Antiplatelet options for secondary prevention in acute coronary syndromes

References

• Wright RS, Anderson JL, Adams CD et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA Focused Update of the Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2007 Guideline): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation123(18), 2022–2060 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvain J, Collet JP, Nagaswami C et al. Composition of coronary thrombus in acute myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.57(12), 1359–1367 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anti-Thrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration. Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ324(7329), 71–86 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith SC Jr et al. 2009 focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update) a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.54(23), 2205–2241 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith SC Jr, Allen J, Blair SN et al. AHA/ACC guidelines for secondary prevention for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2006 update: endorsed by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Circulation113(19), 2363–2372 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox KA, Anderson FA Jr, Goodman SG et al. Time course of events in acute coronary syndromes: implications for clinical practice from the GRACE registry. Nat. Clin. Pract. Cardiovasc. Med.5(9), 580–589 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Savi P, Labouret C, Delesque N, Guette F, Lupker J, Herbert JM. P2Y(12), a new platelet ADP receptor, target of clopidogrel. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.283(2), 379–383 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochholzer W, Trenk D, Frundi D et al. Time dependence of platelet inhibition after a 600-mg loading dose of clopidogrel in a large, unselected cohort of candidates for percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation111(20), 2560–2564 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller I, Seyfarth M, Rudiger S et al. Effect of a high loading dose of clopidogrel on platelet function in patients undergoing coronary stent placement. Heart85(1), 92–93 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serebruany VL, Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, Malinin AI, Bhatt DL, Topol EJ. Variability in platelet responsiveness to clopidogrel among 544 individuals. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.45(2), 246–251 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiviott SD, Antman EM. Clopidogrel resistance: a new chapter in a fast-moving story. Circulation109(25), 3064–3067 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiviott SD, Trenk D, Frelinger AL et al. Prasugrel compared with high loading- and maintenance-dose clopidogrel in patients with planned percutaneous coronary intervention: the Prasugrel in Comparison to Clopidogrel for Inhibition of Platelet Activation and Aggregation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 44 trial. Circulation116(25), 2923–2932 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvain J, Bellemain-Appaix A, Barthelemy O et al. Optimal use of thienopyridines in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome following CURRENT–OASIS 7. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv.4(1), 95–103 (2011).
   Google Scholar
• Montalescot G, Sideris G, Meuleman C et al. A randomized comparison of high clopidogrel loading doses in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: the ALBION (Assessment of the Best Loading Dose of Clopidogrel to Blunt Platelet Activation, Inflammation and Ongoing Necrosis) trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.48(5), 931–938 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Beckerath N, Taubert D, Pogatsa-Murray G, Schomig E, Kastrati A, Schomig A. Absorption, metabolization, and antiplatelet effects of 300-, 600-, and 900-mg loading doses of clopidogrel: results of the ISAR-CHOICE (Intracoronary Stenting and Anti-Thrombotic Regimen: Choose Between 3 High Oral Doses for Immediate Clopidogrel Effect) Trial. Circulation112(19), 2946–2950 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collet JP, Silvain J, Landivier A et al. Dose effect of clopidogrel reloading in patients already on 75-mg maintenance dose: the Reload with Clopidogrel Before Coronary Angioplasty in Subjects Treated Long Term with Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (RELOAD) study. Circulation118(12), 1225–1233 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angiolillo DJ, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Bernardo E et al. Variability in individual responsiveness to clopidogrel: clinical implications, management, and future perspectives. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.49(14), 1505–1516 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates ER, Lau WC, Bleske BE. Loading, pretreatment, and interindividual variability issues with clopidogrel dosing. Circulation111(20), 2557–2559 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hochholzer W, Trenk D, Fromm MF et al. Impact of cytochrome P450 2C19 loss-of-function polymorphism and of major demographic characteristics on residual platelet function after loading and maintenance treatment with clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective coronary stent placement. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.55(22), 2427–2434 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collet JP, Hulot JS, Pena A et al. Cytochrome P450 2C19 polymorphism in young patients treated with clopidogrel after myocardial infarction: a cohort study. Lancet373(9660), 309–317 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulot JS, Bura A, Villard E et al. Cytochrome P450 2C19 loss-of-function polymorphism is a major determinant of clopidogrel responsiveness in healthy subjects. Blood108(7), 2244–2247 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angiolillo DJ, Gibson CM, Cheng S et al. Differential effects of omeprazole and pantoprazole on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of clopidogrel in healthy subjects: randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover comparison studies. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.89(1), 65–74 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Lau WC, Waskell LA, Watkins PB et al. Atorvastatin reduces the ability of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregation: a new drug–drug interaction. Circulation107(1), 32–37 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuisset T, Frere C, Quilici J et al. Comparison of omeprazole and pantoprazole influence on a high 150-mg clopidogrel maintenance dose the PACA (Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel Association) prospective randomized study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.54(13), 1149–1153 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulot JS, Collet JP, Silvain J et al. Cardiovascular risk in clopidogrel-treated patients according to cytochrome P450 2C19*2 loss-of-function allele or proton pump inhibitor coadministration: a systematic meta-analysis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.56(2), 134–143 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Werkum JW, van der Stelt CA, Seesing TH, Hackeng CM, ten Berg JM. A head-to-head comparison between the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay and light transmittance aggregometry for monitoring the individual platelet response to clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. J. Thromb. Haemost.4(11), 2516–2518 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Beckerath N, Kastrati A, Wieczorek A et al. A double-blind, randomized study on platelet aggregation in patients treated with a daily dose of 150 or 75 mg of clopidogrel for 30 days. Eur. Heart J.28(15), 1814–1819 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gladding P, Webster M, Zeng I et al. The antiplatelet effect of higher loading and maintenance dose regimens of clopidogrel: the PRINC (Plavix Response in Coronary Intervention) trial. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv.1(6), 612–619 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L’Allier PL, Ducrocq G, Pranno N et al. Clopidogrel 600-mg double loading dose achieves stronger platelet inhibition than conventional regimens: results from the PREPAIR randomized study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.51(11), 1066–1072 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bonello L, Camoin-Jau L, Arques S et al. Adjusted clopidogrel loading doses according to vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation index decrease rate of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with clopidogrel resistance: a multicenter randomized prospective study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.51(14), 1404–1411 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuisset T, Frere C, Quilici J et al. Benefit of a 600-mg loading dose of clopidogrel on platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary stenting. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.48(7), 1339–1345 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonello L, Camoin-Jau L, Armero S et al. Tailored clopidogrel loading dose according to platelet reactivity monitoring to prevent acute and subacute stent thrombosis. Am. J. Cardiol.103(1), 5–10 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta SR, Bassand JP, Chrolavicius S et al. Dose comparisons of clopidogrel and aspirin in acute coronary syndromes. N. Engl. J. Med.363(10), 930–942 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patti G, Colonna G, Pasceri V, Pepe LL, Montinaro A, Di Sciascio G. Randomized trial of high loading dose of clopidogrel for reduction of periprocedural myocardial infarction in patients undergoing coronary intervention: results from the ARMYDA-2 (Antiplatelet Therapy for Reduction of Myocardial Damage during Angioplasty) study. Circulation111(16), 2099–2106 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Sciascio G, Patti G, Pasceri V, Colonna G, Mangiacapra F, Montinaro A. Clopidogrel reloading in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention on chronic clopidogrel therapy: results of the ARMYDA-4 RELOAD (Antiplatelet Therapy for Reduction of Myocardial Damage during Angioplasty) randomized trial. Eur. Heart J.31(11), 1337–1343 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angiolillo DJ, Shoemaker SB, Desai B et al. Randomized comparison of a high clopidogrel maintenance dose in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: results of the Optimizing Antiplatelet Therapy in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTIMUS) study. Circulation115(6), 708–716 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price MJ, Berger PB, Angiolillo DJ et al. Evaluation of individualized clopidogrel therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with high residual platelet reactivity: design and rationale of the GRAVITAS trial. Am. Heart J.157(5), 818–824, 824.e1 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price MJ, Berger PB, Teirstein PS et al. Standard- vs high-dose clopidogrel based on platelet function testing after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GRAVITAS randomized trial. JAMA305(11), 1097–1105 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurbel PA, Tantry US. An initial experiment with personalized antiplatelet therapy: the GRAVITAS trial. JAMA305(11), 1136–1137 (2011).
   Google Scholar
• Angiolillo DJ, Bates ER, Bass TA. Clinical profile of prasugrel, a novel thienopyridine. Am. Heart J.156(2 Suppl.), S16–S22 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiviott SD. Intensity of antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary intervention: the promise of prasugrel? Cardiol. Clin.26(4), 629–637 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Wallentin L, Varenhorst C, James S et al. Prasugrel achieves greater and faster P2Y12 receptor-mediated platelet inhibition than clopidogrel due to more efficient generation of its active metabolite in aspirin-treated patients with coronary artery disease. Eur. Heart J.29(1), 21–30 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montalescot G, Sideris G, Cohen R et al. Prasugrel compared with high-dose clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome. The randomised, double-blind ACAPULCO study. Thromb. Haemost.103(1), 213–223 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angiolillo DJ, Badimon JJ, Saucedo JF et al. A pharmacodynamic comparison of prasugrel vs. high-dose clopidogrel in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: results of the Optimizing anti-Platelet Therapy In diabetes MellitUS (OPTIMUS)-3 Trial. Eur. Heart J.32(7), 838–846 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pena A, Collet JP, Hulot JS et al. Can we override clopidogrel resistance? Circulation119(21), 2854–2857 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Momary KM, Dorsch MP. Factors associated with clopidogrel nonresponsiveness. Future Cardiol.6(2), 195–210 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Butler K et al. 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. Circulation120(25), 2577–2585 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Storey RF, Angiolillo DJ, Patil SB et al. Inhibitory effects of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel on platelet function in patients with acute coronary syndromes the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) PLATELET Substudy. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.56(18), 1456–1462 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Butler K et al. Response to ticagrelor in clopidogrel nonresponders and responders and effect of switching therapies: the RESPOND study. Circulation121(10), 1188–1199 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bliden KP, Tantry US, Storey RF et al. The effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on high on-treatment platelet reactivity: combined analysis of the ONSET/OFFSET and RESPOND studies. Am. Heart J.162(1), 160–165 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mega JL, Close SL, Wiviott SD et al. Genetic variants in ABCB1 and CYP2C19 and cardiovascular outcomes after treatment with clopidogrel and prasugrel in the TRITON–TIMI 38 trial: a pharmacogenetic analysis. Lancet376(9749), 1312–1319 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallentin L, James S, Storey RF et al. Effect of CYP2C19 and ABCB1 single nucleotide polymorphisms on outcomes of treatment with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for acute coronary syndromes: a genetic substudy of the PLATO trial. Lancet376(9749), 1320–1328 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N. Engl. J. Med.357(20), 2001–2015 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N. Engl. J. Med.361(11), 1045–1057 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, Angiolillo DJ et al. Greater clinical benefit of more intensive oral antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel in patients with diabetes mellitus in the trial to assess improvement in therapeutic outcomes by optimizing platelet inhibition with prasugrel-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 38. Circulation118(16), 1626–1636 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James S, Angiolillo DJ, Cornel JH et al. Ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes and diabetes: a substudy from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Eur. Heart J.31(24), 3006–3016 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James S, Budaj A, Aylward P et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in acute coronary syndromes in relation to renal function: results from the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Circulation122(11), 1056–1067 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannon CP, Harrington RA, James S et al. Comparison of ticagrelor with clopidogrel in patients with a planned invasive strategy for acute coronary syndromes (PLATO): a randomised double-blind study. Lancet375(9711), 283–293 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steg PG, James S, Harrington RA et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes intended for reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial subgroup analysis. Circulation122(21), 2131–2141 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James S, Angiolillo DJ, Cornel JH et al. Ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes and diabetes: a substudy from the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Eur. Heart J.31(24), 3006–3016 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montalescot G, Silvain J. Ticagrelor in the renal dysfunction subgroup: subjugated or substantiated? Circulation122(11), 1049–1052 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohman EM, Roe MT. Explaining the unexpected: insights from the PLATelet inhibition and clinical Outcomes (PLATO) trial comparing ticagrelor and clopidogrel. Editorial on Serebruany ‘Viewpoint: Paradoxical excess mortality in the PLATO trial should be independently verified’. Thromb. Haemost.105(5), 763–765 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serebruany VL. Viewpoint: paradoxical excess mortality in the PLATO trial should be independently verified. Thromb. Haemost.105(5), 752–759 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur. Heart J.31(20), 2501–2555 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar