Early assessment of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects following acetylsalicylic acid loading: toward a definition for acute therapeutic response.

Despite decades of investigations, the optimal assessment of the "therapeutic response" to early after loading dose of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) remains unclear. Limited information is available on the relation between pharmacodynamic (PD) and pharmacokinetic (PK) measurements assessed immediately after ASA administration. Serial PD and PK analyses were performed immediately after a single 162 or 650 mg dose of chewed and swallowed ASA in ten healthy adults. ASA response was defined as > 95% inhibition of serum thromboxane (Tx)B2, < 550 aspirin reaction units (ARU) by VerifyNow Aspirin (VN) test, and ≤ 20% arachidonic acid (AA)-induced platelet aggregation (PA). Correlation analyses between PK and PD measurements and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed. ASA response measured by VN test and AA-induced PA was achieved within 30 min of ASA administration. A correlation was observed between ARU and AA-induced maximum PA (r = 0.69, p < 0.001), serum TxB2 (r = 0.74 and p < 0.001), and serum TxB2 inhibition (r = 0.79, p < 0.001). In ROC curve analyses, ≤ 558 ARU and ≤ 7% AA-induced PA were associated with > 95% inhibition of TxB2. 686 ng/ml plasma ASA cut-off point was associated with > 95% inhibition of serum TxB2, ≤ 7% 1 mM AA-induced PA, and ≤ 585 ARU. A modest ~ 50% inhibition of TxB2 inhibition was associated with marked inhibition of 1 mM AA-induced platelet aggregation by LTA. Our analyses demonstrated important relationships between pharmacodynamic, and pharmacokinetic parameters measured immediately following oral ASA and cutoff values for ARU and AA-induced PA that is associated with > 95% inhibition of serum TxB2.

Serial assessment of thrombogenicity and hemodynamics in patients with type II diabetes in a clinical research unit: Evidence for circadian variations in clot formation.

BACKGROUND: Circadian fluctuations in thrombogenicity and hemostasis play a role in acute cardiovascular thrombotic events occurring in the early morning hours. There is a lack of data assessing thrombogenicity, platelet function, and hemodynamics to investigate diurnal variations in a high cardiovascular risk population. METHODS: This was an exploratory, single-center study conducted in aspirin-treated patients with Type II Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) (n = 37) with documented vascular disease and/or multiple cardiovascular risk factors. Hemodynamic monitoring and blood sample collection for thromboelastography (TEG) and platelet function testing were done serially at 7-9 AM (morning), 7-9 PM (evening), 11 PM-1 AM (night), and at 5-7 AM (awakening). RESULTS: R-value measured by TEG was shorter during awakening hours than during the night and day hours (p < 0.05). There were no changes in platelet reactivity in response to arachidonic acid, adenosine diphosphate, and collagen between time points. Pulse pressure (PP) was highest during awakening hours (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Study findings provide a mechanistic explanation for increased thrombotic events observed in the early waking hours among diabetics with multiple cardiovascular risk factors. The role of chronotherapy in reducing coagulability and PP to improve clinical outcomes should be explored.

Incidence of dyspnea and assessment of cardiac and pulmonary function in patients with stable coronary artery disease receiving ticagrelor, clopidogrel, or placebo in the ONSET/OFFSET study.

OBJECTIVES: We prospectively assessed cardiac and pulmonary function in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) treated with ticagrelor, clopidogrel, or placebo in the ONSET/OFFSET (A Multi-Centre Randomised, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Parallel Group Study of the Onset and Offset of Antiplatelet Effects of AZD6140 Compared With Clopidogrel and Placebo With Aspirin as Background Therapy in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease) study. BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor reduces cardiovascular events more effectively than clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Dyspnea develops in some patients treated with ticagrelor, and it is not known whether this is associated with changes in cardiac or pulmonary function. METHODS: In all, 123 stable aspirin-treated CAD patients randomly received either ticagrelor (180 mg load, then 90 mg twice daily; n=57), clopidogrel (600 mg load, then 75 mg daily; n=54), or placebo (n=12) for 6 weeks in a double-blind, double-dummy design. Electrocardiography, echocardiography, serum N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and pulmonary function tests were performed before (baseline) and 6 weeks after drug administration and/or after development of dyspnea. RESULTS: After drug administration, dyspnea was reported by 38.6%, 9.3%, and 8.3% of patients in the ticagrelor, clopidogrel, and placebo groups, respectively (p<0.001). Most instances were mild and/or lasted<24 h, although 3 patients discontinued ticagrelor because of dyspnea. Eight of 22 and 17 of 22 ticagrelor-treated patients experiencing dyspnea did so within 24 h and 1 week, respectively, after drug administration. In all treatment groups, and in ticagrelor-treated patients with dyspnea, there were no significant changes between baseline and 6 weeks in any of the cardiac or pulmonary function parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Dyspnea is commonly associated with ticagrelor therapy, but was not associated in this study with any adverse change in cardiac or pulmonary function. (A Multi-Centre Randomised, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Parallel Group Study of the Onset and Offset of Antiplatelet Effects of AZD6140 Compared With Clopidogrel and Placebo With Aspirin as Background Therapy in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease [ONSET/OFFSET]; NCT00528411).

Randomized double-blind assessment of the ONSET and OFFSET of the antiplatelet effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with stable coronary artery disease: the ONSET/OFFSET study.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor is the first reversibly binding oral P2Y(12) receptor antagonist. This is the first study to compare the onset and offset of platelet inhibition (IPA) with ticagrelor using the PLATO (PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes) trial loading dose (180 mg) with a high loading dose (600 mg) of clopidogrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, 123 patients with stable coronary artery disease who were taking aspirin therapy (75 to 100 mg/d) received ticagrelor (180-mg load, 90-mg BID maintenance dose [n=57]), clopidogrel (600-mg load, 75-mg/d maintenance dose [n=54]), or placebo (n=12) for 6 weeks. Greater IPA (20 micromol/L ADP, final extent) occurred with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after loading and at 6 weeks (P<0.0001 for all); by 2 hours after loading, a greater proportion of patients achieved >50% IPA (98% versus 31%, P<0.0001) and >70% IPA (90% versus 16%, P<0.0001) in the ticagrelor group than in the clopidogrel group, respectively. A faster offset occurred with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel (4-to-72-hour slope [% IPA/h] -1.04 versus -0.48, P<0.0001). At 24 hours after the last dose, mean IPA was 58% for ticagrelor versus 52% for clopidogrel (P=NS). IPA for ticagrelor on day 3 after the last dose was comparable to clopidogrel at day 5; IPA on day 5 for ticagrelor was similar to clopidogrel on day 7 and did not differ from placebo (P=NS). CONCLUSIONS: Ticagrelor achieved more rapid and greater platelet inhibition than high-loading-dose clopidogrel; this was sustained during the maintenance phase and was faster in offset after drug discontinuation.

Assessment of clopidogrel responsiveness: measurements of maximum platelet aggregation, final platelet aggregation and their correlation with vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein in resistant patients.

BACKGROUND: Controversy surrounds the optimal platelet aggregation measurement to assess clopidogrel non-responsiveness. The P2Y12 reactivity ratio (PRR) determined by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation levels has been used to indicate the extent of P2Y(12) blockade. OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the prevalence of non-responsiveness measured by maximum (MA) and 6 min aggregation (FA) and correlate these measurements with PRR in patients with non-responsiveness. METHODS: MA and FA were measured in stented patients (n=100) before and after clopidogrel treatment. The PRR was determined in 22 non-responsive patients. Responsiveness was defined as pre-treatment minus post-treatment aggregation; and non-responsiveness was defined as <10% change in platelet aggregation. RESULTS: Responsiveness was greater as determined by FA, p=0.006 (5 microM ADP) and p=0.003 (20 microM ADP)). There was a strong correlation between MA and FA stimulated by 5 microM (r=0.84, p<0.0001) and 20 microM ADP (r=0.90, p<0.001). The prevalence of non-responsiveness rose with agonist concentration but did not differ significantly between methods: 5 microM ADP [22% (MA) vs. 17% (FA), p=0.186] and 20 microM ADP [33% (MA) vs. 29% (FA), p=0.270]. PRR correlated with both MA (r=0.66, p<0.001) and FA (r=0.74, p<0.001) in non-responsive patients indicating incomplete receptor blockade. CONCLUSION: Clopidogrel responsiveness is higher when measured by FA as compared to MA. However, these measurements are equivalent in determining the prevalence of non-responsiveness: FA and MA are affected to the same degree in patients with non-responsiveness. These findings are relevant to ongoing studies assessing platelet inhibition by P2Y(12) inhibitors and support previous studies that employed MA to assess non-responsiveness.