading dose of clopidogrel. PD assays included light transmission aggregometry (LTA) using 5 and 20 µmol ADP with and without PGE1 and flow cytometric assessment of the phosphorylation status of the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) to determine the platelet reactivity index. A total of 60 patients were studied (n = 30 eGFR ≥60 mL/min; n = 30 eGFR <60 mL/min). At baseline there were no differences between groups. Following clopidogrel loading dose administration, levels of on-treatment platelet reactivity were similar between groups at 2 and 24 h as measured with LTA and VASP. Accordingly, there were no differences in rates of high on-treatment platelet reactivity between groups. In non-DM patients with CAD, the presence of impaired renal function is not associated with differences in clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects compared with patients with preserved renal function.

Effects of cangrelor in coronary artery disease patients with and without diabetes mellitus: an in vitro pharmacodynamic investigation.

Platelets from patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are hyper-reactive and whether cangrelor, a potent intravenous P2Y(12) receptor blocker, has differential pharmacodynamic (PD) effects according DM status is unknown. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the in vitro PD effects of cangrelor in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with and without DM. This prospective study enrolled 120 clopidogrel-naïve patients with CAD on aspirin therapy. PD assessments using cangrelor (500 nmol/l) in vitro included vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay to obtain the P2Y(12) reactivity index (PRI), and multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA). In a 20 patients subgroup, dose-dependent response was assessed following exposure to escalating concentrations (baseline, 5, 50, 500 and 5,000 nmol/l); thrombin generation processes were evaluated by thromboelastography (TEG). PD data were evaluable in 103 patients. No differences in baseline PD parameters were observed in DM (n = 48) and non-DM (n = 45) subjects. Cangrelor reduced PRI values irrespective of DM status (p < 0.0001), yielding no difference in patients with and without DM (16.1 ± 12.3 vs. 16.8 ± 11.3; p = 0.346). All MEA values were significantly reduced, although this was of greater magnitude with purinergic compared to non-purinergic agonists. A trend analysis showed a dose-dependent effect on platelet inhibition, with no interaction due to DM status, whereas no significant dose-dependent effect was observed for TEG-derived parameters. Therefore, in vitro cangrelor provides potent and dose-dependent blockade of the platelet P2Y(12) receptor, with no differential effect in DM and non-DM patients. In addition, in vitro cangrelor exerts moderate inhibitory effects on non-purinergic platelet signaling pathways, without modulating platelet-derived thrombin generation processes.

Rapid and Highly Accurate Prediction of Poor Loop Diuretic Natriuretic Response in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Removal of excess sodium and fluid is a primary therapeutic objective in acute decompensated heart failure and commonly monitored with fluid balance and weight loss. However, these parameters are frequently inaccurate or not collected and require a delay of several hours after diuretic administration before they are available. Accessible tools for rapid and accurate prediction of diuretic response are needed. METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on well-established renal physiological principles, an equation was derived to predict net sodium output using a spot urine sample obtained 1 or 2 hours after loop diuretic administration. This equation was then prospectively validated in 50 acute decompensated heart failure patients using meticulously obtained timed 6-hour urine collections to quantify loop diuretic-induced cumulative sodium output. Poor natriuretic response was defined as a cumulative sodium output of <50 mmol, a threshold that would result in a positive sodium balance with twice-daily diuretic dosing. Following a median dose of 3 mg (2-4 mg) of intravenous bumetanide, 40% of the population had a poor natriuretic response. The correlation between measured and predicted sodium output was excellent (r=0.91; P<0.0001). Poor natriuretic response could be accurately predicted with the sodium prediction equation (area under the curve =0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.89-1.0; P<0.0001). Clinically recorded net fluid output had a weaker correlation (r=0.66; P<0.001) and lesser ability to predict poor natriuretic response (area under the curve =0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.89; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In patients being treated for acute decompensated heart failure, poor natriuretic response can be predicted soon after diuretic administration with excellent accuracy using a spot urine sample.

Pharmacodynamic effects of standard dose prasugrel versus high dose clopidogrel in non-diabetic obese patients with coronary artery disease.

Increased body weight is independently associated with impaired clopidogrel pharmacodynamic (PD) response. Prasugrel has more potent PD effects compared with clopidogrel, although its PD effects in obese patients are unknown. The aim of this prospective, randomised, study was to compare the PD effects of standard-dose prasugrel [60 mg loading dose (LD)/10 mg daily maintenance dose (MD)] with high-dose clopidogrel (900 mg LD/150 mg daily MD) in non-diabetic obese [body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m²] patients, with coronary artery disease (CAD) on aspirin therapy. PD assessments (baseline, 2 hours post-LD and 6 ± 2 days after MD) were conducted using four platelet function assays, and the platelet reactivity index (PRI) assessed by VASP was used for sample size estimation. A total of 42 patients with a BMI of 36.42 ± 5.6 kg/m² completed the study. There were no differences in baseline PD measures between groups. At 2 hours post-LD, prasugrel was associated with lower PRI compared with clopidogrel (24.3 ± 5.5 vs 58.7 ± 5.7, p≤0.001), with consistent findings for all assays. At one-week, PRI values on prasugrel MD were lower than clopidogrel MD without reaching statistical significance (34.7 ± 5.8 vs 42.9 ± 5.8, p=0.32), with consistent findings for all assays. Accordingly, rates of high on-treatment platelet reactivity were markedly reduced after prasugrel LD, but not after MD. In conclusion, in non-diabetic obese patients with CAD, standard prasugrel dosing achieved more potent PD effects than high-dose clopidogrel in the acute phase of treatment, but this was not sustained during maintenance phase treatment. Whether an intensified prasugrel regimen is required in obese patients warrants investigation.

Pharmacodynamic effects of cangrelor on platelet P2Y12 receptor-mediated signaling in prasugrel-treated patients.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the in vitro P2Y12 receptor inhibitory effects of cangrelor on platelets from patients on maintenance prasugrel therapy treated with 2 reloading dose regimens. BACKGROUND: Despite its more potent and rapid antiplatelet effects compared with clopidogrel, recent studies have shown variability in prasugrel-mediated P2Y12 receptor inhibition, particularly in high-risk settings. Cangrelor is a potent intravenous P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. METHODS: A total of 60 patients with coronary artery disease on maintenance prasugrel (10 mg/day) therapy were randomized to a 30- or 60-mg reload of prasugrel. The platelet reactivity index (PRI), as assessed by whole-blood vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, was measured with and without in vitro incubation of cangrelor (500 nM) at baseline, and at 1 and 4 h after reload. RESULTS: In the absence of cangrelor, prasugrel reloading reduced PRI (p < 0.001 for both doses), although a 60-mg reload had greater platelet inhibition compared with a 30-mg reload at 4 h (p = 0.001). Cangrelor was associated with a reduction in PRI values during the overall study time course in patients reloaded with 30 mg (p = 0.001) and 60 mg (p < 0.001) of prasugrel. In patients reloaded with 30 mg prasugrel, cangrelor decreased PRI at each time point (baseline, p < 0.001; 1 h, p = 0.013; 4 h, p = 0.001). In patients reloaded with 60 mg prasugrel, cangrelor decreased PRI at baseline (p < 0.001) and 1 h (p = 0.002); levels of platelet reactivity comparable to those achieved with cangrelor were observed only at 4 h (p = 0.325). The intergroup comparisons with cangrelor were not significant at any time point. CONCLUSIONS: In patients on maintenance prasugrel therapy exposed to a reloading dose (30 or 60 mg) of prasugrel, in vitro cangrelor is associated with further platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitory effects.

Impaired responsiveness to the platelet P2Y12 receptor antagonist clopidogrel in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown that patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) exhibit an impaired response to clopidogrel. This may contribute to their increased risk of recurrent atherothrombotic events, despite the use of dual-antiplatelet therapy. The mechanisms for impaired clopidogrel response in DM patients have not been fully elucidated. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the mechanisms for impaired clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition in patients with DM using a comprehensive methodological approach embracing both pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) assessments as well as ex vivo and in vitro investigations. METHODS: Patients (DM, n = 30; non-DM, n = 30) with stable coronary artery disease taking aspirin 81 mg/day and P2Y12 antagonist naive were enrolled. Blood was collected before and at various times (0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, and 24 h) after a 600-mg loading dose of clopidogrel. PD assessments included vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, light transmission aggregometry, and VerifyNow P2Y12 ex vivo, before and after dosing and following in vitro incubation with escalating concentrations (1, 3, and 10 µM) of clopidogrel's active metabolite (Clop-AM). Exposure to Clop-AM was also determined. RESULTS: PD assessments consistently showed that during the overall 24-h study time course, residual platelet reactivity was higher in DM patients compared with non-DM patients. In vitro incubation with Clop-AM revealed altered functional status of the P2Y12 signaling pathway in DM platelets as measured by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, but not with other PD assays. Clop-AM exposure was ∼40% lower in DM patients than in non-DM patients. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that among DM patients, impaired P2Y12 inhibition mediated by clopidogrel is largely attributable to attenuation of clopidogrel's PK profile. This is characterized by lower plasma levels of Clop-AM over the sampling time course in DM patients compared with non-DM patients and only modestly attributed to altered functional status of the P2Y12 signaling pathway.

Cigarette smoking and antiplatelet effects of aspirin monotherapy versus clopidogrel monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic disease: results of a prospective pharmacodynamic study.

Smokers have a greater relative benefit of clopidogrel therapy compared with nonsmokers, likely attributed to its enhanced pharmacodynamic (PD) effects. However, to date, all PD studies have been conducted in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel, and it is unknown whether clopidogrel monotherapy can offer more effective antithrombotic effects compared with aspirin alone among smoking patients. Sixty aspirin-treated (81 mg/day) patients with vascular disease, classified as nonsmokers, light smokers, and heavy smokers according to cotinine serum levels, were enrolled. Patients were switched to clopidogrel (75 mg/day) monotherapy for 7-10 days. PD assessments were performed before and after switch by multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) and kaolin-activated thromboelastography (TEG). Complete PD data were obtained in 57 patients (nonsmokers, n = 27; light smokers, n = 13; heavy smokers, n = 17). On treatment platelet reactivity following MEA, adenosine diphosphate (ADP) + prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) and thrombin receptor-activating peptide (TRAP) stimuli were significantly lower among heavy smokers following switch to clopidogrel. A significant inverse effect was observed with MEA arachidonic acid (ASPI), while neutral findings were shown with MEA collagen (COLL) stimulus. Thrombin and fibrin activity assessed by clot generation parameters were all nonsignificantly different but showed trends towards enhanced antithrombotic activity with clopidogrel among heavy smokers. In heavy smokers with vascular disease manifestations, clopidogrel is associated with enhanced platelet inhibitory effects, affecting purinergic and non-purinergic pathways, compared with aspirin as measured by MEA. Moreover, among smokers, clopidogrel offers trends towards enhanced effects on parameters of clot generation measured by TEG.

Impact of aspirin dose on adenosine diphosphate-mediated platelet activities. Results of an in vitro pilot investigation.

Different aspirin dosing regimens have been suggested to impact outcomes when used in combination with adenosine diphosphate (ADP) P2Y12 receptor antagonists. Prior investigations have shown that not only aspirin, but also potent ADP P2Y12 receptor blockade can inhibit thromboxane A2-mediated platelet activation. The impact of aspirin dosing on ADP mediated platelet activities is unknown and represents the aim of this in vitro pilot pharmacodynamic (PD) investigation. Twenty-six patients with stable coronary artery disease on aspirin 81 mg/day and P2Y12 naïve were enrolled. PD assessments were performed at baseline, while patients were on 81 mg/day aspirin and after switching to 325 mg/day for 7 ± 2 days with and without escalating concentrations (vehicle, 1, 3, and 10 µM) of prasugrel's active metabolite (P-AM). PD assays included flow cytometric assessment of VASP to define the platelet reactivity index (PRI) and the Multiplate Analyzer (MEA) using multiple agonists [ADP, ADP + prostaglandin (PGE1), arachidonic acid (AA), and collagen]. Escalating P-AM concentrations showed incremental platelet P2Y12 inhibition measured by VASP-PRI (p<0.001). However, there were no differences according to aspirin dosing regimen at any P-AM concentration (vehicle: p=0.899; 1 µM: p=0.888; 3 µM: p=0.524; 10 µM: p=0.548). Similar findings were observed in purinergic markers assessed by MEA (ADP and ADP+PGE1). P-AM addition significantly reduced AA and collagen induced platelet aggregation (p<0.001 for all measures), irrespective of aspirin dose. In conclusion, aspirin dosing does not appear to affect PD measures of ADP-mediated platelet reactivity irrespective of the degree of P2Y12 receptor blockade. P2Y12 receptor blockade modulates platelet reactivity mediated by alternative activators.

Haemostatic profiles assessed by thromboelastography in patients with end-stage renal disease.

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have abnormalities in the cellular and plasmatic systems regulating blood homeostasis, which may contribute to their risk for thrombotic and bleeding complications. However, their relative contributions in this population are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution of enzymatic and cellular abnormalities in ESRD patients on haemodialysis as assessed by thromboelastography (TEG®). Whole blood samples were analysed by TEG in ESRD patients (n=70) and in a control group (n=70) of subjects with coronary artery disease. Profiles were constructed considering the maximum amplitude (MA), a marker of platelet function, and reaction time (R), a marker of thrombin generation, values. R values were higher in ESRD patients compared with the control group (8.2 ± 2.8 vs. 5.7 ± 1.9 minutes [min], p <0.0001), while there were no differences in MA (66.7 ± 8.1 vs. 66.2 ± 6.6 mm, p=0.562). Normal manufacturer defined coagulation (2-8 min) and aggregation (51-69 mm) parameters were present in 31% of ESRD patients compared with 56% of controls (p=0.006). A hypocoagulable status was observed in 42.9% of ESRD patients compared with 8.9% in the control group (p<0.0001). There were no differences in platelet function, which showed a hyperaggregable status in 41.4% versus 35.7% of cases (p=0.603). Abnormalities in both parameters were observed in 15.7% of ESRD patients versus 1.4% in the control group (p= 0.004), which were more common among older patients (p= 0.005). In conclusion, patients with ESRD have an elevated prevalence of abnormal haemostatic profiles, which may contribute to their elevated risk of bleeding and thrombotic complications.

Impact of adjunctive cilostazol therapy on platelet function profiles in patients with and without diabetes mellitus on aspirin and clopidogrel therapy.

Cilostazol is a platelet inhibitor which when added to aspirin and clopidogrel has shown to reduce the risk of recurrent ischaemic events without an increase in bleeding. These clinical benefits have shown to be more pronounced in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). However, it remains unknown whether cilostazol exerts different pharmacodynamic effects in patients with and without DM. This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over pharmacodynamic study comparing platelet function in patients with and without DM on aspirin and clopidogrel therapy. Patients (n=111) were randomly assigned to either cilostazol 100 mg or placebo twice daily for 14 days and afterwards crossed-over treatment for another 14 days. Platelet function was performed at baseline, 14 days post-randomisation, and 14 days post-cross-over. Functional testing to assess P2Y12 signalling included flow cytometric analysis of phosphorylation status of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein measured by P2Y12 reactivity index (PRI), light transmittance aggregometry and VerifyNow. Thrombin generation processes were also studied using thrombelastography. Significantly lower PRI values were observed following treatment with cilostazol compared with placebo both in DM and non-DM groups (p < 0.0001). The absolute between-treatment differences of PRI between groups was a 35.1% lower in patients with DM (p=0.039). Similar results were obtained using all other functional measures assessing P2Y12 signalling. Thrombin generation was not affected by cilostazol. Cilostazol reduces platelet reactivity both in patients with and without DM, although these pharmacodynamic effects are enhanced in patients with DM. Despite the marked platelet inhibition, cilostazol does not alter thrombin-mediated haemostatic processes, which may explain its ischaemic benefit without the increased risk of bleeding.

Pharmacodynamic effects of different aspirin dosing regimens in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have reduced aspirin-induced pharmacodynamic effects. This may be attributed to increased platelet turnover rates resulting in an increased proportion of non-aspirin-inhibited platelets during the daily dosing interval. The hypothesis of this study was that an increase in the frequency of drug administration [twice daily (bid) versus once daily (od)] may provide more effective platelet inhibition in T2DM patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: T2DM patients with stable coronary artery disease were prospectively recruited. Patients modified their aspirin regimen on a weekly basis according to the following scheme: 81 mg/od, 81 mg/bid, 162 mg/od, 162 mg/bid, and 325 mg/od. Pharmacodynamic assessments included light-transmittance aggregometry after arachidonic acid, collagen and adenosine diphosphate stimuli; VerifyNow-Aspirin assay; and serum thromboxane B(2) (TXB(2)) levels. Twenty patients were analyzed. All patients were sensitive and compliant to aspirin irrespective of dose, as assessed by arachidonic acid-induced aggregation. When aspirin was administered once daily, there was no significant effect on platelet reactivity by increasing the once-daily dosing using aspirin-sensitive assays (collagen-induced aggregation and VerifyNow-Aspirin). An increase in aspirin dose by means of a second daily administration was associated with a significant reduction in platelet reactivity assessed by collagen-induced aggregation and VerifyNow-Aspirin between 81 mg/od and 81 mg/bid (P<0.05 for both assays) and between 81 mg/od and 162 mg/bid (P<0.05 for both assays). There was no impact of aspirin dosing regimens on adenosine diphosphate-induced aggregation. A dose-dependent effect of aspirin was observed on serum TXB(2) levels (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin dosing regimens are associated with different pharmacodynamic effects in platelets from T2DM patients and stable coronary artery disease, with a twice-daily, low-dose aspirin administration resulting in greater platelet inhibition than once-daily administration as assessed by aspirin-sensitive assays and a dose-dependent effect on serum TXB(2) levels. The clinical implications of a modified aspirin regimen tailored to T2DM patients warrant further investigation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01201785.

Pharmacodynamic evaluation of pantoprazole therapy on clopidogrel effects: results of a prospective, randomized, crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Safety concerns have recently emerged based on a drug interaction between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors leading to reduced pharmacodynamic effects. However, whether such drug interaction is a class effect or a drug effect and if this can be modulated by timing of drug administration remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of high-dose pantoprazole therapy, a proton pump inhibitor with low potential to interfere with clopidogrel metabolism, administered concomitantly or staggered, on clopidogrel-mediated pharmacodynamic effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover study conducted in 20 healthy volunteers. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive pantoprazole (80 mg daily) administered concomitantly (CONC) or staggered by 8 to 12 hours (STAG) for 1 week on a background of clopidogrel therapy (600-mg loading dose followed by a 75-mg maintenance dose during all phases) in a crossover fashion with a 2- to 4-week washout period between treatments. All subjects had a 1-week treatment phase with a clopidogrel-only regimen with a 2- to 4-week washout period from randomization sequence. Platelet function was assessed by flow cytometric analysis of the status of phosphorylation of the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, light transmittance aggregometry after adenosine diphosphate stimuli, and VerifyNow P2Y(12) system at 3 time points: baseline, 24 hours after loading dose, and 1 week after maintenance dose. The primary end point was the comparison of P2Y(12) reactivity index assessed by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein at 1 week. After 1 week, there were no significant difference in P2Y(12) reactivity index between the CONC and STAG regimens (least-squares mean±SEM, 56.0±3.9% versus 56.1±3.9%; P=0.974), as well as when compared with the clopidogrel-only regimen (61.0±3.9%; P=0.100 versus CONC and P=0.107 versus STAG). Further, no differences were observed at baseline and 24 hours between regimens. Concordant results were obtained by light transmittance aggregometry and VerifyNow P2Y(12) assays. CONCLUSIONS: Pantoprazole therapy used at high doses is not associated with modulation of the pharmacodynamic effects of clopidogrel, irrespective of timing of drug administration. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01170533.

Pharmacodynamic effects of concomitant versus staggered clopidogrel and omeprazole intake: results of a prospective randomized crossover study.

BACKGROUND: A drug interaction between clopidogrel and omeprazole resulting in impaired platelet inhibition has been reported. It has been suggested that staggering administration of clopidogrel and omeprazole may overcome this pharmacodynamic (PD) interaction. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective, open-label, 3-period, randomized crossover study was performed in 20 healthy volunteers. Subjects were randomly selected to receive omeprazole (40 mg daily) concomitantly (CONC) or staggered by 8 to 12 hours (STAG) for 1 week on a background of clopidogrel therapy in a crossover fashion, with a 2- to 4-week washout period between treatments. After another 2- to 4-week washout period, all subjects were treated for 1 week with clopidogrel alone. Clopidogrel was administered as a 600-mg loading dose followed by a 75-mg maintenance dose during all phases. PD effects were assessed by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay, VerifyNow P2Y(12) system, and light transmittance aggregometry at baseline, 24 hours, and 1 week. The primary end point was the comparison of P2Y(12) reactivity index assessed by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay at 1 week between CONC and STAG regimens. No significant difference in the primary end point was observed (least squares mean ± SEM, 56.1 ± 3.5% for CONC versus 61.6 ± 3.4% for STAG; P = 0.08). P2Y(12) reactivity index values were significantly lower in the clopidogrel regimen (48.8 ±3.4%) than in the CONC (P = 0.02) and STAG (P = 0.001) regimens. No PD differences were observed between regimens at baseline and 24 hours. Concordant results were obtained by P2Y(12)-specific assessments using VerifyNow but not with light transmittance aggregometry. CONCLUSIONS: Omeprazole impairs clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects in the maintenance phase of treatment irrespective of timing of their administration.