Ying G. Li

Effects of the Proton Pump Inhibitor Lansoprazole on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Prasugrel and Clopidogrel

Prasugrel and clopidogrel, thienopyridine prodrugs, are each metabolized to an active metabolite that inhibits the platelet P2Y12 ADP receptor. In this open‐label, 4‐period crossover study, the effects of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel were assessed in healthy subjects given single doses of prasugrel 60 mg and clopidogrel 300 mg with and without concurrent lansoprazole 30 mg qd. Cmax and AUC0‐tlast of prasugrels active metabolite, R‐138727, and clopidogrels inactive carboxylic acid metabolite, SR26334, were assessed. Inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) was measured by turbidimetric aggregometry 4 to 24 hours after each treatment. Lansoprazole (1) decreased R‐138727 AUC0‐tlast and Cmax by 13% and 29%, respectively, but did not affect IPA after the prasugrel dose, and (2) did not affect SR62334 exposure but tended to lower IPA after a clopidogrel dose. A retrospective tertile analysis showed in subjects with high IPA after a clopidogrel dose alone that lansoprazole decreased IPA, whereas IPA was unaffected in these same subjects after a prasugrel dose. The overall data suggest that a prasugrel dose adjustment is not likely warranted in an individual taking prasugrel with a proton pump inhibitor such as lansoprazole.

The use of the VerifyNow P2Y12 point-of-care device to monitor platelet function across a range of P2Y12 inhibition levels following prasugrel and clopidogrel administration

Variability in response to antiplatelet agents has prompted the development of point-of-care (POC) technology. In this study, we compared the VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) POC device with light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in subjects switched directly from clopidogrel to prasugrel. Healthy subjects on aspirin were administered a clopidogrel 600 mg loading dose (LD) followed by a 75 mg/d maintenance dose (MD) for 10 days. Subjects were then switched to a prasugrel 60 mg LD and then 10 mg/d MD for 10 days (n = 16), or to a prasugrel 10 mg/d MD for 11 days (n = 19). Platelet function was measured by LTA and VN-P2Y12 at baseline and after dosing. Clopidogrel 600 mg LD/75 mg MD treatment led to a reduction in P2Y(12) reaction units (PRU) from baseline. A switch from clopidogrel MD to prasugrel 60 mg LD/10 mg MD produced an immediate decrease in PRU, while a switch to prasugrel 10 mg MD resulted in a more gradual decline. Consistent with the reduction in PRU, device-reported percent inhibition increased during both clopidogrel and prasugrel regimens. Inhibition of platelet aggregation as measured by LTA showed a very similar pattern to that found with VN-P2Y12 measurement, irrespective of treatment regimens. The dynamic range of VN-P2Y12 appeared to be narrower than that of LTA. With two different thienopyridines, the VN-P2Y12 device, within a somewhat more limited range, reflected the overall magnitude of change in aggregation response determined by LTA. The determination of the clinical utility of such POC devices will require their use in clinical outcome studies.

Effect of atorvastatin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel in healthy subjects.

Study Objective. To investigate the potential effect of atorvastatin 80 mg/day on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the thienopyridines prasugrel and clopidogrel.

Population Pharmacokinetic Analyses to Evaluate the Influence of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors on Exposure of Prasugrel Active Metabolite in TRITON‐TIMI 38

Serial pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling in 1159 patients from TRITON‐TIMI 38 was undertaken. A multilinear regression model was used to quantitatively predict prasugrels active metabolite (Pras‐AM) concentrations from its 2 downstream inactive metabolites. Population‐based methods were then applied to Pras‐AM concentration data to characterize the PK. The potential influence of body weight, body mass index, age, sex, renal function, diabetes, tobacco use, and other disease status on Bayesian estimates of Pras‐AM exposures was assessed. The PK of Pras‐AM was adequately described by a multicompartmental model and consistent with results from previous studies. The systemic exposure of prasugrel was not appreciably affected by body mass index, gender, diabetes, smoking, and renal impairment. Pras‐AM mean exposure in patients weighing <60 kg (4.1%) was 30% (90% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–1.45) higher than exposure in patients ≥60 kg. Mean Pras‐AM exposures for patients ≥75 years (10.5%) were 19% (90% CI: 1.11–1.28) higher compared with patients <75 years.

A comparison of the antiplatelet effects of prasugrel and high-dose clopidogrel as assessed by VASP-phosphorylation and light transmission aggregometry

Platelet inhibition as measured by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) and light transmission aggregometry (LTA) have shown concordance following dosing of clopidogrel. No reports have directly compared the VASP assay and LTA at the levels of P2Y(12) blockade after loading doses (LDs) of prasugrel or high dose clopidogrel (600 and 900 mg). The aim was to compare the VASP assay and LTA during the loading dose phase of a comparative study of prasugrel and clopidogrel. Prasugrel 60 mg LD/10 mg maintenance dose (MD) and clopidogrel 300 mg/75 mg and 600 mg/75 mg LD/MD regimens were compared in a 3-way crossover study in 41 healthy, aspirin-free subjects. Each LD was followed by seven daily MDs and a 14-day washout period. P2Y(12) receptor blockade was estimated using the VASP assay, expressed as platelet reactivity index (VASP-PRI). Platelet aggregation was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (20 and 5 microM ADP). Twenty-four hours after prasgurel 60 mg or clopidogrel 300 mg and 600 mg, respectively, VASP-PRI decreased from approximately 80% to 8.9%, 54.7%, and 39.0%, and maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) decreased from approximately 79% to 10.8%, 42.7%, and 31.2%, with an overall VASP:MPA correlation of 0.88 (p < 0.01). VASP assay responses after the clopidogrel LDs showed a wider range of values (300 mg: 0-93%; 600 mg: 0-80%) than prasugrel (0-13%); MPA responses followed a similar trend. Pearsons correlation suggested a strong agreement between VASP and LTA (20 microM ADP) for MPA (r = 0.86, p < 0.0001). VASP and LTA demonstrated concordance across the response range of P2Y(12) receptor blockade following thienopyridine LDs.

Prasugrel pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in subjects with moderate renal impairment and end‐stage renal disease

Objective:  The pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) responses to prasugrel were compared in three studies of healthy subjects vs. those with moderate or end‐stage renal impairment.

Effect of ranitidine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel

ABSTRACT Objective: Clopidogrel is an oral thienopyridine antiplatelet agent indicated for the treatment of atherothrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Prasugrel, a novel oral thienopyridine, is under investigation for the reduction of atherothrombotic events in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Prasugrels solubility decreases with increasing pH, suggesting that concomitantly-administered medications that increase gastric pH may lower the rate and/or extent of prasugrel absorption. This study evaluated the influence of ranitidine coadministration on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the respective active metabolite of prasugrel and clopidogrel. Research design and methods: In this open-label, two-period, two-treatment, crossover study, 47 healthy male subjects were randomized to one of two study arms, receiving either prasugrel (60-mg loading dose [LD], 10-mg maintenance dose [MD] for 7 days; n = 23) or clopidogrel (600-mg LD, 75-mg MD for 7 days; n = 24). In one treatment period, subjects received prasugrel or clopidogrel alone, and in the alternate period received the same thienopyridine with ranitidine (150 mg twice daily, starting 1 day before the LD). Pharmacokinetic parameter estimates (AUC0−t last, Cmax, and tmax) and inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) by light transmission aggregometry were assessed at multiple time points after the LD and final MD. Results: Ranitidine had no clinically significant effect on the area under the plasma-concentration-time curve (AUC) and did not affect the time to Cmax (tmax) for active metabolites of either prasugrel or clopidogrel. It reduced the geometric mean maximum concentrations of active metabolite (Cmax) after a prasugrel and clopidogrel LD by 14% and 10%, respectively, but these differences were not statistically significant. When coadministered with a 60-mg prasugrel LD, ranitidine did not affect the time to, or magnitude of, peak IPA, but did result in a modest reduction at 0.5 h from 67.4 to 55.1% (p < 0.001). Ranitidine did not affect prasugrel IPA during MD. For clopidogrel, IPA was not affected by ranitidine. Prasugrel and clopidogrel were both well-tolerated, with/without ranitidine. Conclusions: Results from this study suggest that there is no significant drug–drug interaction between oral ranitidine therapy and concomitantly-administered prasugrel or clopidogrel.

Dose-dependent inhibition of human platelet aggregation by prasugrel and its interaction with aspirin in healthy subjects.

The aims of this open-label, randomized, dose-escalation pharmacodynamic study of prasugrel, an orally active antiplatelet agent, were to assess its interaction with aspirin (ASA, 325 mg) in healthy subjects after a loading dose (LD) and subsequent 5 days of once-daily maintenance doses (MD) of prasugrel or the active comparator, clopidogrel. We measured platelet aggregation induced by ADP, collagen, and TRAP and compared effects on maximal and residual platelet aggregation responses. On a background of ASA, subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 prasugrel treatment groups (LD/MD in mg: 20/5, 30/7.5, 40/10, or 60/15; n = 8/group) or to clopidogrel 300 mg LD/75 mg MD (n = 11). Prasugrel dose-dependently inhibited ADP-induced platelet aggregation and exhibited higher levels of platelet inhibition than clopidogrel or ASA alone. Prasugrel plus ASA resulted in additive inhibition of collagen- and TRAP-induced platelet aggregation. Although inhibition of residual aggregation was greater than inhibition of maximal aggregation, values were highly correlated. The safety and tolerability of prasugrel plus ASA were also monitored. Within the limitations of the study, prasugrel was found to be well tolerated when dosed as LD followed by MD in the presence of ASA and provided greater platelet inhibition than ASA alone.

Inhibition of platelet aggregation with prasugrel and clopidogrel: an integrated analysis in 846 subjects.

This integrated analysis compared speed of onset, level of platelet inhibition, and response variability to prasugrel and clopidogrel in healthy subjects and in patients with stable coronary artery disease with data pooled from 24 clinical pharmacology studies. Data from subjects (N = 846) were categorized into the following treatment groups: prasugrel 60 mg loading dose (LD)/10 mg maintenance dose (MD), clopidogrel 300 mg LD/75 mg MD, or clopidogrel 600 mg LD/75 mg MDs. Maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) and inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) to 5 and 20 μM ADP were assessed by turbidimetric aggregometry. A linear mixed-effect model compared the MPA and IPA between treatments over time points evaluated in the integrated database, and covariates affecting platelet inhibition were identified. Prasugrel 60 mg LD resulted in faster onset, greater magnitude, and more consistent levels of inhibition of platelet function compared to either clopidogrel 300 mg or 600 mg LDs. Greater and more consistent levels of platelet inhibition were observed with the prasugrel 10 mg MD compared to the clopidogrel 75 mg MD. This integrated analysis confirms the findings of earlier individual studies, that prasugrel achieves faster onset of greater extent and more consistent platelet inhibition compared to the approved and higher loading doses of clopidogrel. Gender, race, body weight, and age were identified as statistically significant covariates impacting platelet inhibition.

Switching directly to prasugrel from clopidogrel results in greater inhibition of platelet aggregation in aspirin-treated subjects

Prasugrel, a novel P2Y12 antagonist, achieves faster onset and greater inhibition of platelet aggregation than clopidogrel 300 and 600 mg loading doses (LD). We studied the safety, time course, and level of platelet inhibition when switching directly from clopidogrel 75 mg maintenance dose (MD) to a prasugrel 60 mg LD/10 mg MD or 10 mg MD regimen. Healthy subjects (n = 39) on aspirin (81 mg/d) received a clopidogrel 600 mg LD followed by 10 days of clopidogrel MD (75 mg/d). Subjects were then randomized without a washout period to prasugrel 60 mg LD (n = 16) followed by 10 days of prasugrel MD (10 mg/d) or to prasugrel MD (10 mg/d, n = 19) for 11 days. Maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) to 20 µM ADP was measured by turbidimetric aggregometry. In subjects on clopidogrel 75 mg MD, mean MPA decreased from 39 to 12% by 30 minutes, and to 5% by 1 hour after a prasugrel 60 mg LD (p < 0.001 for both) and from 37 to 28% (p < 0.001) by 1 hour after a prasugrel 10 mg MD. During prasugrel MD, a new pharmacodynamic steady state MPA of ∼24% (p < 0.01 vs. clopidogrel MD) occurred within four to five days of switching from clopidogrel. Changing from clopidogrel to prasugrel did not increase bleeding episodes or other adverse events. Switching directly from clopidogrel MD to either prasugrel LD or MD was well tolerated and resulted in significantly greater levels of platelet inhibition than a clopidogrel 75 mg MD.