Cost Effectiveness of a CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Strategy in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results from the POPular Genetics Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The POPular Genetics trial demonstrated that a CYP2C19 genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibitor strategy reduced bleeding rates compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel without increasing thrombotic event rates after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVE: In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel. METHODS: A 1-year decision tree based on the POPular Genetics trial in combination with a lifelong Markov model was developed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between a genotype-guided and a standard P2Y12 inhibitor strategy in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a Dutch healthcare system perspective. Within-trial survival and utility data were combined with lifetime projections to evaluate lifetime cost effectiveness for a cohort of 1000 patients. Costs and utilities were discounted at 4 and 1.5%, respectively, according to Dutch guidelines for health economic studies. Besides deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, several scenario analyses were also conducted (different time horizons, different discount rates, equal prices for P2Y12 inhibitors, and equal distribution of thrombotic events between the two strategies). RESULTS: Base-case analysis with a hypothetical cohort of 1000 subjects demonstrated 8.98 QALYs gained and €725,550.69 in cost savings for the genotype-guided strategy (dominant). The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model and the cost-effectiveness results. In scenario analyses, the genotype-guided strategy remained dominant. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing primary PCI, a CYP2C19 genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel resulted in QALYs gained and cost savings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01761786, Netherlands trial register number: NL2872.

Efficacy and safety of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in addition to P2Y12 inhibitors in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: A subanalysis of the POPular Genetics trial.

BACKGROUND: Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) are still used in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), although discussion about its clinical benefit is ongoing. METHODS: GPI use was analyzed in this subanalysis of the POPular Genetics trial, which randomized STEMI patients to CYP2C19 genotype-guided treatment (clopidogrel or ticagrelor) or standard treatment with ticagrelor/prasugrel. The composite thrombotic endpoint consisted of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, and stroke at 30 days. The combined bleeding endpoint consisted of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) major and minor bleeding at 30 days. Univariable and multivariable analyses in addition to a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis were conducted. RESULTS: In total, 2378 patients, of whom 1033 received GPI and 1345 did not, were included. In multivariable analysis, GPI administration was associated with fewer thrombotic events (hazard ratio [HR] 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.55) and MIs (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.73). Furthermore, GPI administration was associated with an increase in bleedings (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.27-3.19), driven by minor bleedings (HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.43-3.76), without a significant difference in major bleedings (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.19-2.57). In the PSM analysis, no significant association was found. CONCLUSION: In STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, GPI administration was associated with a reduction in thrombotic events at a cost of an increase in (mostly minor) bleedings in multivariable analysis, while propensity score analysis did not show significant associations.

Factor V Leiden Does Not Modify the Phenotype of Acute Coronary Syndrome or the Extent of Myocardial Necrosis.

Background The prothrombotic defect factor V Leiden (FVL) may confer higher risk of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), compared with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome, and may be associated with more myocardial necrosis caused by higher thrombotic burden. Methods and Results Patients without history of cardiovascular disease were selected from 2 clinical trials conducted in patients with acute coronary syndrome. FVL was defined as G-to-A substitution at nucleotide 1691 in the factor V (factor V R506Q) gene. Odds ratios were calculated for the association of FVL with STEMI adjusted for age and sex in the overall population and in the subgroups including sex, age (≥70 versus <70 years), and traditional cardiovascular risk factors. The peak biomarker levels (ie, creatine kinase-myocardial band and high-sensitivity troponin I or T) after STEMI were contrasted between FVL carriers and noncarriers. Because of differences in troponin assays, peak high-sensitivity troponin levels were converted to a ratio scale. The prevalence of FVL mutation was comparable in patients with STEMI (6.0%) and non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (5.8%). The corresponding sex- and age-adjusted odds ratio was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.86-1.30; P=0.59) for the association of FVL with STEMI. Subgroup analysis did not show any differences. In patients with STEMI, neither the median peak creatine kinase-myocardial band nor the peak high-sensitivity troponin ratio showed any differences between wild-type and FVL carriers (P for difference: creatine kinase-myocardial band=0.33; high sensitivity troponin ratio=0.54). Conclusions In a general population with acute coronary syndrome, FVL did not discriminate between a STEMI or non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome presentation and was unrelated to peak cardiac necrosis markers in patients with STEMI. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00391872 and NCT01761786.

Clopidogrel in noncarriers of CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles versus ticagrelor in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome: A pre-specified sub analysis from the POPular Genetics and POPular Age trials CYP2C19 alleles in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who are carrying CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles derive less benefit from clopidogrel treatment. Despite this, in elderly patients, clopidogrel might be preferred over more potent P2Y12 inhibitors due to a lower bleeding risk. Whether CYP2C19 genotype-guided antiplatelet treatment in the elderly could be of benefit has not been studied specifically. METHODS: Patients aged 70 years and older with known CYP2C19*2 and *3 genotype were identified from the POPular Genetics and POPular Age trials. Noncarriers of loss-of-function alleles treated with clopidogrel were compared to patients, irrespective of CYP2C19 genotype, treated with ticagrelor and to clopidogrel treated carriers of loss-of-function alleles. We assessed net clinical benefit (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke and Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) major bleeding), atherothrombotic outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke) and bleeding outcomes (PLATO major and minor bleeding). RESULTS: A total of 991 patients were assessed. There was no significant difference in net clinical benefit (17.2% vs. 15.1%, adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.44), atherothrombotic outcomes (9.7% vs. 9.2%, adjHR 1.00, 95%CI 0.66-1.50), and bleeding outcomes (17.7% vs. 19.8%, adjHR 0.80, 95%CI 0.62-1.12) between clopidogrel in noncarriers of loss-of-function alleles and ticagrelor respectively. CONCLUSION: In ACS patients aged 70 years and older, there was no significant difference in net clinical benefit and atherothrombotic outcomes between noncarriers of a loss-of-function allele treated with clopidogrel and patients treated with ticagrelor. The bleeding rate was numerically; though not statistically significant, lower in patients using clopidogrel.

Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor or Prasugrel After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention According to CYP2C19 Genotype: A POPular Genetics Subanalysis.

[Figure: see text].

Effect of CYP3A4*22 and PPAR-α Genetic Variants on Platelet Reactivity in Patients Treated with Clopidogrel and Lipid-Lowering Drugs Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

This study aims to determine whether genetic variants that influence CYP3A4 expression are associated with platelet reactivity in clopidogrel-treated patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and to evaluate the influence of statin/fibrate co-medication on these associations. A study cohort was used containing 1124 consecutive elective PCI patients in whom CYP3A4*22 and PPAR-α (G209A and A208G) SNPs were genotyped and the VerifyNow P2Y12 platelet reactivity test was performed. Minor allele frequencies were 0.4% for CYP3A4*22/*22, 6.8% for PPAR-α G209A AA, and 7.0% for PPAR-α A208G GG. CYP3A4*22 was not associated with platelet reactivity. The PPAR-α genetic variants were significantly associated with platelet reactivity (G209A AA: -24.6 PRU [-44.7, -4.6], p = 0.016; A208G GG: -24.6 PRU [-44.3, -4.8], p = 0.015). Validation of these PPAR-α results in two external cohorts, containing 716 and 882 patients, respectively, showed the same direction of effect, although not statistically significant. Subsequently, meta-analysis of all three cohorts showed statistical significance of both variants in statin/fibrate users (p = 0.04 for PPAR-a G209A and p = 0.03 for A208G), with no difference in statin/fibrate non-users. In conclusion, PPAR-α G209A and A208G were associated with lower platelet reactivity in patients undergoing elective PCI who were treated with clopidogrel and statin/fibrate co-medication. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings.

Reasons for early discontinuing or switching of antiplatelet therapy in elderly patients after acute coronary syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine frequency and reasons for prematurely discontinuing or switching antiplatelet therapy in elderly patients admitted with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHOD: Patients of 75 years or older admitted with suspected NSTE-ACS were included between 2013 and 2016. Information was extracted from the patients' medical files. RESULTS: A total of 544 patients were included, 17.3% discontinued aspirin within one year, predominantly (57%) within 30 days. The most common reason was the start of a (non-vitamin-K) oral anticoagulant [(N)OAC], either combined with a P2Y12-inhibitor (43%) or as monotherapy (16%). The P2Y12-inhibitor was discontinued in 31.2% of patients within one year, of which 46% within 30 days. The most common reason was undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; 22%). Switching of clopidogrel seldom occurred; however, ticagrelor was switched in 50/179 patients mainly due to dyspnoea (42%). Independent predictors for prematurely discontinuing antiplatelet therapy were undergoing CABG [odds ratio (OR) 3.257 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.836-5.779)], need for (N)OAC [OR 2.167 (95% CI 1.423-3.300)] and type II ACS as final diagnosis [OR 3.793 (95% CI 1.721-8.361)]. Undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention [OR 0.393 (95% CI 0.243-0.634)] and use of clopidogrel [OR 0.441(95% CI 0.293-0.662)] were independent predictors of continuing antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSION: In elderly patients of at least 75 years with NSTE-ACS, antiplatelet therapy is frequently discontinued prematurely, most often within 30 days. Main reasons for discontinuing are need for (N)OAC, undergoing CABG or type II ACS as final diagnosis and suffering from dyspnoea while on ticagrelor.

A Genotype-Guided Strategy for Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Primary PCI.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) benefit from genotype-guided selection of oral P2Y12 inhibitors. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded trial in which patients undergoing primary PCI with stent implantation were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a P2Y12 inhibitor on the basis of early CYP2C19 genetic testing (genotype-guided group) or standard treatment with either ticagrelor or prasugrel (standard-treatment group) for 12 months. In the genotype-guided group, carriers of CYP2C19*2 or CYP2C19*3 loss-of-function alleles received ticagrelor or prasugrel, and noncarriers received clopidogrel. The two primary outcomes were net adverse clinical events - defined as death from any cause, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, stroke, or major bleeding defined according to Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) criteria - at 12 months (primary combined outcome; tested for noninferiority, with a noninferiority margin of 2 percentage points for the absolute difference) and PLATO major or minor bleeding at 12 months (primary bleeding outcome). RESULTS: For the primary analysis, 2488 patients were included: 1242 in the genotype-guided group and 1246 in the standard-treatment group. The primary combined outcome occurred in 63 patients (5.1%) in the genotype-guided group and in 73 patients (5.9%) in the standard-treatment group (absolute difference, -0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.0 to 0.7; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The primary bleeding outcome occurred in 122 patients (9.8%) in the genotype-guided group and in 156 patients (12.5%) in the standard-treatment group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.98; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing primary PCI, a CYP2C19 genotype-guided strategy for selection of oral P2Y12 inhibitor therapy was noninferior to standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel at 12 months with respect to thrombotic events and resulted in a lower incidence of bleeding. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development; POPular Genetics ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01761786; Netherlands Trial Register number, NL2872.).