Matthew J. Price

Standard- vs high-dose clopidogrel based on platelet function testing after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GRAVITAS randomized trial.

CONTEXT High platelet reactivity while receiving clopidogrel has been linked to cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but a treatment strategy for this issue is not well defined. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of high-dose compared with standard-dose clopidogrel in patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity after PCI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized, double-blind, active-control trial (Gauging Responsiveness with A VerifyNow assay-Impact on Thrombosis And Safety [GRAVITAS]) of 2214 patients with high on-treatment reactivity 12 to 24 hours after PCI with drug-eluting stents at 83 centers in North America between July 2008 and April 2010. INTERVENTIONS High-dose clopidogrel (600-mg initial dose, 150 mg daily thereafter) or standard-dose clopidogrel (no additional loading dose, 75 mg daily) for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was the 6-month incidence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. The key safety end point was severe or moderate bleeding according to the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and t-PA for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) definition. A key pharmacodynamic end point was the rate of persistently high on-treatment reactivity at 30 days. RESULTS At 6 months, the primary end point had occurred in 25 of 1109 patients (2.3%) receiving high-dose clopidogrel compared with 25 of 1105 patients (2.3%) receiving standard-dose clopidogrel (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-1.76; P = .97). Severe or moderate bleeding was not increased with the high-dose regimen (15 [1.4%] vs 25 [2.3%], HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.31-1.11; P = .10). Compared with standard-dose clopidogrel, high-dose clopidogrel provided a 22% (95% CI, 18%-26%) absolute reduction in the rate of high on-treatment reactivity at 30 days (62%; 95% CI, 59%-65% vs 40%; 95% CI, 37%-43%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with high on-treatment reactivity after PCI with drug-eluting stents, the use of high-dose clopidogrel compared with standard-dose clopidogrel did not reduce the incidence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00645918.

Consensus and Future Directions on the Definition of High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity to Adenosine Diphosphate

The addition of clopidogrel to aspirin treatment reduces ischemic events in a wide range of patients with cardiovascular disease. However, recurrent ischemic event occurrence during dual antiplatelet therapy, including stent thrombosis, remains a major concern. Platelet function measurements during clopidogrel treatment demonstrated a variable and overall modest level of P2Y(12) inhibition. High on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate (ADP) was observed in selected patients. Multiple studies have now demonstrated a clear association between high on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP measured by multiple methods and adverse clinical event occurrence. However, the routine measurement of platelet reactivity has not been widely implemented and recommended in the guidelines. Reasons for the latter include: 1) a lack of consensus on the optimal method to quantify high on-treatment platelet reactivity and the cutoff value associated with clinical risk; and 2) limited data to support that alteration of therapy based on platelet function measurements actually improves outcomes. This review provides a consensus opinion on the definition of high on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP based on various methods reported in the literature and proposes how this measurement may be used in the future care of patients.

Prognostic significance of post-clopidogrel platelet reactivity assessed by a point-of-care assay on thrombotic events after drug-eluting stent implantation

AIMS The aim of this study was to determine whether platelet reactivity on clopidogrel therapy, as measured by a point-of-care platelet function assay, is associated with thrombotic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs). METHODS AND RESULTS Platelet reactivity on clopidogrel (post-treatment reactivity) was measured with the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay (Accumetrics Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) in 380 patients undergoing PCI with sirolimus-eluting stents. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was used to derive the optimal cut-off value for post-treatment reactivity in predicting 6 month out-of-hospital cardiovascular (CV) death, non-fatal MI, or stent thrombosis. The mean post-treatment reactivity was 184 +/- 85 PRU (P2Y12 reaction units). The optimal cut-off for the combined endpoint was a post-treatment reactivity > or =235 PRU [area under the curve 0.711 (95% confidence interval 0.529-0.893), P = 0.03], which was similar to the threshold of the upper tertile (231 PRU). Patients with post-treatment reactivity greater than the cut-off value had significantly higher rates of CV death (2.8 vs. 0%, P = 0.04), stent thrombosis (4.6 vs. 0%, P = 0.004), and the combined endpoint (6.5 vs. 1.0%, P = 0.008). CONCLUSION High post-treatment platelet reactivity measured with a point-of-care platelet function assay is associated with post-discharge events after PCI with DES, including stent thrombosis. Investigation of alternative clopidogrel dosing regimens to reduce ischaemic events in high-risk patients identified by this assay is warranted.

Consensus and Update on the Definition of On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity to Adenosine Diphosphate Associated With Ischemia and Bleeding

Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor blocker is a key strategy to reduce platelet reactivity and to prevent thrombotic events in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In an earlier consensus document, we proposed cutoff values for high on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate (ADP) associated with post-percutaneous coronary intervention ischemic events for various platelet function tests (PFTs). Updated American and European practice guidelines have issued a Class IIb recommendation for PFT to facilitate the choice of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor in selected high-risk patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention, although routine testing is not recommended (Class III). Accumulated data from large studies underscore the importance of high on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP as a prognostic risk factor. Recent prospective randomized trials of PFT did not demonstrate clinical benefit, thus questioning whether treatment modification based on the results of current PFT platforms can actually influence outcomes. However, there are major limitations associated with these randomized trials. In addition, recent data suggest that low on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP is associated with a higher risk of bleeding. Therefore, a therapeutic window concept has been proposed for P2Y12 inhibitor therapy. In this updated consensus document, we review the available evidence addressing the relation of platelet reactivity to thrombotic and bleeding events. In addition, we propose cutoff values for high and low on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP that might be used in future investigations of personalized antiplatelet therapy.

Effect of Platelet Inhibition with Cangrelor during PCI on Ischemic Events

BACKGROUND The intensity of antiplatelet therapy during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an important determinant of PCI-related ischemic complications. Cangrelor is a potent intravenous adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-receptor antagonist that acts rapidly and has quickly reversible effects. METHODS In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 11,145 patients who were undergoing either urgent or elective PCI and were receiving guideline-recommended therapy to receive a bolus and infusion of cangrelor or to receive a loading dose of 600 mg or 300 mg of clopidogrel. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48 hours after randomization; the key secondary end point was stent thrombosis at 48 hours. The primary safety end point was severe bleeding at 48 hours. RESULTS The rate of the primary efficacy end point was 4.7% in the cangrelor group and 5.9% in the clopidogrel group (adjusted odds ratio with cangrelor, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.005). The rate of the primary safety end point was 0.16% in the cangrelor group and 0.11% in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.53 to 4.22; P=0.44). Stent thrombosis developed in 0.8% of the patients in the cangrelor group and in 1.4% in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.90; P=0.01). The rates of adverse events related to the study treatment were low in both groups, though transient dyspnea occurred significantly more frequently with cangrelor than with clopidogrel (1.2% vs. 0.3%). The benefit from cangrelor with respect to the primary end point was consistent across multiple prespecified subgroups. CONCLUSIONS Cangrelor significantly reduced the rate of ischemic events, including stent thrombosis, during PCI, with no significant increase in severe bleeding. (Funded by the Medicines Company; CHAMPION PHOENIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01156571.).

Impact of platelet reactivity on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. A collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data.

OBJECTIVES The purpose of the study was to systematically evaluate the significance of platelet reactivity on clopidogrel treatment on adverse cardiovascular events using a collaborative meta-analysis using patient-level data for the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay (Accumetrics, San Diego, California). BACKGROUND Clinical evidence has been controversial regarding the influence of clopidogrel on treatment platelet reactivity and ischemic outcomes. METHODS MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane library databases were searched through January 2010. A database containing individual patient-level time-to-event data was generated from identified studies. The primary outcome of interest was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stent thrombosis. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of: 1) death; 2) MI; and 3) stent thrombosis. RESULTS A total of 6 studies with 3,059 patients was included. In each study, clopidogrel responsiveness was assessed using the same point-of-care assay after percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint occurred more frequently in higher quartiles of P2Y(12) reaction unit (PRU) values: quartile I, 5.8%; quartile II, 6.9%; quartile III, 10.9%; quartile IV, 15.8% (p < 0.001). Taking quartile I as referent, the hazard ratios (HRs) for the primary endpoint were as follows: quartile II, HR: 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 1.78; p = 0.60); quartile III, HR: 1.82 (95% CI: 1.20 to 2.75; p = 0.005); quartile IV, HR: 2.62 (95% CI: 1.78 to 3.87; p < 0.001). On a continuous scale, every 10-U increase in PRU was associated with a significantly higher rate of the primary endpoint (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.06; p < 0.0001). According to receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, a PRU value of 230 appeared to best predict death, MI, or stent thrombosis (p < 0.001). A PRU value ≥230 was associated with a higher rate of the composite primary endpoint (HR: 2.10; 95% CI: 1.62 to 2.73; p < 0.0001), as well as the individual endpoints of death (HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.04 to 2.68; p = 0.04), MI (HR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.51 to 2.76; p < 0.001), and stent thrombosis (HR: 3.11; 95% CI: 1.50 to 6.46; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS In this collaborative meta-analysis, the level of on-treatment platelet reactivity according to the P2Y(12) assay is associated with long-term cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention, including death, MI, and stent thrombosis.

Platelet Reactivity and Cardiovascular Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention A Time-Dependent Analysis of the Gauging Responsiveness With a VerifyNow P2Y12 Assay: Impact on Thrombosis and Safety (GRAVITAS) Trial

Background— In the Gauging Responsiveness With A VerifyNow P2Y12 Assay: Impact on Thrombosis and Safety (GRAVITAS) trial, 6 months of high-dose clopidogrel did not reduce cardiovascular events compared with standard-dose clopidogrel in patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (OTR) after percutaneous coronary intervention, defined as OTR ≥230 P2Y12 reaction units according to the VerifyNow P2Y12 platelet function test. The aim of this analysis was to examine the relationship between outcomes and OTR over the course of the trial. Methods and Results— OTR was measured at 12 to 24 hours and 30±7 days after percutaneous coronary intervention. Cox proportional hazards models with OTR as a time-varying covariate were used to determine the association between OTR and the primary end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Of the 2800 enrolled patients, 2796 (99.98%) had evaluable platelet function data. OTR <208 P2Y12 reaction units was significantly associated with a lower risk of the primary end point at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.04 to 0.79; P=0.02) and at 6 months (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.82; P=0.01). After adjustment for other significant predictors of outcome, OTR <208 P2Y12 reaction units remained independently associated with the primary end point at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.98; P=0.047) and tended to be associated at 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 1.04; P=0.065). Conclusions— In the GRAVITAS trial, achievement of on-clopidogrel reactivity <208 P2Y12 reaction units at 12 to 24 hours after percutaneous coronary intervention or during follow-up was associated with a lower risk for cardiovascular events. The efficacy of an individualized strategy to target a level of OTR below this threshold merits investigation. Clinical Trial Registration— http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00645918.

A collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis on 1278 patients undergoing percutaneous drug-eluting stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery disease ☆

BACKGROUND Cardiac surgery is the standard treatment for unprotected left main disease (ULM). Drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation has been recently reported in patients with ULM but with unclear results. We systematically reviewed outcomes of percutaneous DES implantation in ULM. METHODS Several databases were searched for clinical studies reporting on > or = 20 patients and > or = 6-month follow-up. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs; ie, death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization [TVR]) at the longest follow-up. Incidence and adjusted risk estimates were pooled with generic inverse variance random-effect methods (95% CIs). RESULTS From 823 initial citations, 16 studies were included (1278 patients, median follow-up 10 months). Eight were uncontrolled registries, 5 nonrandomized comparisons between DES and bare-metal stents and 3 nonrandomized comparisons between DES and CABG, with no properly randomized trial. Meta-analysis for DES-based PCI showed, at the longest follow-up, rates of 16.5% (11.7%-21.3%) MACE, 5.5% (3.4%-7.7%) death, and 6.5% (3.7%-9.2%) TVR. Comparison of DES versus bare-metal stent disclosed adjusted odds ratios for MACE of 0.34 (0.16-0.71), and DES versus CABG showed adjusted odds ratios for MACE plus stroke of 0.46 (0.24-0.90). Meta-regression showed that disease location predicted MACE (P = .001) and TVR (P = .020), whereas high-risk features predicted death (P = .027). CONCLUSIONS Clinical studies report apparently favorable early and midterm results in selected patients with ULM. However, given their limitations in validity and the inherent risk for DES thrombosis, results from randomized trials are still needed to definitely establish the role of DES implantation instead of the reference treatment, surgery.

Stem Cell Repair of Infarcted Myocardium: An Overview for Clinicians

Under appropriate cell culture conditions, stem cells are capable of differentiating into cardiac myocytes and endothelial cells (Table 1). If these results can be reproduced in vivo, it may be possible to use stem cells to impede progressive deterioration into heart failure or even to restore cardiac function in patients with acutely or chronically damaged myocardium. In this article, we will provide for the clinical cardiologist a brief overview of the conceptual basis for stem cell therapy and review the current laboratory evidence supporting its potential value. We will describe the clinical options in stem cell treatment of damaged myocardium and the potential limitations that need to be assessed in randomized clinical trials. View this table: TABLE 1. Glossary of Terms Used in This Article ### The Conceptual Basis of Stem Cell Therapy Stem cells share the following two defining characteristics: the capacity to differentiate into a spectrum of different cell types and the capacity to renew themselves.1 The biological principle that underlies stem cell therapy is tissue-directed differentiation. For example, adult stem cells isolated from liver tissue and reinjected into liver become hepatocytes, whereas the same cells injected into myocardium become myocytes.2 Stem cells have been engrafted into a broad spectrum of tissues, including regenerating bone, neural tissue, dystrophic skeletal muscle, and injured skeletal muscle.3 The classification of stem cells, based on a large number of cell markers, is still in evolution, and interested readers are referred to excellent reviews in the basic science literature.4,5 The primary distinction is between embryonic and adult stem cells. Most cardiovascular research has used adult stem cells derived from the bone marrow. Within the bone marrow, a simplified distinction is between CD34+ hematopoietic stem cells, which are precursors of blood and endothelial cells, and CD34− mesenchymal stem cells, which are precursors of stromal cells, including fibroblasts and osteocytes. …

Early safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage suture ligation: results from the U.S. transcatheter LAA ligation consortium

BACKGROUND Transcatheter left atrial appendage (LAA) ligation may represent an alternative to oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVES This study sought to assess the early safety and efficacy of transcatheter ligation of the LAA for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. METHODS This was a retrospective, multicenter study of consecutive patients undergoing LAA ligation with the Lariat device at 8 U.S. sites. The primary endpoint was procedural success, defined as device success (suture deployment and <5 mm leak by post-procedure transesophageal echocardiography), and no major complication at discharge (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding type 3 or greater, or cardiac surgery). Post-discharge management was per operator discretion. RESULTS A total of 154 patients were enrolled. Median CHADS2 score (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke, transient ischemic attack, or thromboembolism [doubled]) was 3 (interquartile range: 2 to 4). Device success was 94%, and procedural success was 86%. A major complication occurred in 15 patients (9.7%). There were 14 major bleeds (9.1%), driven by the need for transfusion (4.5%). Significant pericardial effusion occurred in 16 patients (10.4%). Follow-up was available in 134 patients at a median of 112 days (interquartile range: 50 to 270 days): Death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 4 patients (2.9%). Among 63 patients with acute closure and transesophageal echocardiography follow-up, there were 3 thrombi (4.8%) and 13 (20%) with residual leak. CONCLUSIONS In this initial multicenter experience of LAA ligation with the Lariat device, the rate of acute closure was high, but procedural success was limited by bleeding. A prospective randomized trial is required to adequately define clinical efficacy, optimal post-procedure medical therapy, and the effect of operator experience on procedural safety.