Cheryl Wei

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 P2Y12 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 &mgr;mol/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. Clinical Trial Registration Information— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: 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 Randomized Double-Blind Assessment of the ONSET and OFFSET of the Antiplatelet Effects of Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Stable Cornonary Disease: The ONSET/OFFSET Study

Background— Ticagrelor is the first reversibly binding oral P2Y12 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 &mgr;mol/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. Clinical Trial Registration Information— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00528411.

Response to Ticagrelor in Clopidogrel Nonresponders and Responders and Effect of Switching Therapies. The RESPOND Study

Background— The antiplatelet effects of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial dose of ticagrelor in patients nonresponsive to clopidogrel and after they switch agents are unknown. Methods and Results— Patients with stable coronary artery disease on aspirin therapy received a 300-mg clopidogrel load; nonresponders were identified by light transmittance aggregometry. In a 2-way crossover design, nonresponders (n=41) and responders (n=57) randomly received clopidogrel (600 mg/75 mg once daily) or ticagrelor (180 mg/90 mg twice daily) for 14 days during period 1. In period 2, all nonresponders switched treatment; half of the responders continued the same treatment, whereas the others switched treatment. Inhibition of platelet aggregation was higher in nonresponders treated with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel (P<0.05). Treatment with ticagrelor among nonresponders resulted in a >10%, >30%, and >50% decrease in platelet aggregation from baseline in 100%, 75%, and 13% of patients, respectively. Platelet aggregation fell from 59±9% to 35±11% in patients switched from clopidogrel to ticagrelor and increased from 36±14% to 56±9% in patients switched from ticagrelor to clopidogrel (P<0.0001 for both). Platelet reactivity was below the cut points previously associated with ischemic risk measured by light transmittance aggregometry, VerifyNow P2Y12 assay, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation in 98% to 100% of patients after ticagrelor therapy versus 44% to 76% of patients after clopidogrel therapy. Conclusions— Ticagrelor therapy overcomes nonresponsiveness to clopidogrel, and its antiplatelet effect is the same in responders and nonresponders. Nearly all clopidogrel nonresponders and responders treated with ticagrelor will have platelet reactivity below the cut points associated with ischemic risk. Clinical Trial Registration— http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT00642811.

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).

First Analysis of the Relation Between CYP2C19 Genotype and Pharmacodynamics in Patients Treated With Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel The ONSET/OFFSET and RESPOND Genotype Studies

Background—The influence of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 genotype on platelet function in patients treated with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel is unknown. Methods and Results—CYP2C19 (*1, *2, *3, *4, *5, *6, *7, *8, *17) genotyping was performed in patients with coronary artery disease treated with ticagrelor (180-mg load, 90 mg BID) (n=92) or clopidogrel (600-mg load, 75 mg/d) (n=82). All patients received 75 to 100 mg/d aspirin. Platelet function was measured by aggregometry, VerifyNow P2Y12 assay, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein-phosphorylation assay at predose, 8 hours postloading, and maintenance. In each treatment group, patients were categorized according to 2C19 genotype carrier status (loss-of-function, gain-of-function) and metabolizer status. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare platelet function among these categories for each treatment, and Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare platelet function between the clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups for each category. There was no statistically significant influence of genotype on platelet function during aspirin therapy alone. Ticagrelor exhibited lower platelet reactivity than clopidogrel by all assays irrespective of 2C19 genotype or metabolizer status (P<0.01). Loss-of-function carriers had greater platelet reactivity during clopidogrel therapy. The influence of genotype on platelet reactivity was greatest during clopidogrel maintenance and best demonstrated by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. Conclusions—This report is the first to demonstrate the superior pharmacodynamic effect of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel irrespective of CYP2C19 genotype. Whereas CYP2C19 genotype influenced the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel, there was no effect of CYP2C19 genotype during ticagrelor therapy. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00642811 and NCT00528411.

The effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on high on-treatment platelet reactivity: Combined analysis of the ONSET/OFFSET and RESPOND studies

OBJECTIVES The objective of the study was to determine the prevalence of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) in coronary artery disease patients enrolled in the ONSET/OFFSET and RESPOND studies. BACKGROUND HPR has been linked to the occurrence of adverse events after stenting in patients treated with clopidogrel (C) and aspirin. Prevalence of HPR after treatment with ticagrelor (T), a reversible oral P2Y(12) receptor antagonist developed to overcome the limitations of C, is unknown. METHODS Patients were treated with T (n = 106) or C (n = 103) on top of aspirin therapy. HPR was defined by published cutoff points associated with post-percutaneous coronary intervention ischemic risk: >59% 20 μM adenosine diphosphate-induced aggregation (light transmittance aggregometry), >235 P2Y12 reaction unit by VerifyNow P2Y(12) assay (VerifyNow, San Diego, CA), and >50% platelet reactivity index by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay (VASP-P). Proportion differences for T versus C were analyzed by χ(2) test for each time point. Correlations (R) were analyzed by the Pearson method. RESULTS Ticagrelor was associated with a significantly lower prevalence of HPR (0%-8%) compared with C (21%-81%) at 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours and ≥2 weeks postdosing (P < .0001, for all assays). The R values between light transmittance aggregometry and VerifyNow/VASP-P were all ≥0.43, P < .0001. CONCLUSIONS The above data represent the largest serial pharmacodynamic evaluation of the comparative effects of T versus C. Ticagrelor was rapidly and consistently associated with a very low prevalence of HPR compared with C, as determined by multiple established methods to measure platelet reactivity. These results provide a mechanism for the lower ischemic event rate associated with T therapy reported in the PLATO trial.

Effect of Saxagliptin on Renal Outcomes in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 Trial

OBJECTIVE Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors may have a protective effect in diabetic nephropathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We studied renal outcomes of 16,492 patients with type 2 diabetes, randomized to saxagliptin versus placebo and followed for a median of 2.1 years in the Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 53 (SAVOR-TIMI 53) trial. RESULTS At baseline, 9,696 (58.8%) subjects had normoalbuminuria (albumin/creatinine ratio [ACR] <30 mg/g), 4,426 (26.8%) had microalbuminuria (ACR 30–300 mg/g), and 1,638 (9.9%) had macroalbuminuria (ACR >300 mg/g). Treatment with saxagliptin was associated with improvement in and/or less deterioration in ACR categories from baseline to end of trial (EOT) (P = 0.021, P < 0.001, and P = 0.049 for individuals with baseline normoalbuminuria, microalbuminuria, and macroalbuminuria, respectively). At 2 years, the difference in mean ACR change between saxagliptin and placebo arms was −19.3 mg/g (P = 0.033) for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >50 mL/min/body surface area per 1.73 m2 (BSA), −105 mg/g (P = 0.011) for 50 ≥ eGFR ≥ 30 mL/min/BSA, and −245.2 mg/g (P = 0.086) for eGFR <30 mL/min/BSA. Analyzing ACR as a continuous variable showed reduction in ACR with saxagliptin (1 year, P < 0.0001; 2 years, P = 0.0143; and EOT, P = 0.0158). The change in ACR did not correlate with that in HbA1c (r = 0.041, 0.052, and 0.036; 1 year, 2 years, and EOT, respectively). The change in eGFR was similar in the saxagliptin and placebo groups. Safety renal outcomes, including doubling of serum creatinine, initiation of chronic dialysis, renal transplantation, or serum creatinine >6.0 mg/dL, were similar as well. CONCLUSIONS Treatment with saxagliptin improved ACR, even in the normoalbuminuric range, without affecting eGFR. The beneficial effect of saxagliptin on albuminuria could not be explained by its effect on glycemic control.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ticagrelor in patients with stable coronary artery disease: results from the ONSET-OFFSET and RESPOND studies.

AbstractBackground and Objectives: Ticagrelor, the first reversibly binding oral P2Y12 receptor antagonist, improves outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) compared with clopidogrel. In the ONSET-OFFSET study (parallel group trial) and the RESPOND study (crossover trial), the pharmacodynamic effects of ticagrelor were compared with clopidogrel in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). We now report the pharmacokinetic analyses of ticagrelor, and the exposure-inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) relationships from these studies. Patients and Methods: Patients were treated with ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily maintenance dose) or clopidogrel (600 mg loading dose, 75 mg once daily maintenance dose) in addition to aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) [75–100 mg once daily]. Ticagrelor administration was for 6 weeks in ONSET-OFFSET. In RESPOND, ticagrelor was given for 14 days before or after 2 weeks of clopidogrel in patients classified as clopidogrel responders or non-responders. Pharmacokinetics and IPA were evaluated following the loading and last maintenance doses. Exposure-IPA relationships were evaluated using a sigmoid maximum effect (Emax) model. Outcome Measures: The outcome measures were ticagrelor and AR-C124910XX (active metabolite) pharmacokinetics and exposure-IPA relationships in both trials, including the effect of prior clopidogrel exposure, and effects in clopidogrel responders and non-responders in RESPOND. Results: In ONSET-OFFSET, maximum (peak) plasma concentration (Cmax), time to Cmax (tmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 8 hours (AUC8) for ticagrelor were 733 ng/mL, 2.0 hours and 4130 ng · h/mL, respectively; and for AR-C124910XX were 210 ng/mL, 2.1 hours and 1325 ng · h/mL, respectively. Emax estimates were IPA > 97%. Trough plasma ticagrelor (305 ng/mL) and AR-C124910XX (121 ng/mL) concentrations were 5.2 and 7.7 times higher than respective concentration producing 50% of maximum effect (EC50) estimates. In RESPOND, ticagrelor mean Cmax and AUC8 following 2-week dosing were comparable between clopidogrel responders (724 ng/mL and 3983 ng · h/mL, respectively) and non-responders (764 ng/mL and 3986 ng · h/mL, respectively). Pharmacokinetics of ticagrelor were unaffected by prior clopidogrel dosing. Emax estimates were IPA > 96% for both responders and non-responders. Trough plasma concentrations were sufficient to achieve high IPA. Conclusions: Ticagrelor pharmacokinetics in stable CAD patients were comparable to previous findings in stable atherosclerotic and ACS patients, and were not affected by prior clopidogrel exposure or clopidogrel responsiveness. Ticagrelor effectively inhibited platelet aggregation, and trough plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and AR-C124910XX were sufficient to result in high IPA in stable CAD patients.

Earlier recovery of platelet function after discontinuation of treatment with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients with high antiplatelet responses

Summary.  Background: The rate of recovery of platelet function after discontinuation of P2Y12 inhibitors depends on the reversibility of the antiplatelet effect and the extent of the on‐treatment response. P2Y12 inhibition increases the bleeding risk in patients requiring surgery. Objectives: To evaluate recovery of platelet function after discontinuation of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with high levels of platelet inhibition (HPI) during the ONSET/OFFSET study. Methods: Patients received aspirin 75–100 mg per day and either ticagrelor 90 mg twice‐daily or clopidogrel 75 mg daily for 6 weeks. This subanalysis included patients with HPI after the last dose of maintenance therapy, defined as: inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) > 75% 4 h post‐dose (ADP 20 μm, final extent); < 120 P2Y12 reaction units 8 h post‐dose (VerifyNow P2Y12 assay); or platelet reactivity index < 50% 8 h post‐dose (VASP‐P assay). Results: IPA > 75% was observed in 39 out of 47 ticagrelor‐treated and 17 out of 44 clopidogrel‐treated patients. The rate of offset of IPA over 4–72 h was greater with ticagrelor (IPA %/hour slope: −1.11 vs. −0.67 for clopidogrel; P < 0.0001). Mean IPA was significantly lower with ticagrelor than clopidogrel between 48 and 168 h post‐dose (P < 0.01). Similar findings were observed with the other assays. The average time for IPA to decline from 30% to 10% was 50.8 h with ticagrelor vs. 110.4 h with clopidogrel. Conclusions: In patients with HPI, recovery of platelet function was more rapid after discontinuation of ticagrelor than clopidogrel leading to significantly greater platelet reactivity by 48 h after the last dose in the ticagrelor group.

Incidence of Fractures in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 Trial

OBJECTIVE Patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of bone fractures, the predisposing factors for which are unknown. Treatment with thiazolidinediones (TZDs) further increases the incidence of osteoporotic fractures. In the Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 53 (SAVOR-TIMI 53) trial, fractures were considered an adverse event of special interest, and information regarding fractures was collected. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We compared the incidence of fractures among the 8,280 patients who were assigned to treatment with saxagliptin with that in the 8,212 patients who were assigned to placebo. We further analyzed the participants’ baseline characteristics and fracture risk. RESULTS During a median follow-up of 2.1 years, 241 patients (2.9%) in the saxagliptin group and 240 (2.9%) in the placebo group experienced a fracture (hazard ratio [HR] 1.00 [95% CI 0.83–1.19]). Event rates for fractures were the same in both treatment arms: 14.7 per 1,000 patient-years in the entire population and 14.0 in the on-treatment population (first event only). Fracture risk was similar in patients treated with saxagliptin or placebo across different subgroups defined by race, cardiovascular risk, and renal function. A multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that risk of fracture was associated with female sex (P < 0.0001), longer diabetes duration (P < 0.0001), older age (P = 0.002), major hypoglycemic events (P = 0.01), noncompliance with study drug (P = 0.01), and treatment with TZDs (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS In a large population of older patients with type 2 diabetes, treatment with saxagliptin was not associated with an increased risk of fractures. The association between longer diabetes duration and increased risk of bone fracture is an intriguing finding.