Is the concomitant use of clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors still associated with increased adverse cardiovascular outcomes following coronary angioplasty?: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recently published studies (2012 - 2016)

An update on oral antiplatelet drug interactions with proton pump inhibitors: what are the risks?

INTRODUCTION

Aspirin and anti-P2Y12 are widely prescribed in cardiovascular patients, often in combination with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to limit the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleedings. The potential interaction between PPIs and antiplatelet agents has been widely discussed, but doubts remain as to whether PPIs may reduce the cardiovascular protection provided by aspirin, prasugrel, ticagrelor, and clopidogrel.

AREAS COVERED

Many pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) studies have confirmed the interaction, especially between PPIs and clopidogrel, but with uncertain consequences on clinical outcomes. Therefore, we aimed to summarize the evidence for the widespread combined use of oral antiplatelet drugs and PPIs, to outline the current evidence supporting or opposing drug-drug interaction, and to discuss the clinical implications of such interactions.

EXPERT OPINION

A large body of evidence describes the PK/PD interaction of antiplatelet drugs with PPIs and its potential role in increasing clinical cardiovascular adverse events, but no solid clinical data have confirmed these effects. In the light of the published studies, there seems to be no restriction on the choice of PPI with aspirin, prasugrel, and/or ticagrelor. The choice of a PPI with no (or minimal) interference with the hepatic cytochrome P450 2C19 is preferred in patients receiving clopidogrel.

Potassium-competitive acid blockers: rethinking acid suppression for gastroesophageal reflux disease and Helicobacter pylori

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection are different disease states that are united by the core role of acid suppression in their management. In GERD, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have long been standard therapy based on abundant positive clinical trial data supporting their efficacy and safety. In H. pylori, PPIs are also a critical element of therapy in combination with 1 or more antibiotics to achieve and maintain a pH that maximizes the efficacy of therapy. Despite the considerable clinical success and widespread use of PPIs, room remains for agents with differentiated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. The potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs) are mechanistically distinct from PPIs but are acid-stable and do not require activation of the proton pump by coadministration of food. In pharmacodynamic studies, these agents have shown greater durations of acid suppression above the critical threshold of pH 4 (for GERD) and pH 6 (for H. pylori), which have been shown to optimize therapeutic efficacy in these settings. These results have translated in clinical studies to similar and, in some cases, improved outcomes relative to PPIs in these disease states. This review summarizes current knowledge on the physiology of acid secretion, pathophysiology and management of GERD and H. pylori, and key characteristics and clinical trial data for PPIs and PCABs.

Identifying the Incidence, Predictors, Outcomes, and Prevention of Stent Thrombosis (ST) in Post-percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Patients With Drug-Eluting Stents (DES): A Systematic Review

Stent thrombosis (ST) is a rare but catastrophic event to happen to a stented coronary artery. The incidence of ST has greatly been reduced after the advent of modern drug-eluting stent (DES) implants, which have become the most preferred treatment option in the stenting category for coronary artery disease (CAD). Although the risk reduction by newer category implant provides substantial benefits, the possibility of thrombosis still exists mostly during the early stage of DES implantation. The development of ST after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can be predicted by multiple factors, but advancements in early diagnostic techniques and modified stent types have greatly reduced the occurrence of this complication. Mortality, which is one of the complications of ST, is primarily influenced by patient-related factors such as incomplete treatment duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The duration of DAPT after DES implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is determined based on individual characteristics, mainly considered in view of bleeding or ischemia risk. Risk evaluation systems like DAPT/precise-DAPT scores help tailor and personalize the duration of DAPT for each individual patient. This systematic review contains pertinent articles extracted from the PubMed database. We retrieved articles from various study categories, encompassing publications from the period spanning 2014 to 2022. Our analysis highlighted results from studies investigating different aspects contributing to ST development. The most favorable prevention option was the use of customized DAPT intervention based on patient-specific predictable factors. Several complications associated with ST were identified, including recurrent ST, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) encompassing all-cause mortality (including cardiac and non-cardiac mortality), cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) or transient ischemic attacks (TIA), hospitalization due to heart failure, and myocardial infarction requiring revascularization. Mortality was also observed as a significant outcome. The umbrella term of ST includes multiple causative factors. Although DES has improved patient survival rates vastly with its usage, careful risk factor assessment and required follow-up, in each individual being stented, further guarantee a more promising reduction in late adverse outcomes.

Impact of Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel on Recurrent Stroke and Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Conflicting results have been reported regarding the interaction between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel. We investigated whether concomitant PPI use influenced the risk of recurrence in patients with stroke and myocardial infarction (MI).

METHODS

This study used two databases for two different designs, the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database for a self-controlled case series design, and the national sample cohort of the NHIS data base converted to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership-Common Data Model version for a cohort study based on large-scale propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In the PPI co-prescription group, recurrent hospitalization with stroke occurred in 17.6% of the 8201 patients with history of stroke, and recurrent MI occurred in 17.1% of the 1216 patients with history of MI within1 year. According to the self-controlled case series, the overall relative risk (RR) of recurrent stroke was 2.09 (95% confidence interval (CI); 1.83-2.38); the RR showed an increasing trend parallel to the time from the beginning of PPI co-prescription. In the cohort study, there was a higher incidence of recurrent stroke in the PPI co-prescription group (Hazard ratio (HR): 1.34, 95% CI: 1.01-1.76, p = 0.04). The overall RR of recurrent MI was 1.47 (95% CI; 1.02-2.11) in the self-controlled case series; however, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrent MI in the cohort study (HR:1.42, 95% CI:0.79-2.49, p = 0.23). The impact of individual PPIs on stroke and MI showed different patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

A PPI co-prescription >4 weeks with clopidogrel was associated with hospitalization of recurrent stroke within 1 year of initial diagnosis; however, its association with recurrent MI remains inconclusive. The influence of individual PPIs should be clarified in the future.

Proton pump inhibitors and gastroprotection in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs: A cardiologic point of view

Aspirin, other antiplatelet agents, and anticoagulant drugs are used across a wide spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. A concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed in these patients, as gastrointestinal complications are relatively frequent. On the other hand, a potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested in patients treated with PPIs; in particular, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection of clopidogrel, due to pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions through hepatic metabolism. Previously, the concomitant use of clopidogrel and omeprazole or esomeprazole has been discouraged. In contrast, it remains less known whether PPI use may affect the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor and prasugrel, new P2Y12 receptor antagonists. Current guidelines recommend PPI use in combination with antiplatelet treatment in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, PPIs could be recommended, even if their usefulness deserves further data. H. pylori infection should always be investigated and treated in patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication) treated with antithrombotic drugs. The present review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread combined use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs, discussing consequent clinical implications.

Concomitant Use of Antiplatelet Agents and Proton-Pump Inhibitors Increases the Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study Using Balanced Operational Definitions

Antiplatelet agents are commonly used in combination with proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients with acute coronary syndrome who are at risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. However, studies have reported that PPIs can alter the pharmacokinetics of antiplatelet agents and result in adverse cardiovascular events. We enrolled 311 patients who received antiplatelet therapy with PPIs for >30 days and 1244 matched controls following a 1:4 propensity score matching during the index period. Patients were followed up until death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or the end of the follow-up period. Patients who used antiplatelet therapy with PPIs were found to be at higher risk of mortality than the controls (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.77; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30-2.40). The adjusted HR for patients who used antiplatelet agents with PPIs developing myocardial infarction and coronary revascularization events was 3.52 (95% CI: 1.34-9.22) and 4.74 (95% CI: 2.03-11.05), respectively. Additionally, middle-aged patients or those within 3 years of concomitant use showed a higher risk of myocardial infarction and coronary revascularization. Our findings suggest that antiplatelet therapy combined with PPIs has a higher mortality risk in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding and is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction and coronary revascularization.

Adverse Effects Associated with Long-Term Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors

Proton Pump Inhibitors are used widely to manage many gastric acid-related conditions such as gastroesophageal disease, gastritis, esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, Zollinger-Ellison syndrome, peptic ulcer disease, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated ulcers, and Helicobacter pylori eradication, around the globe. This review article focuses on adverse effects associated with the long-term use of proton pump inhibitors. Various observational studies, clinical trials, and meta-analyses have established the adverse effects associated with the long-term use of proton pump inhibitors including renal disorders (acute interstitial nephritis, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and end-stage renal disease), cardiovascular risks (major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and stroke), fractures, infections (Clostridium difficile infection, community-acquired pneumonia, and Coronavirus disease 2019), micronutrient deficiencies (hypomagnesemia, anemia, vitamin B12 deficiency, hypocalcemia, hypokalemia), hypergastrinemia, cancers (gastric cancer, pancreatic cancer, colorectal cancer, hepatic cancer), hepatic encephalopathy, and dementia. Clinicians including prescribers and pharmacists should be aware of the adverse effects of taking proton pump inhibitors for an extended period of time. In addition, the patients taking proton pump inhibitors for long-term should be monitored for the listed adverse effects. The American Gastroenterological association recommends a few non-pharmacological measures and the use of histamine 2 blockers to lessen gastrointestinal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflex disease and the utilization of proton pump inhibitors treatment if there is a definitive indication. Additionally, the American Gastroenterological association's Best Practice Advice statements emphasize deprescribing when there is no clear indication for proton pump inhibitors therapy.

The Safety of Long-Term Proton Pump Inhibitor Use on Cardiovascular Health: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most prescribed classes of drugs worldwide as a first-line treatment of acid-related disorders. Although adverse effects are rare and rapidly reversible after a short exposure, concerns have been recently raised about a greater toxicity on cardiovascular health after a longer exposure, especially when combined with clopidogrel. We aimed to evaluate the safety of long-term PPI use on cardiovascular health in patients with known atheromatous cardiovascular disease. Methods: A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and grey literature in April 2022. Articles published between 2014 and 2022 were considered relevant if they were designed as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included post hoc analyses or prospective observational studies and if they investigated clinical cardiovascular outcomes associated with PPI use for 6 months or more in patients suffering from cardiovascular disease requiring antiplatelet agent therapy and/or coronary angioplasty. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 software (Computer program, the Cochrane Collaboration, 2020, London, UK). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for the RCTs and the Newcastle−Ottawa scale for the observational studies. Results: A total of 10 full-text articles involving 53,302 patients were included. Substantial heterogeneity was found among the 10 included studies. The primary analysis showed no significant differences between the PPI group and the control group for the risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), all-cause death (ACD), or target vessel revascularization (TVR) using a random-effects model (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98−1.35, p = 0.08, I2 = 73%; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.94−1.65, p = 0.13, I2 = 63%; and OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.76−1.87, p = 0.45, I2 = 61%, respectively). The primary analysis yielded similar results for the risks of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and cardiovascular death (CVD) using a fixed-effects model (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88−1.09, p = 0.66, I2 = 0%; OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90−1.17, p = 0.73, I2 = 0%; and OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.94−1.16, p = 0.44, I2 = 35%, respectively). Likewise, a subgroup analysis based on eight randomized controlled trials failed to identify any association between PPI use and the risks of MACEs, MI, stroke, TVR, ACD, or CVD using a fixed-effects model (overall pooled OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96−1.06; p = 0.66; I2 = 0%). The pulled data from the two included observational studies (OS) demonstrated a significantly increased risk of MACEs in the PPI group (OR 1.42, 95% CI [1.29−1.57], p <0.001; I2 = 0%). In another subgroup analysis, no evidence of an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events in the co-therapy PPI/clopidogrel versus clopidogrel alone groups was found with the exception of the risk of ACD (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.23−1.82, p = 0.001, I2 = 0%). Nevertheless, after performing a sensitivity analysis reaching heterogeneity I2 = 0%, the co-prescription of PPIs and clopidogrel was at increased risk of MACEs (p < 0.001), CVD (p = 0.008), and TVR (p < 0.001) but remained statistically non-significant for the risk of MI (p = 0.11). Conclusions: The overall results of this meta-analysis showed that long-term PPI use was not associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. However, inconsistent results were found for combined PPI/clopidogrel therapy. These results should be considered with caution in light of the significant heterogeneity, the limited number of included studies, and the lack of adjustment for potential confounders.

An Up-to-Date Article Regarding Particularities of Drug Treatment in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure

Since the prevalence of heart failure (HF) increases with age, HF is now one of the most common reasons for the hospitalization of elderly people. Although the treatment strategies and overall outcomes of HF patients have improved over time, hospitalization and mortality rates remain elevated, especially in developed countries where populations are aging. Therefore, this paper is intended to be a valuable multidisciplinary source of information for both doctors (cardiologists and general physicians) and pharmacists in order to decrease the morbidity and mortality of heart failure patients. We address several aspects regarding pharmacological treatment (including new approaches in HF treatment strategies [sacubitril/valsartan combination and sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors]), as well as the particularities of patients (age-induced changes and sex differences) and treatment (pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes in drugs; cardiorenal syndrome). The article also highlights several drugs and food supplements that may worsen the prognosis of HF patients and discusses some potential drug-drug interactions, their consequences and recommendations for health care providers, as well as the risks of adverse drug reactions and treatment discontinuation, as an interdisciplinary approach to treatment is essential for HF patients.

Association of proton-pump inhibitor use with adverse health outcomes: A systematic umbrella review of meta-analyses of cohort studies and randomised controlled trials

AIMS

The aim was to perform an umbrella review to summarise the existing evidence on proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) use and adverse outcomes and to grade the certainty of evidence.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched up to July 2021 for meta-analyses of cohort studies and/or randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Summary effect sizes from a random-effects model, between-study heterogeneity, 95% prediction interval, small-study effect, excess significance and credibility ceilings were devised to classify the credibility of evidence from meta-analyses of cohort studies, whereas the GRADE approach was used for meta-analyses of RCTs.

RESULTS

In meta-analyses of cohort studies, 52 of the 91 examined associations were statistically significant (P ≤ .05). Convincing evidence emerged from main analysis for the association between PPI use and risk of all-site fracture and chronic kidney disease in the elderly population. However, none of these associations remained supported by convincing evidence after sensitivity analyses. The use of PPI is also associated with an increased risk of mortality due to COVID-19 infection and other related adverse outcomes, but the quality of evidence was weak. In meta-analyses of RCTs, 38 of the 63 examined associations were statistically significant. However, no associations were supported by high or moderate-quality evidence.

CONCLUSION

This study's findings imply that most putative adverse outcomes associated with PPI use may not be supported by high-quality evidence and are likely to have been affected by underlying confounding factors. Future research is needed to confirm the causal association between PPI use and risk of fracture and chronic kidney disease.

ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) continues to be among the most common diseases seen by gastroenterologists, surgeons, and primary care physicians. Our understanding of the varied presentations of GERD, enhancements in diagnostic testing, and approach to patient management have evolved. During this time, scrutiny of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has increased considerably. Although PPIs remain the medical treatment of choice for GERD, multiple publications have raised questions about adverse events, raising doubts about the safety of long-term use and increasing concern about overprescribing of PPIs. New data regarding the potential for surgical and endoscopic interventions have emerged. In this new document, we provide updated, evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for the evaluation and management of GERD, including pharmacologic, lifestyle, surgical, and endoscopic management. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to evaluate the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Key concepts and suggestions that as of this writing do not have sufficient evidence to grade are also provided.

ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) continues to be among the most common diseases seen by gastroenterologists, surgeons, and primary care physicians. Our understanding of the varied presentations of GERD, enhancements in diagnostic testing, and approach to patient management have evolved. During this time, scrutiny of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has increased considerably. Although PPIs remain the medical treatment of choice for GERD, multiple publications have raised questions about adverse events, raising doubts about the safety of long-term use and increasing concern about overprescribing of PPIs. New data regarding the potential for surgical and endoscopic interventions have emerged. In this new document, we provide updated, evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for the evaluation and management of GERD, including pharmacologic, lifestyle, surgical, and endoscopic management. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to evaluate the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Key concepts and suggestions that as of this writing do not have sufficient evidence to grade are also provided.

Cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes of intermittent/continuous proton pump inhibitors infusion in high bleeding risk of ulcers: A retrospective observational cohort study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes, including patient prognosis and medication expense, of proton pump inhibitors administered by high-dose continuous infusion (HDC, 80 mg loading dose, then 8 mg/h for 72 hours) or non-high-dose intermittent infusion (NHDI, 40 mg qd or 40 mg q12 h, for 3 days) regimens in high-risk patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.In this retrospective cohort study, patients with peptic ulcers and endoscopic hemostasis between January, 2013 and December, 2015 were included. The primary endpoints were rebleeding and mortality rates within 7 days. The secondary endpoints were length of stay (LOS), transfusion units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs), and the number needed to treat.A total of 335 patients met the inclusion criteria during the 3-year follow-up period. The cumulative incidence of rebleeding within 7 days was 20.4% and 11.2% in the HDC and NHDI groups, respectively, with a significant difference (P = .021). The mortality rate was 12.1% and 7.3% in the HDC and NHDI groups, respectively, with no significant difference (P = .136). Univariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis showed that the risk of rebleeding within 7 days in the HDC group was higher than that in the NHDI group. The hazard ratio for HDC vs. NHDI was 1.93 (P = .021). There were significant differences in LOS (P = .034) and PRBC units (P = .005) for risk of rebleeding within 7 days, as well as in transfusion units of PRBCs for mortality rate analysis (p < 0.001), between the HDC and NHDI groups. The results showed that the NHDI regimen could reduce the risk of rebleeding within 7 days in 1 of 11 patients (number needed to treat = 11) and could reduce medication cost by US$ 400 to 800.The NHDI regimen showed a lower risk of rebleeding within 7 days, shorter LOS, and fewer PRBC units than that of the HDC regimen. Receiving NHDI has better cost-effective outcomes than that of HDC for patients with high-risk bleeding peptic ulcers.

Underutilization of Peptic Ulcer Disease Prophylaxis Among Elderly Users of Antiplatelets and Anticoagulants

INTRODUCTION

Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) develops in approximately 25% of chronic users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The incidence of uncomplicated PUD has been declining over the past 3 decades unlike that of complicated PUD in the elderly. An expert consensus document published jointly in 2008 by the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF), and the American Heart Association (AHA) provided recommendations on prevention of PUD among users of antiplatelets and anticoagulants. This work aimed to evaluate physicians' compliance with these guidelines in a tertiary academic setting.

METHODS

We examined our medical record database for the 9 month period extending from April 2018 until December 2018. Using this database, we identified elderly patients (> 64 years old) who were chronic (> 3 months) users of low dose aspirin (81 mg once daily) and had an indication for PUD prophylaxis as per the ACG-ACCF-AHA guideline document. We performed a retrospective chart review of patients included in this study. Descriptive statistics were compared using χ² and independent sample t tests.

RESULTS

A total of 852 patients were included in this study. The mean age was 75 years old, and 43% of patients were females. In addition to aspirin, patients were prescribed P2Y12 inhibitors (45.5%), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (23%), warfarin (12%), steroids (9%) or enoxaparin (1%). Users of DOACs were most commonly prescribed apixaban (16%), followed by rivaroxaban (6%) and dabigatran (1%). Overall, only 40% of patients with an indication for PUD prophylaxis received a proton pump inhibitor.

CONCLUSION

PUD prophylaxis may be underutilized in elderly patients. This finding, along with increasing rates of NSAID use and an aging population, may help explain the increased incidence of complicated PUD in the elderly. Efforts are needed to raise physician awareness of PUD prophylaxis guidelines.

Clinical Outcomes of Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The safety and efficacy associated with the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) by patients with coronary artery disease receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) remain unclear. Methods: The evaluated outcomes included combined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. A random effects meta-analysis, stratified by study design, was performed and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Results: In total, 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (6930 patients) and 16 observational studies (183,546 patients) were included. Analysis of RCTs showed that there were no significant differences in the incidences of MACEs (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75-1.05]), MI (RR = 0.93 [95% CI = 0.76-1.15]), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.79 [95% CI = 0.50-1.23]) in the PPI groups vs. the non-PPI groups. Pooled data from observational studies revealed an inconsistent association between the use of each PPI subtype and the increased risks of MACEs during clopidogrel treatment. There was no increased risk of MACEs or all-cause mortality associated with the use of PPIs (as a class) and other P2Y12 inhibitors. Both the RCTs and observational studies revealed that the use of PPIs significantly reduced the risks of GI bleeding. Conclusion: The use of PPIs was associated with a reduced risk of GI bleeding in patients treated with DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention or acute coronary syndrome. There was no clear evidence of an association between the use of PPIs and adverse cardiovascular events. Clinical Trial Registration: identifier [CRD42020190315].

Potential drug-drug interactions in patients with cardiovascular diseases: findings from a prospective observational study

Background

Patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are at high risk of experiencing drug–drug interactions (DDIs). The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency, level and risk factors associated with potential-DDIs (pDDIs) in hospitalized CVD patients at cardiology departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Quetta, Pakistan.

Methods

In the current prospective observational study, a total of 300 eligible CVD inpatients were evaluated for pDDIs using Lexicomp Interact®. The pDDIs were classified into class A (no known interaction); B (no action needed); C (monitor therapy: it is documented that the benefits of an interaction outweigh the risk, appropriately monitor therapy in order to avoid potential adverse outcomes); D (consider therapy modification: it is documented that proper actions must be taken to reduce the toxicity resulting from an interaction); X (avoid combination: the risk of an interaction outweighs the benefits and are usually contraindicated). Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis was used to find factors associated with the presence of Class-D and/or X pDDIs. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

With a median of 8.50 pDDIs per patient, all patients (100%) had ≥ 1 pDDIs. Out of total 2787 pDDIs observed, 74.06% (n = 2064) were of moderate and (n = 483) 17.33% of major severity. Class C pDDIs were most common (n = 1971, 70.72%) followed by D (n = 582, 20.88%), B (n = 204, 7.32%) and X (n = 30, 1.08%). Suffering from cardiovascular diseases other than myocardial infarction (OR 0.053, p-value < 0.001) and receiving > 12 drugs (OR 4.187, p-value = 0.009) had statistical significant association with the presence of class D and/or X pDDIs.

Conclusion

In the current study, pDDIs were highly prevalent. The inclusion of DDI screening tools, availability of clinical pharmacists and paying special attention to the high-risk patients may reduce the frequency of pDDIs at the study sites.

Classification of drugs for evaluating drug interaction in drug development and clinical management

During new drug development, clinical drug interaction studies are carried out in accordance with the mechanism of potential drug interactions evaluated by in vitro studies. The obtained information should be provided efficiently to medical experts through package inserts and various information materials after the drug's launch. A recently updated Japanese guideline presents general procedures that are considered scientifically valid at the present moment. In this review, we aim to highlight the viewpoints of the Japanese guideline and enumerate drugs that were involved or are anticipated to be involved in evident pharmacokinetic drug interactions and classify them by their clearance pathway and potential intensity based on systematic reviews of the literature. The classification would be informative for designing clinical studies during the development stage, and the appropriate management of drug interactions in clinical practice.

Effectiveness of boosted darunavir plus rilpivirine in patients with long-lasting HIV-1 infection: DARIL study

BACKGROUND

The combination of boosted darunavir plus rilpivirine, once daily, could be a convenient, effective and well-tolerated two-drug regimen to achieve HIV suppression in HIV-infected patients.

METHODS

Multicentre, retrospective cohort study in nine hospitals in Spain. All HIV-infected subjects starting boosted darunavir plus rilpivirine were included, irrespective of their viral load (VL). The primary objective was the percentage of patients with VL <50 copies/mL at 48 weeks. Secondary objectives included changes in CD4+ cell count, lipid profile and renal function.

RESULTS

Eighty-one of 84 patients reached Week 48. Fifty-nine (70.2%) patients had VL <50 copies/mL at baseline and the rest had a median VL of 202 (IQR 98-340) copies/mL. Subjects had a median of 21 years of infection with six prior regimens. The main reasons for starting boosted darunavir plus rilpivirine were simplification (44%), kidney or bone toxicity (28.6%) and virological failure (17.9%). Historical genotypes from 47 patients showed 41 (87.2%) patients with NRTI RAMs, 21 (44.7%) with NNRTI RAMs, 12 (25.5%) with primary PI RAMs and 7 (14.9%) with integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) RAMs. One patient had low-level resistance to boosted darunavir and five patients had some resistance to rilpivirine. At 48 weeks, 71 (87.7%) patients had VL <50 copies/mL. According to undetectable or detectable baseline VL, effectiveness was 91.1% or 80%, respectively. There were four virological failures with no emergence of new RAMs. Three of these patients resuppressed viraemia while maintaining the same regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of boosted darunavir plus rilpivirine has shown good effectiveness and tolerability in this cohort of pretreated patients with a long-lasting HIV infection, exposure to multiple antiretroviral regimens and prior HIV resistance.

Omeprazole-clopidogrel interaction and neurovascular complications after flow-diverter device placement

BACKGROUND

Omeprazole is a common proton pump inhibitor that interferes with the hepatic activation of clopidogrel and potentially reduces its platelet-inhibitory effect. Omeprazole has been shown to increase P2Y₁₂ levels and adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients treated with drug-eluting stents. However, omeprazole use among patients treated with flow-diverting stents for intracranial aneurysms has not been evaluated.

METHODS

All patients with placement of a flow-diverting device for treatment of an intracranial aneurysm at a tertiary institution from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria included documented clopidogrel administration, available P2Y₁₂ levels, and thorough documentation of administration of other medications, including omeprazole.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen patients (12%) were receiving omeprazole and clopidogrel at treatment. P2Y₁₂ reactivity was significantly greater in the omeprazole cohort (mean P2Y₁₂ level, 250 P2Y₁₂ reaction units (PRU)) than in the control cohort (mean P2Y₁₂ level, 112PRU) (P<0.001). Furthermore, a greater proportion of patients had a P2Y₁₂ level >180 PRU in the omeprazole cohort (14 of 16 [88%] vs 24 of 122 [20%]; P<0.001; OR [95% CI], 29 [6-134]).

CONCLUSION

Omeprazole was associated with a significant increase in the mean P2Y₁₂ reactivity level among patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with flow-diverting devices who received clopidogrel. However, receipt of omeprazole was not associated with an increased risk of ischemic events or stent stenosis. For neuroendovascular patients who are treated with a flow diverter while receiving clopidogrel, alternative gastrointestinal medication regimens should be considered.

The Role of Genetic Polymorphism and Other Factors on Clopidogrel Resistance (CR) in an Asian Population with Coronary Heart Disease (CHD)

Clopidogrel is a widely-used antiplatelet drug. It is important for the treatment and prevention of coronary heart disease. Clopidogrel can effectively reduce platelet activity and therefore reduce stent thrombosis. However, some patients still have ischemic events despite taking the clopidogrel due to the alteration in clopidogrel metabolism attributable to various genetic and non-genetic factors. This review aims to summarise the mechanisms and causes of clopidogrel resistance (CR) and potential strategies to overcome it. This review summarised the possible effects of genetic polymorphism on CR among the Asian population, especially CYP2C19 *2 / *3 / *17, where the prevalence rate among Asians was 23.00%, 4.61%, 15.18%, respectively. The review also studied the effects of other factors and appropriate strategies used to overcome CR. Generally, CR among the Asian population was estimated at 17.2-81.6%. Therefore, our overview provides valuable insight into the causes of RC. In conclusion, understanding the prevalence of drug metabolism-related genetic polymorphism, especially CYP2C19 alleles, will enhance clinical understanding of racial differences in drug reactions, contributing to the development of personalised medicine in Asia.

Gastroprotection in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy: a position paper of National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO)

Aspirin and P2Y12 receptor antagonists are widely used across the spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Gastrointestinal complications, including ulcer and bleeding, are relatively common during antiplatelet treatment and, therefore, concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed. However, potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested for PPIs, and, in recent years, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection by aspirin and, even more so, clopidogrel. Indeed, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies suggested an interaction through hepatic CYP2C19 between PPIs and clopidogrel, which could translate into clinical inefficacy, leading to higher rates of cardiovascular events. The FDA and the EMA sent a warning in 2010 discouraging the concomitant use of clopidogrel with omeprazole or esomeprazole. In addition, whether the use of PPIs may affect the clinical efficacy of the new P2Y12 receptor antagonists, ticagrelor and prasugrel, remains less known. According to current guidelines, PPIs in combination with antiplatelet treatment are recommended in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori infection. Like vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), DOACs can determine gastrointestinal bleeding. Results from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies suggest that high-dose dabigatran (150 mg bid), rivaroxaban and high-dose edoxaban (60 mg daily) are associated with a higher risk of GI bleeding as compared with apixaban and warfarin. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with GI risk factor, PPI could be recommended, even if usefulness of PPIs in these patients deserves further data. Helicobacter pylori should always be searched, and treated, in patients with history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication). Given the large number of patients treated with antithrombotic drugs and PPIs, even a minor reduction of platelet inhibition or anticoagulant effect potentially carries a considerable clinical impact. The present joint statement by ANMCO and AIGO summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs in combination. Moreover, it outlines evidence supporting or opposing drug interactions between these drugs and discusses consequent clinical implications.

Use of Clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors Alone or in Combinations in Persons with Diabetes in Denmark; Potential for CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Drug Therapy

Background: Clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most used drugs in Denmark for which there exists pharmacogenomics (PGx)-based dosing guidelines and FDA annotations. In this study, we further scrutinized the use of clopidogrel and PPIs when prescriptions were redeemed from Danish Pharmacies alone or in combination in the Danish population and among persons with diabetes in Denmark. The focus deals with the potential of applying PGx-guided antiplatelet therapy taking both drug–drug interactions (DDI) and drug–gene interactions (DGI) into account. Methods: The Danish Register of Medicinal Product Statistics was the source to retrieve consumption data. Results: The consumption of PPIs and clopidogrel in terms of prevalence (users/1000 inhabitants) increased over a five-year period by 6.3% to 103.1 (PPIs) and by 41.7% to 22.1 (clopidogrel), respectively. The prevalence of the use of clopidogrel and PPIs in persons with diabetes are 3.8 and 2.1–2.8 times higher compared to the general population. When redeemed in combination, the prevalence increased to 4.7. The most used combination was clopidogrel and pantoprazole. Conclusions: The use of clopidogrel and PPIs either alone or in combination is quite widespread, in particular among the elderly and persons with diabetes. This further supports the emerging need of accessing and accounting for not only DDI but also for applying PGx-guided drug therapy in clinical decision making for antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel having a particular focus on persons with diabetes and the elderly.

Dabigatran Dual Therapy vs Warfarin Triple Therapy Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation With/Without a Proton Pump Inhibitor: A Pre-Specified Analysis of the RE-DUAL PCI Trial

Background and Objective

In patients with atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention, if a proton pump inhibitor is used, could that allow the use of warfarin triple therapy, or is there additional reduction in bleeding while using it with dual therapy?

Methods

The RE-DUAL PCI trial randomized 2725 patients with atrial fibrillation post-percutaneous coronary intervention to dabigatran dual therapy (110 or 150 mg twice daily, with clopidogrel or ticagrelor) or warfarin triple therapy (with clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin for 1–3 months). This prespecified subgroup analysis evaluated risks of a first major bleeding event or clinically relevant non-major bleeding event, all gastrointestinal bleeding, and a composite efficacy endpoint of all-cause mortality/thromboembolic event or unplanned revascularization according to baseline use of a proton pump inhibitor.

Results

Of 2678 analyzed patients, 1641 (61.3%) were receiving a proton pump inhibitor at baseline. Dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced the risk of major bleeding events or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events vs warfarin triple therapy regardless of proton pump inhibitor use, with comparable risk of the composite efficacy endpoint (all interaction p values > 0.05). For gastrointestinal bleeding, no interaction was observed between study treatment and proton pump inhibitor use (interaction p values 0.84 and 0.62 for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy, respectively, vs warfarin triple therapy).

Conclusions

Dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced the risk of major bleeding events or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events vs warfarin triple therapy, regardless of proton pump inhibitor use at baseline, in patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Risk of the composite efficacy endpoint appeared to be similar for dabigatran dual therapy vs warfarin triple therapy in patients receiving/not receiving a proton pump inhibitor.

ClinicalTrials.gov unique identifier

NCT02164864.

Video abstract

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40265-020-01323-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Treatment Outcomes of Clopidogrel in Patients With ACS and Diabetes Undergoing PCI-Analysis of Beijing Municipal Medical Insurance Database

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Several clinical trials have proved the efficacy of clopidogrel treatment for patients with percutaneous coronary intervention. There are few large-scale studies to identify the mortality associated with different durations of treatment of clopidogrel in patients with diabetes and ACS undergoing PCI in the Chinese population. The objective of this analysis was to determine the efficacy of long-term clopidogrel therapy (≥12 months) versus short-term use (<12 months) in Chinese patients with diabetes after PCI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used the Beijing Municipal Medical Insurance Database provided by the Beijing Municipal Medical Insurance Bureau. The Beijing Municipal Medical Insurance Database contained medical data of about 16 million people, including about 990,000 patients with diabetes and a history of taking antidiabetic medicines. Patients were divided into two groups, one group of 9,116 patients receiving consecutive clopidogrel for one year or more, and another group of 3290 patients receiving consecutive clopidogrel for less than one year. The primary outcomes of this analysis were the risk of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization. In patients with diabetes after PCI, long-term clopidogrel treatment was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause death (HR, 0.57[95%CI, 0.49-0.67], P<0.0001), myocardial infarction (HR, 0.79[95%CI, 0.68-0.93], P=0.0035) and an increased risk of angina (HR, 1.18[95%CI, 1.10-1.27], P<0.0001]) and revascularization (HR, 1.07[95%CI, 1.01-1.13], P=0.02]). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of all-cause re-hospitalization, diabetes-related re-hospitalization, and cerebrovascular re-hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

The present study concluded that long-term dual antiplatelet therapy including clopidogrel and aspirin could decrease the risks of all-cause death, myocardial infarction. But it could increase the risks of angina and revascularization. Further studies should interpret the cause of this question.

The Use and Misuse of Proton Pump Inhibitors: An Opportunity for Deprescribing

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are proven medications of choice for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), acid-related disorders, erosive esophagitis, Barrett esophagus, prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding while on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, eosinophilic esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease, stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients, and other indications. Best practice guidelines from several sources on the appropriate indications and duration of PPI therapy have been summarized for easy assimilation. Individualized decision with regard to PPI use is illustrated by case vignettes; best approaches are provided. The significant increase in use of PPIs for ill-defined indications over the years, associated adverse outcomes with long-term use, and consequent increase in health care costs have drawn much attention. Adverse outcomes due to PPI therapy may be categorized as unrelated or related to gastric acid inhibition. Examples of outcomes unrelated to acid inhibition include allergic reactions, acute interstitial nephritis, chronic kidney disease, poor cardiovascular outcomes, dementia, and drug interactions; consequences of acid inhibition include gastrointestinal infections, pneumonia, nutrient deficiencies, fractures, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. Provider awareness regarding best practice guidelines on PPI use and imparting pertinent education to patients may be the rational approach to safe and effective PPI therapy. In individuals in whom the drug is not indicated, efforts at deprescribing the PPI may be attempted following discussion with the patient. Approaches include stopping the drug, reducing the dose or using "on-demand" therapy after completing the course of treatment for the specific indication. Barriers to successful deprescribing exist. Follow-up is recommended for recurrence of manifestations; in the event of recurrence, the PPI may need to be re-instituted. PPIs are valuable, irreplaceable drugs in the prevention and treatment of certain disorders for specific durations of time. Evidence nevertheless suggests that excessive and inappropriately prolonged use of PPIs is associated with a broad range of adverse effects. Education of provider and patient, stewardship, and motivation are key to appropriate use of PPIs for the right indications. Key implications for practice are offered.

[Updating in prescription of proton pump inhibitors. What to do and what not to do]

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most prescribed pharmacological subgroup of the National Health System and their use has been related to possible potentially serious adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current indications for treatment with PPIs as well as the data related to their safety, in order to promote their adecuate use.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A review of the literature focused on the following topics has been carried out: a) molecules and mechanism of action; b) current indications for treatment and adherence to them; c) adverse effects related to its use; d) drug interactions; e) alternatives in deprescription.

RESULTS

The current indications have not changed substantially in recent years and are well established, however, there is a high percentage of inappropriate prescription, mainly in individuals with low or no risk.

CONCLUSIONS

PPIs are safe drugs and generally well tolerated and their benefits are higher than possible adverse effects. Adhering to evidence-based recommendations represents the only rational approach to safe and effective therapy.

Mechanisms of CYP450 Inhibition: Understanding Drug-Drug Interactions Due to Mechanism-Based Inhibition in Clinical Practice

In an ageing society, polypharmacy has become a major public health and economic issue. Overuse of medications, especially in patients with chronic diseases, carries major health risks. One common consequence of polypharmacy is the increased emergence of adverse drug events, mainly from drug–drug interactions. The majority of currently available drugs are metabolized by CYP450 enzymes. Interactions due to shared CYP450-mediated metabolic pathways for two or more drugs are frequent, especially through reversible or irreversible CYP450 inhibition. The magnitude of these interactions depends on several factors, including varying affinity and concentration of substrates, time delay between the administration of the drugs, and mechanisms of CYP450 inhibition. Various types of CYP450 inhibition (competitive, non-competitive, mechanism-based) have been observed clinically, and interactions of these types require a distinct clinical management strategy. This review focuses on mechanism-based inhibition, which occurs when a substrate forms a reactive intermediate, creating a stable enzyme–intermediate complex that irreversibly reduces enzyme activity. This type of inhibition can cause interactions with drugs such as omeprazole, paroxetine, macrolide antibiotics, or mirabegron. A good understanding of mechanism-based inhibition and proper clinical management is needed by clinicians when such drugs are prescribed. It is important to recognize mechanism-based inhibition since it cannot be prevented by separating the time of administration of the interacting drugs. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the different types of mechanism-based inhibition, along with illustrative examples of how mechanism-based inhibition might affect prescribing and clinical behaviors.

Hypochlorhydria reduces mortality in heart failure caused by Kcne2 gene deletion

Heart failure (HF) is an increasing global health crisis, affecting 40 million people and causing 50% mortality within 5 years of diagnosis. A fuller understanding of the genetic and environmental factors underlying HF, and novel therapeutic approaches to address it, are urgently warranted. Here, we discovered that cardiac-specific germline deletion in mice of potassium channel β subunit-encoding Kcne2 (Kcne2^CS-/- ) causes dilated cardiomyopathy and terminal HF (median longevity, 28 weeks). Mice with global Kcne2 deletion (Kcne2^Glo-/- ) exhibit multiple HF risk factors, yet, paradoxically survived over twice as long as Kcne2^CS-/- mice. Global Kcne2 deletion, which inhibits gastric acid secretion, reduced the relative abundance of species within Bacteroidales, a bacterial order that positively correlates with increased lifetime risk of human cardiovascular disease. Strikingly, the proton-pump inhibitor omeprazole similarly altered the microbiome and delayed terminal HF in Kcne2^CS-/- mice, increasing survival 10-fold at 44 weeks. Thus, genetic or pharmacologic induction of hypochlorhydria and decreased gut Bacteroidales species are associated with lifespan extension in a novel HF model.

Prevalence of drug interactions in hospitalised elderly patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in hospital settings is variable, and elderly patients are considered a high risk population for DDIs. There are no systematic reviews describing the prevalence of DDIs in hospitalised elderly patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess and summarise the available data on the prevalence of DDIs in hospitalised elderly patients and to describe which drugs, drug classes and drug combinations are most commonly involved in DDIs.

DATA SOURCE

A systematic electronic literature search was conducted on Medline/PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, SciElo, Web of Science, Cinahl, Scopus, Cochrane, OpenGrey, Capes Thesis Bank, OasisBR, OpenAire and abstracts from scientific events, without limitation on language or period of publication. Study selection was completed on 21 September 2018.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Original observational studies that reported the prevalence of actual or potential DDIs during hospitalisation in patients aged 60 years or older were included. The main outcome measure was prevalence of DDIs and number of DDIs per patient. Subgroup analysis was performed in studies that reported the prevalence of DDIs in geriatric units.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Study quality was assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality methodological checklist for cross sectional and prevalence studies.

RESULTS

34 studies were included, involving 9577 patients. The prevalence of DDIs ranged from 8.34% to 100%. In studies conducted in geriatric units, the prevalence ranged from 80.5% to 90.5%. The number of DDIs per patient ranged from 1.2 to 30.6. Single drugs most commonly involved in DDIs were furosemide, captopril, warfarin and dipyrone. Drug classes mostly involved were potassium sparing diuretics and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors.

LIMITATIONS

The main limitation is the heterogeneity between the included studies that precluded a meta-analysis. Several different methods were used to identify DDIs, majorly, and potential DDIs. Few studies have reported measures to control the quality of the collected data.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

The prevalence of DDIs ranged widely, and the variation may reflect differences in the conditions of the elderly patients and level of attention (or complexity of care), as well as methodological differences, especially the methods and/or software used to identify DDIs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018096720.

Proton pump inhibitors and cardiovascular adverse effects: Real or surreal worries?

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most widely prescribed agents, either for treatment or prophylaxis of gastrointestinal (GI) disease, that are often administered for prolonged or chronic use. Patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease frequently receive PPIs for prophylaxis against GI bleeding due to common use of antithrombotic drugs. Over the last several years there is a growing number of reports associating chronic PPI use with a variety of serious CV and non-CV adverse effects. In this context, PPI use has been independently associated with an increased risk of CV morbidity (myocardial infarction, stroke, other CV events) and mortality. However, the critique remains that these data do not largely derive from randomized controlled trials. On the other hand, in certain conditions, the benefits of PPIs may outweigh the risks of adverse CV effects. As the indications for prolonged, particularly lifelong, prophylactic use of PPIs are not compelling and in the light of evidence of serious CV and other adverse effects, clinicians have to reconsider such long-term use of these drugs. Importantly, histamine 2 blockers have not been found to be associated with increased CV risk and thus may be an alternative therapeutic option in certain patients. These issues are amply discussed together with the potential mechanisms of these pleiotropic and off-target effects of PPIs, which are also depicted in an illustrative schema; data are also presented on differential effects of specific agents involved, alternative modes of therapy available, and relevant current guidelines on this issue.

Antithrombotic Therapy: Prevention and Treatment of Atherosclerosis and Atherothrombosis

Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial vascular disease that develops in the course of a lifetime. Numerous risk factors for atherosclerosis have been identified, mostly inflicting pro-inflammatory effects. Vessel injury, such as occurring during erosion or rupture of atherosclerotic lesions triggers blood coagulation, in attempt to maintain hemostasis (protect against bleeding). However, thrombo-inflammatory mechanisms may drive blood coagulation such that thrombosis develops, the key process underlying myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke (not due to embolization from the heart). In the blood coagulation system, platelets and coagulation proteins are both essential elements. Hyperreactivity of blood coagulation aggravates atherosclerosis in preclinical models. Pharmacologic inhibition of blood coagulation, either with platelet inhibitors, or better documented with anticoagulants, or both, limits the risk of thrombosis and may potentially reverse atherosclerosis burden, although the latter evidence is still based on animal experimentation.Patients at risk of atherothrombotic complications should receive a single antiplatelet agent (acetylsalicylic acid, ASA, or clopidogrel); those who survived an atherothrombotic event will be prescribed temporary dual antiplatelet therapy (ASA plus a P2Y12 inhibitor) in case of myocardial infarction (6-12 months), or stroke (<6 weeks), followed by a single antiplatelet agent indefinitely. High risk for thrombosis patients (such as those with peripheral artery disease) benefit from a combination of an anticoagulant and ASA. The price of gained efficacy is always increased risk of (major) bleeding; while tailoring therapy to individual needs may limit the risks to some extent, new generations of agents that target less critical elements of hemostasis and coagulation mechanisms are needed to maintain efficacy while reducing bleeding risks.

Impact of a multidisciplinary quality improvement initiative to reduce inappropriate usage of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalized patients

AIMS

To promote effective methods to improve overutilization patterns of acid-suppressive therapy in hospitalized patients and to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary team efforts to reduce inappropriate use of stress ulcer prophylaxis in low-risk patients.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary quality improvement initiative incorporating education, medication use reviews and reconciliation, and pharmaceutical intervention was implemented in June 2018 for surgical patients hospitalized via emergency department. For the pre-post analysis and time series analysis, patients admitted during April and May were classified into the pre-intervention cohort and those admitted during July and August into the post-intervention cohort.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventeen patients were included in this study (153 and 164 in the pre- and post-intervention cohorts, respectively). The multidisciplinary program was effective in reducing overuse of stress ulcer prophylaxis and healthcare expenses associated with it. Biweekly education on risk factors warranting stress ulcer prophylaxis was provided for clinicians, and acid-suppressive therapy was removed from a preset list of admission orders. The incidence of inappropriate prophylaxis use declined substantially following intervention in overall patients (OR = 0.51, P = 0.01) and a significant decrease was primarily observed among non-ICU patients (OR = 0.50, P = 0.01). Interrupted time series analysis confirmed the significant decline in inappropriate use post intervention (coefficient = -0.63, P < 0.001). The total healthcare expenses associated with such overuse decreased by 58.5% from US$ 19.39 to US$ 8.04 per 100 patient-days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multidisciplinary team efforts were associated with improvement in stress ulcer prophylaxis overuse patterns, resulting in a substantial decrease in the incidence of inappropriate use, especially in general wards, and associated healthcare costs.

Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors with Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

There is inconsistency in the literature regarding the clinical effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) when added to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in subjects with coronary artery disease (CAD). We performed meta-analysis stratified by study design to explore these differences.

METHODS AND RESULTS

39 studies [4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 35 observational studies) were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Inception-January 2018). In 221,204 patients (PPI = 77,731 patients, no PPI =143,473 patients), RCTs restricted analysis showed that PPI did not increase the risk of all-cause mortality (Risk Ratio (RR): 1.35, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.56-3.23, P = 0.50, I2 = 0), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.94, 95% CI, 0.25-3.54, P = 0.92, I2 = 56), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR: 0.97, 95% CI, 0.62-1.51, P = 0.88, I2 = 0) or stroke (RR: 1.11, 95% CI, 0.25-5.04, P = 0.89, I2 = 26). However, PPI significantly reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR: 0.32, 95% CI, 0.20-0.52, P < 0.001, I2 = 0). Conversely, analysis of observational studies showed that PPI significantly increased the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI, 1.11-1.41, P < 0.001, I2 = 82), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI, 1.03-1.52, P = 0.02, I2 = 71), MI (RR: 1.30, 95% CI, 1.16-1.47, P < 0.001, I2 = 82) and stroke (RR: 1.60, 95% CI, 1.43-1.78, P < 0.001, I2 = 0), without reducing GI bleeding (RR: 0.74, 95% CI, 0.45-1.22, P = 0.24, I2 = 79).

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis of RCTs endorsed the use of PPI with DAPT for reducing GI bleeding without worsening cardiovascular outcomes. These findings oppose the negative observational data regarding effects of PPI with DAPT.

CYP2C19 phenotype in South-East Asian Acute Coronary Syndrome patients and impact on major adverse cardiovascular events

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Several Caucasian cohort studies have associated at least one loss-of-function CYP2C19 on Clopidogrel (LoF-Clopidogrel) with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and only a couple have used Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC^® ) phenotype grouping to study the associations. We primarily aimed to study the impact of use of platelet reactivity testing to escalate antiplatelet therapy and secondarily to study the association of CPIC phenotype with MACE outcomes in South-East Asian Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) subjects.

METHOD

A retrospective genotype study was performed on 238 percutaneous coronary intervention subjects, originally planned for escalation of antiplatelets using platelet reactivity testing.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There was no difference in MACE between the switched and unswitched groups; however, 'all bleeds' and 'clinically significant bleeds' (CSB) were statistically higher in the patients who were switched to prasugrel. The subgroup of patients who remained on clopidogrel (n = 199) were analysed using phenotype categories and MACE. Eleven percent (11.4%) of CYP2C19 poor metabolizers (PM) suffered MACE, compared with 1.3% of extensive metabolizers (EM). LoF-Clopidogrel patients are significantly more likely to experience MACE compared with non-LoF subjects (8.0% vs 5.4%, P: .041).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

In our multivariate analysis, LoF-Clopidogrel, malay ethnicity, diabetics and use of proton pump inhibitors were independent predictors of MACE. There were numerically more bleeds in LoF subjects who were on prasugrel compared with Clopidogrel (23.5% vs 11%, P = .082). Our data corroborate with current findings on platelet reactivity testing, suggesting that the assay would not be sensitive enough to pick up sufficient 'at-risk' subjects as compared to the use of CYP2C19 genotyping.

Problems Associated with Deprescribing of Proton Pump Inhibitors

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are recommended as a first-line treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and other acid related disorders. In recent years, concerns have been raised about the increasing prevalence of patients on long-term PPI therapy and inappropriate PPI use. It is well known that short-term PPI therapy is generally well tolerated and safe; however, their extensive long-term use is a major global issue. One of these long-standing concerns is PPI-induced gastrin elevation secondary to hypoacidity. Hypergastrinemia is believed to play a role in rebound hyperacidity when PPIs are discontinued resulting in induced dyspeptic symptoms that might result in the reinstitution of therapy. Gastrin exerts tropic effects in the stomach, especially on enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cells, and concerns have also been raised regarding the potential progression to dysplasia or tumor formation following long-term therapy. It is well known that a substantial number of patients on long-term PPI therapy can discontinue PPIs without recurrence of symptoms in deprescribing trials. What is unknown is how sustainable deprescribing should be undertaken in practice and how effective it is in terms of reducing long-term outcomes like adverse drug events, morbidity and mortality. Moreover, there is no clear consensus on when and how deprescribing strategies should be attempted in practice. This review sought to summarize the harms and benefits of long-term PPI therapy with special focus on gastrin elevation and its relation to deprescribing studies and future interventions that may improve PPI use.

Interaction of CYP2C19 G681A polymorphism and omeprazole on clopidogrel responsiveness and impact in patients with acute coronary syndrome

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the individual effects of the CYP2C19 G681A polymorphism and omeprazole use and their interaction on clopidogrel responsiveness in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The CYP2C19 G681A polymorphism and omeprazole use were both known for retarding the effects of clopidogrel under broad cardiovascular conditions; however, data from ACS patients were limited.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of 102 ACS patients who received clopidogrel before percutaneous coronary intervention. The platelet function was assessed by a Platelet Function Analyzer-200, in which clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness was defined as a closure time (CT) of ≤ 106 s. The CYP2C19 G681A polymorphism was investigated using the PCR-RFLP technique. Statistical analysis was performed by using χ test, Student's t-test, binary logistic regression, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

Carriages of the CYP2C19 681A allele and omeprazole use were present in 47.1 and 37.3% patients, respectively. The mean CT ± SD was 103.1 ± 1.7 s and the prevalence of clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness was 66.7%. The CT was significantly shorter in carriages of the 681A allele compared with the 681G allele (P = 0.002), but had no significant difference in patients with vs. without omeprazole use (P = 0.467). The ROC analysis of an effect on clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness of CYP2C19 G681A alone and combination with omeprazole use had area under the curve values of 0.654 and 0.672, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In ACS patients, the effect of the CYP2C19 G681A polymorphism on clopidogrel responsiveness, but not omeprazole use, is strong. However, a combination of both factors enhances clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness.

Drug-related problems in prescribing for coronary artery diseases in Vietnam: cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence, patterns and determinants of drug-related problems (DRPs) in prescribing for coronary artery diseases (CADs) in Vietnam.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional study on outpatients with CADs at a general hospital in Can Tho, Vietnam. DRPs were classified according to Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe definitions. We determined the prevalence and patterns of DRPs. Logistic regression was used to identify the determinants of DRPs.

RESULTS

Among 683 patients (mean age 63.4; 64.3% female), the prevalence of DRPs was 61.1%. DRPs comprised inappropriate indication (3.5%), inappropriate dosage (22.2%), wrong frequency of use (24.2%), wrong time of taking medications (4.1%), taking medications at the wrong time around meals (19.2%) and drug interactions (19.3%). Patients who took ≥ 5 drugs were more likely to have DRPs (adjusted odds ratio = 1.96; 95% confidence interval = 1.31-2.93). Patients without health insurance were more likely to have inappropriate indication (ORa = 2.93; 95%CI = 1.28-6.70). Taking medications at inappropriate times around meals was common among men (ORa = 1.82; 95%CI = 1.23-2.69) and among those with health insurance (ORa = 1.66; 95%CI = 1.05-2.63). Patients < 65 years old were more likely to be prescribed inappropriate doses (ORa = 1.67; 95%CI = 1.15-2.45). Prescriptions with ≥ 5 drugs were more likely to be taken at inappropriate frequency (ORa = 1.87; 95%CI = 1.09-3.21) and to cause drug interactions (ORa = 6.48; 95%CI = 2.59-16.24).

CONCLUSIONS

DRPs are common among patients with CADs in Vietnam. The number of DRPs increases with the number of drugs in prescriptions. Further studies should identify other potential determinants of DRPs and effective interventions to improve prescribing practice in Vietnam.

Aspirin Versus Clopidogrel Monotherapy for the Treatment of Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Although aspirin (ASA) is the mainstay of treatment for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke, the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events (CAPRIE) trial showed ASA monotherapy to be inferior to clopidogrel in preventing recurrent adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high cardiac risks. Here, we aimed to systematically compare ASA versus clopidogrel monotherapy for the treatment of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

Methods

Electronic databases were searched and studies were included if they compared ASA versus clopidogrel monotherapy for the treatment of patients with CAD and they reported adverse clinical outcomes. The latest version of RevMan software (version 5.3) was used as the statistical tool for the data analysis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated to interpret the data.

Results

A total number of 5497 patients (from years 2003 to 2011) were treated with ASA monotherapy, whereas 2544 patients were treated with clopidogrel monotherapy. Results of this analysis showed no significant difference in composite endpoints (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47–2.10; P = 0.98), all-cause mortality (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.82–1.33; P = 0.71), cardiac death (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.17–4.74; P = 0.89, myocardial infarction (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.52–1.36; P = 0.48), stroke (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.39–4.06; P = 0.70), and bleeding defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC [grade 3 or above]) (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.78–2.12; P = 0.33).

Conclusion

This analysis did not show any significant difference in all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and BARC grade 3 or above among CAD patients who were treated with either ASA or clopidogrel monotherapy. However, as a result of the limited data, this hypothesis should be confirmed in other major trials.

The Association between Proton Pump Inhibitors and Myocardial Infarction: What Do Food and Drug Administration Data Tell Us?

Objective:

There is limited and conflicting evidence on the association between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and myocardial infarction (MI). This study aims to examine the occurrence of MI associated with PPI use from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System database.

Methods:

This is a cross-sectional study using data from the FDA dated from December 2013 to April 2018. Standard descriptive statistics were used to describe demographic information. Logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the association between the independent variables and MI.

Findings:

Among the 52,443 individuals who were taking a PPI and experienced an adverse event which was registered on the FDA database, 726 (1.38%) experienced MI. Of all the PPIs, esomeprazole had the largest proportion of users experiencing MI (1.81%). Compared to other PPIs, esomeprazole was associated with a significantly higher rate of MI (odds ratio [OR] =1.53, P < 0.001), whereas lansoprazole was associated with a lower rate of MI (OR = 0.74, P = 0.03).

Conclusion:

Among the PPIs, esomeprazole appeared to have the highest risk of MI. Although the observed associations do not infer causality, this study highlighted a need for further studies to determine if a PPI, especially esomeprazole, can indeed cause MI.

Effects of medicines used to treat gastrointestinal diseases on the pharmacokinetics of coadministered drugs: a PEARRL Review

OBJECTIVES

Drugs used to treat gastrointestinal diseases (GI drugs) are widely used either as prescription or over-the-counter (OTC) medications and belong to both the 10 most prescribed and 10 most sold OTC medications worldwide. The objective of this review article is to discuss the most frequent interactions between GI and other drugs, including identification of the mechanisms behind these interactions, where possible.

KEY FINDINGS

Current clinical practice shows that in many cases, these drugs are administered concomitantly with other drug products. Due to their metabolic properties and mechanisms of action, the drugs used to treat gastrointestinal diseases can change the pharmacokinetics of some coadministered drugs. In certain cases, these interactions can lead to failure of treatment or to the occurrence of serious adverse events. The mechanism of interaction depends highly on drug properties and differs among therapeutic categories. Understanding these interactions is essential to providing recommendations for optimal drug therapy.

SUMMARY

Interactions with GI drugs are numerous and can be highly significant clinically in some cases. While alterations in bioavailability due to changes in solubility, dissolution rate, GI transit and metabolic interactions can be (for the most part) easily identified, interactions that are mediated through other mechanisms, such as permeability or microbiota, are less well-understood. Future work should focus on characterising these aspects.

Impact of genetic polymorphisms on platelet function and response to anti platelet drugs

Cardiovascular genomic consists in the identification of polymorphic genes responsible for the susceptibility to cardiovascular disease including coronary artery disease (CAD). Genes involved in platelet activation and aggregation play a key role in the predisposition to CAD. A considerable inter-variability of platelet response to agonists and to drugs exists and in particular the hyper-reactivity phenotype seems to be heritable. Besides glycoproteins and receptors expressed on platelets surface whose mutations significantly impact on platelet function, moreover researchers in the last decades have paid great attention to the genes involved in the response to anti-platelet drugs, considering their pivotal role in the treatment and outcomes of CAD patients especially those undergoing PCI. With the outbreak of advanced techniques developed to analyse human genetic footprints, researchers nowadays have shifted from genetic linkage analysis and a candidate gene approach toward genome-wide association (GWAS) studies and the analysis of miRNA-mRNA expression profiles.

Choosing between ticagrelor and clopidogrel following percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis (2007-2017)

BACKGROUND

Limitations have been observed with the use of clopidogrel following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) indicating the urgent need of a more potent anti-platelet agent. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel following PCI.

METHODS

Online databases were searched for relevant studies (published between the years 2007 and 2017) comparing ticagrelor versus clopidogrel following coronary stenting. Primary outcomes assessed efficacy whereas secondary outcomes assessed safety. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on a random effect model were calculated and the analysis was carried out by the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total number of 25,632 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) [12,992 patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 14,215 patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)] were included in this analysis, of whom 23,714 patients were revascularized by PCI. Results of this analysis did not show any significant difference in all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), myocardial infarction, stroke and stent thrombosis observed between ticagrelor and clopidogrel with (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67-1.03; P = .09), (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.41-1.01; P = .06), (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.57-1.03; P = .08), (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.57-1.26; P = .42) and (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.47-1.05; P =.09).However, ticagrelor was associated with a significantly higher minor and major bleeding with (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.30-1.89; P = .00001) and (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.01-2.29; P = 0.04) respectively. Dyspnea was also significantly higher in the ticagrelor group (OR: 2.64, 95% CI: 1.87-3.72; P = .00001).

CONCLUSION

Ticagrelor and clopidogrel were comparable in terms of efficacy in these patients with ACS. However, the safety outcomes of ticagrelor should further be investigated.