Cost-effectiveness of universal and platelet reactivity assay-driven antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndrome

Assessing the efficacy of VerifyNow platelet-function testing in predicting postoperative thromboembolic complications of neuroendovascular surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis (part 1)

BACKGROUND

Despite the heavily debated use of routine platelet-function testing, the VerifyNow Platelet Reactivity Unit (PRU) assay has been increasingly adopted as standard of care for assessing risk of postoperative thromboembolic complications of neuroendovascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the relationship between platelet response and risk of ischemic events from neuroendovascular surgery, assess the efficacy of point-of-care platelet-function testing in predicting thromboembolic outcomes, and assess whether a clinically useful threshold for platelet response can be defined in order to standardize guidelines.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched. Following deduplication, articles were first screened for relevance by title and abstract, followed by full text.

RESULTS

Of 735 resultant articles, 22 studies consisting of 3266 patients undergoing neuroendovascular intervention were included. Diagnoses included both intracranial and extracranial pathologies, of which 45.8% were treated with flow diversion, 16.4% with stent-assisted coil embolization, 15.8% with intracranial stenting, 12.0% with simple coil embolization, 3.4% with balloon-assisted coil embolization, 3.6% with extracranial stenting, and 3.0% with an alternate method. 54.5% (12/22) of studies determined platelet hyporesponse to be an independent predictor of postoperative thromboembolic complications, with 27.3% (6/22) of studies reporting a similar, but non-statistically significant trend. 18.2% (4/22) of studies found no relationship between platelet response and postoperative thromboembolic complications. The estimated clinical threshold for PRU to prevent thromboembolic complications varied greatly across studies (Range: > 144-295 PRU). Meta-analysis found platelet hyporesponse to have a 2.23-fold increased risk of thromboembolic complications compared to normoresponders (RR = 2.23, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

While PRU demonstrates a significant predictive value for postoperative thromboembolic complications of neuroendovascular surgery, the target therapeutic threshold for minimizing ischemic events remains unclear. Further studies, such as large multicenter cohorts of the existing data, are needed to standardize guidelines.

Bleeding risk in patients prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy and triple therapy after coronary interventions: the ADAPTT retrospective population-based cohort studies

Background

Bleeding among populations undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting and among conservatively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome exposed to different dual antiplatelet therapy and triple therapy (i.e. dual antiplatelet therapy plus an anticoagulant) has not been previously quantified.

Objectives

The objectives were to estimate hazard ratios for bleeding for different antiplatelet and triple therapy regimens, estimate resources and the associated costs of treating bleeding events, and to extend existing economic models of the cost-effectiveness of dual antiplatelet therapy.

Design

The study was designed as three retrospective population-based cohort studies emulating target randomised controlled trials.

Setting

The study was set in primary and secondary care in England from 2010 to 2017.

Participants

Participants were patients aged ≥ 18 years undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting or emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (for acute coronary syndrome), or conservatively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Data sources

Data were sourced from linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics.

Interventions

Coronary artery bypass grafting and conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome: aspirin (reference) compared with aspirin and clopidogrel. Percutaneous coronary intervention: aspirin and clopidogrel (reference) compared with aspirin and prasugrel (ST elevation myocardial infarction only) or aspirin and ticagrelor.

Main outcome measures

Primary outcome: any bleeding events up to 12 months after the index event. Secondary outcomes: major or minor bleeding, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, mortality from bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke, additional coronary intervention and major adverse cardiovascular events.

Results

The incidence of any bleeding was 5% among coronary artery bypass graft patients, 10% among conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome patients and 9% among emergency percutaneous coronary intervention patients, compared with 18% among patients prescribed triple therapy. Among coronary artery bypass grafting and conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome patients, dual antiplatelet therapy, compared with aspirin, increased the hazards of any bleeding (coronary artery bypass grafting: hazard ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.69; conservatively-managed acute coronary syndrome: hazard ratio 1.72, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 2.57) and major adverse cardiovascular events (coronary artery bypass grafting: hazard ratio 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 3.46; conservatively-managed acute coronary syndrome: hazard ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.78). Among emergency percutaneous coronary intervention patients, dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, compared with dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, increased the hazard of any bleeding (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.82), but did not reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.27). Among ST elevation myocardial infarction percutaneous coronary intervention patients, dual antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel, compared with dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, increased the hazard of any bleeding (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 2.12), but did not reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.51). Health-care costs in the first year did not differ between dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin monotherapy among either coronary artery bypass grafting patients (mean difference £94, 95% confidence interval -£155 to £763) or conservatively managed acute coronary syndrome patients (mean difference £610, 95% confidence interval -£626 to £1516), but among emergency percutaneous coronary intervention patients were higher for those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor than for those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel, although for only patients on concurrent proton pump inhibitors (mean difference £1145, 95% confidence interval £269 to £2195).

Conclusions

This study suggests that more potent dual antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of bleeding without reducing the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. These results should be carefully considered by clinicians and decision-makers alongside randomised controlled trial evidence when making recommendations about dual antiplatelet therapy.

Limitations

The estimates for bleeding and major adverse cardiovascular events may be biased from unmeasured confounding and the exclusion of an eligible subgroup of patients who could not be assigned an intervention. Because of these limitations, a formal cost-effectiveness analysis could not be conducted.

Future work

Future work should explore the feasibility of using other UK data sets of routinely collected data, less susceptible to bias, to estimate the benefit and harm of antiplatelet interventions.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN76607611.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of a novel platelet assay for guiding dual antiplatelet therapy duration in acute coronary syndrome patients following percutaneous coronary intervention

OBJECTIVE

Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) influences ischemic and bleeding events. Platelet expression of constant fragment of immunoglobulin, low affinity IIa, receptor (FcγRIIa) independently predicts risk of ischemic complications and is proposed as a tool to guide individualized care.

METHODS

We used a Markov model to predict lifetime ischemic and bleeding events and healthcare costs in acute myocardial infarction (MI) patients treated with PCI and DAPT and to project cost-effectiveness of platelet FcγRIIa-assay-guided care (30:3 months DAPT for patients at high: low ischemic risk) versus current standard care (12 months DAPT) from the perspective of the US healthcare system. Model inputs included assay sensitivity and specificity, ischemic and bleeding event rates, and impacts on quality of life, mortality, and costs. Assay cost was $90. Sensitivity analyses were conducted over a range of plausible clinical and cost assumptions.

RESULTS

Under base case assumptions, platelet FcγRIIa-assay-guided DAPT duration was projected to increase lifetime costs by $19 versus standard care, with an associated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $436 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Assay-guided DAPT duration was consistent with high-value care (ICER < $50 000/QALY gained) over a broad range of alternative assumptions.

CONCLUSION

Based on a decision-analytic model, for patients with MI treated with PCI, the additional costs of the platelet FcγRIIa assay for guiding DAPT duration would be largely offset by reductions in downstream event-related costs, and assay-guided care would be highly cost-effective by current standards. These findings require confirmation in prospective studies and in a randomized clinical trial of assay-guided versus nonassay-guided DAPT duration.

Cost-Effectiveness of Ticagrelor for Acute Coronary Disease to Prevent Cardiovascular Events in Three Hospitals in Indonesia

Background: Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are life-threatening CVD associated with Indonesia's significant health and economic burdens. The study objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor in reducing CV endpoint in the Indonesia setting. Methods: Markov model was used as a decision analysis to compare ticagrelor with clopidogrel. We constructed decision tree model included four health conditions (no additional events, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, and any cause death), The probability of each state and quality-adjusted life years were derived from the PLATO trial and Indonesia life table. The outcome's resource consumption and associated costs were collected from three hospitals (public, national referral, and private hospitals) in Indonesia. The study used 5 years and lifetime horizon and discounting rate of 3%. Results: The incremental QALYs and life-year gained (LYG) of ticagrelor in five years was 0.0410 and 0.0462, respectively; in a lifetime was 0.0828, and 0.0947, respectively. The ICER per QALY of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in private, national referral, and public hospitals was USD 2390.276, USD 3813.638, USD 1278.361, respectively for five years; and USD 2471.392, USD 5453.987, USD 2343.269, respectively for a lifetime. The probability of ticagrelor to be cost-effective was about 66.6% on a five-year and 99.7% on a lifetime with WTP USD 3634. Conclusion: Compared to the clopidogrel, QALYs and life-year gained of use ticagrelor higher. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in five years and lifetime model showed under one-time GDP, it means the use of ticagrelor was vastly cost-effective and acceptable to apply in the Indonesian clinical setting.

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none?

Purpose

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) studies how inherited genetic variations in individuals affect drug absorption, distribution, and metabolism. PGx panel testing can potentially help improve efficiency and accuracy in individualizing therapy. This study compared the cost-effectiveness between preemptive PGx panel testing, reactive PGx panel testing and usual care (no testing) in cardiovascular disease management.

Methods

We developed a decision analytic model from the US payer’s perspective for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients ≥45 years old, using a short-term decision tree and long-term Markov model. The testing panel included the following gene–drug pairs: CYP2C19–clopidogrel, CYP2C9/VKORC1–warfarin, and SLCO1B1–statins with 30 test-return days. Costs were reported in 2019 US dollars and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER = ΔCost/ΔQALY), assuming 3% discount rate for costs and QALYs. Scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of demographics, risk level, and follow-up timeframe.

Results

Preemptive testing was found to be cost-effective compared with usual care (ICER $86,227/QALY) at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY while reactive testing was not (ICER $148,726/QALY). Sensitivity analyses suggested that our cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to longer follow-up, and the age group 45–64 years.

Conclusion

Compared with usual care, preemptive PGx panel testing was cost-effective in cardiovascular disease management.

The Role of CYP450 Drug Metabolism in Precision Cardio-Oncology

As many novel cancer therapies continue to emerge, the field of Cardio-Oncology (or onco-cardiology) has become crucial to prevent, monitor and treat cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity. Furthermore, given the narrow therapeutic window of most cancer therapies, drug-drug interactions are prevalent in the cancer population. Consequently, there is an increased risk of affecting drug efficacy or predisposing individual patients to adverse side effects. Here we review the role of cytochrome P450 (CYP450) enzymes in the field of Cardio-Oncology. We highlight the importance of cardiac medications in preventive Cardio-Oncology for high-risk patients or in the management of cardiotoxicities during or following cancer treatment. Common interactions between Oncology and Cardiology drugs are catalogued, emphasizing the impact of differential metabolism of each substrate drug on unpredictable drug bioavailability and consequent inter-individual variability in treatment response or development of cardiovascular toxicity. This inter-individual variability in bioavailability and subsequent response can be further enhanced by genomic variants in CYP450, or by modifications of CYP450 gene, RNA or protein expression or function in various 'omics' related to precision medicine. Thus, we advocate for an individualized approach to each patient by a multidisciplinary team with clinical pharmacists evaluating a treatment plan tailored to a practice of precision Cardio-Oncology. This review may increase awareness of these key concepts in the rapidly evolving field of Cardio-Oncology.

Cost-effectiveness of Platelet Function-Guided Strategy with Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor

Some patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) can still exhibit heightened residual platelet reactivity (HRPR), which is potentially linked to adverse vascular outcomes. Better tailored DAPT strategies are needed to address this medical need. Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of guided DAPT with clopidogrel or ticagrelor in addition to aspirin when using VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ testing in post-ACS patients. Methods: The costs were calculated per 1,000 patients aged >55 years. It was assumed that all patients received either generic clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 1 year, and underwent VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay testing before DAPT maintenance. Results: Guided DAPT will prevent five more MIs and six more deaths per 1,000 patients than a standard prescription of generic clopidogrel. The total predictive value of costs per patient is 32% lower if a guided strategy is used than if ticagrelor is given to all patients. Conclusion: Assessment of heightened residual platelet reactivity with P2Y₁₂ assay in triaging DAPT post-ACS patients for 1 year is a cost-effective strategy that would reduce financial burden compared to routine administration of more expensive antiplatelet agents.

Universal versus platelet reactivity assay-driven use of P2Y12 inhibitors in acute coronary syndrome patients

Platelet reactivity assays (PRAs) can predict patients’ likely response to clopidogrel. As ticagrelor and prasugrel are typically considered first-line agents for acute coronary syndrome in Europe, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of universal compared to PRA-driven selection of these agents. A Markov model was used to calculate five-year costs (2013£/€), quality-adjusted life-years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for one-year of universal ticagrelor or prasugrel (given to all) compared to each agents’ corresponding PRA-driven strategy (ticagrelor/prasugrel in those with high platelet reactivity [HPR, >208 on the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay], others given generic clopidogrel). We assumed patients had their index event at 65–70 years of age and had a 42.7% incidence of HPR 24–48 hours post-revascularisation. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of six countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and United Kingdom) and used a one-year cycle length. Event data for P2Y12 inhibitors were taken from multinational randomised trials and adjusted using country-specific epidemiologic data. Neither universal ticagrelor nor prasugrel were found to be cost-effective (all ICERs >40,250€ or £36,600/QALY) compared to their corresponding PRA-driven strategies in any of the countries evaluated. Results were sensitive to differences in P2Y12 Inhibitors costs and drug-specific relative risks of major adverse cardiac events. Monte Carlo simulation suggested universal ticagrelor or prasugrel were cost-effective in only 25–44% and 11–17% of 10,000 iterations compared to their respective PRA-driven strategies, when applying a willingness-to-pay threshold = €30,000 or £20,000/QALY. In conclusion, the universal use of newer P2Y12 inhibitors is not likely cost-effective compared to PRA-driven strategies.

Contemporary Trends in Oral Antiplatelet Agent Use in Patients Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Recent trials demonstrated the efficacy of prasugrel and ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in the reduction of cardiovascular complications in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, it is unclear how use of the 3 antiplatelet medications has changed in commercially insured patients since the advent of the new agents.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) describe the adoption of prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the onset of ACS and (b) explore patient factors associated with the selection of the drug to provide insight into utilization patterns of these antiplatelet agents.

METHODS

Patients who received a new dispensing of an antiplatelet agent following a hospitalization for a PCI administered for ACS were identified from insurance claims between 2009 and 2013. Demographics and comorbid conditions were determined based on a 6-month period before the ACS event. Longitudinal trends in antiplatelet agent selection were illustrated using descriptive statistics segmented by month and quarter. Using logistic regressions with stepwise model selection, factors associated with use of the newer medications, as well as with the selection between ticagrelor and prasugrel, were identified.

RESULTS

The analysis included 66,335 subjects. The use of clopidogrel decreased from 100% to roughly 65% of total antiplatelet agent use by the end of 2011 and leveled off thereafter. The introduction of ticagrelor in 2011 coincided with a drop in prasugrel initiation from 35%-18% by December 2013. The use of new agents as opposed to use of clopidogrel was associated with younger age (< 65 years), male gender, and a diagnosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. In addition, conditions increasing mortality and risk of cardiovascular complication were associated with higher odds of using clopidogrel. The odds of using ticagrelor over prasugrel increased with older age and history of a cerebrovascular event.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2013, clopidogrel remained the most prescribed agent. Meanwhile, ticagrelor had gradually replaced a substantial portion of prasugrel initiation. Further investigation into outcomes associated with the newer agents, as well as reasons behind the conservative use of the antiplatelet agents, is warranted.

DISCLOSURES

No funding was received for the conduct of this study. DiDomenico received an honorarium from Amgen for the preparation of a heart failure drug monograph for Pharmacy Practice News and was a co-investigator on funded research for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. DiDomenico also serves as an advisory board member for a heart failure program at Otsuka America Pharmaceuticals and as an advisory board member at Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Touchette has received unrestricted grant funding from Cardinal Health and Sunovion Pharmaceuticals and has also served as a consultant to and director of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Practice-Based Research Network on a study funded by Pfizer. None of the authors of this study are involved in financial or personal relationships with agencies, institutions, or organizations that inappropriately influenced the statistical analysis plan or interpretation of the results. Study concept and design were contributed by Kim, Lee, Touchette, and Walton, with assistance from DiDomenico and Ardati. Kim and Lee collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by Lee, DiDomenico, and Ardati, along with Kim and Walton and assisted by Touchette. The manuscript was written by Kim and Walton, with assistance from the other authors, and revised by Kim, Walton, and Lee, with assistance from the other authors.

Association of measured platelet reactivity with changes in P2Y12 receptor inhibitor therapy and outcomes after myocardial infarction: Insights into routine clinical practice from the TReatment with ADP receptor iNhibitorS: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events after Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the use of platelet function testing to guide choice of P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor therapy in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

We studied 671 myocardial infarction (MI) patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention in the TRANSLATE-ACS Registry who had VerifyNow platelet function testing performed while on clopidogrel treatment during their index hospitalization (April 2010-October 2012).

RESULTS

High platelet reactivity (>208 platelet reactivity units [PRU]) was present in 261 (38.9%) patients. Clopidogrel was switched in-hospital to prasugrel in 80 (30.7%) patients with high platelet reactivity and 18 (4.4%) patients with therapeutic platelet reactivity (≤208 PRU). Among high platelet reactivity patients, switch to prasugrel was associated with lower major adverse cardiovascular events (death, MI, stroke, or unplanned revascularization) at 1year (10.0% vs 22.7%, P=.02; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.85, P=.02) and no significant difference in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher bleeding (23.8% vs 22.1%, P=.77; adjusted OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.48-1.7, P=.77) compared with patients continued on clopidogrel. No significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular event (22.2% vs 12.8%, P=.25; adjusted OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.47-7.3, P=.38) or bleeding (22.2% vs 19.4%, P=.77; adjusted OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.27-6.8, P=.72) were observed among therapeutic platelet reactivity patients between switching and continuation on clopidogrel.

CONCLUSIONS

Only one-third of percutaneous coronary intervention-treated MI patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity were switched to a more potent P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor. Intensification of antiplatelet therapy was associated with lower risk of ischemic events at 1year among HPR patients.

Latin American Clinical Epidemiology Network Series - Paper 8: Ticagrelor was cost-effective vs. clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome in Chile

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the use of ticagrelor as a substitute for clopidogrel for secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome in Chile.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a Markov model: Safety and effectiveness data of ticagrelor were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Costs are expressed in Chilean pesos (CLP) as of 2013. The evaluation was conducted from the payer standpoint. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis comprising discount rates and national cost variability was done. A budget impact analysis estimated for 2015 was conducted to calculate the total cost for both treatments.

RESULTS

The ICER with a discount rate of 6% for ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel was CLP 4,893,126 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (=9,689 US$). In the budget impact analysis for the baseline scenario, considering 100% of treatment, coverage, and adherence, ticagrelor represented an additional cost of CLP 5,233,854,272, for 979 QALYs gained compared with clopidogrel.

CONCLUSIONS

Ticagrelor is cost-effective in comparison with clopidogrel for the secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome. These findings are similar to those reported in other international cost-effectiveness studies.

Cost–effectiveness analysis of personalized antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Aim: This study aimed to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of pharmacogenetic-guided (PG-guided) and platelet reactivity testing-guided antiplatelet therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods: A decision-analytic model was simulated including four antiplatelet strategies: universal clopidogrel 75 mg daily, universal alternative P2Y12 inhibitor (prasugrel or ticagrelor), PG-guided therapy, and platelet reactivity testing-guided therapy. Results: PG-guided therapy was the preferred option with lowest cost (US$75,208) and highest quality-adjusted life years gained (7.6249 quality-adjusted life years). The base-case results were robust in sensitivity analysis. Conclusion: PG-guided antiplatelet therapy showed the highest probability to be preferred antiplatelet strategy for acute coronary syndrome patients with percutaneous coronary intervention.

Impact of a high-fat meal on assessment of clopidogrel-induced platelet inhibition in healthy subjects

Background

Ideal conditions for platelet reactivity testing are critical for optimal selection of a P2Y12 inhibitor. Data are inconsistent regarding the impact of high-fat meals on test assessment.

Methods

Participants included 12 healthy subjects not taking antiplatelet drugs after a 12-hour fast. After baseline assessment, subjects were given a 600 mg dose of clopidogrel. Four hours later, maximum platelet inhibition was tested in the fasting state by light transmission aggregometry (LTA), VerifyNow P2Y₁₂, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP), and whole blood aggregometry (WBA). Subjects were then provided a high-fat meal, and platelet function was evaluated two hours later. Change in measured platelet aggregation by LTA was the primary endpoint of the study. The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test was used to compare the change in platelet reactivity between fasting and non-fasting conditions. The Spearman rho (ρ) correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the association between fasting platelet reactivity and the change following a high-fat meal.

Results

No significant change occurred in maximal light transmission, as assessed by LTA with 5 μM ADP (p = 0.15) and with 20 μM ADP (p = 0.07). There was a significant change in the area under the curve with 5 μM ADP (p = 0.03) but not with 20 μM ADP (p = 0.18). Although there was no significant change with the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay (p = 0.16), the change was correlated with the initial fasting value (Spearman’s rho p = 0.008). The VASP assay and WBA varied minimally.

Conclusion

The high-fat meal did not significantly alter platelet function assessment of commonly used platelet function tests. Greater intra-subject variability existed for the optically-dependent compared with non-optically dependent tests.

Trial registration

NCT01307657.

Genotype- and phenotype-directed antiplatelet therapy selection in patients with acute coronary syndromes

Although dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been a standard treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) for over a decade, only recently have therapeutic options beyond aspirin and clopidogrel become available. Additional treatment options are particularly useful because of the documented history of variability in antiplatelet response. This article reviews the current treatment options for DAPT in ACS, and reviews both genotype- and phenotype-guided methods for determining optimal antiplatelet therapy for patients with ACS. Additionally, recommendations from current guidelines as well as expert commentary are provided for the use of available testing methods to determine optimal DAPT for ACS patients.

A model-based analysis of the clinical and economic impact of personalising P2Y12-receptor inhibition with platelet function testing in acute coronary syndrome patients

Although some observational studies reported that the measured level of P2Y12-inhibition is predictive for thrombotic events, the clinical and economic benefit of incorporating PFT to personalize P2Y12-receptor directed antiplatelet treatment is unknown. Here, we assessed the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of selecting P2Y12-inhibitors based on platelet function testing (PFT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing PCI. A decision model was developed to analyse the health economic effects of different strategies. PFT-guided treatment was compared with the three options of general clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor treatment. In the PFT arm, low responders to clopidogrel received prasugrel, while normal responders carried on with clopidogrel. The associated endpoints in the model were cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis and major bleeding. With a simulated cohort of 10,000 patients treated for one year, there were 93 less events in the PFT arm compared to general clopidogrel. In prasugrel and ticagrelor arms, 110 and 86 events were prevented compared to clopidogrel treatment, respectively. The total expected costs (including event costs, drug costs and PFT costs) for generic clopidogrel therapy were US$ 1,059/patient. In the PFT arm, total costs were US$ 1,494, while in the prasugrel and ticagrelor branches they were US$ 3,102 and US$ 3,771, respectively. The incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio (ICER) was US$ 46,770 for PFT-guided therapy, US$ 185,783 for prasugrel and US$ 315,360 for ticagrelor. In this model-based analysis, a PFT-guided therapy may have fewer adverse outcomes than general treatment with clopidogrel and may be more cost-effective than prasugrel or ticagrelor treatment in ACS patients undergoing PCI.

Current Concepts in the Clinical Utility of Platelet Reactivity Testing

The pharmacodynamic effect of clopidogrel varies among individuals; approximately a third will have high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to adenosine diphosphate and may benefit from more intensive antiplatelet therapy. Platelet reactivity testing has an important role in monitoring the therapeutic efficiency of clopidogrel and the safety of more potent drugs that confer an increased bleeding risk, because it provides a direct measure of the biological effect of these drugs. Numerous studies have demonstrated an association between HTPR and the risk of cardiac events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). While the prognostic value of platelet reactivity testing following PCI has been demonstrated repeatedly in cohort studies and meta-analyses, randomised controlled studies investigating the clinical utility of the technique to guide treatment decisions failed to improve clinical outcomes of clopidogrel-treated patients undergoing stent implantation. Available data suggest that platelet function monitoring may be carried out in clopidogrel-treated patients with a higher risk of thrombotic events. These include patient risk factors such as body mass index (BMI), type 2 diabetes, and those prior unexpected ischemic events such as stent thrombosis, as well as procedural risk factors. As we move towards conclusively defining a therapeutic window associated with both cardiovascular (upper threshold) and bleeding risk (lower threshold) for antiplatelet agents, platelet reactivity testing will become a central tool in the practice of personalised strategies.