Switching from Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Aspirin Plus a P2Y12 Inhibitor to Dual Pathway Inhibition with Aspirin Plus Vascular-Dose Rivaroxaban: The Switching Anti-Platelet and Anti-Coagulant Therapy (SWAP-AC) Study.

BACKGROUND: To date, there are no data on switching to dual pathway inhibition (DPI) patients who have completed a guideline-recommended dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimen. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of switching from DAPT to DPI and to compare the pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of these treatments. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, PD study conducted in 90 patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) on DAPT with aspirin (81 mg/qd) plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel [75 mg/qd; n = 30], ticagrelor [90 mg/bid; n = 30], or prasugrel [10 mg/qd; n = 30]). Patients in each cohort were randomized to maintain DAPT or switch to DPI (aspirin 81 mg/qd plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid). PD assessments included: VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction units; light transmittance aggregometry following stimuli with adenosine diphosphate (ADP), tissue factor (TF), and a combination of collagen, ADP, and TF (maximum platelet aggregation %); thrombin generation (TG). Assays were performed at baseline and 30 days postrandomization. RESULTS: Switching from DAPT to DPI occurred without major side effects. DAPT was associated with enhanced P2Y12 inhibition, while DPI with reduced TG. Platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity (primary endpoint) showed no differences between DAPT and DPI in the ticagrelor (14.5% [0.0-63.0] vs. 20.0% [0.0-70.0]; p = 0.477) and prasugrel (20.0% [0.0-66.0] vs. 4.0% [0.0-70.0]; p = 0.482), but not clopidogrel (27.0% [0.0-68.0] vs. 53.0% [0.0-81.0]; p = 0.011), cohorts. CONCLUSION: In patients with CCS, switching from different DAPT regimens to DPI was feasible, showing enhanced P2Y12 inhibition with DAPT and reduced TG with DPI, with no differences in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity between DPI and ticagrelor- and prasugrel-, but not clopidogrel-, based DAPT. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Unique Identifier: NCT04006288.

Switching From Cangrelor to Prasugrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Switching Antiplatelet-6 (SWAP-6) Study.

BACKGROUND: A drug-drug interaction (DDI) may occur when transitioning from intravenous P2Y12 inhibition with cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibition with prasugrel. However, this has never been tested in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to rule out a DDI when cangrelor and prasugrel are concomitantly administered in PCI patients. METHODS: SWAP-6 (Switching Antiplatelet-6) was a prospective, randomized, 3-arm, open-label pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study. Patients (N = 77) were randomized to 1) prasugrel only at the start of PCI, 2) cangrelor plus prasugrel concomitantly at the start of PCI, or 3) cangrelor at the start of PCI plus prasugrel at the end of infusion. Cangrelor infusion was maintained for 2 hours. PK/PD assessments were performed at baseline and 6 time points postrandomization. The primary endpoint was noninferiority in VerifyNow (Werfen) P2Y12 reaction units measured at 4 hours after randomization between cangrelor plus prasugrel concomitantly administered vs prasugrel only. PK assessments included plasma levels of the active metabolite of prasugrel. RESULTS: Compared with prasugrel, cangrelor further enhances P2Y12 inhibitory effects. At 4 hours postrandomization, P2Y12 reaction unit levels were significantly lower with prasugrel only compared to cangrelor and prasugrel concomitantly administered (least squares means difference = 130; 95% CI: 85-176), failing to meet the prespecified noninferiority margin. Findings were corroborated by multiple PD assays. The active metabolite of prasugrel levels were not affected by concomitant administration of cangrelor and were low at the end of cangrelor infusion. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PCI, concomitant administration of prasugrel with cangrelor leads to a marked increase in platelet reactivity after stopping cangrelor infusion, supporting the presence of a DDI. (Switching Antiplatelet Therapy-6 [SWAP-6]; NCT04668144).

Clinical and Pre-Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Bentracimab.

Antiplatelet agents are among the most frequently used medications in cardiovascular medicine. Although in patients with atherosclerotic disease manifestations, in particular those treated by percutaneous coronary intervention, antiplatelet agents are beneficial for the prevention of ischemic events, they inevitably increase the risk of bleeding. Furthermore, 5-15% of patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention may need a surgical procedure within 2 years, creating challenges to safe and effective antiplatelet drug management. Importantly, major spontaneous or procedural-related bleedings are associated with increased hospital admission, length, costs, and poor prognosis. Although the effects of other antithrombotic therapies, such as direct oral anticoagulants, can be reversed by approved specific agents, there are no approved reversal agents for any antiplatelet drugs. The fact that many antiplatelet agents, such as aspirin and thienopyridines (i.e., clopidogrel and prasugrel), bind irreversibly to their targets represents a challenge for the development of a drug-specific reversal agent. In contrast, ticagrelor is a non-thienopyridine with a plasma half-life of 7-9 h that reversely binds the P2Y12 receptor producing potent signaling blockage. In 2015, bentracimab (also known as PB2452 or MEDI2452), a neutralizing monoclonal antibody fragment that binds free plasma ticagrelor and its major active metabolite, was identified. This systematic overview provides a comprehensive summary of the drug development program of bentracimab, focusing on its pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and safety profiles.

Influence of body weight and body mass index on the chronic pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to clinically available doses of ticagrelor in patients with chronic coronary syndromes.

Ticagrelor has multiple indications, including for some patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) at high risk of ischaemic events. Body mass can potentially affect pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK). We investigated the influence of body mass (range 53-172 kg, 20.8-46.9 kg/m2) on PD/PK in 221 CCS patients receiving ticagrelor 60 mg or 90 mg twice-daily (BD) during two randomised-controlled trials. Correlations between body weight (BW) or body mass index (BMI) and PD/PK measurements obtained during maintenance treatment at trough ('pre-dose') and peak effect ('post-dose') were assessed. BW and BMI correlated with P2Y12 reactivity units at pre-dose (e.g. BW:R = 0.26, p = 0.008) but not post-dose timepoints. BW affected ticagrelor active metabolite (TAM) levels (e.g. 60 mg BD, post-dose:R = -0.39, p < 0.0001) and there was evidence of an inverse power law relationship between BW and TAM-to-ticagrelor ratio. PK with ticagrelor 60 mg correlated significantly with BMI. BW and BMI did not affect the chance of high platelet reactivity, which remained very low across the whole cohort. There was no difference in PRU between the two doses of ticagrelor within each weight or BMI group. Body mass has modest effects on the PK/PD response to ticagrelor in patients with CCS but currently-used regimens appear adequate across the range of BW/BMI studied.

Cangrelor in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Pretreated With Ticagrelor: The Switching Antiplatelet (SWAP)-5 Study.

BACKGROUND: There are no studies specifically designed to rule out a drug-drug interaction (DDI) when cangrelor is used among patients who have been pretreated with ticagrelor. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to rule out a DDI among cangrelor-treated patients who have been pretreated with ticagrelor. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study, patients with coronary artery disease (N = 20) were pretreated with a 180-mg ticagrelor loading dose and after 1 hour randomized to placebo or cangrelor (bolus and infusion for 2 hours). Patients crossed over after 1 to 4 weeks of washout. PK analysis included ticagrelor plasma levels and its active metabolite. PD assessments included VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction units (PRU), light transmittance aggregometry, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, and Total Thrombus-Formation Analysis System. PK/PD assessments were performed at 7 time points. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, adding cangrelor to patients pretreated with ticagrelor resulted in a significant reduction in PRU at 30 minutes and 1 hour after starting infusion. At 2 hours after stopping cangrelor/placebo infusion, PRU were low and similar in both groups (16.9 vs 12.6; mean difference: 4.3; 95% CI: -28.6 to 37.3), meeting the noninferiority primary endpoint (predefined noninferiority margin 45 PRU). Consistent findings were shown with all PD assays. PK tracked PD findings with no differences between groups in plasma levels of ticagrelor and its metabolite. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, the use of cangrelor in patients pretreated with ticagrelor results in enhanced platelet inhibition with no differences in PK/PD profiles after discontinuation of drug infusion indicating the absence of a DDI. (PD and PK Profiles of Switching Between Cangrelor and Ticagrelor Following Ticagrelor Pre-treatment [SWAP-5]; NCT04634162).

Role of platelet function and genetic testing in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) represents the standard of care for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Increasing evidence indicates that a "one-size-fits-all" approach with the use of a standard DAPT regimen for all patients undergoing PCI could lead to either suboptimal efficacy or prohibitively high bleeding in specific cohorts of patients. Moreover, the broad interindividual variability in response to P2Y12 inhibitors can impact outcomes and resource utilization. Among the strategies proposed to provide a more balanced trade-off between bleeding and ischemic events at a single patient level, a guided selection of P2Y12 inhibitors, by using platelet function or genetic testing, has shown promising results. In this review, we provide a focused summary of the rationale and evidence on the use of platelet function and genetic testing-guided antiplatelet therapy, and we explore the implications for their use in the modern setting of patients undergoing PCI.

Impact of diabetes mellitus on the pharmacodynamic effects of prasugrel and ticagrelor after switching from clopidogrel in patients with coronary artery disease.

Switching P2Y12 inhibitors is common in clinical practice. However, data on the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of switching in clinical settings characterized by high platelet reactivity, such as diabetes mellitus (DM), are limited. This is a post-hoc analysis from a prospective, randomized, open-label study conducted in coronary artery disease patients comparing the PD effects of loading dose (LD) and maintenance dose regimens of prasugrel vs ticagrelor according to DM status. A total of 110 patients were enrolled: 42 (38%) with DM and 68 (62%) without DM. All patients were on maintenance dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. PD assessments were performed using whole blood vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP), with results quantified by the platelet reactivity index (PRI), VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) with results reported as P2Y12 reaction units (PRU), and light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) following 20 and 5 µM adenosine diphosphate stimuli with results reported as maximum platelet aggregation (MPA). PD assessments were performed at baseline (while on clopidogrel), 30 min after LD, 2 h after LD, and 1 week after LD. Overall, platelet reactivity was higher in DM than in non-DM patients while on clopidogrel therapy. After switching to either prasugrel or ticagrelor, platelet reactivity dropped but remained significantly higher among patients with DM at 30 min with all tests (VN-PRU p < 0.01, MPA 20 µM p < 0.01, VASP-PRI p = 0.02) and at 2 h with VN-PRU (p < 0.01) and LTA-MPA 20 µM (p < 0.01) but not with VASP-PRI (p = 0.19). There were no significant differences between prasugrel and ticagrelor both among patients with or without DM, except for lower LTA-MPA 20 at 30 min (p < 0.01) among non-DM patients treated with prasugrel. Patients with DM treated with clopidogrel have higher platelet reactivity compared to patients without DM. Although platelet reactivity markedly reduces to a similar extent after switching to prasugrel or ticagrelor, patients with DM persist with increased platelet reactivity compared to patients without DM.Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01852175.

Precision medicine in interventional cardiology: implications for antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Precision medicine is a medical model that proposes the customization of medical treatments to the individual patient, as opposed to a one-drug-fits-all model. Such a "personalized medicine" approach has been widely adopted in several medical fields, such as cancer medicine, but the implementation of precision medicine in cardiovascular medicine has not been similarly straightforward. Because pharmacogenomics plays an important role in the safety and efficacy of cardiovascular drug therapy, there has been a great interest in the use of tools aiming at personalizing antiplatelet therapy. Moreover, antiplatelet therapy is essential for the treatment of cardiovascular patients to reduce the risk of thrombotic complications, particularly those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, but it is inevitably associated with increased bleeding risk. In this review, the authors discuss the rationale, summarize the evidence and discuss the current and future directions for the personalization of antiplatelet treatment regimens in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

For 20 years, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of the combination of aspirin and a platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, has been the gold standard of antithrombotic pharmacology after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the past 5 years, several investigations have challenged this paradigm by testing the efficacy and safety of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (that is, without aspirin) following a short course of DAPT. Collectively, these studies suggested a reduction in the risk of major bleeding and no significant increase in thrombotic or ischaemic events compared with guideline-recommended DAPT. Current recommendations are evolving to inform clinical practice on the ideal candidates for P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after PCI. Generalizing the results of studies of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy requires a thorough understanding of their design, populations, interventions, comparators and results. In this Review, we provide an up-to-date overview on the use of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after PCI, including supporting pharmacodynamic and clinical evidence, practical recommendations and future directions.

Platelet P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in adjunct to vascular dose of rivaroxaban or aspirin: a pharmacodynamic study of dual pathway inhibition vs. dual antiplatelet therapy.

AIMS: Dual pathway inhibition (DPI) by adding a vascular dose of rivaroxaban to a single antiplatelet agent has emerged as a promising antithrombotic strategy. However, in most studies the antiplatelet agent of choice used in adjunct to a vascular dose of rivaroxaban was aspirin, and data on a P2Y12 inhibitor and how this DPI regimen compares with standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: This investigation was a substudy analysis conducted in selected cohorts of patients with stable atherosclerotic disease enrolled from a larger prospective, open-label, parallel-group pharmacodynamic (PD) study. We analysed data from 40 patients treated with either clopidogrel- or ticagrelor-based DAPT first, and clopidogrel- or ticagrelor-based DPI thereafter. PD measures explored key pathways involved in thrombus formation and included markers of (1) P2Y12 reactivity, (2) platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, (3) cyclooxygenase-1 activity, (4) thrombin receptor-activating peptide (TRAP)-induced platelet aggregation, (5) tissue factor (TF)-induced platelet aggregation, and (6) thrombin generation. Compared with DAPT, on a background of the same P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or ticagrelor), DPI was associated with reduced thrombin generation, increased markers of cyclooxygenase-1 activity and TRAP-induced platelet aggregation, and no differences in markers of P2Y12 signalling, platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, and TF-induced platelet aggregation. In an analysis according to P2Y12 inhibitor type, ticagrelor reduced markers of platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, P2Y12 signalling, and rates of high platelet reactivity compared with clopidogrel. CONCLUSION: Compared with DAPT with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor, the use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in adjunct to a vascular dose of rivaroxaban as part of a DPI strategy is associated with similar effects on platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity but reduced thrombin generation. A DPI strategy with ticagrelor is associated with enhanced antithrombotic efficacy, the clinical implications of which warrant larger scale investigations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03718429.

Pharmacodynamic Profiles of Dual-Pathway Inhibition with or without Clopidogrel versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients with Atherosclerotic Disease.

AIM: Inhibition of thrombin-mediated signaling processes using a vascular dose of rivaroxaban in adjunct to antiplatelet therapy, known as dual-pathway inhibition (DPI), reduces atherothrombotic events in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease. However, there are limited data on the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of this strategy and how it compares to standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). METHODS AND RESULTS: This investigation was conducted in selected cohorts of patients (n = 40) with stable atherosclerotic disease-enrolled within a larger prospective, open-label, parallel-group PD study-who were treated with either aspirin plus clopidogrel (DAPT), aspirin plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid (DPI), or DAPT plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid. Multiple PD assays providing a comprehensive assessment of markers of thrombosis were used. PD endpoints included platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity measured by light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) following stimuli with CATF (collagen-related peptide + adenosine diphosphate [ADP] + tissue factor [TF]), markers of P2Y12 reactivity, markers of platelet aggregation using LTA following several stimuli (arachidonic acid, ADP, collagen, TF, and thrombin receptor-activating peptide [TRAP]), thrombin generation, and thrombus formation. There was no difference in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity between groups. Rivaroxaban significantly reduced thrombin generation and was associated with a trend toward reduced TF-induced platelet aggregation. Clopidogrel-based treatments reduced markers of P2Y12 signaling and TRAP-induced platelet aggregation. There were no differences between groups on markers of cyclooxygenase-1-mediated activity. CONCLUSION: Compared with DAPT, DPI does not result in any differences in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, but reduces thrombin generation. These PD observations suggest that modulating thrombin generation-by means of factor Xa inhibition-in adjunct to antiplatelet therapy provides effective antithrombotic effects, supporting the efficacy and safety findings of a DPI strategy observed in clinical trials.

Comparative effects of guided vs. potent P2Y12 inhibitor therapy in acute coronary syndrome: a network meta-analysis of 61 898 patients from 15 randomized trials.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend the use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel for the reduction of ischaemic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, this comes at the expense of increased bleeding. A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy has the potential to overcome this limitation. We aimed at evaluating the comparative safety and efficacy of guided vs. routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different oral P2Y12 inhibitors currently recommended for the treatment of patients with ACS (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor). RCTs including a guided approach (i.e. platelet function or genetic testing) vs. standard selection of P2Y12 inhibitors among patients with ACS were also included. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. P-scores were used to estimate hierarchies of efficacy and safety. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint was all bleeding. A total of 61 898 patients from 15 RCTs were included. Clopidogrel was used as reference treatment. A guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced MACE (IRR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.98) without any significant trade-off in all bleeding (IRR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.96-1.55). A guided approach and prasugrel were associated with reduced myocardial infarction. A guided approach, prasugrel, and ticagrelor were associated with reduced stent thrombosis. Ticagrelor was also associated with reduced total and cardiovascular mortality. Prasugrel was associated with increased major bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with increased minor bleeding. The incidence of stroke did not differ between treatments. CONCLUSION: In patients with an ACS, compared with routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy (prasugrel or ticagrelor), a guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy is associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided approach for the selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021258603). KEY QUESTION: A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy using platelet function or genetic testing improves outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Nevertheless, the comparative safety and efficacy of a guided versus routine selection of potent P2Y12-inhibiting therapy in acute coronary syndrome has not been explored. KEY FINDING: In a comprehensive network meta-analysis including the totality of available evidence and using clopidogrel as treatment reference, a guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events without any significant trade-off in bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor increased bleeding and only ticagrelor reduced mortality. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: A guided selection of P2Y12-inhibiting therapy represents the strategy associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Genetic testing in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: rationale, evidence and practical recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Clopidogrel is the most frequently utilized P2Y12 inhibitor and is characterized by broad interindividual response variability resulting in impaired platelet inhibition and increased risk of thrombotic complications in a considerable number of patients. The potent P2Y12 inhibitors, prasugrel and ticagrelor, can overcome this limitation but at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding. Genetic variations of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2 C19 enzyme, a key determinant in clopidogrel metabolism, have been strongly associated with clopidogrel response profiles prompting investigations of genetic-guided selection of antiplatelet therapy. AREAS COVERED: The present manuscript focuses on the rationale for the use of genetic testing to guide the selection of platelet P2Y12 inhibitors among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Moreover, a comprehensive appraisal of the available evidence and practical recommendations is provided. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Implementation of genetic testing as a strategy to guide the selection of therapy can result in escalation (i.e. switching to prasugrel or ticagrelor) or de-escalation (i.e. switching to clopidogrel) of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy. Most recent investigations support the clinical benefit of a genetic guided selection of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergo PCI. Integrating the results of genetic testing with clinical and procedural variables represents a promising strategy for a precision medicine approach for the selection of antiplatelet therapy among patients undergoing PCI.

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 Registration http://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT04492423, registered July 2020 retrospectively registered.

Pharmacodynamic Effects of Vorapaxar in Prior Myocardial Infarction Patients Treated With Potent Oral P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitors With and Without Aspirin: Results of the VORA-PRATIC Study.

Background Vorapaxar as an adjunct to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduces thrombotic events in patients with prior myocardial infarction at the expense of increased bleeding. Withdrawal of aspirin has emerged as a bleeding reduction strategy. The pharmacodynamic effects of vorapaxar with potent P2Y12 inhibitors as well as the impact of dropping aspirin is unexplored and represented the aim of the VORA-PRATIC (Vorapaxar Therapy in Patients With Prior Myocardial Infarction Treated With Newer Generation P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitors Prasugrel and Ticagrelor) study. Methods and Results Post-myocardial infarction patients (n=130) on standard DAPT (aspirin+prasugrel or ticagrelor) were randomized to 1 of 3 arms: (1) triple therapy: aspirin+prasugrel/ticagrelor+vorapaxar; (2) dual therapy (drop aspirin): prasugrel/ticagrelor+vorapaxar; (3) DAPT: aspirin+prasugrel/ticagrelor. Pharmacodynamic assessments were performed at 3 time points (baseline and 7 and 30 days). Vorapaxar reduced CAT (collagen-ADP-TRAP)-induced platelet aggregation, a marker of platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity (triple therapy versus DAPT at 30 days: mean difference=-27; 95% CI,-35 to -19; P<0.001; primary end point). This effect was attenuated but still significant in the absence of aspirin (dual therapy versus DAPT at 30 days: mean difference=-15; 95% CI,-23 to -7; P<0.001; between-group comparisons, P<0.05). Vorapaxar abolished TRAP-induced aggregation (P<0.001), without affecting thrombin generation and clot strength. There were no differences in markers of P2Y12 reactivity. Markers sensitive to aspirin-induced effects increased (P<0.001) in the dual-therapy arm. Conclusions In post-myocardial infarction patients treated with potent P2Y12 inhibitors, vorapaxar reduces platelet-driven global thrombogenicity, an effect that persisted, albeit attenuated, in the absence of aspirin and without affecting markers of P2Y12 reactivity or clot kinetics. The clinical implications of these PD observations warrant future investigation. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02545933.

Platelet Inhibition With Cangrelor and Crushed Ticagrelor in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: The platelet inhibitory effects induced by oral P2Y12 receptor antagonists are delayed in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI). In turn, this leads to a gap in platelet inhibition, exposing patients to an increased risk of early thrombotic complications and underscoring the need to define strategies associated with more effective platelet inhibition in the peri-primary percutaneous coronary intervention period. Cangrelor is an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor with prompt and potent antiplatelet effects. However, to date, there are limited data on the effects of cangrelor used in combination with ticagrelor in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Moreover, questions have emerged on the potential for drug-drug interactions during the transition from cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibitors. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pharmacodynamic study conducted in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (n=50) who were randomized to treatment with either cangrelor or matching placebo (bolus followed by 2-hour infusion). All patients received ticagrelor 180-mg loading dose administered as crushed tablets at the time of cangrelor/placebo bolus administration. Pharmacodynamic analyses were performed at 8 time points. Pharmacodynamic effects were measured as P2Y12 reaction units by VerifyNow and platelet reactivity index by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, cangrelor was associated with reduced P2Y12 reaction units as early as 5 minutes after bolus, which persisted during the entire duration of drug infusion, including at 30 minutes (63 [32-93] versus 214 [183-245]; mean difference, 152 [95% CI, 108-195]; P<0·001; primary end point). Parallel findings were shown with platelet reactivity index. Accordingly, high on-treatment platelet reactivity rates were reduced with cangrelor. After discontinuation of cangrelor/placebo infusion, there were no differences in levels of platelet reactivity between groups, ruling out a drug-drug interaction when cangrelor and ticagrelor are concomitantly administered. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, cangrelor is an effective strategy to bridge the gap in platelet inhibition associated with the use of oral P2Y12 inhibition induced by ticagrelor. Ticagrelor can be administered as a crushed formulation concomitantly with cangrelor without any apparent drug-drug interaction. The clinical implications of these pharmacodynamic findings warrant investigation in an adequately powered clinical trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03247738.

Pharmacodynamic Effects of Vorapaxar in Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus: Results of the OPTIMUS-5 Study.

Vorapaxar reduces thrombotic cardiovascular events at the expense of increased bleeding. However, the differential pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of vorapaxar according to diabetes mellitus (DM) status are unknown. Moreover, although withdrawal of aspirin has emerged as a bleeding reduction strategy, the PD effects of stopping aspirin in patients treated with vorapaxar also are unknown. In this prospective PD investigation, vorapaxar was associated with reduced platelet-mediated thrombogenicity without affecting clot kinetics irrespective of DM status. However, platelet-mediated thrombogenicity increased after aspirin withdrawal, particularly among patients with DM. (Optimizing anti-Platelet Therapy In diabetes MellitUS-5 Study [OPTIMUS-5]; NCT02548650).