Evidence of platelet sensitization to ADP following discontinuation of clopidogrel therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

Epidemiological studies have linked clopidogrel discontinuation with an increased incidence of ischemic events. This has led to the hypothesis that clopidogrel discontinuation may result in a pharmacological rebound. We evaluated the impact of clopidogrel discontinuation on platelet function. Platelet aggregation was measured by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in response to adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2.5, 5 and 10 µM and by VerifyNow® P2Y12, in 37 clinically stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients scheduled to discontinue clopidogrel treatment, and 37 clinically stable CAD patients not taking clopidogrel. Platelet function was assessed the day before clopidogrel cessation and 1, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days after. Clopidogrel had been initiated a median of 555 days (ranging from 200 to 2280 days) before the treating cardiologist recommended its discontinuation. All participants were taking aspirin, most commonly 80 mg daily although a minority was prescribed 325 mg daily. Following clopidogrel discontinuation, VerifyNow® P2Y12 did not detect any rebound platelet activity, but ADP-induced LTA showed platelet sensitization to ADP, particularly at low ADP levels. Increased platelet activity was detectable seven days after clopidogrel cessation and remained higher than in controls 28 days after discontinuation. No clinical event occurred in any of the participants during the 28 days following clopidogrel cessation. In conclusion, platelet sensitization to ADP as a consequence of chronic clopidogrel administration may partially explain the recrudescence of ischemic events following clopidogrel discontinuation in otherwise stable coronary artery patients.

Genetic determinants of response to aspirin: appraisal of 4 candidate genes.

INTRODUCTION: Intersubject variability in platelet response to aspirin could be related to genetic factors that regulate platelet enzymes or receptors. This study evaluates the impact of the selected polymorphisms in the COX-1 gene, the CYP5A1 gene, the P2RY1 receptor gene, and the GPIIbIIIa receptor gene on platelet response to aspirin and risk of suffering from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 192 Caucasian patients with stable coronary artery disease treated with daily aspirin were recruited and followed for 3 years. Platelet aggregation was measured by light transmission aggregometry with arachidonic acid (1.6 mM) and adenosine diphosphate (5, 10 or 20 µM) used as agonists. Genotyping was performed by standard PCR methods. RESULTS: Arachidonic acid-induced platelet aggregation was unaffected by the COX-1 22C/T and by the Pl(A1/A2) polymorphisms. However, carriers of the 1622 G/G genotype of the P2RY1 gene had significantly higher levels of arachidonic acid-induced platelet aggregation compared with non-carriers (AA 2.0%, AG 2.0% vs. GG 9.0%, p=0.047). Carrying the 1622 G/G genotype increased the risk of inadequate platelet response to aspirin, defined as arachidonic acid-induced aggregation ≥ 20%, by a factor of 8.5 (1.4 - 53.3, p=0.022) and the risk of 3-year MACCE by a factor of 7 (1.4 - 34.7, p=0.017). CONCLUSION: The 1622A/G mutation of the P2RY1 gene could contribute to inadequate platelet response to aspirin and is associated with an increased risk of suffering from MACCE.

Heterogeneity in platelet cyclooxygenase inhibition by aspirin in coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Platelets, long believed to be incapable of de novo protein synthesis, may retain their ability to form the cyclooxygenase (COX) enzyme once it has been inactivated by aspirin. This may explain the inefficacy of the drug to induce sustained platelet inhibition in certain patients. We evaluated the stability of platelet inhibition following once-daily enteric-coated aspirin administration. METHODS: Platelet responsiveness to aspirin was evaluated in 11 stable coronary artery disease patients on chronic aspirin therapy before and 1, 3, 8, and 24h after observed ingestion of 80-mg enteric-coated aspirin. Inhibition of the COX pathway was measured pharmacologically through plasma thromboxane (Tx) B(2) levels, and functionally by light transmission aggregometry in response to arachidonic acid. COX-independent platelet activity was measured in response to adenosine diphosphate, epinephrine and collagen. RESULTS: Plasma TxB(2) levels showed profound inhibition of TxA(2) formation, which was stable throughout 24h, in all but 1 subject. This subject had optimal response to aspirin (inhibition of platelet TxA(2) production within 1h), but recovered the ability to synthesize TxA(2) within 24h of aspirin ingestion. Arachidonic acid-induced platelet aggregation closely mirrored TxB(2) formation in this patient, portraying a functional ability of the platelet to aggregate within 24h of aspirin ingestion. COX-independent platelet aggregation triggered TxA(2) production to a similar extent in all patients, likely through signal-dependent protein synthesis. CONCLUSIONS: COX-dependent platelet activity is recovered in certain individuals within 24h of aspirin administration. Further research should consider increasing aspirin dosing frequency to twice daily, to allow sustained inhibition in such subjects.

Platelet count, not oxidative stress, may contribute to inadequate platelet inhibition by aspirin.

BACKGROUND: Several patient characteristics have been shown to increase the risk of inadequate platelet inhibition by aspirin, yet underlying mechanisms remain mostly unknown. We explored whether oxidative stress, via isoprostane formation, was associated with inadequate platelet response to aspirin. Additionally, we sought to investigate whether individual pre-selected demographic, hematological or biochemical parameters further increased the risk of inadequate platelet response to aspirin. METHODS: Two hundred consecutive subjects suffering from stable coronary artery disease and under daily aspirin therapy were enrolled in our study. Inadequate platelet response to aspirin was defined as residual platelet aggregation>or=20% per arachidonic acid-induced light transmission aggregometry. Morning urinary samples were used to determine levels of isoprostanes (8-iso-PGF2alpha) using an enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: Eight subjects were deemed to present inadequate platelet response to aspirin. Wide intersubject variability was observed in urinary 8-iso-PGF2alpha levels. However, levels were similar between aspirin responders and non-responders. Patients with inadequate platelet response to aspirin had higher platelet counts and received the lowest daily aspirin dose when compared to responders, suggesting subtherapeutic aspirin therapy due to increased platelet production. Only platelet count remained independently predictive of inadequate platelet response to aspirin in a multiple logistic regression model. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary 8-iso-PGF2alpha levels, a reflection of systemic oxidative stress, did not appear to contribute to impaired platelet responsiveness to aspirin, while increased platelet production may partly explain this phenomenon.

Prevalence of unresponsiveness to aspirin and/or clopidogrel in patients with stable coronary heart disease.

This study sought to assess whether inadequate platelet responses to aspirin and clopidogrel are distinct phenomena caused by different mechanisms or different facets of the same phenomenon (i.e., general platelet hyperactivity). A total of 85 patients with stable coronary artery disease who were taking aspirin and clopidogrel daily for > or =3 months were enrolled in the present study. Platelet aggregation was measured by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) stimulated with 1.6 mM of arachidonic acid and 5, 10 and 20 microM of adenosine diphosphate, and by the VerifyNow Aspirin and VerifyNow P2Y12 point-of-care assays. An inadequate platelet response was defined as aggregation greater than or equal to the mean + 2 SDs. The prevalence of an inadequate platelet response varied greatly among the assays. For aspirin, the prevalence was 2.4% using arachidonic acid-induced LTA and 5.9% using the VerifyNow Aspirin assay. For clopidogrel, the prevalence varied from 1.2% to 3.9% using adenosine diphosphate-induced LTA and was 2.4% using the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. The point-of-care assays did not select the same patients as LTA. No subject was unresponsive to both aspirin and clopidogrel, regardless of the assay used, suggesting that separate mechanisms govern platelet unresponsiveness to aspirin and clopidogrel. In conclusion, an inadequate platelet response to either aspirin or clopidogrel is rare, and the definition is dependent on the platelet function assay used. Because no subject was found to be unresponsive to both agents, the unresponsiveness is suspected to occur through distinct mechanisms of platelet activation.

Week-long high-maintenance dose clopidogrel regimen achieves better platelet aggregation inhibition than a standard loading dose before percutaneous coronary intervention: results of a double-blind, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Adequate platelet inhibition before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces periprocedural and long-term ischemic complications. Reduced response to clopidogrel has been associated with subsequent major adverse cardiovascular events. Strategies to optimize platelet inhibition pre-PCI are under investigation. This study evaluated the effect on platelet aggregation of four different dosing regimens of clopidogrel given before elective PCI in a randomized, prospective, double-blind, and placebo-controlled design. METHODS: One hundred twenty participants were randomized to one of four groups of clopidogrel: (a) 300 mg on the day prior to angiography; (b) 600 mg on the day prior to angiography; (c) 300 mg followed by 75 mg daily started 1 week prior to angiography; and (d) 300 mg followed by 150 mg daily started 1 week prior to angiography. Platelet aggregation was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) after stimulation with adenosine diphosphate 20 microM at baseline and at the time of diagnostic coronary angiography. The absolute change in platelet aggregation between these two time points was considered the main outcome measure. RESULTS: At the time of diagnostic coronary angiography, the 300-mg/150-mg daily regimen achieved the greatest decrease in platelet aggregation (37 +/- 19%), while the 300 mg regimen provided the smallest (20 +/- 22%), an absolute difference between the two groups of 17.2 +/- 5.1% (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: A 300-mg loading dose of clopidogrel followed by 150 mg daily for 1 week prior to coronary angiography provides more effective platelet inhibition, as defined by LTA, compared to the standard 300-mg loading dose regimen at the time of coronary intervention.

Insights into the interpretation of light transmission aggregometry for evaluation of platelet aggregation inhibition by clopidogrel.

INTRODUCTION: When studying the efficacy of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregation by light transmission aggregometry, technical decisions must be taken prior to assessment or during analysis, including, but not limited to, concentration of agonist to use and timing of the evaluation of the response on the aggregation curve obtained (peak ADP-stimulated platelet aggregation vs. late aggregation). We investigated how some of these technical modalities affected the results of platelet aggregation obtained after clopidogrel administration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and twenty stable coronary artery disease patients requiring a diagnostic angiography were recruited prior to pre-treatment with clopidogrel. Blood samples were tested before clopidogrel initiation and immediately preceding coronary angiography using light transmission aggregometry with either 5 or 20 microM of ADP. Aggregation was measured at maximal amplitude (peak), and 5 minutes after agonist addition (late). RESULTS: While measurements of platelet aggregation as either peak or late aggregation were strongly correlated, peak platelet aggregation was significantly higher than late aggregation, by 10.8% and by 10.3% with ADP 5 and 20 microM, respectively. Moreover, the use of ADP 20 microM resulted in less spontaneous disaggregation than 5 microM in the absence of clopidogrel (11.8% and 4.8% with ADP 5 microM and 20 microM, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: When assessing platelet aggregation following clopidogrel, measurement of late aggregation after addition of ADP 20 microM should be preferred. Large clinical trials should be conducted to assess which parameter between residual aggregation or inhibition of platelet aggregation by clopidogrel best predicts clinical efficacy of the drug.

Evaluation of the platelet count drop method for assessment of platelet function in comparison with "gold standard" light transmission aggregometry.

INTRODUCTION: Hyporesponsiveness to antiplatelet agents has been linked to an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. However, light transmission aggregometry (LTA), the gold standard methodology for assessing platelet function, requires expertise and is labour-intensive, which render its use in clinical settings impractical. We assessed whether platelet count drop (PCD), a technique widely available in any haematology laboratory, could replace LTA in testing for inhibition of platelet aggregation induced by antiplatelet agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty-one coronary artery disease patients taking aspirin alone and 91 patients taking a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel were enrolled. Platelet aggregation was measured by LTA and PCD stimulated with 1.6 mM of arachidonic acid (AA) for aspirin and 5 and 20 microM of adenosine diphosphate (ADP) for clopidogrel. RESULTS: Correlation between AA-induced LTA and PCD was nonexistent (r=-0.043, p=0.587), while correlation between ADP-induced LTA and PCD was low (r=0.374, p<0.0001 for ADP 5 microM and r=0.402, p<0001 for ADP 20 microM ). PCD, whether stimulated with AA or ADP, overestimated platelet aggregation as assessed by LTA, by 13-18%. The wide 95% limits of agreement suggest that the assays can disagree significantly in individual patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although the PCD method is widely available in non-specialized laboratories, our results demonstrate that there is poor correlation with the current gold standard, i.e. LTA. Thus, PCD should not be used in replacement of LTA to assess antiplatelet responsiveness.

Comparison of four tests to assess inhibition of platelet function by clopidogrel in stable coronary artery disease patients.

AIMS: We investigated the comparability of platelet function tests in quantifying platelet inhibition achieved by clopidogrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: This pre-specified substudy of a randomized, double-blind trial included 116 patients with stable coronary artery disease requiring diagnostic angiography. Patients received clopidogrel for 1 (300 or 600 mg) or 7 days (300 + 75 or 150 mg daily) before the procedure. Blood samples obtained before clopidogrel initiation and before diagnostic coronary angiography were assayed using light transmission aggregometry [adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 5 and 20 microM as the agonist], whole-blood aggregometry (ADP 5 and 20 microM), PFA-100 (Collagen-ADP cartridge), and VerifyNow P2Y12. Although all assays studied were found sensitive to clopidogrel ingestion, none could distinguish categorically between patients who had, or not, ingested clopidogrel. Agreement between assays to identify patients with insufficient inhibition of platelet aggregation by clopidogrel was low. CONCLUSION: The assessment of platelet function inhibition by clopidogrel is highly test-specific. Decision to increase clopidogrel dosage may vary on the basis of the assay used, thus highlighting the need for unambiguous guidelines with respect to assay selection, as platelet function assays are not interchangeable. At present, platelet function testing evaluating clopidogrel efficacy cannot be recommended in routine clinical practice.

A comparison of six major platelet function tests to determine the prevalence of aspirin resistance in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

AIMS: We sought to compare the results obtained from six major platelet function tests in the assessment of the prevalence of aspirin resistance in patients with stable coronary artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: 201 patients with stable coronary artery disease receiving daily aspirin therapy (> or =80 mg) were recruited. Platelet aggregation was measured by: (i) light transmission aggregometry (LTA) after stimulation with 1.6 mM of arachidonic acid (AA), (ii) LTA after adenosine diphosphate (ADP) (5, 10, and 20 microM) stimulation, (iii) whole blood aggregometry, (iv) PFA-100, (v) VerifyNow Aspirin; urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B(2) concentrations were also measured. Eight patients (4%, 95% CI 0.01-0.07) were deemed resistant to aspirin by LTA and AA. The prevalence of aspirin resistance varied according to the assay used: 10.3-51.7% for LTA using ADP as the agonist, 18.0% for whole blood aggregometry, 59.5% for PFA-100, 6.7% for VerifyNow Aspirin, and finally, 22.9% by measuring urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B(2) concentrations. Results from these tests showed poor correlation and agreement between themselves. CONCLUSION: Platelet function tests are not equally effective in measuring aspirin's antiplatelet effect and correlate poorly amongst themselves. The clinical usefulness of the different assays to classify correctly patients as aspirin resistant remains undetermined.

Aspirin resistance: truth or dare.

Acetylsalicylic acid, or aspirin (ASA), is widely used in patients with cardiovascular disease to prevent acute ischemic events. However, platelet response to ASA is not equal in all individuals, and a high variability in the prevalence of ASA resistance is reported in the literature (0.4-83%). Actually, ASA resistance is poorly understood; this stems from the fact that its definition is unclear, its presence can be evaluated by a number of assays that are not equivalent, and its prevalence may vary widely based on the population studied. This article (1) exposes the difficulties in defining ASA resistance; (2) discusses the mechanisms by which ASA resistance may occur; (3) presents the characteristics that may put patients at greater risk of exhibiting ASA resistance; and (4) discusses the clinical impact of ASA resistance in patients requiring chronic therapy.

Sirolimus-eluting stents at two years: a pooled analysis of SIRIUS, E-SIRIUS, and C-SIRIUS with emphasis on late revascularizations and stent thromboses.

Prospective follow-up at 2 years was obtained for 98.7% of the pooled 1,510 patients enrolled in SIRIUS, E-SIRIUS and C-SIRIUS, 3 randomized controlled trials that compared sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) with bare metal stents (BMSs) to treat long stenoses in small coronary arteries. By 720 days, clinically driven target lesion revascularizations were performed in 5.7% of patients with SESs versus 22.6% of patients with BMSs (risk ratio 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.35, p <0.001). Of these, late target lesion revascularization (from 271 to 720 days) was performed in 12 patients who received SESs (1.6%) compared with 37 patients with BMSs (4.9%) (risk ratio 0.32, 0.17 to 0.61, p <0.001). Stent thromboses occurred in 7 of 758 patients with SESs (0.9%, 4 subacute, 3 late) and 5 of 752 patients with BMSs (0.7%, 1 subacute, 4 late) (risk ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 4.36, p = 0.774). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from major cardiac adverse events was 89.3% for patients with SESs versus 73.4% for patients with BMSs (p <0.001). This analysis demonstrates the sustained efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents at 2 years, characterized by a persistent significant benefit in freedom from repeat revascularization compared with BMSs and a low risk of late stent thrombosis, not different from BMSs.

Inhibition of streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated platelet aggregation with tirofiban after exposure to streptokinase or streptococcal infection.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of tirofiban (a glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitor) in preventing streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated platelet aggregation after administration of streptokinase or development of a streptococcal infection. DESIGN: Prospective analysis. SETTING: Research center of a Canadian hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-five healthy volunteers, 45 patients who had received streptokinase within the past 3 years, and 13 patients who had a severe streptococcal infection also within the past 3 years. INTERVENTION: Blood samples were drawn to measure the extent of inhibition of streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated platelet activation and aggregation by tirofiban. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Platelet aggregation was measured by using a turbidimetric method. The extent of inhibition by tirofiban was measured by incubating tirofiban for 2 minutes before adding streptokinase 5000 U/ml. Also, tirofiban was added 2 minutes before adding adenosine 5'-diphosphate (ADP) 2 microM/L into the last tube as a comparison. Strepto-kinase-induced, antibody-mediated platelet aggregation was observed in 10 (22%) of the 45 patients treated with streptokinase, in 3 (23%) of the 13 patients with streptococcal infection, and in none of the 45 healthy volunteers. Tirofiban inhibited streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated platelet aggregation by 89 +/- 14% (p<0.001). Similarly, ADP-induced platelet aggregation was inhibited by 92 +/- 6% (p<0.001) with tirofiban. CONCLUSION: Streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated platelet aggregation occurred in 13 (22%) of 58 patients who received streptokinase or were exposed to a streptococcal infection in the past 3 years. Such patients may not benefit from streptokinase therapy. In these patients, tirofiban significantly decreased the extent of antistreptokinase antibody-mediated platelet aggregation. Hence, patients undergoing streptokinase therapy may benefit from tirofiban as adjunctive therapy.

Effects of high ticlopidine doses on platelet function in acute coronary syndrome patients.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether higher doses of ticlopidine combined with acetylsalicylic acid would allow a faster inhibition of platelet activation and aggregation in patients with acute coronary syndromes potentially undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent placement. METHODS: Seventeen patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes and candidates for possible percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to ticlopidine 250 mg or 500 mg twice daily for 5 days. Platelet aggregation and activation were assessed at baseline before the first dose and daily for 5 days. RESULTS: After 2 days of treatment, 500 mg twice daily of ticlopidine produced a significantly larger reduction in platelet activation and aggregation than 250 mg twice daily. Mean platelet activation was 17.6 +/- 3.3% lower with 500 mg twice daily from days 3 to 6 (P < or = 0.05). Mean platelet aggregation was 16.9 +/- 0.6% lower in patients treated with the higher dose on days 3 through 6 when compared with those on ticlopidine 250 mg twice daily (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A faster and stronger inhibition of platelet activation and aggregation is obtained when 500 mg twice daily of ticlopidine is administered daily in combination with acetylsalicylic acid in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

Platelet activity and antibody titers after exposure to streptokinase or streptococcal infection.

INTRODUCTION: Streptokinase use, in acute myocardial infarction, is hindered by failure to reperfuse (60%) and early reocclusion (16%). This phenomenon may, among other causes, be due to systemic inactivation of streptokinase, as well as streptokinase-induced platelet aggregation and clot propagation from antibodies to streptokinase produced after streptokinase administration or streptococcal infections. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated, platelet activation and aggregation after administration of SK or development of a streptococcal infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 45 normal volunteers (Control group), as well as 45 patients who had received streptokinase (Streptokinase group) and 13 who had suffered a severe streptococcal infection (Streptococcal infection group) within the past 3 years. Extent of streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated, platelet activation and aggregation, as well as anti-streptokinase antibody and streptokinase resistance titers (lowest streptokinase concentration to cause clot lysis within 10 min) were measured. RESULTS: Whereas streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated, platelet activation was observed in 49% of streptokinase patients and in only 17% and 15% of streptococcal infection patients and normal volunteers (p<0.05 Streptokinase vs. Control and Streptokinase vs. Streptococcal infection), streptokinase-induced platelet aggregation was observed in 23% of streptokinase patients and streptococcal infection patients, and in none of the control patients (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Streptokinase-induced, antibody-mediated, platelet activation and aggregation occur in patients with high titers of anti-streptokinase antibody and may play a role in failure of streptokinase therapy. Streptococcal infection patients behave like streptokinase patients in terms of the reactivity of their platelets to subsequent streptokinase dose in vitro.

Potential anaphylactic shock with abciximab readministration.

A 46-year-old woman developed an anaphylactic reaction during percutaneous coronary intervention after she was pretreated with prednisone and diphenhydramine for a known allergy to iodine. She developed pruritus, edema, and nausea, which were followed by bradycardia and shock, minutes after administration of a bolus and standard-dose infusion of abciximab. The reaction was treated successfully with epinephrine, methoxamine, hydrocortisone, atropine, furosemide, sodium bicarbonate, diphenhydramine, and ranitidine.