Inhibition of clinical benefits of aspirin on first myocardial infarction by nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs

Inhibition of atherosclerosis progression by modular micelles

Atherosclerosis is a chronic disease initiated by lipid-mediated vascular inflammation. From the perspective of conventional treatment, it is difficult to achieve good therapeutic effects via regulation of a single lipid or anti-inflammatory effects. Herein, we designed an amphiphilic low molecular weight heparin-unsaturated fatty acid conjugate (LMWH-uFA) that acted as both an antiatherosclerotic agent and a nanocarrier with self-delivery properties. Structurally, LMWH-uFA self-assembled to form micelles with LMWH as the shell and uFA as the core, without any additives, which guaranteed their biosafety. Functionally, the hydrophilic segment, LMWH, prevented monocyte adhesion to inhibit early vascular inflammation, and the hydrophobic segment, uFA, could participate in the regulation of blood lipids. The anti-inflammatory drug rapamycin (RAP) was encapsulated in the micellar core, which improved its water solubility, and cooperated with LMWH to achieve targeted blockade of the vascular inflammation cascade at P-selectin. The three treatment modules, LMWH, uFA and RAP, were integrated into one system for different therapeutic targets in anticipation of better efficacy. In an atherosclerosis mouse model, RAP-loaded NPs significantly reduced the plaque area and showed satisfactory curative effects, which were related to the targeting of lipid regulation and inflammation. Thus, these modular micellar nanoparticles offer a promising approach for the clinical treatment of atherosclerosis.

Programmed prodrug breaking the feedback regulation of P-selectin in plaque inflammation for atherosclerotic therapy

Inflammation is the main driver of the aggravation of arteriosclerosis, and the complex inflammatory response in plaque is usually the result of the interaction of various cells and cytokines. Therefore, it is difficult to comprehensively regulate the inflammatory process of arteriosclerosis by intervening a single target, resulting in the poor effect of existing treatment method. Based on our clinical findings that P-selectin stably and highly expressed in patients' plaque endothelial cells, the programmed prodrug, low molecular weight heparin-indomethacin nanoparticles (LI NPs), were established as anti-inflammatory agent to multiphase inhibit arteriosclerosis by cascade interference of P-selectin. Structurally, LI NPs was obtained by simple esterification of low molecular weight heparin and indomethacin without any additives, guaranteeing the biocompatibility and applicability of LI NPs. Functionally, LI NPs could interfere with P-selectin in the inflammatory process, such as inhibiting macrophage adhesion, reducing the secretion of inflammatory factors, and inducing macrophage apoptosis. In the arteriosclerosis mice model, LI NPs significantly reduced the plaque area and showed satisfactory curative effect, which is related to the intervention of the multiphase inflammation between endothelial cells and macrophages. In conclusion, the programmed prodrug LI NPs offered a promising approach for the clinical therapy of arteriosclerosis.

Functional requirements of a mobile-based application for stroke self-management: A Delphi study

This study aimed to determine the functional requirements of a self-management mobile application for stroke survivors. For extracting the initial functional requirements, a literature review as well as interviews with 17 patients and caregivers were done. The results were analyzed using the content analysis method. The initial extracted requirements were then provided to the specialists by the Delphi technique to determine the final functional requirements. Content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI) were calculated according to the Lawshe model. Criteria for item approval included CVR > 0.49 and CVI > 0.79. Finally, the approved items were turned into a five-point Likert scale questionnaire and were then provided to 53 experts and items with a mean score higher than 3.75 were approved. Functional requirements including creating a user account, educational material, support services, providing reminders and alerts for drugs administration and physician appointments, and rehabilitation exercises (to improve balance, upper and lower extremities rehabilitation, and activities of daily living (ADLs)) were approved. Most of the approved functional requirements were related to rehabilitation exercises for improving upper limb motor function. The experts did not approve the requirements for using splints and slings or the recommendation to take some medications.

Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Low-dose aspirin is used for primary cardiovascular disease prevention and may have benefits for colorectal cancer prevention.

OBJECTIVE

To review the benefits and harms of aspirin in primary cardiovascular disease prevention and colorectal cancer prevention to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through January 2021; literature surveillance through January 21, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of low-dose aspirin (≤100 mg/d) compared with placebo or no intervention in primary prevention populations.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Single extraction, verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative synthesis using Peto fixed-effects meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cardiovascular disease events and mortality, all-cause mortality, colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, major bleeding, and hemorrhagic stroke.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs (N = 134 470) and 1 pilot trial (N = 400) of low-dose aspirin for primary cardiovascular disease prevention were included. Low-dose aspirin was associated with a significant decrease in major cardiovascular disease events (odds ratio [OR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85-0.95]; 11 RCTs [n = 134 470]; I2 = 0%; range in absolute effects, -2.5% to 0.1%). Results for individual cardiovascular disease outcomes were significant, with similar magnitude of benefit. Aspirin was not significantly associated with reductions in cardiovascular disease mortality or all-cause mortality. There was limited trial evidence on benefits for colorectal cancer, with the findings highly variable by length of follow-up and statistically significant only when considering long-term observational follow-up beyond randomized trial periods. Low-dose aspirin was associated with significant increases in total major bleeding (OR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.32-1.57]; 10 RCTs [n = 133 194]; I2 = 4.7%; range in absolute effects, 0.1% to 1.0%) and in site-specific bleeding, with similar magnitude.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Low-dose aspirin was associated with small absolute risk reductions in major cardiovascular disease events and small absolute increases in major bleeding. Colorectal cancer results were less robust and highly variable.

Role of oxylipins generated from dietary PUFAs in the modulation of endothelial cell function

Oxylipins, which are circulating bioactive lipids generated from polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) by cyclooxygenase, lipooxygenase and cytochrome P450 enzymes, have diverse effects on endothelial cells. Although studies of the effects of oxylipins on endothelial cell function are accumulating, a review that provides a comprehensive compilation of current knowledge and recent advances in the context of vascular homeostasis is lacking. This is the first compilation of the various in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo reports to examine the effects and potential mechanisms of action of oxylipins on endothelial cells. The aggregate data indicate docosahexaenoic acid-derived oxylipins consistently show beneficial effects related to key endothelial cell functions, whereas oxylipins derived from other PUFAs exhibit both positive and negative effects. Furthermore, information is lacking for certain oxylipin classes, such as those derived from α-linolenic acid, which suggests additional studies are required to achieve a full understanding of how oxylipins affect endothelial cells.

Practice Advisory on the Appropriate Use of NSAIDs in Primary Care

Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective and nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are important in managing acute and chronic pain secondary to inflammation. As a greater understanding of the risks of gastrointestinal (GI), cardiovascular (CV) and renal events with NSAIDs use has emerged, guidelines have evolved to reflect differences in risks among NSAIDs. Updated guidelines have yet to reflect new evidence from recent trials which showed similar CV event rates with celecoxib compared to naproxen and ibuprofen, and significantly better GI tolerability for celecoxib. This practice advisory paper aims to present consensus statements and associated guidance regarding appropriate NSAID use based on a review of current evidence by a multidisciplinary group of expert clinicians. This paper is especially intended to guide primary care practitioners within Asia in the appropriate use of NSAIDs in primary care. Following a literature review, group members used a modified Delphi consensus process to determine agreement with selected recommendations. Agreement with a statement by 75% of total voting members was defined a priori as consensus. For low GI risk patients, any nonselective NSAID plus proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or celecoxib alone is acceptable treatment when CV risk is low; for high CV risk patients, low-dose celecoxib or naproxen plus PPI is appropriate. For high GI risk patients, celecoxib plus PPI is acceptable for low CV risk patients; low-dose celecoxib plus PPI is appropriate for high CV risk patients, with the alternative to avoid NSAIDs and consider opioids instead. Appropriate NSAID prescription assumes that the patient has normal renal function at commencement, with ongoing monitoring recommended. In conclusion, appropriate NSAID use requires consideration of all risks.

No beneficial effects of aspirin on secondary cardiovascular prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

There is little evidence on whether non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and aspirin interact in secondary cardiovascular prevention in type 2 diabetic patients. This is an observational study using data from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes and Follow-on studies. Hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models to compare time to death in patients using and not using aspirin who were simultaneously using or not using NSAIDs. A total of 3600 type 2 diabetic patients with cardiovascular disease were included. During a mean follow-up period of 8.8 years, 948 patients died. After adjustments, the risk of all-cause mortality in patients not using NSAIDs was significantly lower in those using aspirin than in those not using aspirin (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.93; P = 0.004). The risk in patients using NSAIDs did not differ significantly between the two groups. There was a significant interaction between aspirin use and NSAIDs use. In type 2 diabetic patients with cardiovascular disease, aspirin use was not beneficial for those using NSAIDs.

Cardiorenal Safety of OTC Analgesics

Over-the-counter analgesics are used globally for the relief of acute pain. Although effective, these agents can be associated with adverse effects that may limit their use in some people. In the early 2000s, observations from clinical trials of prescription-strength and supratherapeutic doses of nonselective and cyclooxygenase-2-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) raised safety concerns regarding the risk of cardiovascular adverse effects with the use of these medications. Subsequently, the US Food and Drug Administration mandated additional study of the cardiovascular safety of NSAIDs for a more comprehensive understanding of their risk. As these data were being collected, and based on a comprehensive review of prescription data and the recommendations of the US Food and Drug Administration Advisory Committee, the warning labels of over-the-counter NSAIDs were updated to emphasize the potential cardiovascular risks of these agents. The recently reported “Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Celecoxib Integrated Safety versus Ibuprofen or Naproxen” (PRECISION) trial, in which participants with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis and underlying cardiovascular risk factors were treated with prescription-strength celecoxib, ibuprofen, or naproxen, revealed similar rates of cardiovascular events (death from cardiovascular causes including hemorrhagic death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) among the 3 treatment groups. Although informative, the cardiovascular safety findings derived from PRECISION cannot be extrapolated to the safety of the over-the-counter pain relievers ibuprofen and naproxen, given that the doses used were higher (mean [standard deviation]: ibuprofen, 2045 [246] mg; naproxen, 852 [103] mg) and the durations of use longer (∼20 months) than recommended with over-the-counter use of NSAIDs, which for ibuprofen is up to 10 days. This review discusses the cardiorenal safety of the most commonly used over-the-counter analgesics, ibuprofen, naproxen, and acetaminophen. Available data suggest that there is little cardiovascular risk when over-the-counter formulations of these agents are used as directed in their labels.

Studying additive interaction in a healthcare database: Case study of NSAIDs, cardiovascular profiles, and acute myocardial infarction

Purpose

There are clinical trial data on risk of acute myocardial infarction (MI) with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients at increased cardiovascular (CV) risk requiring chronic daily treatment. This study investigated whether risks of acute MI with real-world prescription NSAIDs, such as low-dose or intermittent use, vary according to an individual’s CV profile.

Methods

Nested case-control analyses were carried out on an administrative health cohort from Quebec, Canada by randomly selecting 10 controls per case matched on age ± 1 year, sex, and month and year of cohort entry. We measured the additive joint effects on acute MI of current NSAID use and presence of hypertension, coronary heart disease (CHD), history of previous MI, or concomitant use of cardioprotective aspirin. The endpoint was the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). To verify the robustness of interaction findings, we performed sensitivity analyses with varying specifications of NSAID exposure-related variables.

Results

The cohort consisted of 233 816 elderly individuals, including 21 256 acute MI cases. For hypertension, CHD, and previous MI, we identified additive interactions on MI risk with some but not all NSAIDs, which also depended on the definition of NSAID exposure. Hypertension was sub-additive with naproxen but not with the other NSAIDs. Celecoxib and CHD were sub-additive in the primary analysis only (modelling NSAID dose on index date or up to 7 days before–best-fitting base model) whereas celecoxib and rofecoxib were super-additive with a history of previous MI in the secondary analysis only (modelling NSAID use on index date). For cardioprotective aspirin we found no evidence for an additive interaction with any of the NSAIDs.

Conclusions

Alternative specifications of NSAID exposure concurred in finding that concomitant use of cardioprotective aspirin does not attenuate the risks of acute MI with NSAIDs. However we were unable to demonstrate consistent interactions between an individual’s cardiovascular comorbidities and NSAID-associated acute MI. Our study highlights challenges of studying additive interactions in a healthcare database and underscores the need for sensitivity analyses.

Role of Dipyrone in the High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity amongst Acetylsalicylic Acid-Treated Patients Undergoing Peripheral Artery Revascularisation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of dipyrone on sensitivity to aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA]) in patients who underwent peripheral artery vascular reconstruction.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Impedance aggregometry and light transmission aggregometry were used to determine the effects of dipyrone on ASA treatment in 21 patients. Blood samples were drawn in a 7-day period after the surgery. The cut-off value for high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) was set at < 65% of aggregation inhibition for impedance aggregometry. For light transmission aggregometry the cut-off value for arachidonic acid-induced aggregation was set at > 20% of aggregating platelets, and the cut-off value for epinephrine-induced aggregation was > 44% of aggregating platelets. The cut-off value for each method was derived from a large number of patients treated with a daily dose of 100 mg of ASA.

RESULTS

We found HTPR in 14 (67%) of the 21 patients. None had primary resistance to ASA, i.e., after the addition of ASA in vitro all samples showed antiplatelet efficacy. Regression analysis showed a possible correlation between lower efficacy of ASA treatment and higher daily doses of dipyrone (p = 0.005 for impedance aggregometry, p = 0.04 for light transmission aggregometry), higher platelet count (p = 0.005 for impedance aggregometry), and shorter time from surgery (p = 0.03 for impedance aggregometry).

CONCLUSION

HTPR occurs in 67% of ASA-treated patients after lower limb vascular surgery. The occurrence of HTPR correlates with the daily dose of dipyrone. Therefore, dipyrone should not be used as a postoperative analgesic in ASA-treated patients after peripheral artery revascularisation due to its influence on the effectiveness of ASA.

Analgesic medication with dipyrone in patients with coronary artery disease: Relation to MACCE

BACKGROUND

The non-opioid analgesic dipyrone can trigger life-threatening blood formation disorders. However, it is frequently used, as many patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) rely on non-opioid analgesics to relieve pain. In this study, we investigated the incidence of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke in CAD patients with aspirin and dipyrone comedication as compared to aspirin-alone.

METHODS

We conducted an observational pilot study in 72 CAD patients with aspirin ± dipyrone comedication in the department of cardiology of the University Hospital Düsseldorf. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. The secondary end points were the components of the primary end point. The median follow-up period was 3.2years.

RESULTS

The primary end point occurred 67% of patients in the aspirin+dipyrone group as compared to 31% in the aspirin-alone group (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7 to 12.3; P=0.0028;). All-cause mortality was significantly higher in the aspirin+dipyrone group (44%) than the aspirin-alone group (22%; OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.01 to 7.8; P=0.049). Ischemic events (MI and stroke) were more frequent in the aspirin+dipyrone group as compared to the aspirin alone group as well (OR 4, 95% CI 1.1 to 14; P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

In this hypothesis generating pilot analysis, dipyrone medication in aspirin treated coronary artery disease patients is associated with an increased cumulative incidence of death, MI or stroke as well as all-cause mortality and ischemic events. These data have to be confirmed in larger registries and trials.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01402804; Identifier: NCT01402804; Date of registration: July 25, 2011.

Impact of Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs on the Cardioprotective Effects of Aspirin

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the evidence of a pharmacodynamic interaction between aspirin and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); specifically, to determine whether a deleterious relationship exists with respect to the cardioprotective effects of aspirin.

DATA SOURCES:

Primary articles were identified by a MEDLINE search (1966—May 2004). Search terms included aspirin, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug, drug interaction, mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION:

All prospective and retrospective studies conducted in human subjects and investigating the potential interaction between aspirin and NSAIDs were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS:

Several controlled pharmacodynamic studies indicate that the sustained inhibition of cyclooxygenase activity by aspirin is blunted in the presence of some NSAIDs. While these data are fairly consistent, they are limited in that they rely on surrogate markers and not clinical outcomes. Observational studies have shown conflicting results regarding the effect of combination NSAID and aspirin therapy on mortality risk and incidence of myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS:

Pharmacodynamic data indicating an interaction between aspirin and NSAIDs have not translated to a consistent clinical effect in observational studies. In the absence of a randomized, controlled, clinical outcomes study, there is insufficient evidence to dictate a change in therapy.

Influence of aspirin or heparin on platelet function and postoperative blood loss after coronary artery bypass surgery

The aim of the study was to assess the effect of aspirin or heparin pretreatment on platelet function and bleeding in the early postoperative period after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery.

Seventy-five male patients with coronary artery disease who underwent CABG with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) were studied. The patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 ( n = 25) included patients receiving aspirin pretreatment, Group 2 ( n = 22) received heparin pretreatment, and Group 3 ( n = 28) included patients who received no antiplatelet or anticoagulant pretreatment. Twenty-four hours after surgery, all patients were administered aspirin therapy that was continued throughout their hospitalization period. We assessed the following preoperative blood coagulation indices: activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), international normalized ratio (INR), and fibrinogen. We compared platelet count and platelet aggregation induced by adenosinediphosphate (ADP) before surgery, 1 h after surgery, 20 h after surgery and on the seventh postoperative day. We assessed drained blood loss within 20 postoperative hours.

Preoperative blood coagulation indices did not differ among the groups. Platelet count was also similar. One hour after surgery, platelet count significantly decreased in all groups ( p <0.001), after 20 postoperative hours it did not undergo any marked changes, and on the seventh postoperative day, it significantly increased in all groups ( p <0.001). Before surgery, the lowest index of ADP-induced platelet aggregation was found in Group 1 ( p <0.05). One hour after surgery, platelet aggregation significantly decreased in all groups, most markedly in Group 3 ( p <0.001), yet after 20 h, its restitution tendency and a significant increase in all groups was noted. On the seventh day, a further increase in the statistical mean platelet aggregation value was noted in Groups 2 and 3. Comparison of platelet aggregation after 20 postoperative hours and on the seventh day after surgery revealed a significantly higher than 10% increase of the index in 32% of patients in Group 1 ( p <0.05), 27.3% of patients in Group 2 ( p <0.05) and in 35.7% of patients in Group 3 ( p <0.001). The lowest statistically significant value of postoperative blood loss was noted in Group 2 ( p <0.01).

Our study has shown that aspirin or heparin pretreatment had no impact on the dynamics of platelet function in the early postoperative period after CABG. The lowest postoperative blood loss was noted in patients pretreated with heparin.

Adverse drug reactions and drug-drug interactions with over-the-counter NSAIDs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ibuprofen have a long history of safe and effective use as both prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics/antipyretics. The mechanism of action of all NSAIDs is through reversible inhibition of cyclooxygenase enzymes. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) including gastrointestinal bleeding as well as cardiovascular and renal effects have been reported with NSAID use. In many cases, ADRs may occur because of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between the NSAID and a concomitant medication. For example, DDIs have been reported when NSAIDs are coadministered with aspirin, alcohol, some antihypertensives, antidepressants, and other commonly used medications. Because of the pharmacologic nature of these interactions, there is a continuum of risk in that the potential for an ADR is dependent on total drug exposure. Therefore, consideration of dose and duration of NSAID use, as well as the type or class of comedication administered, is important when assessing potential risk for ADRs. Safety findings from clinical studies evaluating prescription-strength NSAIDs may not be directly applicable to OTC dosing. Health care providers can be instrumental in educating patients that using OTC NSAIDs at the lowest effective dose for the shortest required duration is vital to balancing efficacy and safety. This review discusses some of the most clinically relevant DDIs reported with NSAIDs based on major sites of ADRs and classes of medication, with a focus on OTC ibuprofen, for which the most data are available.

Safe prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with osteoarthritis--an expert consensus addressing benefits as well as gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks

BACKGROUND

There are several guidelines addressing the issues around the use of NSAIDs. However, none has specifically addressed the upper versus lower gastrointestinal (GI) risk of COX-2 selective and non-selective compounds nor the interaction at both the GI and cardiovascular (CV) level of either class of drugs with low-dose aspirin. This Consensus paper aims to develop statements and guidance devoted to these specific issues through a review of current evidence by a multidisciplinary group of experts.

METHODS

A modified Delphi consensus process was adopted to determine the level of agreement with each statement and to determine the level of agreement with the strength of evidence to be assigned to the statement.

RESULTS

For patients with both low GI and CV risks, any non-selective NSAID (ns-NSAID) alone may be acceptable. For those with low GI and high CV risk, naproxen may be preferred because of its potential lower CV risk compared with other ns-NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors, but celecoxib at the lowest approved dose (200 mg once daily) may be acceptable. In patients with high GI risk, if CV risk is low, a COX-2 selective inhibitor alone or ns-NSAID with a proton pump inhibitor appears to offer similar protection from upper GI events. However, only celecoxib will reduce mucosal harm throughout the entire GI tract. When both GI and CV risks are high, the optimal strategy is to avoid NSAID therapy, if at all possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Time is now ripe for offering patients with osteoarthritis the safest and most cost-effective therapeutic option, thus preventing serious adverse events which could have important quality of life and resource use implications. Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0291-x.

Searching for factors associated with resistance to acetylsalicylic acid used for secondary prevention of stroke

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of resistance to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), used for secondary prevention of stroke, including the assessment of risk factors associated with the lack of ASA anti-aggregatory action.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients after a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or ischaemic stroke in the acute (n = 111) and chronic phase (n = 87) were enrolled in the study. The assessment of platelet function was performed by whole blood impedance aggregometry using a multi-channel platelet function analyser (Multiplate).

RESULTS

A proper response to ASA was found in 121 patients (61.1%) (ASA responders), a partial response to ASA in 59 patients (29.8%) (ASA partial responders), and ASA resistance in 18 patients (9.1%) (ASA non-responders). Acetylsalicylic acid resistance was observed more frequently in the chronic phase. The mean low-density lipoprotein (LDL) concentration was higher in ASA non-responders (p = 0.02). The mean heart rate (p = 0.03) and the mean haematocrit (p = 0.03) were higher in the group of ASA partial responders and ASA non-responders. Angiotensin II receptor antagonists were more often used in the group of ASA partial responders and ASA non-responders (p = 0.04). Diuretics were more rarely used by ASA non-responders, whereas fibrates were more rarely used by ASA partial responders.

CONCLUSIONS

The method enabled the detection of ASA resistance in some patients with cerebrovascular disease. The study revealed some possible risk factors of ASA resistance: long ASA therapy, increased heart rate, higher LDL concentration, and higher haematocrit value. The relationship between the effect of ASA and other medications (angiotensin II receptor blockers, fibrates, diuretics) requires further study. Platelet function monitoring should be considered in patients at a greater risk of ASA resistance.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity in peripheral endovascular procedures

The use of aspirin is considered the "gold standard" for the decrease of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with atherosclerosis, including peripheral arterial disease (PAD), whereas a dual-antiplatelet regimen with aspirin and clopidogrel is usually indicated for such patients after angioplasty and stent deployment. However, a substantial number of subsequent adverse events still occur, even in patients who receive double-antiplatelet therapy. The "high on-treatment platelet reactivity" (HTPR) phenomenon has been lately recognized and plays a major role in the management of patients with PAD. Greater and more rapid inhibition of platelet aggregation has become the goal for new antiplatelet agents with the expectation of further improving outcomes for percutaneous intervention for PAD. The purpose of this review article is to highlight current evidence regarding the prevalence, aetiology, and clinical implications of HTPR in PAD as well as to discuss the possibilities of novel alternative antiplatelet regiments.

Resistance to acetylsalicylic acid in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with lipid disorders and history of current smoking

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an important risk factor for stroke. Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is the most frequently used medication for prevention of cardio-cerebral vascular diseases. However, some patients experience ischaemic vascular events despite the use of ASA. This phenomenon is known as "aspirin resistance" (AR). The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of AR in diabetic patients and search for factors associated with it.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The examined group consisted of 96 subjects with diagnosed type 2 DM. Platelet function test was performed by the method of whole blood impedance aggregometry.

RESULTS

Among examined subjects, 51 patients (53.1 %) were sensitive to ASA action (ASA responders) and 45 patients (46.9 %) were resistant to ASA action (ASA non-responders). No association was found between platelet aggregation and gender, age, dose of ASA, known duration of diabetes, BMI, heart rate, mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and risk factors except for current smoking (p = 0.030). ASA non-responders were treated shorter with ASA than ASA responders (p = 0.010). The mean total cholesterol (p = 0.020), LDL concentration (p = 0.005), HCT (p = 0.010), WBC (p = 0.030), and PLT (p = 0.050) were significantly higher in ASA non-responders. No association was found between AR and results of other laboratory tests and medications. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed factors associated with AR: current smoking and LDL concentration higher than 3.5 mmol/l.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of our study did not confirm the association between poor glycaemic control in the diabetic patients and AR. Resistance to ASA in diabetic patients is associated with lipid disorders and history of current smoking.

Minimizing risks of NSAIDs: cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and renal

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective in treating inflammation, pain and fever, but their cardiovascular, renal and gastrointestinal toxicity can result in significant morbidity and mortality to patients. Techniques for minimizing the adverse risks of NSAIDs include avoiding use of NSAIDs where possible, particularly in high-risk patients; keeping NSAID dosages low; prescribing modified-release and enteric-coated NSAIDs; prescribing cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitors where appropriate; monitoring for early signs of side effects; prescribing treatments designed to minimize NSAID side effects; and developing new therapeutic strategies beyond the inhibition of cyclooxygenase. All of the above strategies can be useful in reducing the risk of NSAID complications. The optimal use and management of NSAIDs involves an individualized paradigm approach to establish efficacy with optimal tolerability given the patient risk factors for adverse events.

The emerging role of oxylipins in thrombosis and diabetes

The prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), the leading cause of death in the US, is predicted to increase due to the shift in age of the general population and increase in CVD risk factors such as obesity and diabetes. New therapies are required to decrease the prevalence of CVD risk factors (obesity and diabetes) as well as reduce atherothrombosis, the major cause of CVD related mortality. Oxylipins, bioactive metabolites derived from the oxygenation of polyunsaturated fatty acids, play a role in the progression of CVD risk factors and thrombosis. Aspirin, a cyclooxygenase-1 inhibitor, decreases atherothrombotic associated mortality by 25%. These potent effects of aspirin have shown the utility of modulating oxylipin signaling pathways to decrease CVD mortality. The role of many oxylipins in the progression of CVD, however, is still uncertain or controversial. An increased understanding of the role oxylipins play in CVD risk factors and thrombosis could lead to new therapies to decrease the prevalence of CVD and its associated mortality.

Mechanisms of aspirin resistance

Aspirin is integral to the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease and acts to impair the development of platelet-mediated atherothromboembolic events by irreversible inhibition of platelet cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1). Inhibition of this enzyme prevents the synthesis of the potent pro-aggregatory prostanoid thromboxane A2. A large number of patients continue to experience atherothromboembolic events despite aspirin therapy, so-called 'aspirin treatment failure', and this is multifactorial in aetiology. Approximately 10% however do not respond appropriately to aspirin in a phenomenon known as 'aspirin resistance', which is defined by various laboratory techniques. In this review we discuss the reasons for aspirin resistance in a systematic manner, starting from prescription of the drug and ending at the level of the platelet. Poor medication adherence has been shown to be a cause of apparent aspirin resistance, and may in fact be the largest contributory factor. Also important is high platelet turnover due to underlying inflammatory processes, such as atherosclerosis and its complications, leading to faster regeneration of platelets, and hence of COX-1, at a rate that diminishes the efficacy of once daily dosing. Recent developments include the identification of platelet glycoprotein IIIa as a potential biomarker (as well as possible underlying mechanism) for aspirin resistance and the discovery of an anion efflux pump that expels intracellular aspirin from platelets. The absolute as well as relative contributions of such factors to the phenomenon of aspirin resistance are the subject of continuing research.

Aspirin resistance: a clinical review focused on the most common cause, noncompliance

Aspirin is an inexpensive, readily available medication that reduces the risk of subsequent vascular disease by about 25% in patients with known occlusive vascular disease. Aspirin's beneficial effect is mediated via inhibition of arachidonic acid (AA) activation of platelets and is detected by demonstrating a decrease in platelet function and/or a decrease in prostaglandin metabolites. Patients who are assumed to be taking their aspirin, but who do not demonstrate an aspirin effect are labeled as, "aspirin resistant." This is an unfortunate designation as the vast majority of patients labeled as "aspirin resistant" are noncompliant. Noncompliance is demonstrated in multiple studies that use repeat testing for platelet inhibition in patients with an initial inadequate response to aspirin. When the test is repeated under condition where ingestion of the test aspirin is assured, the patients' platelets are inhibited. Instead of using the term "aspirin resistance," this review will use "inadequate response to aspirin." Patients with an inadequate aspirin response have an increased likelihood for subsequent vascular events. Detection and treatment of an inadequate aspirin response would be facilitated by the development of a bedside assay that uses whole blood, is technically simple, inexpensive, sensitive, specific, reproducible, and provides an answer in a few minutes. Future research in patients with an inadequate response to aspirin should focus on mechanisms to improve compliance, which should decrease their risk of future vascular events.

Vascular effects of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs

The effect of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on the risk of cardiovascular events remains controversial. Among NSAIDs, only low-dose aspirin exerts protective vascular effects. Low-dose aspirin has been proven effective for secondary prevention. For primary prevention, the usefulness of low-dose aspirin is debated, as illustrated by the differences in recommendations across countries. NSAIDs other than aspirin, whether COX-2 selective or nonselective, increase the risk of cardiovascular events. Among them, naproxen is associated with the smallest risk increase. In patients with a history of coronary artery disease, diclofenac seems to carry the greatest risk, but all NSAIDs should be avoided. Uncertainties persist about aspirin interactions with other NSAIDs and with proton pump inhibitors. An adverse effect of acetaminophen on the risk of cardiovascular disease cannot be completely ruled out.

Meloxicam Does Not Affect the Antiplatelet Effect of Aspirin in Healthy Male and Female Volunteers

This study determined if meloxicam, a selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, interferes with the antiplatelet effect of aspirin using platelet aggregation and thromboxane (Tx) B(2) endpoints in healthy volunteers. Eight male and 8 female volunteers participated in this open-label, randomized, two-treatment, two-way crossover trial. Treatment 1 was meloxicam (15 mg qd) over 4 days, and then aspirin (100 mg qd) was ingested 2 hours after meloxicam for an additional 7 days. Blood samples were taken 2, 6, and 24 hours after the last dose. Treatment 2 consisted of only aspirin (100 mg) over 2 days. Samples were taken at the same time points. Each subject received both treatments with a 2-week washout between the treatment periods. Treatments were safe and well tolerated. The initial 4-day treatment with meloxicam had no effect on platelet aggregation but reduced serum TxB(2) by 64% +/- 19%. Addition of aspirin (100 mg qd) for 7 days resulted in complete inhibition of aggregation and TxB(2) for 24 hours. Two-day treatment with only 100 mg aspirin also resulted in complete inhibition of platelet aggregation and TxB(2). These results indicate that meloxicam does not affect the ability of aspirin to inhibit COX-1 in platelets, thereby allowing aspirin to effectively prevent platelet aggregation and reduce TxB(2) levels, and that meloxicam is selective for COX-2.

Low-dose naproxen interferes with the antiplatelet effects of aspirin in healthy subjects: recommendations to minimize the functional consequences

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether low-dose naproxen sodium (220 mg twice a day) interferes with aspirin's antiplatelet effect in healthy subjects.

METHODS

We performed a crossover, open-label study in 9 healthy volunteers. They received for 6 days 3 different treatments separated by 14 days of washout: 1) naproxen 2 hours before aspirin, 2) aspirin 2 hours before naproxen, and 3) aspirin alone. The primary end point was the assessment of serum thromboxane B(2) (TXB(2)) 24 hours after the administration of naproxen 2 hours before aspirin on day 6 of treatment. In 5 volunteers, the rate of recovery of TXB(2) generation (up to 72 hours after drug discontinuation) was assessed in serum and in platelet-rich plasma stimulated with arachidonic acid (AA) or collagen.

RESULTS

Twenty-four hours after the last dosing on day 6 in volunteers receiving aspirin alone or aspirin before naproxen, serum TXB(2) was almost completely inhibited (median [range] 99.1% [97.4-99.4%] and 99.1% [98.0-99.7%], respectively). Naproxen given before aspirin caused a slightly lower inhibition of serum TXB(2) (median [range] 98.0% [90.6-99.4%]) than aspirin alone (P = 0.0007) or aspirin before naproxen (P = 0.0045). All treatments produced a maximal inhibition of AA-induced platelet aggregation. At 24 hours, compared with baseline, collagen-induced platelet aggregation was still inhibited by aspirin alone (P = 0.0003), but not by aspirin given 2 hours before or after naproxen. Compared with administration of aspirin alone, the sequential administration of naproxen and aspirin caused a significant parallel upward shift of the regression lines describing the recovery of platelet TXB(2).

CONCLUSION

Sequential administration of 220 mg naproxen twice a day and low-dose aspirin interferes with the irreversible inhibition of platelet cyclooxygenase 1 afforded by aspirin. The interaction was smaller when giving naproxen 2 hours after aspirin. The clinical consequences of these 2 schedules of administration of aspirin with naproxen remain to be studied in randomized clinical trials.

Coxibs: pharmacology, toxicity and efficacy in cancer clinical trials

This chapter briefly summarizes the current knowledge about the role of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), specially focusing on those selective for cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 (coxibs), on colorectal cancer (CRC) onset, and progression. Both epidemiological and experimental studies have reported that these drugs reduce the risk of developing colonic tumors. However, the promising use of coxibs in chemoprevention was halted abruptly due to the detection on enhanced cardiovascular (CV) risks. Thus, we discuss the clinical data and plausible mechanisms of CV hazards associated with traditional NSAIDs and coxibs. The extent of inhibition of COX-2-dependent prostacyclin, an important vasoprotective and anti-thrombotic pathway, in the absence of a complete suppression of COX-1-dependent platelet function, at common doses of NSAIDs, might play a role in CV toxicity. Coxibs might still be reserved for younger patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). However, it should be taken into consideration that recent findings of enhanced thromboxane (TX)A(2) biosynthesis in colon tumorigenesis, detected in humans. In this context, the use of low-dose aspirin (which mainly acts by inhibiting platelet COX-1-dependent TXA(2)) may have a place for chemoprevention of CRCs (see also Chap. 3 ). The possible use of coxibs to prevent CRC will depend mainly on research progresses in biomarkers able to identify the patients uniquely susceptible to developing thrombotic events by inhibition of COX-2.

Prostaglandins: modulators of inflammation and cardiovascular risk

Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-specific drugs such as rofecoxib and celecoxib and the newer agents, etoricoxib and valdecoxib, were developed to provide a safer alternative to traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs). These drugs have been shown significantly to reduce endoscopically visualized gastrointestinal ulcers, and one of them, rofecoxib, has demonstrated a 50% reduction in clinically important gastrointestinal outcomes compared with a tNSAID. However, COX-derived prostaglandins also have complex interactions with the cardiovascular system. This article briefly reviews our current understanding of the interactions between prostaglandins and cardiovascular physiology, and addresses some of the concerns that recently have been raised regarding coxibs and the risk of cardiovascular events.

Interference of NSAIDs with the thrombocyte inhibitory effect of aspirin: a placebo-controlled, ex vivo, serial placebo-controlled serial crossover study

PURPOSE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) are often prescribed concurrently in patients with nociceptive pain and cardiovascular comorbidity. NSAIDs and ASA inhibit the same COX-enzymes, and thus may interact. ASA's cardioprotective antiplatelet effect is entirely COX-1 dependent. NSAIDs can be either non-COX-1 and COX-2 selective or COX-2 selective. The aim of this study was to examine the interaction between ASA and different selective and nonselective NSAIDs on thrombocyte function.

METHODS

Single-blind, prospective, placebo-controlled, ex vivo, serial crossover trial of 3-day cycles separated by washout periods of at least 12 days in 30 healthy volunteers, evaluating interaction on ASA's antithrombocyte effect by naproxen, ibuprofen, meloxicam, or etoricoxib taken 2 h before ASA. Ex vivo thrombocyte function, closure time (CT) in seconds, was measured using the Platelet Function Analyzer 100 (PFA-100). CT prolongation during a cycle reflects thrombocyte inhibitory effect. ASA nonresponse was defined as CT prolongation <40 % in the placebo cycle. ASA nonresponders were excluded. Wilcoxon signed-rank was used to evaluate NSAID effect on ASA-induced CT prolongation.

RESULTS

Ibuprofen and naproxen inhibit ASA's antithrombocyte effect below the nonresponse threshold. Etoricoxib and meloxicam do not cause relevant change in ASA thrombocyte inhibition. Naproxen has an inherent weak thrombocyte inhibitory action below the ASA response threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

COX-1 affinity determines the interaction between NSAIDs and ASA on thrombocyte adhesion and aggregation. Ibuprofen and naproxen, but not etoricoxib or meloxicam, taken 2 h before ASA, significantly inhibit ASA's antithrombocyte effect.

Latest evidence in personalized antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

In patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel, a P2Y12 adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor antagonist, is the gold standard of antiplatelet therapy. Two more potent P2Y12 ADP receptor antagonists are now available. Pharmacodynamic studies have revealed a large interindividual variability in the biological response to clopidogrel that is primarily related to variable active metabolite generation, depending on clinical factors, drug-drug interactions, and genetic polymorphisms. Several assays to measure platelet function are available and have revealed a high prevalence of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR). Patients exhibiting HTPR after a clopidogrel loading dose have a higher risk of thrombotic recurrence after percutaneous coronary intervention. A recent consensus has defined HTPR for the main platelet assays available (using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis) to define the optimal cutoff value for each assay in order to predict thrombotic recurrences. In this article, we present several lines of evidence that suggest a therapeutic window of platelet reactivity inhibition with P2Y12 ADP receptor antagonists. Such a paradigm shift is supported by the results of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial and the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition with Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TRITON-TIMI) 38, which showed the superiority of ticagrelor and prasugrel on thrombotic events compared with clopidogrel; however, these 2 medications had an increased bleeding rate. With the results of these trials, in addition to the evidence of a therapeutic window with P2Y12 ADP receptor antagonists, we summarize the potential of platelet reactivity monitoring and pharmacogenomics to tailor therapy.

Is there a role for antiplatelet therapy in infective endocarditis? A review of current scientific evidence

Recently, interest has emerged regarding adjuvant antiplatelet therapy in infective endocarditis (IE) and its impact on clinical outcomes. Despite ongoing research, the role of antiplatelet therapy in this setting remains unclear. Generally, investigations of IE are limited by the low incidence of the disease, practical issues related to diagnosis, and the highly variable latency period between symptom onset and definitive diagnosis. This article reviews the rationale for using antiplatelet therapy in the setting of IE and the contemporary literature that investigates its use.

Harmful effects of NSAIDs among patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

There is limited information about the safety of chronic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis from the INternational VErapamil Trandolapril STudy (INVEST), which enrolled patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease. At each visit, patients were asked by the local site investigator if they were currently taking NSAIDs. Patients who reported NSAID use at every visit were defined as chronic NSAID users, while all others (occasional or never users) were defined as nonchronic NSAID users. The primary composite outcome was all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Cox regression was used to construct a multivariate analysis for the primary outcome.

RESULTS

There were 882 chronic NSAID users and 21,694 nonchronic NSAID users (n = 14,408 for never users and n=7286 for intermittent users). At a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, the primary outcome occurred at a rate of 4.4 events per 100 patient-years in the chronic NSAID group, versus 3.7 events per 100 patient-years in the nonchronic NSAID group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.82; P=.0003). This was due to an increase in cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR 2.26; 95% CI, 1.70-3.01; P<.0001).

CONCLUSION

Among hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease, chronic self-reported use of NSAIDs was associated with an increased risk of adverse events during long-term follow-up.

Ischemic stroke in patients receiving aspirin

BACKGROUND

The widespread use of aspirin-driven vascular prevention strategies does not impede the occurrence of first and recurrent ischemic strokes in numerous subjects. It is not clear what factors are associated with aspirin failure beyond the functional diagnosis of aspirin resistance in selected subjects. Current management guidelines provide little or no recommendations on the proper strategy for subjects who had a stroke while receiving aspirin. We assessed clinical features of subjects who had a first or recurrent stroke while taking aspirin.

METHODS

We studied demographic characteristics, vascular risk factors, stroke subtypes, and concomitant medication use in subjects with first or recurrent ischemic strokes. Patients receiving antiplatelet medications other than aspirin and/or oral anticoagulants were excluded from this analysis.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and nine patients with first (n = 552) or recurrent (n = 157) ischemic stroke were evaluated. Aspirin was being taken by 29% of first and 48% of recurrent stroke subjects. There was a higher prevalence of hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and smoking in aspirin users with first and recurrent stroke (P < .05). Diabetes and coronary artery disease were more frequent in aspirin users with first ischemic strokes (P < .003), but not in those who had recurrent ischemic strokes. Aspirin users were more likely to be also receiving statins and antihypertensive drugs (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Aspirin failure in ischemic stroke prevention may exceed functional resistance to aspirin and could be associated with a higher prevalence of lacunar stroke, comorbidities, and/or adverse interactions with other drugs. These patients may require a different approach regarding prevention strategies.

[Antiplatelet agents and proton pump inhibitors. How can the risk-benefit balance be optimized in patients at risk for cardiovascular disease and gastrointestinal bleeding?]

Antiplatelet agents are routinely used in both primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. The development of new antiplatelet agents and the strong growth of interventional cardiology have led to this therapy being more widely prescribed and for longer periods. The most important secondary effect is the rise in the incidence of hemorrhagic complications, the most prevalent being gastrointestinal bleeding. In this context, the balance between the cardiovascular benefits and bleeding risk of these agents must be optimized. This review provides specific management recommendations and highlights important practical aspects related to antiplatelet therapy, including the interaction between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors. The benefits and hazards in distinct clinical settings are outlined within the context of optimizing the balance between the cardiovascular benefits and bleeding risk of antiplatelet therapy.

Migraine and cardiovascular disease in women and the role of aspirin: subgroup analyses in the Women's Health Study

BACKGROUND

Migraine with aura (MA) has been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The role of aspirin on this association remains unclear.

METHODS

Post-hoc subgroup analyses of the Women's Health Study, a randomized trial testing 100 mg aspirin on alternate days in primary prevention of CVD among 39,876 women aged ≥ 45.

RESULTS

During 10 years, 998 major CVD events were confirmed in 39,757 women with complete migraine information. Aspirin reduced risk of ischaemic stroke (relative risk, RR, 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.93) but not other CVD. Migraine or MA did not modify the effect of aspirin on CVD except for myocardial infarction (MI) (p for interaction = 0.01). Women with MA on aspirin had increased risk of MI (RR 3.72, 95% CI 1.39-9.95). Further exploratory analyses indicate that this increased risk is only apparent among women with MA on aspirin who ever smoked or had history of hypertension (p for interaction<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In post-hoc subgroup analyses, aspirin had similar protective effects on ischaemic stroke for women with or without migraine. By contrast, our data suggest that women with MA on aspirin had increased risk of MI. The small number of outcome events in subgroups, the exploratory nature of our analyses, and lack of plausible mechanisms raise the possibility of a chance finding, which must caution the interpretation.

The use of antiplatelet therapy in the outpatient setting: Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines Executive Summary

Antiplatelet agents are a cornerstone of therapy for patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease. There is presently a lack of comprehensive guidelines focusing on the use of antiplatelet drugs in patients currently manifesting or at elevated risk of cardiovascular disease. The Canadian Antiplatelet Therapy Guidelines Committee reviewed existing disease-based guidelines and subsequently published literature and used expert opinion and review to develop guidelines on the use of antiplatelet therapy in the outpatient setting. This Executive Summary provides an abbreviated version of the principal recommendations. Antiplatelet therapy appears to be generally underused, perhaps in part because of a lack of clear, evidence-based guidance. Here, we provide specific guidelines for secondary prevention in patients discharged from hospital after acute coronary syndromes, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting; patients with a history of transient cerebral ischemic events or strokes; and patients with peripheral arterial disease. Issues related to primary prevention are also addressed, in addition to special clinical contexts such as diabetes, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, pregnancy or lactation, and perioperative management. Recommendations are provided regarding pharmacologic interactions that may occur during combination therapy with warfarin, clopidogrel, and proton-pump inhibitors, or aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, as well as for the management of bleeding complications. The complete guidelines document is published as a supplementary issue of the Canadian Journal of Cardiology and is available at http://www.ccs.ca/.

Antiplatelet drug therapy: role of pharmacodynamic and genetic testing

Antiplatelet therapy represents the cornerstone of treatment for the short- and long-term prevention of atherothrombotic disease processes, in particular in high-risk settings such as in patients with acute coronary syndrome and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Currently, dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel represents the most commonly used treatment regimen in these settings. However, a considerable number of patients continue to experience adverse outcomes, including both bleeding and recurrent ischemic events. Numerous investigations have demonstrated that this phenomenon may be, in part, attributed to the broad variability in individual response profiles to this standard antiplatelet treatment regimen, as identified by various assays of platelet function testing. In addition, recent studies have demonstrated that genetic polymorphisms may also have an important role in determining levels of platelet inhibition and may be considered as a tool to identify patients at risk of adverse events. This article provides an overview on antiplatelet drug response variability, an update on definitions, including the role of pharmacodynamic testing, underlying mechanisms – with emphasis on recent understandings on pharmacogenetics and drug–drug interactions – and current and future perspectives on individualized antiplatelet therapy.