Laboratory Assessment of the Anticoagulant Activity of Apixaban in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Our aim is to determine the most appropriate laboratory tests, besides anti-factor Xa (anti-FXa) chromogenic assays, to estimate the degree of anticoagulation with apixaban and compare it with that of rivaroxaban in real-world patients. Twenty patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation treated with apixaban 5 mg twice daily and 20 patients on rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily were studied. Conventional coagulation tests, thrombin generation assay (TGA), and thromboelastometry (nonactivated TEM [NATEM] assay) were performed in the 40 patients and 20 controls. The anti-FXa chromogenic assays were used to measure apixaban and rivaroxaban plasma levels. The NATEM measurements showed no significant difference between the 2 groups of patients. Concerning TGA, endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) was significantly decreased in patients on rivaroxaban as compared to those treated with apixaban (P < .003). A statistically significant, strong inverse correlation between apixaban plasma concentrations and ETP (P < .001) was observed. Apixaban significantly reduces ETP compared to controls, but to a lesser extent than rivaroxaban. Thrombin generation assay might provide additional information on apixaban exposure, which is required in order to individualize treatment especially for patients with a high bleeding risk. Our findings have to be further investigated in studies with larger sample sizes, in the entire range of apixaban exposure, with other direct oral anticoagulants, and in relation to clinical outcomes.

Impact of the proton pump inhibitors and CYP2C19*2 polymorphism on platelet response to clopidogrel as assessed by four platelet function assays.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggested a possible negative interference of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on clopidogrel's antiplatelet effect because of the competitive inhibition of the CYP 2C19 isoenzyme. Moreover, carriers of the loss-of-function allele of CYP2C19 polymorphism (CYP2C19*2) display significantly lower responses to clopidogrel. In this study, we investigated the association between CYP2C19*2 genotype, PPI intake and clopidogrel resistance in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and their effect on clinical outcome. METHODS: We recruited 95 patients with CAD receiving chronic clopidogrel therapy in combination with aspirin. Platelet reactivity was simultaneously assessed by INNOVANCE PFA-100 P2Y, ADP-induced light transmission aggregometry (LTA), flow-cytometric vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP)-phosphorylation assay and multiple electrode aggregometry (Multiplate). Cardiovascular outcomes were recorded during 1-year follow-up period. RESULTS: Only platelet reactivity assessed by measuring platelet phosphorylated-VASP demonstrated a significant higher platelet reactivity in carriers of CYP2C19*2 (p=0.023). The other methods displayed higher - but not statistically significant - platelet reactivity in patients carrying the CYP2C19*2 variant as compared with non-carriers. Patients on PPIs demonstrated almost similar suppression of platelet reactivity in comparison with those not treated with PPIs by all platelet function assays. In logistic regression analysis none of the platelet function assays measurements were related with clinical outcomes. Similarly neither CYP2C19*2 genetic variant nor PPI treatment were associated with adverse clinical events. CONCLUSIONS: PPI co-administration did not influence clopidogrel's antiplatelet effect on laboratory testing by all platelet function assays used. On the contrary, patients carrying CYP2C19*2 genotype had significantly higher residual platelet reactivity as estimated by VASP-phosphorylation assay.

Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism and circulating ACE levels are not associated with outcome in critically ill septic patients.

BACKGROUND: In critically ill patients independent studies have shown contradictory findings regarding the prognostic significance of the D/D genotype of the I/D angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) polymorphism. The study aim was to evaluate the effect of both ACE I/D polymorphism and ACE serum levels on the clinical outcomes of critically ill septic patients. METHODS: This study recruited 186 Caucasian patients with sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. Epidemiological, clinical data, co-morbidities and severity scores were recorded. Measurements of serum ACE activity and genotyping for ACE I/D polymorphism were carried out. Primary outcomes were the 28- and the 90-day mortality; secondary outcomes included the number of days without renal or cardiovascular failure and ventilation-free days over the 28-day period following study enrolment. RESULTS: Neither 28- nor 90-day mortality were associated with ACE I/D polymorphism (p=0.59 and 0.34, respectively) or circulating ACE levels (p=0.17 and 0.25, respectively). Similarly, ACE polymorphism and levels were not related to ventilation-free days (p=0.14 and 0.25, respectively), days without cardiovascular failure (p=0.14 and 0.81, respectively) and days without renal failure (p=0.64 and 0.27, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Neither ACE I/D polymorphism nor serum ACE levels seem to be significant prognostic factors of clinical outcomes in septic, critically ill patients.